2013 Ford F150 Fx4 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Submit your questions for Autoblog Podcast #321 LIVE!

We're set to record Autoblog Podcast #321 tonight, and you can drop us your questions and comments regarding the rest of the week's news via our Q&A module below. Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast in iTunes if you haven't already done so, and if you want to take it all in live, tune in to our UStream (audio only) channel at 10:00 PM Eastern tonight.
Discussion Topics for Autoblog Podcast Episode #321
Unibody Ford Ranger replacement

The 2015 Ford Mustang is not so mellow in yellow

When we first saw the 2015 Ford Mustang, much was made of its new, more expressive color palette, which includes the return of both yellow and orange in addition to a new grayish shade, Guard. At that time, we didn't have anything to look at but a few small scale models painted in the new colors - the only Mustangs on display were in Race Red.
For its auto show debut here at in the Motor City, Ford has trotted out a couple of as-yet-unseen shades, including the striking Triple Yellow shown above. The new shade marks a return to a paint color that enthusiasts have been clamoring for, and we must say, it looks excellent under the lights of Cobo Hall.
Stat wise, there are still a number of questions we have about the redesigned Mustang. None of the three engines have had official power figures published. The same goes for pricing information, although if any loose-lipped execs let something slip in Detroit, we'll be sure to let you know. Until then, have a look at the new Triple Yellow Mustang on display at the 2014 Detroit Auto Show.

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.