2011 Ford F150 Xlt on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Chris Harris pits Fiesta ST against Mercedes G63 AMG in 0-60 battle... sort of

Vehicle performance tests are serious business, with reputations made or broken by things like braking distance, top speed, and lateral g-forces. King of the metrics, though, is the 0-60 run, which for unknown reasons has become the benchmark for what truly makes a car a performance machine.
Now, Chris Harris from Drive has turned the whole idea behind the sprint to 60 on its ear. Taking a new Ford Fiesta ST, Harris asks a simple question: would the ST be quicker to 60 on its own, or on a trailer being towed by a Mercedes-Benz G63 AMG?
It's a fair question, really. The Fiesta Harris tested hit 60 in 7.2 seconds on a slightly uphill section of runway. It should be noted that Harris quotes his ST at 182 horsepower, which is about 15 ponies less than what we're getting in the US, so these numbers might not hold up all that well against an American model. The G63 AMG, meanwhile, is a 536-horsepower monster, powered by a twin-turbo V8 that, able to propel the big SUV to 60 mph in just 5.2 seconds without towing a Fiesta.

Ford tells Congress it collects and protects some driver data

Last month Ford's Jim Farley made waves at the CES when it was reported he told show attendees, "We have GPS in your car, so we know what you're doing. By the way, we don't supply that data to anyone." Farley and Ford later partially retracted and clarified that statement.
Spurred by a desire for further transparency on data collection policies, Ford representatives answered questions from Congress, specifically Senator Al Franken (D-Minn.), about driver privacy.
The Detroit News reports that Ford told Congress it does collect some vehicle location data in an effort to "troubleshoot and improve our products" on behalf of the driver. Ford went on to say that it only collects limited data after receiving permission from owners.

Nuclear-powered concept cars from the Atomic Age

In the 1950s and early 60s, the dawn of nuclear power was supposed to lead to a limitless consumer culture, a world of flying cars and autonomous kitchens all powered by clean energy. In Europe, it offered the then-limping continent a cheap, inexhaustible supply of power after years of rationing and infrastructure damage brought on by two World Wars.
The development of nuclear-powered submarines and ships during the 1940s and 50s led car designers to begin conceptualizing atomic vehicles. Fueled by a consistent reaction, these cars would theoretically produce no harmful byproducts and rarely need to refuel. Combining these vehicles with the new interstate system presented amazing potential for American mobility.
But the fantasy soon faded. There were just too many problems with the realities of nuclear power. For starters, the powerplant would be too small to attain a reaction unless the car contained weapons-grade atomic materials. Doing so would mean every fender-bender could result in a minor nuclear holocaust. Additionally, many of the designers assumed a lightweight shielding material or even forcefields would eventually be invented (they still haven't) to protect passengers from harmful radiation. Analyses of the atomic car concept at the time determined that a 50-ton lead barrier would be necessary to prevent exposure.