Black Lincoln Ls on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2020 Lincoln Aviator crossover is a hot rod with 400 horsepower standard

LOS ANGELES — The 2020 Lincoln Aviator has finally been revealed in production form following its "concept" debut at the New York Auto Show earlier this year. We add the quotes because the production model is identical to the New York model. Appearances aside, the big news is under the hood. At launch, the Lincoln Aviator will be available with two engines. They're both twin-turbocharged 3.0-liter V6s, and one of them is a plug-in hybrid. The standard engine makes an impressive 400 horsepower and 400 pound-feet of torque. To help put that into perspective, that's about 40 more horsepower than the top-rung six-cylinder Mercedes-Benz GLE 450 we just drove, and about 65 more horsepower than the entry-level six-cylinder BMW X5 xDrive40i. Moving to the hybrid powertrain brings Aviator output to 450 horsepower and a staggering 600 pound-feet of torque. That's just 6 ponies shy of the V8-powered BMW X5 xDrive50i, but 121 more pound-feet of torque. This plug-in hybrid powertrain will also be able to do the typical plug-in stuff. You can run the vehicle in pure electric mode or hold the charge to be deployed at a more advantageous time such as driving in town at the end of a highway drive. Lincoln did not give estimates for the pure electric range. Fuel economy hasn't been revealed yet, either. Other interesting hybrid notes: The battery fits entirely under the passenger side of the vehicle between the front and rear wheels. The motor is sandwiched between the engine and transmission. Lincoln also mentioned this is a modular hybrid system, so expect to see it appear in other Lincoln and Ford products in the future. This powertrain layout is part of what makes it possible for all versions of the Aviator to use the same 10-speed automatic transmission, which is gradually proliferating through the whole Ford family. From there, power either goes solely to the rear wheels, or through an optional all-wheel-drive system. All of this power can ride on an available adaptive air suspension the company calls Air Glide. It works like many adaptive suspensions, scanning the road with a camera to adjust damping for bumps ahead. It does have some other trick features, though. When the Aviator is parked, the suspension lowers to make the crossover look more attractive while sitting. And when the driver approaches, it lowers itself further for easier ingress. It also raises itself for snow or mild off-road driving, and it lowers down at highway speeds for better aerodynamics.

2020 Lincoln Aviator Grand Touring plug-in hybrid range, fuel economy revealed

The range-topping 2020 Lincoln Aviator Grand Touring plug-in hybrid luxury crossover finally has official fuel economy ratings. The electric range is 21 miles, and when the battery is exhausted, gas-only combined fuel economy is 23 mpg. The EPA's combined electric and gas test loop yielded 56 mpg-e. These numbers make the Aviator Grand Touring the most frugal version of the three-row luxury crossover, with the next most efficient one being the rear-drive non-hybrid model at 21 mpg combined. When going by gas-only fuel economy, though, the Aviator Grand Touring's non-plug-in cousin, the Ford Explorer Hybrid, returns up to 28 mpg combined with rear-wheel drive, and 25 mpg with all-wheel drive. It has much less power at 318 horsepower and 322 pound-feet of torque, compared to the Aviator Grand Touring's 494 horsepower and 630 pound-feet of torque. The luxury plug-in hybrid crossover segment is quite small right now. The closest competitor to the Aviator Grand Touring is probably the Porsche Cayenne E-Hybrid. It has a shorter electric range of 13 miles, and its gas-only fuel economy is a slightly worse at 22 mpg. The Porsche is less powerful with 455 horsepower and 516 pound-feet of torque, and its base price of $82,450 exceeds the Lincoln's $69,895 price. The Mercedes-Benz GLC 350e splits the difference on efficiency with a worse 10-mile electric range, but a better gasoline fuel economy of 25 mpg combined. This could improve for 2020, as the updated model will have a larger battery. It's cheaper, too, at $51,645, but it's also a full size smaller than the Lincoln.

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.