11 Ford F150 Crew Cab Xlt, V6 Ecoboost, Chrome Package, We Finance! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Again? Ford issues second 2015 Fusion and Lincoln MKZ seat belt recall

In 2016, Ford issued a recall for 603,392 2013-2016 Fusions and 2013-2015 Lincoln MKZs due to potentially faulty seat belts. Apparently, that wasn't the end of it. Ford announced another recall this week for the same issue, this time covering 108,399 2015 Fusions and MKZs.  In both cases, the seat belt anchor pretensioners are the issue. According to Ford, "increased temperatures generated during deployment of the driver or front-passenger seat belt anchor pretensioner could degrade the tensile strength of the cable below the level needed to restrain an occupant." Basically, heat could weaken the seat belts, and in extreme cases, they wouldn't be able to keep up proper safety standards. Ford knows of at least one injury that has occurred due to this issue.   The recall includes 103,374 vehicles in the United States, 4,002 in Canada, and 1,023 in Mexico. Possibly affected Fusions were built at Ford's Flat Rock Assembly Plant between August 1, 2014 and January 30, 2015. The MKZs were built at the Hermosillo Assembly Plant between August 1, 2014 and November 21, 2014.  As a fix, Ford says dealers will add an extra coating to the seat belt pretensioner cable for protection from the heat. If this recall might affect your vehicle, call your local Ford dealership and use recall reference No. 19S25. This news comes after Ford recalled 1.3 million Fusions and MKZs in 2018 due to the possibility that the steering wheels could fall off. Fusions have also been recalled due to the risk of rolling away.

Porsche, Jaguar continue dominance in 2015 JD Power APEAL study

The top of JD Power's 2015 APEAL Study has not changed much in the last year. Porsche remains No. 1 with Jaguar nipping at its heels, although both premium brands saw their overall score fall compared to 2014. For those that need a refresher, the APEAL Study looks at how "gratifying" a vehicle is to own and drive, rating cars and brands on a 1,000-point scale. The industry average for 2015 has increased from 794 to 798, while the total number of automakers that finished above the curve increased from 16 to 20. While Porsche and Jaguar finished at the top, their scores dropped eight and seven points, respectively, to 874 and 855. The top "non-premium" brand was Mini, which scored an impressive 825, up from 795. If the BMW-owned British marque is still a bit too premium for your tastes, last year's non-premium winner, Hyundai, did climb five points and is this year's runner up. At the opposite end of the scale, Smart sits at the very bottom of the rankings, with a score of 683 (it didn't appear on the 2014 rankings). Fiat also dropped, from fourth worst in 2014 to second worst in 2015, despite the 500 being named most appealing city car. Subaru made an impressive climb, from third worst to seventh, falling just 10 points shy of the industry average and two points south of the non-premium average. In the individual vehicle segments, eight brands earned multiple awards, with Ford, Chevrolet, and Porsche earning three apiece. Surprise segment victories included the new Ford Expedition, which beat out Chevy's popular Suburban. The Infiniti QX80 bested the likes of the Cadillac Escalade and Range Rover for best large luxury SUV, and the Dodge Challenger beat its muscle car rivals from Ford and Chevy. Most of the victories, though, were quite predictable. The Mazda6 and CX-5 took wins for the midsize sedan and compact SUV categories respectively, while the Volkswagen Golf captured the compact car win. The Ford F-150 won the large pickup category, while the Porsche Cayman was named most appealing compact premium sporty car. Check out the official release on the 2015 APEAL Study, available below, from JD Power. 2015 U.S. APEAL Study Results The latest safety-related technologies are among the drivers of customer satisfaction with new vehicles, according to the J.D. Power 2015 U.S.

Aluminum lightweighting does, in fact, save fuel

When the best-selling US truck sheds the equivalent weight of three football fullbacks by shifting to aluminum, folks start paying attention. Oak Ridge National Laboratory took a closer look at whether the reduced fuel consumption from a lighter aluminum body makes up for the fact that producing aluminum is far more energy intensive than steel. And the results of the study are pretty encouraging. In a nutshell, the energy needed to produce a vehicle's raw materials accounts for about 10 percent of a typical vehicle's carbon footprint during its total lifecycle, and that number is up from six percent because of advancements in fuel economy (fuel use is down to about 68 percent of total emissions from about 75 percent). Still, even with that higher material-extraction share, the fuel-efficiency gains from aluminum compared to steel will offset the additional vehicle-extraction energy in just 12,000 miles of driving, according to the study. That means that, from an environmental standpoint, aluminum vehicles are playing with the house's money after just one year on the road. Aluminum-sheet construction got topical real quickly earlier this year when Ford said the 2015 F-150 pickup truck would go to a 93-percent aluminum body construction. In addition to aluminum being less corrosive than steel, that change caused the F-150 to shed 700 pounds from its curb weight. And it looks like the Explorer and Expedition SUVs may go on an aluminum diet next. Take a look at SAE International's synopsis of the Oak Ridge Lab's study below. Life Cycle Energy and Environmental Assessment of Aluminum-Intensive Vehicle Design Advanced lightweight materials are increasingly being incorporated into new vehicle designs by automakers to enhance performance and assist in complying with increasing requirements of corporate average fuel economy standards. To assess the primary energy and carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) implications of vehicle designs utilizing these materials, this study examines the potential life cycle impacts of two lightweight material alternative vehicle designs, i.e., steel and aluminum of a typical passenger vehicle operated today in North America. LCA for three common alternative lightweight vehicle designs are evaluated: current production ("Baseline"), an advanced high strength steel and aluminum design ("LWSV"), and an aluminum-intensive design (AIV).