1972 Ford F100 Prerunner on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford recalls 2017 Lincoln Continental for headlight problem

Ford Motor Co. is already recalling the 2017 Lincoln Continental for a headlight problem, the automaker announced Tuesday. The HID headlights may have been assembled with LED lens that don't have the correct lens optics to meet federal visibility requirements for turn signals. Ford says it is unaware of any accidents related to the issue. The company will replace the headlamp assemblies, if needed. The safety compliance recall covers 1,876 Continentals built from June 14 to Sept. 23 at Ford's Flat Rock factory south of Detroit. Most of the cars are in the United States; 49 are in Canada, and one is in a federalized territory. Only about 300 cars are in consumers' hands, a spokesperson said. Customers can use a Lincoln service program where dealers will pick up their Continental, fix it for free, and return it, the spokesperson said. Lincoln has high hopes for the Continental. The flagship sedan uses one of Lincoln's most iconic names and features a luxurious interior, available 400-horsepower V6 engine, and safety features like adaptive cruise control and a 360-degree camera. Lincoln recently announced an elaborate marketing campaign shot by renown photographer Annie Leibovitz to generate interest in the Continental. In a separate recall, Ford also said Tuesday that 60 Edges from the 2015-16 model year are being recalled to update their antilock braking system module. Related Video: Featured Gallery 2017 Lincoln Continental Campaign View 12 Photos Recalls Ford Lincoln

Weekly Recap: Hackers demonstrate auto industry's vulnerability

There's always been a certain risk associated with driving, and this week cyber security came into focus as the latest danger zone when researchers demonstrated how easily they could hack into a 2014 Jeep Cherokee from across the country. The incident raised concerns over the vulnerability of today's cars, many of which double as smartphones and hot spots. During the now-infamous experiment, Chris Valasek and Charlie Miller infiltrated the Jeep's cellular connection and were able to control the infotainment system, brakes, and other functions. The hackers told the Jeep's maker, FCA US, of their findings last year, the company devised a software fix. Though Valesek and Miller hacked a Cherokee (like the one shown above), several FCA products, including recent versions of the Ram, Grand Cherokee, Dodge Durango, and Viper were also affected, illustrating potentially wide exposure that could reverberate across the sector. "For the auto industry, this is a very important event and shows that cyber-security protection is needed even sooner than previously planned," Egil Juliussen, senior analyst and research director for IHS Automotive, wrote in a research note. "Five years ago, the auto industry did not consider cyber security as a near-term problem. This view has changed." Hours after the Cherokee hacking incident was publicized on Tuesday, Sens. Ed Markey (D-Mass) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn) introduced legislation to direct the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Federal Trade Commission to establish national standards for automotive cyber security. The bill also would require vehicles to have a cyber-rating system to alert consumers how well their cars' privacy and security are defended. "Drivers shouldn't have to choose between being connected and being protected," Markey said in a statement. "We need clear rules of the road that protect cars from hackers and American families from data trackers." Though FCA and its Jeep Cherokee were in the spotlight this time, they were just the latest to showcase how automotive technology has advanced faster than safety and regulatory measures. IHS forecasts 82.5 million cars will be connected to the internet by 2022, which is more than three times today's level. "Cyber-security will become a major challenge for the auto industry and solutions are long overdue," Juliussen said.

2016: The year of the autonomous-car promise

About half of the news we covered this year related in some way to The Great Autonomous Future, or at least it seemed that way. If you listen to automakers, by 2020 everyone will be driving (riding?) around in self-driving cars. But what will they look like, how will we make the transition from driven to driverless, and how will laws and infrastructure adapt? We got very few answers to those questions, and instead were handed big promises, vague timelines, and a dose of misdirection by automakers. There has been a lot of talk, but we still don't know that much about these proposed vehicles, which are at least three years off. That's half a development cycle in this industry. We generally only start to get an idea of what a company will build about two years before it goes on sale. So instead of concrete information about autonomous cars, 2016 has brought us a lot of promises, many in the form of concept cars. They have popped up from just about every automaker accompanied by the CEO's pledge to deliver a Level 4 autonomous, all-electric model (usually a crossover) in a few years. It's very easy to say that a static design study sitting on a stage will be able to drive itself while projecting a movie on the windshield, but it's another thing entirely to make good on that promise. With a few exceptions, 2016 has been stuck in the promising stage. It's a strange thing, really; automakers are famous for responding with "we don't discuss future product" whenever we ask about models or variants known to be in the pipeline, yet when it comes to self-driving electric wondermobiles, companies have been falling all over themselves to let us know that theirs is coming soon, it'll be oh so great, and, hey, that makes them a mobility company now, not just an automaker. A lot of this is posturing and marketing, showing the public, shareholders, and the rest of the industry that "we're making one, too, we swear!" It has set off a domino effect – once a few companies make the guarantee, the rest feel forced to throw out a grandiose yet vague plan for an unknown future. And indeed there are usually scant details to go along with such announcements – an imprecise mileage estimate here, or a far-off, percentage-based goal there. Instead of useful discussion of future product, we get demonstrations of test mules, announcements of big R&D budgets and new test centers they'll fund, those futuristic concept cars, and, yeah, more promises.