Only 18k Car Fax Certified Florida Miles . Not A Rental Car Like Most Of Them. on 2040-cars

Auto blog

The 1965 Ford Mustang could have looked a lot different

The 1965 Ford Mustang is unquestionably an automotive design icon, and nearly every generation of Mustang has some connection to that original car. Because it's such a universally-known vehicle, we were amazed to see all the different designs that were being considered. Head of Ford's archives Ted Ryan recently shared photos of design proposals for the original Mustang on Twitter that he and Jamie Myler found, and we reached out to them to find out more. As Ryan initially noted, the photos were taken on August 19, 1962, and they are proposals for the Ford Mustang. Apparently Ford had committed to doing a Falcon-based youth-oriented car at this point, and it did have plans to launch the car in 1964 for the 1965 model year. But after having little success with early design proposals, the company asked all of its design studios — the Advanced Studio, Lincoln-Mercury Studio and Ford Studio — to submit proposals. With only about two years before the planned launch, Ford was understandably short on time, and it's believed that the studios only had a month to create and present these designs. Lincoln-Mercury design proposal View 8 Photos The majority of the designs, a total of five, came from the Advanced Studio, and part of this was because they already had a couple of concept designs in reserve it could present. Two other models representing three design possibilities came from Lincoln-Mercury, and just one model with two options came from Ford. The Advanced Studio proposals are shown in the gallery at the very top of this article, and the Lincoln-Mercury and Ford proposals are in the gallery directly above this paragraph. The Advanced Studio's most radical design is the one that was clearly related to the Mustang I concept that would be shown later that year with huge wraparound rear glass, turbine-inspired bumpers and enormous side scoops. The other proposals from the studio were more conservative, featuring simple lines, grilles reminiscent of the Falcon, and one even borrowing the jet-thruster-style taillights made famous on the Thunderbird. Lincoln-Mercury had some impressively bold designs, particularly its fastback that had buttresses to extend the shape all the way to the tail. This car had two different side trim possibilities. The other Lincoln-Mercury design was toned down a bit, but had two interesting possibilities for side detailing, as well as some crisp, low-profile tail fins.

Junkyard Gem: 1991 Mercury Capri XR2

Just a year after the Mazda MX-5 Miata first went on sale in the United States, Ford's Mercury Division began selling a similarly-priced two-seat convertible here. This was the 1991-1994 Mercury Capri, and I've found an example of the hot-rod turbocharged version in a northeastern Colorado car graveyard. The Capri name has an illustrious history within the Ford Empire. First used on a Lincoln in 1952, it went on to serve as the name for a hardtop version of the early-1960s Ford Consul in the UK, then as the designation for a low-end trim level on the 1966-1967 Mercury Comet. Starting in the 1969 model year in Europe (1970 in North America), Ford began selling the best-known Capri of all: a sporty coupe based on the Cortina, sold through Mercury dealers in the United States but never badged as a Mercury here. Sales of that Capri halted here after 1978 (they continued through 1986 in Europe), but the Mercury Division then moved the name over to its version of the 1979-1986 Ford Mustang. After that, Ford Australia took the Capri name for a new Mazda 323-based sports car beginning in 1989. Then Dearborn decided that an Americanized version of the Australian Capri would be a success on this side of the Pacific, and left-hand-drive Capris began showing up in American Mercury showrooms in late 1990. Today's Junkyard Gem is one of those first-model-year cars, and it's the very rare turbocharged XR2 version. While this car was intended to be a competitor for the Miata, it's really that car's Mazda cousin. Both cars got their power from 1.6-liter versions of Mazda's versatile B engine, though the Capri had the same front-wheel-drive setup as its 323/Protege (and Escort/Tracer) platform siblings. At the same time, Ford was selling Kia-built Mazdas with Festiva (and, a bit later, Aspire) badging, alongside Mazda MX-6s with Probe badges. Just to make things interesting, American Mazda dealers were selling Ford Explorers as Mazda Navajos, while Rangers with Mazda badges followed starting in 1994. The 1990s were Mazda-riffic times at Ford! This car wasn't the first Australian-designed, Mazda-based Ford product sold in the United States. That honor belongs to the 1988-1989 Mercury Tracer, which was based on the same Mazda 323 platform as the Capri and built in Mexico. Later on, the Tracer remained a member of the 323 chassis family but was a nearly identical twin to its Ford Escort sibling.

NHTSA upgrades Ford floor mat unintended acceleration probe

According to a Bloomberg report, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has upgraded an investigation into complaints of unintended acceleration lodged against Ford vehicles. The investigation began in June of 2010 when just three complaints had been received and it only concerned the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan, but this was at a time when the phrase "unintended acceleration" made grown men go pale. With 49 additional complaints received since then, the investigation has been reclassified as an engineering analysis - the last phase before a recall - and it has been expanded to include the Lincoln MKZ, making for a total of "around 480,000" units affected between the three sedans from the 2008 to 2010 model years.
The ostensible cause is that floor mats are trapping the accelerator pedal, but according to a Ford statement at the time, the entrapment is due to owners placing the optional all-weather floor mats, or aftermarket floor mats, on top of the car's standard floor mats. NHTSA has backed up that assessment, pinning the blame on "unsecured or double stacked floor mats."
On the face of it, it would appear that NHTSA has upgraded the status not because of Ford's error, but owner error, and Ford has stated publicly that it is "disappointed" in NHTSA's move. On top of NHTSA still being skittish after that other unintended acceleration debacle, it could be seen to be taking its time investigating all of the variables: it's reported that Ford changed its accelerator pedal design in 2010, a "heel blocker" in the floorpan has been considered a potential culprit in how the floor mats could be trapping the pedal, some drivers have said the floor mats weren't anywhere near the pedal, and according to a report in the LA Times, in "a letter sent by Ford to NHTSA in August 2010, the automaker said it found three injuries and one fatality that 'may have resulted from the alleged defect.'"