2001 Superduty 4x4 Lariat on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Car companies used to cook up sales with recipe books

The evolution of automotive marketing has undergone a number of strange phases. Few, though, match the strangeness of the 1930s to 1950s, when automotive marketers turned to cookbooks as a means of promoting their vehicles. Yes, cookbooks. We can't make this stuff up, folks.
This bizarre trend led to General Motors distributing cookbooks under the guise of its then-subsidiary Frigidaire. Ford, meanwhile, offered a compilation of recipes from Ford Credit Employees (shown above). The cookbook-craze wasn't limited to domestic manufacturers, though. As The Detroit News discovered, both Rolls-Royce and Volkswagen got in on the trend, although not until the 1970s.
The News has the full story on this strange bit of marketing. Head over and take a look.

Bacon-wrapped Ford Fiesta hams it up for International Bacon Day

This is a bacon-wrapped Ford Fiesta. It is a real thing, that a real, multi-billion-dollar company designed. And it isn't even April Fools' Day. Designed for International Bacon Day, which is also apparently a thing, the 2014 Fiesta is finished in Green Envy paint - we're told black paint, like the color of a skillet, made the car look camouflaged - and features 10 gigantic decals depicting strips of tender, cured bacon.
The design, which was approved by the CEO of Benton's Country Hams, Allan Benton, show off the depth of Ford's Custom Graphics program. Unbelievably, Ford will actually start offering bacon decals to everyday customers, including (and we can't believe we're writing this) dual bacon racing stripes which will no doubt have Carroll Shelby spinning and/or salivating in his grave, and a "side of bacon," which wraps a couple of strips over the rear wheels.
Benton, who Ford claims is the King of Bacon, had this to say: "This car just makes so much sense." The Fiesta's marketing manager, Liz Elser added, "It's just awesome to drive down the road in a piece of bacon."

Is it time for American carmakers to give up on dual-clutch transmissions? [w/poll]

Last week, in the midst of Detroit's first days seeking relief in Chapter 9 of the bankruptcy code, Automotive News contributor Larry P. Vellequette penned an editorial suggesting that American car companies raise the white flag on dual clutch transmissions and give up on trying to persuade Americans to buy cars fitted with them. Why? Because, Vellequette says, like CVT transmissions, they "just don't sound right or feel right to American drivers." (Note: In the article, it's not clear if Vellequette is arguing against wet-clutch and dry-clutch DCTs or just dry-clutch DCTs, which is what Ford and Chrysler use.) The article goes on to state that Ford and Chrysler have experimented with DCTs and that both consumers and the automotive press haven't exactly given them glowing reviews, despite their quicker shifts and increased fuel efficiency potential compared to torque-converter automatic transmissions.
Autoblog staffers who weighed in on the relevance of DCTs in American cars generally disagreed with the blanket nature of Vellequette's statement that they don't sound or feel right, but admit that their lack of refinement compared to traditional automatics can be an issue for consumers. That's particularly true in workaday cars like the Ford Focus and Dodge Dart, both of which have come in for criticism in reviews and owner surveys. From where we sit, the higher-performance orientation of such transmissions doesn't always meld as well with the marching orders of everyday commuters (particularly if drivers haven't been educated as to the transmission's benefits and tradeoffs), and in models not fitted with paddle shifters, it's particularly hard for drivers to use a DCT to its best advantage.
Finally, we also note that DCT tuning is very much an evolving science. For instance, Autoblog editors who objected to dual-clutch tuning in the Dart have more recently found the technology agreeable in the Fiat 500L. Practice makes perfect - or at least more acceptable.