2006 Ford Explorer , New Engine on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Ford Mustang SVT hides big power under its domed hood

With a number of 2015 Ford Mustang versions finally available to configure, the fun of speculating about next year's high-performance 'Stang can now begin. It looks like Ford has something seriously fun planned too. One of our spy photographers just snapped some fresh pics of the 2016 Mustang SVT, which is believed to be hiding the final body shape under all of that heavy camouflage.
Ford clearly doesn't want prying eyes looking at its new pride and joy. It would be hard to put much more obfuscation on a car than this one wears - it even has mesh baffles around the exhausts to conceal how many there are and panels over the wheels to hide their design. However, the Blue Oval can't keep everything a secret. The biggest clue that something special is hidden underneath is the massive hood bulge and vent in front of it. Clearly, whatever is under there is hungry for cool air. The shape of the camo indicates that there may be fender vents on each side, and there are also obscured outlets behind the front wheels likely to pull cool air through the brakes. At the rear, the concealment does its job, making it hard to observe any big changes. The fact that Ford wants it kept such a secret might indicate something, though.
A few photos of the interior show far less cover than the outside. You can easily make out the model's 6,500 rpm redline with a possible 7,000 rpm over-rev function. The big Recaro sport seats also look quite supportive.

Weekly Recap: Auto execs face life in prison for recall delays under proposed legislation

The stiff punishments are part of broader transportation legislation, but clearly McCaskill has automakers in her sights.
Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill threw down the gauntlet this week, proposing a bill that could send auto executives to prison for life if they were found to have delayed a recall. She also wants to eliminate the limit for fines for auto safety violations, which are currently capped at $35 million.

Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid

It's been a rough time for the official fuel economy figures for the Ford C-Max Hybrid. When the car was released in 2012, Ford made a huge deal about how it would beat the Toyota Prius V, which was rated at 42 combined miles per gallon, 44 city and 40 highway. The Ford? 47 mpg across the board. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? Well, after hearing customer complaints and issuing a software update in mid-2013, then discovering a real problem with the numbers last fall and then making a big announcement last week that the fuel economy ratings of six different 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles would need to be lowered, the C-Max Hybrid has ended up at 40 combined, 42 city and 37 highway. In other words, the Prius trumps it, as daily drivers of those two vehicles have known for a long time. The changes will not only affect the window sticker, but also the effect that the C-Max Hybrid (and the five other Ford vehicles that had their fuel economy figures lowered last week) have on Ford's compliance with greenhouse gas and CAFE rules for model year 2013 and 2014. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? There are two technical answers to that question, which we've got below, as well as some context for how Ford's mistakes will play out in the bigger world of green vehicles. Let's start with Ford's second error, which is easy to do since we documented it in detail last year (the first, needing to do a software update, was also covered). The basic gist is that Ford used the general label rule (completely legally) to test the Fusion Hybrid and use those numbers to figure out how efficient the C-Max Hybrid is. That turned out to be a mistake, since the two vehicles are different enough that their numbers were not comparable, despite having the same engine, transmission and test weight, as the rules require. You can read more details here. Ford's Said Deep admitted that the TRLHP issue is completely separate from the general label error from last year. Now let's move on to last week's announcement. What's interesting is that the new recalculation of the MPG numbers – downward, of course – was caused by a completely separate issue, something called the Total Road Load Horsepower (TRLHP). Ford's Said Deep admitted to AutoblogGreen that the TRLHP issue had nothing to do with the general label error from last year.