1997 Ford F-350 Xl Crew Cab Pickup 4-door 7.3l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

EPA says fuel economy test for hybrids is accurate

The EPA says it stands behind its fuel economy test for hybrid vehicles following controversy about the testing process after Ford C-Max Hybrid customers and automotive journalists alike struggled to achieve 47 miles per gallon, the advertised mpg number, Automotive News reports. Ford responded to the issue almost two weeks ago by claiming that a 1970s-era EPA general label rule was responsible for the inaccurate mileage numbers, rerating the C-Max Hybrid's mpg numbers and offering customers rebates. Ford later said it didn't overstate the C-Max Hybrid's fuel economy and that it was surprised by the low numbers.
Ford technically didn't do anything wrong because it was following the general label rule, but agency regulator Christopher Grundler says the automaker was exploiting a loophole when it came up with the hybrid C-Max numbers, and that the testing process remains accurate. The general label rule allows vehicles that use the same engine and transmission and are in the same weight class to share fuel economy numbers, but it doesn't take into account other factors such as aerodynamic efficiency, which affects hybrids more drastically than non-hybrid vehicles. Ford originally used the Fusion Hybrid economy figures for the C-Max Hybrid and claimed the engineers didn't realize that its aerodynamic efficiency would affect fuel economy as much as it did.

Stocks down as automakers, Boeing lead China's hit list in trade spat

Shares in U.S. exporters of everything from planes to tractors fell on Wednesday after China retaliated against the Trump administration's tariff plans by proposing duties on key U.S. imports including soybeans, beef and chemicals. U.S. automakers' products are prominent on China's list of tariff targets, yet shares of automakers ended higher on Wednesday as Wall Street stocks changed course in the afternoon when investors' trade fears subsided. Tesla shares closed 7.3 percent higher at $286.94, Ford shares gained 1.6 percent to close at $11.33, and GM shares were up 3 percent at $38.03. Aircraft maker Boeing closed down 1 percent, weighing the most on the Dow Jones Industrial Average as documents from China's Ministry of Commerce and the U.S. manufacturer showed the move would affect some older Boeing narrowbody models. It was not immediately clear how much the tariffs would impact its newer aircraft. Boeing said it was assessing the situation while analysts from JP Morgan said the proposals from China looked to have been calibrated carefully to avoid a major impact on the planemaker. Fellow Dow component 3M lost as much as 2.4 percent. And farming equipment maker Deere lost nearly $10 per share at its lowest. The company urged the two countries to work toward a resolution to "limit uncertainty for farmers and avoid meaningful disruptions to agricultural trade." The speed with which the trade spat between Washington and Beijing is ratcheting up — the Chinese government took less than 11 hours to respond with its own measures — led to a sharp selloff in global stock markets and commodities. China was hitting back against U.S. President Donald Trump's plans to impose tariffs on $50 billion in Chinese goods with similar tariffs on U.S. goods even as Trump said the country is "not in a trade war with China." "Everybody knew they were going to retaliate. The question was how strong of a retaliation. Today's move clearly shows that they mean business," said Adam Sarhan, chief executive of 50 Park Investments in New York. China levied 25 percent additional tariffs on U.S. goods, but unlike Washington's list that covers many obscure industrial items, Beijing's covers 106 key U.S. imports including soybeans, planes, cars, whiskey and chemicals. Trump denied that the tit-for-tat moves amounted to a trade war between the world's two economic superpowers.

Rising aluminum costs cut into Ford's profit

When Ford reports fourth-quarter results on Wednesday afternoon, it is expected to fret that rising metals costs have cut into profits, even as rivals say they have the problem under control. Aluminum prices have risen 20 percent in the last year and nearly 11 percent since Dec. 11. Steel prices have risen just over 9 percent in the last year. Ford uses more aluminum in its vehicles than its rivals. Aluminum is lighter but far more expensive than steel, closing at $2,229 per tonne on Tuesday. U.S. steel futures closed at $677 per ton (0.91 metric tonnes). Republican U.S. President Donald Trump's administration is weighing whether to impose tariffs on imported steel and aluminum, which could push prices even higher. Ford gave a disappointing earnings estimate for 2017 and 2018 last week, saying the higher costs for steel, aluminum and other metals, as well as currency volatility, could cost the company $1.6 billion in 2018. Ford shares took a dive after the announcement. Ford Chief Financial Officer Bob Shanks told analysts at a conference in Detroit last week that while the company benefited from low commodity prices in 2016, rising steel prices were now the main cause of higher costs, followed by aluminum. Shanks said the automaker at times relies on foreign currencies as a "natural hedge" for some commodities but those are now going in the opposite direction, so they are not working. A Ford spokesman added that the automaker also uses a mix of contracts, hedges and indexed buying. Industry analysts point to the spike in aluminum versus steel prices as a plausible reason for Ford's problems, especially since it uses far more of the expensive metal than other major automakers. "When you look at Ford in the context of the other automakers, aluminum drives a lot of their volume and I think that is the cause" of their rising costs, said Jeff Schuster, senior vice president of forecasting at auto consultancy LMC Automotive. Other major automakers say rising commodity costs are not much of a problem. At last week's Detroit auto show, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV's Chief Executive Officer Sergio Marchionne reiterated its earnings guidance for 2018 and held forth on a number of topics, but did not mention metals prices. General Motors Co gave a well-received profit outlook last week and did not mention the subject. "We view changes in raw material costs as something that is manageable," a GM spokesman said in an email.