2002 Ford F-250 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Honda poised for growth, Detroit to hold steady, Car Wars study says

The automotive industry is expected to keep booming in the US over the next several years, but the train might start running out of steam in the long term, according to 2015's Car Wars report from Bank of America Merrill Lynch analyst John Murphy. The forecast focuses on changes between the 2016 and 2019 model years, and the latest trends appear similar in some cases to the past predictions. Sales are expected to keep growing and reach a peak of 20 million in 2018, according to the Detroit Free Press. The expansion is projected to come from a quick pace of vehicle launches, with an average of 48 introductions a year – 26 percent more than in 1996. Crossovers are expected to make up a third of these, maintaining their strong popularity. However, Murphy predicts a decline, as well. By 2025, total sales could fall to around 15 million units. As of May 2015, the seasonally adjusted annual rate for this year stands at 17.71 million. Like last year, Honda is predicted to be a big winner in the future thanks to products like the next-gen Civic. "Honda should be the biggest market share gainer," Murphy said when presenting the report, according to Free Press. Meanwhile, in a situation similar to Car Wars from 2012, a lack of many new vehicles is expected to cause a drop for Hyundai, Kia, and Nissan. Based on this forecast, Ford, General Motors, and FCA US will all generally maintain market share for the coming years. The report does make some future product predictions, though. The next Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra might come in 2019, which is earlier than expected. Also, Lincoln could get a Mustang-based coupe for 2017, a compact sedan for 2018 and an Explorer-based model in 2019, according to the Free Press. Related Video: News Source: The Detroit Free PressImage Credit: Nam Y. Huh / AP Photo Earnings/Financials Chrysler Fiat Ford GM Honda Lincoln Car Buying fca us

BMW M4 versus Audi RS5 | Autoblog Podcast #546

On this week's Autoblog Podcast, Editor-in-Chief Greg Migliore is joined by Associate Editor Reese Counts. We debate the merits of the BMW M4 and the new Audi RS5 and our hopes for the refreshed Mercedes-AMG C63. We also discuss the state of Cadillac, the future of the Ford Fusion and the rumored Mercedes-AMG competitor to the Porsche 718 Boxster and Cayman. Autoblog Podcast #546 Get The Podcast iTunes – Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast in iTunes RSS – Add the Autoblog Podcast feed to your RSS aggregator MP3 – Download the MP3 directly Rundown 2018 BMW M4 versus 2018 Audi RS5 Cadillac and Mercedes-AMG sport coupes The state of the luxury car industry The future of the Ford Fusion Replacement for the Mercedes-Benz SLC Feedback Email – Podcast@Autoblog.com Review the show on iTunes Related Video: Design/Style Podcasts Audi BMW Cadillac Ford Lexus Lincoln Mercedes-Benz Convertible Coupe Crossover SUV Luxury Performance bmw m4 mercedes-amg c63

Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy

With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.