Ford 1997 F450 Tow Truck Milles 85,025 - Engine 7.3 Turbo Diesel 5 Speed Trans on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Motorweek goes retro with '80s hot hatch shootout

Motorweek's decades of history on television make it the perfect medium to look back into the automotive past and see how things are different now. It recently added old road test videos to its YouTube channel of the Acura NSX and Toyota Supra, as well as the Ferrari F40. For one of its newest flashback clips, Motorweek has exhumed an affordable five-car challenge of 1986's premiere hot hatches.
By today's standards, this is an eclectic field that features fondly remembered classics like the Volkswagen GTI 16-valve and Acura Integra. However, it also throws in some nearly forgotten contenders like the Dodge Colt Turbo and Ford Escort GT. The angular Toyota Corolla FX16 GT-S rounds out the group.
It's fascinating to watch Motorweek run the quintet through the slalom, down the drag strip and on various roads. What's most striking in this clip is the difference in the definition of a performance car between then and now. With its 16-valve, 1.8-liter four-cylinder, the GTI is the burliest of the contenders with 123 horsepower, but it still takes 8.8 seconds to reach 60 miles per hour. By today's standards, that would make it a plain-jane economy car, and not even a particularly quick one.

All 25 James Bond movies ranked only by their cars

There is no shortage of lists ranking the best James Bond movies. Ditto lists about the best or worst James Bond cars. I know, I've written some of them. As such, why not combine the two ideas into one new list that ranks all 25 official James Bond movies based exclusively on their cars, or more accurately their car content. I would then pull from my 25 years of James Bond nerddom plus the excellent "Bond Cars: The Definitive History" and our interview with long-time Bond special effects supervisor Chris Corbould to provide tidbits and factoids about the cars and their roles in the movies. And yes(!), this list now includes "No Time to Die," which impresses by adding plenty of car content to the series. It's now available on Blu-ray and download. To determine the list, I considered the inherent coolness of the cars as well as their importance to Bond, film and car history. I considered their importance to the story as well as the quality/excitement of the chases and scenes they participated in. Finally, I tried my best to divorce the car content from my opinions about the movies in general. That my personal list of best James movies looks nothing like this shows I was at least partially successful.     25. 'Moonraker' There are virtually no cars in "Moonraker." None. Oh, there's a gondola on wheels that makes a pigeon do a double-take, but that's not the same thing as a car. Neither is a golf cart. Or an ambulance. Or a space shuttle.   24. 'From Russia With Love' The literary James Bond mostly drove an ancient Bentley, and "From Russia with Love" is the only film in which it appears. It stays parked and the coolest thing that happens (by 1962 standards) is 007 answers its car phone. Thereafter, we get some old cars (even by 1962 standards) driving around Istanbul and a yellow truck. So yeah. Classic Bond film, a must-watch, just not for its car content.   23. 'Dr. No' History records that the first "Bond car" is the Sunbeam Alpine in "Dr. No." The car itself was literally borrowed from a Miss Jennifer Jackson of 53 Lady Musgrave Road in Jamaica for 10 pounds per day for two days during filming. Also, the stunt where it drove under an excavator blocking the road was entirely conceived because the filmmakers showed up to the road they intended to film on and discovered an excavator blocking the thing. Sadly, those are really the only two things interesting about the Alpine, which is a pretty small and dainty thing by Bond car standards.

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.