1995 Ford Thunderbird No Reserve on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

Performance cars overpower the Detroit Auto Show

At precisely the stroke of noon on Monday, the 2016 Acura NSX rolled on stage at the Detroit Auto Show amid plumes of smoke and dancing lights. The sounds of the powerful engine revving soared to the rafters. It was the second coming of Acura's iconic sports car, and the reveal had all of the expected trappings. Afterwards, champagne corks popped and the bubbly flowed. It was noon in Detroit, but for the green-car movement, it seemed like the clock had struck midnight. That's an exaggeration, but performance was the overwhelming theme of North America's most important show. Ford – which has helped lead the way in smaller displacement engines and early adoption of hybrid powertrains – had more than 1,500 horsepower on stage one point after it revealed the GT concept, the new F-150 Raptor and the Shelby Mustang GT350R. The NSX is technically a hybrid (it has three electric motors), but with 550-plus hp, there's no doubt this Acura was bred on the track. The theme continued throughout the show at nearly every stand. Alfa Romeo showed off the 4C Spider, which is the open-air version of a car that purports to be the spiritual successor of the high-performance 33 Stradale from 1967. On Tuesday, Cadillac is scheduled to reveal the 640-hp CTS-V with the V8 transplanted from the Corvette Z06, and the Lexus was expected to roll out its own V8-powered beast, the 467-hp GS F. For enthusiasts – especially enthusiasts with money – these are halcyon days. But make no mistake, all of this power has a purpose. Ford product chief Raj Nair said the Blue Oval uses high performance cars to develop technologies, like aerodynamics and materials, which are then shared across its lineup. "It's another proof point about how serious we are in developing innovation through performance," he said. Ford, which is rolling out at least 12 performance cars by 2020, said the sporty cars attract younger and more influential buyers to its fold, which can help burnish its image beyond adding sales volume. Toyota is taking a similar approach, senior vice president Bob Carter said, noting the Lexus RC coupe draws people into showrooms and gets them excited about the brand, even if they don't end up buying one. "They provide an aspiration and a halo that provides the attention that gets you noticed in a cluttered market," he said.

Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid

It's been a rough time for the official fuel economy figures for the Ford C-Max Hybrid. When the car was released in 2012, Ford made a huge deal about how it would beat the Toyota Prius V, which was rated at 42 combined miles per gallon, 44 city and 40 highway. The Ford? 47 mpg across the board. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? Well, after hearing customer complaints and issuing a software update in mid-2013, then discovering a real problem with the numbers last fall and then making a big announcement last week that the fuel economy ratings of six different 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles would need to be lowered, the C-Max Hybrid has ended up at 40 combined, 42 city and 37 highway. In other words, the Prius trumps it, as daily drivers of those two vehicles have known for a long time. The changes will not only affect the window sticker, but also the effect that the C-Max Hybrid (and the five other Ford vehicles that had their fuel economy figures lowered last week) have on Ford's compliance with greenhouse gas and CAFE rules for model year 2013 and 2014. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? There are two technical answers to that question, which we've got below, as well as some context for how Ford's mistakes will play out in the bigger world of green vehicles. Let's start with Ford's second error, which is easy to do since we documented it in detail last year (the first, needing to do a software update, was also covered). The basic gist is that Ford used the general label rule (completely legally) to test the Fusion Hybrid and use those numbers to figure out how efficient the C-Max Hybrid is. That turned out to be a mistake, since the two vehicles are different enough that their numbers were not comparable, despite having the same engine, transmission and test weight, as the rules require. You can read more details here. Ford's Said Deep admitted that the TRLHP issue is completely separate from the general label error from last year. Now let's move on to last week's announcement. What's interesting is that the new recalculation of the MPG numbers – downward, of course – was caused by a completely separate issue, something called the Total Road Load Horsepower (TRLHP). Ford's Said Deep admitted to AutoblogGreen that the TRLHP issue had nothing to do with the general label error from last year.