1941 - Ford Pickup on 2040-cars

Auto blog

The U-2 spy plane needs high-performance cars to help land

Typically, aircraft deploy their landing gear from three main points. Most military aircraft, for example, deploy two gears at the back and one forward, like a tricycle. Some civilian aircraft flip the layout, with two in front and one in back - tail-draggers. The U-2 Dragon Lady is wildly different than any of these. With a 103-foot wingspan but a body that's just 63-feet long, the layout of the U-2 makes a traditional landing setup infeasible. Instead, the U-2 utilizes a pair of wheels, one up front and one in back. With such a bizarre layout, landings are so tough that since the U-2's earliest flights at Area 51, the US Air Force has used high-performance chase cars to guide the pilot down safely. The landing process isn't over there, though. As this video from Sploid shows, balancing out the aircraft to fit the detachable "pogos" – think training wheels for spy planes – is a comical procedure requiring a number of airman using their full body weight to even out the U-2. This video also recaps some of the great vehicles that have served as chase vehicles for this legendary spy plane. They include Chevrolet El Caminos, and the Fox-body Ford Mustangs so favored by the California Highway Patrol. For the last several years, the USAF has utilized products from General Motors, using fourth-generation Chevy Camaros, before switching over to the Pontiac GTO and most recently, the awesome Pontiac G8. It's fair to say that if you're a gearhead in the Air Force, this is the job you want. Check out the video, embedded up top. News Source: Sploid via YouTubeImage Credit: Sploid Chevrolet Ford GM Pontiac Military Performance Videos

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.

Jaguar design boss admits X-Type was a mistake

History has a way of repeating itself, especially in the auto industry. When Jaguar was owned by Ford, the British brand attempted to field a competitor for the BMW 3 Series, called the X-Type. Based on the bones of a Ford Mondeo, it aped the styling of Jaguar's flagship model, the XJ, while borrowing liberally from the Ford parts bin. That was 2001.
Now, in 2013, Jaguar is planning a new 3 Series challenger based on the platform previewed by the C-X17 Concept, while Ford is attempting to take the latest Mondeo upmarket. The moves have both brands recognizing where, why, and how the X-Type failed. "It didn't look mature or powerful or anything. It was just a car," Jaguar's current head of advanced design, Julian Thomson, told PistonHeads. Basing the X-Type on a front-drive car while giving it styling that was meant for a rear-driver lead to proportions that "were plainly wrong," Thomson told PH. Ford's European head of quality, Gunnar Herrmann, added that the X-Type was "a fake Jaguar, because every piece I touch is Ford."
For what it's worth, the X-Type's successor in the segment will sport rear-drive, with plenty of input from Ian Callum. Thomson described the new model, which would challenge the 3 Series as having, "Big wheels right to the ends of the car, low bonnet, short overhangs, very low cabins." Sounds good to us.