1966 Ford Falcon/ Primer/very Solid Condition. on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2017 Ford Super Duty trucks recalled because the fuel tank could fall off

Bad news from Dearborn. Ford just announced a pair of recalls, including a particularly worrying flaw in the new F-Series Super Duty. According to Ford's official announcement, there are roughly 8,000 of its big trucks on the roads with a missing reinforcement bracket – if it's not there, the fuel tank could separate from the frame. Yes, Ford is basically saying the fuel tank could fall out. We don't need to explain why this would be a very bad thing. Fortunately, no owners have experienced said bad things – Ford claims it's unaware of any fires, injuries, or accidents resulting from the flaws. The Kentucky Truck Plant built the affected pickups between August 10 and September 17. The bulk of the vehicles are in the US – 7,103, to be precise. Another 964 are cruising around the frozen Canadian tundra, while two more are in "federalized territories." The other recall is smaller, but reaches across a broad swath of the Blue Oval's family vehicles. Ford says there are 1,352 Taurus sedans, Flex crossovers, Explorer SUVs – including the Police Interceptor Utility variant – and Lincoln MKTs equipped with the company's 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 that could catch fire. In this case, the danger isn't a detached fuel tank, but an "improperly brazed turbocharger oil supply tube" that could leak and spill engine oil on the turbocharger. Again, Ford isn't aware of any fires, accidents, or injuries due to the flaw. Here's the breakdown of manufacturer dates and location: 2016 Ford Taurus vehicles built at Chicago Assembly Plant, Oct. 18, 2016 to Nov. 2, 2016 2016-17 Ford Flex vehicles built at Oakville Assembly Plant, Oct. 18, 2016 to Nov. 10, 2016 2017 Ford Explorer vehicles built at Chicago Assembly Plant, Oct. 15, 2016 to Nov. 12, 2016 2017 Ford Police Interceptor Utility vehicles built at Chicago Assembly Plant on Nov. 2, 2016 2016-17 Lincoln MKT vehicles built at Oakville Assembly Plant, Oct. 18, 2016 to Nov. 10, 2016 As with the Super Duty recall, most of the affected cars, crossovers, and SUVs are in the US market. There are 126 units in Canada and six in the same "federalized territories" mentioned above. In the case of both recalls, dealers will inspect the affected parts and replace or add them as necessary. Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.

Autoblog's guilty pleasure cars

Guilty pleasures are part of life – don't even try to pretend like you don't have one (or two, or six). In the non-automotive space, this could come down to that secret playlist in your iPhone of songs you'll only listen to when you're alone; or think of that one TV show you really do love, but won't admit to your friends. I've got plenty, and so do you. Going back to cars, here's a particularly juicy one for me: several years ago, I had a mad crush on the very last iteration of the Cadillac DTS. Oh yes, the front-wheel-drive, Northstar V8-powered sofa-on-wheels that was the last remaining shred of the elderly-swooning days of Cadillac's past. Every time I had the chance to drive one, I was secretly giddy. Don't hate me, okay? These days, the DTS is gone, but I've still got a mess of other cars that hold a special place in my heart. And in the spirit of camaraderie, I've asked my other Autoblog editors to tell me some of their guilty pleasure cars, as well – Seyth Miersma, as you can see above, has a few choice emotions to share about the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution. Read on to find out what cars make us secretly happy. Mercedes-Benz SL65 AMG This decadent convertible is the epitome of the guilty pleasure. It's big, powerful, fairly heavy and it's richly appointed inside and out. It's a chocolate eclair with the three-pointed star on the hood. Given my druthers, I'd take the SL65 AMG, which delivers 621 horsepower and 738 pound-feet of torque. That output is borderline absurd for this laid-back convertible. I don't care. You don't need dessert. Sometimes you just crave it. The SL line is about the feel you get on the road. The roof is open. The air, sun and engine sounds all embrace you. It's the same dynamic you could have experienced in a Mercedes a century ago, yet the SL gives you the most modern of luxuries. An Airscarf feature that warms my neck and shoulders through a vent embedded in the seat? Yes, please. Sure, it's an old-guy car. Mr. Burns and Lord Grantham are probably too young and hip for an SL65. I don't care. This is my guilty pleasure. Release the hounds. – Greg Migliore Senior Editor Ford Flex I drove my first Flex in 2009 when my mother let me borrow hers for the summer while I was away at college. The incredibly spacious interior made moving twice that summer a breeze, and the 200-mile trips up north were quite comfortable.

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.