1965 Ford Mustang K-code Convertible 4 Speed Rare!!!!!! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Big electric trucks won't save the planet, says the NYT

When The New York Times decides that an issue is an issue, be prepared to read about it at length. Rarely will a week passes these days when the esteemed news organization doesn’t examine the realities, myths and alleged benefits and drawbacks of electric vehicles, and even The Atlantic joins in sometimes. That revolution, marked by changes in manufacturing, consumer habits and social “consciousness,” may in fact be upon us. Or it may not. Nonetheless, the newspaper appears committed to presenting to the public these pros and cons. In this recently published article titled, “Just How Good for the Planet Is That Big Electric Pickup Truck?”—wow, thatÂ’s a mouthful — the Times focuses on the “bigness” of the current and pending crop of EVs, and how that impacts or will impact the environment and road safety. This is not what news organizations these days are fond of calling “breaking news.” In October, we pointed to an essay in The Atlantic that covered pretty much the same ground, and focused on the Hummer as one particular villain, In the paper and online on Feb. 18, the Times' Elana Shao observes how “swapping a gas pickup truck for a similar electric one can produce significant emissions savings.” She goes on: “Take the Ford F-150 pickup truck compared with the electric F-150 Lightning. The electric versions are responsible for up to 50 percent less greenhouse gas emissions per mile.” But she right away flips the argument, noting the heavier electric pickup trucks “often require bigger batteries and more electricity to charge, so they end up being responsible for more emissions than other smaller EVs. Taking into consideration the life cycle emissions per mile, they end up just as polluting as some smaller gas-burning cars.” Certainly, itÂ’s been drummed into our heads that electric cars donÂ’t run on air and water but on electricity that costs money, and that the public will be dealing with “the shift toward electric SUVs, pickup trucks and crossover vehicles, with some analysts estimating that SUVs, pickup trucks and vans could make up 78 percent of vehicle sales by 2025." No-brainer alert: Big vehicles cost more to charge. And then thereÂ’s the safety question, which was cogently addressed in the Atlantic story. Here Shao reiterates data documenting the increased risks of injuries and deaths caused by larger, heavier vehicles.

How the Ram Multifunction Tailgate compares to Ford, GMC, Honda

Ram just announced its Multifunction Tailgate — a descriptive if not very creative name. It's an asymmetrical barn-door arrangement, which can both fold down like a conventional tailgate or swing open like a gate. There's a new bed step, but unlike Ford or GM, the step isn't part of the tailgate itself. Rather, it kicks out from under the bumper (as opposed to out from under the driver's side of the rear bumper in its previous incarnation). So let's just focus on the tailgate functionality. A video of the Ram Multifunction Tailgate in action is above. For one, either of the swinging tailgate sections can be opened independently. They open to a full 88 degrees. In conventional flip-down mode, the tailgate works just like a normal one, too, with a 2,000-pound rating. The bottom line is that while it gives a variety of types of access to the load area, it doesn't "do" anything else. It's a $995 option on any Ram 1500. Its closest analogue is the Honda Ridgeline, which works basically the same way, but on that truck the tailgate swings as one piece. And the Honda's load rating isn't as hefty as the Ram's tailgate: 300 pounds. As Honda says, that's sufficient to hold the weight of the part of an ATV hanging out of the bed, or something similar, but it's a lighter-duty unit (and a lighter-duty truck) than the Ram's overall. Let's also get Ford's one-trick tailgate out of the way before comparing to the more analogous, and complicated, GM MultiPro. A bit of trivia: Ford's optional Tailgate Step is actually designed and supplied by Multimatic, better known as the outfit that builds the Ford GT and produces the DSSV spool-valve shocks. This step has been available for years. It pulls out of the top edge of the tailgate when the tailgate is lowered, deploying a single step. A separate handle pulls out from beside the step and flips up, giving a handhold. While it was initially (and infamously) mocked by competitors, with load floor heights as high as they are it's better than toting around a stepstool. It's currently a $375 standalone option. Now we get to the GMC MultiPro tailgate, the most complicated and multi-functioned around. It's essentially a tailgate within a tailgate, with a fold-out stopper that deploys from the inner tailgate. This gives it several functions depending on the position of all the parts. It can still be used like a normal tailgate, dropping down at the push of a button or using the key fob.

Ford Mustang Mach-E fails Sweden's moose test

The infamous moose test has claimed another casualty. This time it's the Ford Mustang Mach-E AWD Long Range, which was tested in an electric four-way alongside the Tesla Model Y, Hyundai Ioniq 5 and Skoda Enyaq iV (an electric utility vehicle closely related to the Volkswagen ID.4 that is sold in the United States). According to the Swedish testers at Teknikens Varld, Ford's electric car not only failed to hit the speed necessary for a passing grade, it didn't perform well at slower speeds, either. To pass the outlet's moose test, a car has to complete a rapid left-right-straight S-shaped pattern marked by cones at a speed of at least 72 km/h (44.7 miles per hour). The test is designed to mimic the type of avoidance maneuver a driver would have to take in order to avoid hitting something that wandered into the road, which in Sweden may be a moose but could just as easily be a deer or some other member of the animal kingdom elsewhere in the world, or possibly a child or car backing into the motorway. Not only is the maneuver very aggressive, it's also performed with weights belted into each seat and more weight added to the cargo area to hit the vehicle's maximum allowable carrying capacity. The Mustang Mach-E only managed to complete the moose test at 68 km/h (42.3 mph), well below the passing-grade threshold. Even at much lower speeds, Teknikens Varld says the Mach-E (which boasts the highest carrying capacity and was therefore loaded with more weight than the rest of the vehicles tested in this quartet) is "too soft in the chassis" and suffers from "too slow steering." Proving that it is indeed possible to pass the test, the Hyundai and Skoda completed the maneuver at the 44.7-mph figure required for a passing grade and the Tesla did it at 46.6 mph, albeit with less weight in the cargo area. It's not clear whether other versions of the Mustang Mach-E would pass the test. It's also unknown if Ford will make any changes to its chassis tuning or electronic stability control software, as some other automakers have done after a poor performance from Teknikens Varld, to improve its performance in the moose test. Related video: