1967 Ford Galaxie 500 Ltd 390 W/ Factory A/c on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Lincoln MKC recalled because start button located too close to touchscreen [UPDATE]

UPDATE: Ford spokesperson Kelli Felker responded to our questions and let us know that the fix for the push-button start on the 2015 MKC has the switch moved to the top of the of the column of gear shift buttons instead of the bottom. Owners should be notified about both campaigns "toward the end of February." After massive campaigns from General Motors and to fix Takata airbag inflators, 2014 will undoubtedly go down as The Year Of The Recall. And with little time to spare, Ford is getting in just under the wire to adding two more to its yearly total. The larger of the campaigns is actually one of the most bizarre campaigns we've heard of all year. Lincoln is recalling 13,574 units of its 2015 MKC compact crossover in North America to move the location of the push-button ignition switch on the dashboard. According to the automaker's announcement: "Due to the switch's close proximity to other controls, occupants are inadvertently shutting off the engine while driving." The button is located near the bottom of the touchscreen, which can apparently make it possible to hit by mistake. Back when Autoblog first drove the new MKC in June, we came away very impressed, but noted: "... we're still not completely sold on the aforementioned pushbutton transmission selector ... it still seems somewhat gimmicky and it can't be operated by feel alone, as you might when shifting a traditional console-mounted lever from Park to Drive." According to Lincoln, there have been no reported accidents or injuries stemming from this button misapplication. Of the affected vehicles, there are 11,144 in the US, 2,033 in Canada and 397 in Mexico. To fix the problem, dealers are moving the button to a different location and reprogramming the powertrain control module. According to Automotive News, models built since September already have a different layout. The change was reportedly done to match the rest of the Lincoln lineup. The second recall covers 12,205 units of the 2014 Ford Escape (2015 model year pictured below) and 2015 Lincoln MKC in North America because of a problem with nickel plating on the fuel pump. The issue can cause the pump to seize, which can cause the crossovers not to start or stall while driving. The automaker is not aware of any accidents or injuries related to this fault. Dealers are replacing the fuel deliver module to fix the situation. Of the affected vehicles, there are 9,038 in the US, 3,074 in Canada and 93 in Mexico.

Automakers' rush on aluminum may result in shortage

Aluminum is the new buzzword in the automotive industry. The latest Range Rover and Range Rover Sport both take advantage of the lightweight material to shave huge amounts of body fat (only it's called "aluminium" over there). Audi and Jaguar have been using the stuff for years in their A8 and XJ, respectively, and now, aluminum is going mainstream, arriving on the 2015 Ford F-150.
While we're excited to see aluminum make an impact outside the premium market, its widespread adoption apparently won't come without some problems, notably in terms of supply. "There isn't an automotive manufacturer that makes vehicles in North America that we're not talking to," Tom Boney, of Novelis, the largest global supplier of aluminum sheetmetal, told The Detroit News.
According to Boney, Ford's use of aluminum on such a large scale has forced auto manufacturers in "every boardroom" to reconsider their plans following the F-150's unveiling, for one simple reason: there's not exactly enough aluminum to go around, at least in the short term. The auto industry presently only accounts for six percent of the aluminum sheet produced, but as the material is adopted by more and more brands, that figure is expected to swell to 25 percent within the next six years.

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.