1928 Ford Model A Street Rod on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Europe's most-wanted classic car is... the Ford Mustang?

Over the span of its 49 years and five generations, the Ford Mustang has held a special place in the hearts of automotive enthusiasts in the US, but, as it turns out, this car is also very popular amongst European car lovers. Earlier this summer, AutoScout24 - a new and used car shopping site in Europe - polled around 75,000 European "car lovers" (not sure how they vetted the respondents) to see which cars were the most popular, and the Mustang came out on top over iconic European classics like the BMW M1 and Volkswagen Beetle.
In the whole of Europe, 37 percent of those polled dream of owning a Mustang, but that number jumps in individual countries like Austria (42 percent) and Spain (41 percent). Rounding out the top five popular classics in Europe are the Mini and Citroën 2CV. Find out which cars made up the rest of the top 10 in the press release posted below.

Weekly Recap: 2016 CTS-V gives Cadillac new momentum for the new year

It's been a rough year for Cadillac. The historic luxury carmaker been in the news for all of the wrong reasons: Declining sales, ditching its advertising agency and the relocation of its headquarters from Detroit to New York. But in late December, Cadillac reminded everyone what it does best: Build some of the rawest and most compelling luxury sedans in the world, as evidenced by the 2016 CTS-V. This monster churns out 640 horsepower from a supercharged 6.2-liter V8. Sound familiar? That's the Corvette Z06 engine, and it makes this CTS the most powerful production Cadillac ever. It also puts the sporting divisions of the Germans on notice. The new CTS-V easily overpowers the Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG S 4Matic and its 5.5-liter biturbo V8 rated at 577 hp, and the BMW M5 (with the competition pack) and its 4.4-liter twin-turbo V8 that pushes out 575 hp. The rear-wheel drive Cadillac can sprint to 60 miles per hour in 3.7 seconds, which is close to the 3.5-second time turned in by the 4Matic-driven E63 S, and a bit quicker than the 4.1 seconds posted by the M5. With Magnetic Ride Control, General Motors' stout eight-speed automatic transmission (also used in the Corvette), Brembo brakes and a carbon-fiber option package that pretty much builds your car out of carbon fiber – it's clear this Cadillac means business. Truth be told, we expected this CTS-V to deliver. It's been a serious sports sedan for a decade, and the recent generation and its 556-hp arrogance have been particularly memorable. But notice what we're doing here? We're talking about product. Not who makes Cadillac's ads, or if the brand's headquarters has a mailing address in NYC. Like the 2016 ATS-V that's due in the spring, the debut of the 2016 CTS-V (on sale in late summer) is a shot in the arm for Cadillac, and its arrival comes during time of transition. The brand is trying to reinvent itself as a modern luxury maker. It wants new customers, a different image and obviously more sales. Those things are going to take time, but with a 640-hp sledgehammer of a sports sedan on tap for next year, Cadillac can still maintain some of its swagger through all of the change. Other News And Views 1984 Audi Sport Quattro heads for the auction block If you're into '80s rally cars, you're really a car person. But if you're into that stuff – and we are – this 1984 Audi Sport Quattro is sure to get your blood flowing.

Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy

With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.