1977 Ford F 350 Super Cab Truck One Ton Runs Strong 460 Ready For Paint on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford announces bevy of recalls, 2 of which are recalls on recalls

Ford has announced five separate recalls, affecting 202,000 vehicles built between 2005 and 2014.
It's not been a great couple of weeks for Ford. On October 30, the company announced a 205,000-unit recall, and yesterday, it was revealed that the Ford brand's year-over-year sales were down over 5,000 units while the company itself was down 3,000 units over through October. Now, the company has announced five separate recalls affecting 202,000 vehicles built between 2005 and 2014.

Ford, GM to collaborate on 9- and 10-speed transmissions

Back in October, there were reports that General Motors and Ford Motor Company were hard at work co-developing new nine- and ten-speed automatic transmissions, and now both automakers have confirmed this joint operation. While there are no specific vehicles mentioned to receive either transmission, a collaborative press release issued by GM and Ford mention that the transmission will be designed for front- and rear-wheel-drive cars, crossovers, trucks and SUVs.
These aren't the first powertrain components developed jointly between these cross-town rivals, either. The six-speed automatic currently used in vehicles like the Ford Edge, Ford Fusion, Chevrolet Cruze and Chevrolet Equinox was engineered in a similar fashion. As is the case with this existing transmission, both automakers will assist in the design, development and testing of the new transmissions, but each will build its own units in its own factories. Scroll down for the official press release.

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.