Model T Touring - Originally Bought From Dealership To Be Restored. Very Solid. on 2040-cars

Auto blog

1979 Dodge Li'l Red Express in Generation Gap showdown with 1933 Ford Pickup

Auto enthusiasts love a good debate, whether it's Mustang versus Camaro or Ferrari against Lamborghini. But how about a battle between two very different vintages of classic pickup trucks? In this case, the fight is between a 1979 Dodge Li'l Red Express and a 1933 Ford Model 46 truck with a flathead V8.
The shootout comes courtesy of the internet series Generation Gap, and its concept is super-simple. One guy prefers classics, and the other likes newer rides. They choose a category, pick two vehicles and put them head to head. In this case, neither is exactly modern, though. The Ford is more than old enough to receive Social Security checks, and the Dodge is hardly a young whippersnapper.
Other than both being pickups, these two models were made to serve very different functions. The Li'l Red Express was basically the progenitor of today's muscle trucks, with a big V8 that made it one of the quickest new models in its day (admittedly, 1979 was a rough time for automotive performance). On the other hand, the '33 Ford was just meant to work, with little pretense for anything else. One of the hosts describes it as "the simplest, most difficult" vehicle he's driven because of the tricky double clutchwork necessary to shift gears. Scroll down to watch the video and try to decide which of these two American classics you would rather have in your garage.

Ford recalls 9,900 vehicles across two campaigns

Ford is recalling a total of 9,885 vehicles in two campaigns. The Basics: In one recall, Ford will recall 9,017 examples of the 2013 Escape with build dates from January 11, 2012, to April 1, 2013, and the 2013-2014 Focus ST produced between May 3, 2012, and October 14, 2013. The Problem: Splices in the engine wiring harness might not have enough compression, and this can cause the manifold absolute pressure sensor to send incorrect signals to the powertrain control module. This issue could cause the engine to stall. Injuries/Deaths: None reported. The Fix: Dealers will replace the current crimped splices with new splices, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. If You Own One: The repair campaign will begin on January 4, 2016. More Information: Ford recalled the 2013 Escape and Focus ST in August 2014 for the same problem, and this is an expansion of that campaign, according to company spokesperson John Cangany to Autoblog. The Basics: In the smaller of the two campaigns, Ford will recall 868 examples of the 2013 Explorer, Explorer Police Utility, Taurus, Taurus Police Interceptor, Flex, Lincoln MKS, and MKT. The Problem: The fuel delivery module can crack, which would cause a fuel leak. Injuries/Deaths: None reported. The Fix: Dealers will replace the fuel delivery module. If You Own One: Owners should receive notice soon because NHTSA's report says the recall begins in December. More Information: According to Cangany, this recall is an expansion of a campaign from 2013 for these vehicles. RECALL Subject : Engine Wiring Splices may cause Stall Report Receipt Date: DEC 02, 2015 NHTSA Campaign Number: 15V813000 Component(s): ELECTRICAL SYSTEM Potential Number of Units Affected: 9,017 All Products Associated with this Recall Vehicle Make Model Model Year(s) FORD ESCAPE 2013 FORD FOCUS 2013-2014 Details Manufacturer: Ford Motor Company SUMMARY: Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2013 Escape vehicles manufactured January 11, 2012, to April 1, 2013, and 2013-2014 Focus ST vehicles manufactured May 03, 2012, to October 14, 2013. Insufficient compression in the engine wiring harness splices to the Manifold Absolute Pressure (MAP) sensor may provide incorrect signals to the powertrain control module (PCM). CONSEQUENCE: The incorrect signals could cause the vehicle to hesitate or the engine to stall, increasing the risk of a crash.

The next-generation wearable will be your car

This year's CES has had a heavy emphasis on the class of device known as the "wearable" – think about the Apple Watch, or Fitbit, if that's helpful. These devices usually piggyback off of a smartphone's hardware or some other data connection and utilize various onboard sensors and feedback devices to interact with the wearer. In the case of the Fitbit, it's health tracking through sensors that monitor your pulse and movement; for the Apple Watch and similar devices, it's all that and some more. Manufacturers seem to be developing a consensus that vehicles should be taking on some of a wearable's functionality. As evidenced by Volvo's newly announced tie-up with the Microsoft Band 2 fitness tracking wearable, car manufacturers are starting to explore how wearable devices will help drivers. The On Call app brings voice commands, spoken into the Band 2, into the mix. It'll allow you to pass an address from your smartphone's agenda right to your Volvo's nav system, or to preheat your car. Eventually, Volvo would like your car to learn things about your routines, and communicate back to you – or even, improvise to help you wake up earlier to avoid that traffic that might make you late. Do you need to buy a device, like the $249 Band 2, and always wear it to have these sorts of interactions with your car? Despite the emphasis on wearables, CES 2016 has also given us a glimmer of a vehicle future that cuts out the wearable middleman entirely. Take Audi's new Fit Driver project. The goal is to reduce driver stress levels, prevent driver fatigue, and provide a relaxing interior environment by adjusting cabin elements like seat massage, climate control, and even the interior lighting. While it focuses on a wearable device to monitor heart rate and skin temperature, the Audi itself will use on-board sensors to examine driving style and breathing rate as well as external conditions – the weather, traffic, that sort of thing. Could the seats measure skin temperature? Could the seatbelt measure heart rate? Seems like Audi might not need the wearable at all – the car's already doing most of the work. Whether there's a device on a driver's wrist or not, manufacturers seem to be developing a consensus that vehicles should be taking on some of a wearable's functionality.