1997 Ford F-150 Xl Standard Cab Pickup 2-door 5.4l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Question of the Day: Most degraded car name?

When Ford came up with a not-so-sporty version of the Pinto and slapped Mustang badges on it in 1974, that was a low point for the Mustang name. When Chrysler applied the venerable Town & Country name on perfectly functional but unglamorous minivans, it saddened many of us. But perhaps the biggest demotion for a once-proud model came when, in 1988, General Motors imported a misery-enhancing Daewoo from Korea and called it the Pontiac LeMans. The original Pontiac LeMans was a great-looking midsize car with fairly advanced (for the time) suspension design and engine options including potent V8s and a screaming overhead-cam straight-six. The Daewoo-based Pontiac LeMans was a cramped, shoddy hooptie that served only to ruin the LeMans name forever, while stealing sales from the Suzuki-based Chevrolet Sprint. Sure, using the once-respected Monterey name on the Mercurized Ford Freestar was bad, but Mercury didn't have long to live at that point. I say the downward spiral of the LeMans name was the most agonizing in automotive history. What do you think? Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Auto News Ford Mercury Pontiac Automotive History Classics questions ford pinto names

Why the 2015 Detroit Auto Show will be the best since The Crisis

The Detroit Auto Show clearly has its swagger back, and the 2015 edition will be a veritable feast for the enthusiast senses. We're talking serious performance, and it will be exhibited in a variety of forms. Sports cars. Supercars. Muscle-bound luxury cars. They're all set for splashy debuts in January in the Motor City. It's another signpost that companies have recovered from the global economic crisis that gripped the industry from 2008-09. For a while, automakers played it safe at Detroit and other shows. Environmentally friendly cars were important, especially for General Motors and Chrysler that were living on loans from Uncle Sam. Ford, Toyota and other companies generally focused on their best-selling or core models. With a few notable exceptions, recent auto shows have been a bit more buttoned-down than in the past. Boring probably isn't the right word, but austerity has been reality. That's changing. Car companies are making money. Sales are up. Aside from the many nagging recalls – and they are notable – the industry now has the time and energy to make performance cars a priority. That will be offered in hard evidence in Detroit. A year from now when we look back at this auto show, we'll sum it up with one word: Horsepower. But make no mistake, this isn't frivolous. Sports and luxury cars are expensive. They're profitable. They boost images and highlight strengths. With that in mind, here are five significant performance-oriented reveals to watch for when the show kicks off in less than two weeks. 2016 Acura NSX Acura's reborn NSX is a strong bet to earn plenty of votes for our Editors' Choice awards. It's one of the most anticipated – and strung-out – reveals of the year. Think back: we actually saw an NSX concept at the 2012 Detroit show, and Acura has spent the last three years teasing the car in a variety of ways. The slow burn, however, means we know a lot about the NSX. It's will use a mid-mounted twin-turbo hybrid powertrain and run with all-wheel drive. It will also wear an innovative zirconium e-coat paint, a new paint process that Honda says is more environmentally friendly. Honda has also said it will build the new NSX in Ohio, where a large part of the car's development work has been done. The original NSX was produced from 1990-2005 and helped establish Acura's performance credentials in the United States. It was a landmark car and a shot across the bow of Ferrari, Lamborghini and others.

For EV drivers, realities may dampen the electric elation

The Atlantic, a decades-old monthly journal well-regarded for its intelligent essays on international news, American politics and cultural happenings, recently turned its attention to the car world. A piece that ran in The Atlantic in October examined the excesses of the GMC Hummer EV for compromising safety. And now in its latest edition, the magazine ran a compelling story about the challenges of driving an electric vehicle and how those experiences “mythologize the car as the great equalizer.” Titled “The Inconvenient Truth About Electric Vehicles,” the story addresses the economics of EVs, the stresses related to range anxiety, the social effects of owning an electric car — as in, affording one — and the overarching need for places to recharge that car. Basically, author Andrew Moseman says that EV life isn't so rosy: “On the eve of the long-promised electric-vehicle revolution, the myth is due for an update. Americans who take the plunge and buy their first EV will find a lot to love Â… they may also find that electric-vehicle ownership upends notions about driving, cost, and freedom, including how much car your money can buy. "No one spends an extra $5,000 to get a bigger gas tank in a Honda Civic, but with an EV, economic status is suddenly more connected to how much of the world you get to see — and how stressed out or annoyed youÂ’ll feel along the way.” Moseman charts how a basic Ford F-150 Lightning electric truck might start at $55,000, but an extended-range battery, which stretches the distance on a charge from 230 miles to 320, “raises the cost to at least $80,000. The trend holds true with all-electric brands such as Tesla, Rivian, and Lucid, and for many electric offerings from legacy automakers. The bigger battery option can add a four- or five-figure bump to an already accelerating sticker price.” As for the charging issue, the author details his anxiety driving a Telsa in Death Valley, with no charging stations in sight. “For those who never leave the comfort of the city, these concerns sound negligible," he says. "But so many of us want our cars to do everything, go everywhere, ferry us to the boundless life we imagine (or the one weÂ’re promised in car commercials),” he writes. His conclusions may raise some hackles among those of us who value automotive independence — not to mention fun — over practicalities.