White P71 Ex Fed Car 26k Miles Only Pw Pl Cruise Am Fm Cd Nice on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Chris Harris checks out Ken Block's Hoonicorn '65 Mustang

Ken Block's Hoonicorn, which stars in Gymkhana Seven, might still bear a passing resemblance to a vintage 1965 Ford Mustang, but underneath the skin, the car is one of the baddest custom machines to ever do a smoky burnout on the road. The ever enthusiastic British auto journalist Chris Harris is now showing what really makes Block's new ride tick on video, and Harris even gets to go for quite a ride. The only Mustang components really left on the Hoonicorn are the A-pillar, B-pillar and roof, according to Harris. Everything else is ditched to create Block's ultimate Gymkhana tool. The 845-horsepower, 6.7-liter Rousch Yates V8 sits behind the front axle, and the grunt is routed to all four wheels through a Sadev gearbox usually found on Dakar Rally vehicles. The whole drivetrain is packed with cool little touches; like that giant handbrake that also disconnects power from the front wheels when in use. The superlatives about the Hoonicorn could go on forever, but settle in and let a very excited Harris tell you about just some of them. He's like a kid in a candy store here, and the look that combines surprise, fear and joy during his ride with Block is the kind that lacks a suitable word in the English language.

RTR Spec 5 Concept shows off 2015 Ford Mustang's drifty potential

Meet the Ford Mustang RTR Spec 5 Concept, a fully functional drift car that, according to our team in Sin City, has been doling out demo drifts in front of the Las Vegas Convention Center.
Destined to be the flagship of RTR's Tactical Performance Line, the Spec 5 Concept is, in addition to its 5.0-liter Aluminator V8 engine, chock full of performance parts that you can buy for your very own 2015 Mustang. In addition to the Ford Racing engine, the OEM parts supplier has lent the Spec 5 an aluminum radiator and a close-ratio six-speed transmission.
ASD Motorsports provided the front lower control arms, while the car itself rides on a fully customized coilover suspension. Magnaflow and American Racing have provided the exhaust system and headers, respectively. 20-inch HRE wheels, designed for RTR, are wrapped in sticky Nitto rubber.

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.