2007 Ford F150 Fx4 Supercrew on 2040-cars

Auto blog

The U-2 spy plane needs high-performance cars to help land

Typically, aircraft deploy their landing gear from three main points. Most military aircraft, for example, deploy two gears at the back and one forward, like a tricycle. Some civilian aircraft flip the layout, with two in front and one in back - tail-draggers. The U-2 Dragon Lady is wildly different than any of these. With a 103-foot wingspan but a body that's just 63-feet long, the layout of the U-2 makes a traditional landing setup infeasible. Instead, the U-2 utilizes a pair of wheels, one up front and one in back. With such a bizarre layout, landings are so tough that since the U-2's earliest flights at Area 51, the US Air Force has used high-performance chase cars to guide the pilot down safely. The landing process isn't over there, though. As this video from Sploid shows, balancing out the aircraft to fit the detachable "pogos" – think training wheels for spy planes – is a comical procedure requiring a number of airman using their full body weight to even out the U-2. This video also recaps some of the great vehicles that have served as chase vehicles for this legendary spy plane. They include Chevrolet El Caminos, and the Fox-body Ford Mustangs so favored by the California Highway Patrol. For the last several years, the USAF has utilized products from General Motors, using fourth-generation Chevy Camaros, before switching over to the Pontiac GTO and most recently, the awesome Pontiac G8. It's fair to say that if you're a gearhead in the Air Force, this is the job you want. Check out the video, embedded up top. News Source: Sploid via YouTubeImage Credit: Sploid Chevrolet Ford GM Pontiac Military Performance Videos

Ford rakes in record $2.5b profit during Q1 of 2016

Fears that the auto industry is due for a downturn may be fading. Ford posted record profits in the first quarter of 2016, the company announced Thursday. Chief financial officer Bob Shanks said Ford enjoyed its best quarterly performance in history, generating operating profits of $3.8 billion and a record profit margin of 9.8 percent. Overall, the company's $2.5 billion profit in the quarter more than doubled from the 2015 quarterly results. "The first quarter was an absolutely terrific start to the year, an all-time record for the company, with very strong performance across the business," said chief executive officer Mark Fields. "We're excited about our future and confident in our ability to deliver long-term growth and profitability as we expand our business model to be both an auto and a mobility company." During the quarter, Ford announced the creation of Ford Smart Mobility, a new subsidiary that would vet future mobility projects in the realm of car-sharing, fractional ownership and autonomous deployment. The company also kicked off a billion-dollar makeover of its Dearborn, Michigan campus and headquarters. The company's after-tax earnings of $0.68 per share trumped Wall Street's expectations, and were significantly up from $0.39 per share a year ago. The results were buoyed by the company's fourth consecutive quarter of growth in Europe, which comes after a long period of stagnant sales. Ford's earnings results come amid reports that April car sales are on pace to jump 4 percent year over year, which would make it the best-selling April in history. Kelley Blue Book projects that car sales will reach 1.51 million this month, placing the industry on track for 17.5 million vehicles sold in 2016. Even as SUV and crossover sales drive the market, analysts say Nissan and Honda are positioned to benefit from renewed interest in mid-size cars. "Following a disappointing March, we expect sales to get back on track in April with SAAR in the mid-17 million range," said Tim Fleming, analyst for Kelley Blue Book. "Increased fleet sales and rising incentive spending among automakers remain the factors to watch, but the retail demand appears to be holding steady, signaling the industry's strong run isn't over quite yet." Related Video: Image Credit: Getty Earnings/Financials Ford Lincoln 5g Connectivity mobility auto industry financial

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.