1923 Ford "t" Bucket Street Rod on 2040-cars

Auto blog

How Ford made its 2015 Ford Mustang safer for toupee wearers [w/video]

Ford is ready to tell the story of its 2015 Mustang Convertible, the can't-miss bits being the easier, quicker and quieter roof operation, a more robust roof build for a coupe-like cabin noise, more trunk space, better visibility and reduced in-cabin buffeting. The top release system has been completely redesigned with a single, center-mounted latch on the windshield frame instead of the dual latches of before. The driver can now release the roof without having to lean over into the passenger space, after which the top goes down fully automatically with the press of a button. Ford doesn't say how long it takes to stow, but it's apparently done in half as much time as before, so figure around 8 seconds.
The roof uses a five-bow structure, with the fabric outer and full inner headliner sandwiching ten millimeters of insulation. Detailing work on the top has eliminated "unsightly folds" in the corners when the roof is up and made it more compact when down; its Z-fold assembly is 6.7 inches lower than before at its highest point when put down. Ford says the new electric drive internals make less noise when in operation, and the fully-finished droptop look is achieved with snap-in caps that flank the rear seating and stow in the trunk when not in use (the outgoing Mustang's top was higher and the front when folded and always looked like it was catching air and creating drag).
The compact roof and newly independent rear suspension setup in back means liberated trunk space, 11.4 cubic feet ready to swallow golf bags and tourist swag. You can read a lot more about it in the press release below, check it out in the short video of running footage and learn about the aerodynamic improvements made to the entire Mustang lineup that decrease drag and increase fuel economy.

Ford finds flex-fuel engine design plays big role in emissions output

How bad is ethanol for your engine? There's been a lot of debate on this issue as the US considers upping the biofuel content in the national gasoline supply from 10 percent (E10) to 15 percent (E15). The ethanol industry and some scientists say higher ethanol blends show no "meaningful differences" in new engines while the oil industry says ethanol creates health risks. Researchers working at the Ford Research and Innovation Center decided to take a closer look at how a wide range of gas-ethanol blends - E0, E10, E20, E30, E40, E55 and E80 - affected the emissions coming out of a flex-fuel 2006 Mercury Grand Marquis. To see the full report, printed in the journal Environmental Science & Technology, requires payment, but there is an abstract and Green Car Congress has some more details. The gist is that, "with increasing ethanol content in the fuel, the tailpipe emissions of ethanol, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, methane, and ammonia increased." At least NOx and NMHC emissions decreased. The researchers say that the effects are due to the fuel and "are expected for all FFVs," but that the way that a manufacturer calibrates the engine will affect NOx, THC, and NMOG emissions. It's this last bit that's important, since the researchers found, "Higher ethanol content in gasoline affects several fundamental fuel properties that can impact emissions. ... These changes can have positive or negative effects that can depend on engine design, hardware, and control strategy. In addition to direct emissions impacts, higher ethanol content fuel can also provide more efficient combustion and overall engine operation under part-load conditions and under knock-limited higher-load conditions." So, as we head towards more ethanol in our fuel supply (maybe), manufacturers are going to need to learn how to burn it most efficiently.

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.