on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Your official Ford Transit specs are here, $29,565* to start

Ford has released the full list of pricing and specs on its new Transit, the replacement for the long-lived E-Series cargo van. Prices are set to start at $29,565 and can increase rapidly from there, depending on length, engine and wheelbase, among other options.
Let's talk first about those new engines. The base is the familiar 3.7-liter, naturally aspirated V6. It boasts 275 horsepower and 260 pound-feet of torque and can return up to 14 miles per gallon in the city and 19 mpg on the highway. This engine can also be adapted to run on LPG or compressed natural gas. Of course, there are better alternatives, for a price, the first of which is Ford's well-received, 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6. It packs 310 hp and a best-in-class 400 lb-ft of torque (available at just 2,500 rpm) while matching the naturally aspirated engine in both city and highway fuel economy.
Then, there's the diesel. With a 3.2-liter, five-cylinder diesel mill at its disposal, the Transit generates 350 lb-ft between 1,500 and 2,500 rpm, along with 185 hp. This engine hasn't been rated by the EPA, although we'd be really, really surprised if it didn't handily best either of the gas-powered engines in fuel efficiency. A six-speed automatic is standard, regardless of engine.

Big electric trucks won't save the planet, says the NYT

When The New York Times decides that an issue is an issue, be prepared to read about it at length. Rarely will a week passes these days when the esteemed news organization doesn’t examine the realities, myths and alleged benefits and drawbacks of electric vehicles, and even The Atlantic joins in sometimes. That revolution, marked by changes in manufacturing, consumer habits and social “consciousness,” may in fact be upon us. Or it may not. Nonetheless, the newspaper appears committed to presenting to the public these pros and cons. In this recently published article titled, “Just How Good for the Planet Is That Big Electric Pickup Truck?”—wow, thatÂ’s a mouthful — the Times focuses on the “bigness” of the current and pending crop of EVs, and how that impacts or will impact the environment and road safety. This is not what news organizations these days are fond of calling “breaking news.” In October, we pointed to an essay in The Atlantic that covered pretty much the same ground, and focused on the Hummer as one particular villain, In the paper and online on Feb. 18, the Times' Elana Shao observes how “swapping a gas pickup truck for a similar electric one can produce significant emissions savings.” She goes on: “Take the Ford F-150 pickup truck compared with the electric F-150 Lightning. The electric versions are responsible for up to 50 percent less greenhouse gas emissions per mile.” But she right away flips the argument, noting the heavier electric pickup trucks “often require bigger batteries and more electricity to charge, so they end up being responsible for more emissions than other smaller EVs. Taking into consideration the life cycle emissions per mile, they end up just as polluting as some smaller gas-burning cars.” Certainly, itÂ’s been drummed into our heads that electric cars donÂ’t run on air and water but on electricity that costs money, and that the public will be dealing with “the shift toward electric SUVs, pickup trucks and crossover vehicles, with some analysts estimating that SUVs, pickup trucks and vans could make up 78 percent of vehicle sales by 2025." No-brainer alert: Big vehicles cost more to charge. And then thereÂ’s the safety question, which was cogently addressed in the Atlantic story. Here Shao reiterates data documenting the increased risks of injuries and deaths caused by larger, heavier vehicles.

Ford recalling 2015 Mustang for fuel line leak, 20K Transit Connects for plastic panel

Ford is recalling 738 examples of the 2015 2015 Mustang with the 2.3-liter EcoBoost engine – 712 in the US, 16 in Canada. A fuel pressure sensor might have been installed incorrectly on the affected cars, and that could result in a fuel leak. At the time of writing the company hasn't heard any reports of any incidents related to the issue, and parties with affected vehicles can take them to the dealer to have the fuel tube assembly replaced free of charge. The 2014 Transit Connect Cargo Van is also the subject of a safety recall, due to a possible problem with adhesive used on the exterior plastic panel on the sliding doors. There are 19,825 units covered by that recall, which dealers will also repair free of charge. You can find more information on both bulletins in the press releases below. Ford Issues Safety Recall for Certain 2015 Mustang Vehicles in North America for Fuel Pressure Sensor Issue Dec 4, 2014 | DEARBORN, Mich. - Ford is issuing a safety recall for approximately 730 2015 Ford Mustang vehicles in North America (actual 728) for a potential fuel line leak. A fuel pressure sensor, which is part of the fuel supply tube assembly, may have been installed incorrectly, potentially resulting in a pressurized fuel leak. A fuel leak in the presence of an ignition source may result in a fire. Ford is not aware of any fires, accidents or injuries related to this condition. Affected vehicles include certain 2015 Ford Mustangs equipped with 2.3-liter engines built at Flat Rock Assembly Plant, Sept. 25, 2014 to Oct. 9, 2014. Ford is aware of 712 vehicles in the United States and federalized territories and 16 in Canada. These totals are as of Dec. 3, 2014. Dealers will replace the fuel supply tube assembly at no cost to the customer. *** Ford Issues Safety Recall for Certain 2014 Transit Connect Cargo Van Vehicles in North America for Issue with the Plastic Panel on the Sliding Doors Dec 4, 2014 | DEARBORN, Mich. - Ford is issuing a safety recall for approximately 20,000 2014 Transit Connect cargo van vehicles in North America (actual 19,825) for an issue with adhesion of an exterior plastic panel to the sliding doors. This issue may result in noise, a water leak, a loose panel, or separation of the plastic panel from the vehicle while driving, potentially increasing the risk of an accident or injury. Ford is not aware of any accidents or injuries related to this condition.