1977 Ford Thunderbird Base Hardtop 2-door 5.0l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Surprise! More Ford and Lincoln cars found with marijuana

Ford is starting to have a serious problem on its hands. Today, ABC 7 in Detroit reported that another batch of Ford Fusion and Lincoln MKZ cars were found packed with 227 pounds of marijuana. This is a little over a week after Fords in Ohio were found stuffed with marijuana and only about two months after Fords in Minnesota were found full of weed. All of the cars traveled on train from Mexico to their destination. All in, several thousand pounds and several million dollars worth of marijuana has been discovered. According to the report, Immigration and Customs Enforcement found the cars at the Ford Rail Distribution Facility in Woodhaven, Michigan, just south of Ford's world headquarters in Dearborn. ICE became involved after a Ford employee reported the cars to Woodhaven police. It's unclear when and where the cars were packed with marijuana. With the cars in Minnesota, it's believed that the weed was added after leaving the factory but before being loaded on the train. Spare tires were removed and the space was used to smuggle the marijuana. Related Video:

Ford F-150 SVT Raptor sales jumping to new heights

Ford can't seem to build F-150 SVT Raptors fast enough. The off-road-ready trucks have been one of the Blue Oval's most reliable sellers, with record sales in eight of the last 10 months and a 14-percent jump in 2013. That's impressive enough, considering that the least expensive Raptor starts at $44,000. Factor in the modded F-150's fuel economy (it's rated at 11 miles per gallon in the city and 16 on the highway) and a national average gas price, as of this writing, of $3.55 per gallon, and its success is as unlikely as Ford's home team, the Detroit Lions, winning the Super Bowl this year (sorry, Lions fans, we're just quoting the experts in Vegas...).
Yet for some reason, Raptors spend an average of just 15 days on dealer lots before being snapped up, which is a quarter of the 60-day industry average. According to Ford's truck group marketing manager, Doug Scott, it's capability that keeps the Raptor selling strong. "What's helping drive Raptor sales is that Raptor delivers unmatched off-road performance to our customers. Raptor is also proof of our commitment to offer a truck for every customer and continuously improving them to meet our customers' evolving needs."
To address the strong demand for Raptors, Ford will bump production from three trucks per hour to five. Not much, we agree. But building an extra 48 trucks per day, at most, seems like a prudent way of addressing demand without oversaturating what is ultimately a niche market. Check out the press release below for more.

EPA says fuel economy test for hybrids is accurate

The EPA says it stands behind its fuel economy test for hybrid vehicles following controversy about the testing process after Ford C-Max Hybrid customers and automotive journalists alike struggled to achieve 47 miles per gallon, the advertised mpg number, Automotive News reports. Ford responded to the issue almost two weeks ago by claiming that a 1970s-era EPA general label rule was responsible for the inaccurate mileage numbers, rerating the C-Max Hybrid's mpg numbers and offering customers rebates. Ford later said it didn't overstate the C-Max Hybrid's fuel economy and that it was surprised by the low numbers.
Ford technically didn't do anything wrong because it was following the general label rule, but agency regulator Christopher Grundler says the automaker was exploiting a loophole when it came up with the hybrid C-Max numbers, and that the testing process remains accurate. The general label rule allows vehicles that use the same engine and transmission and are in the same weight class to share fuel economy numbers, but it doesn't take into account other factors such as aerodynamic efficiency, which affects hybrids more drastically than non-hybrid vehicles. Ford originally used the Fusion Hybrid economy figures for the C-Max Hybrid and claimed the engineers didn't realize that its aerodynamic efficiency would affect fuel economy as much as it did.