7.3l Powerstroke Bulletproof F-450 Diesel Turbo New Jasper Trans Runs And Drives on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Final 2015 Ford Edge performance and fuel economy data released

Ford unveiled the brawny look and heap of new tech of the all-new 2015 Edge last summer, and confirmed some of the pricing in November. However, until now buyers couldn't be entirely sure what they are getting for that money in terms of power and fuel economy, but the Blue Oval is finally spilling all the beans. For customers looking for performance, the Edge Sport is the place to be with its stiffer suspension and plusher interior. The trim level uses a version of the 2.7-liter EcoBoost V6 found in the latest F-150, but in this case the engine is tuned to 315 horsepower and 350 pound-feet of torque. That's a 10 percent jump in power and 25 percent improvement in torque compared to the naturally aspirated 3.7-liter V6 in the last-gen model, according to Ford. The mill should be a bit more useable too with peak twist coming on at 2,750 rpm, rather than 4,000 rpm in the previous Edge, and the Active Noise Cancellation system should keep it quiet inside, too. Front-wheel-drive versions of the Sport get EPA-estimated economy of 18 miles per gallon city, 27 mpg highway and 21 mpg combined. Opting for all-wheel drive reduces the figures to 17/24/20, respectively. Of course, not everyone is looking for the power of the Sport trim. In a first for Ford, the standard engine for the Edge is a 2.0-liter EcoBoost four-cylinder with 245 hp and 275 lb-ft. In front-wheel-drive form, it's rated at 20/30/24 mpg or with all-wheel drive at 20/28/23. For something in the middle the naturally aspirated 3.5-liter V6 brings 280 hp and 250 lb-ft of torque and carries EPA estimates of 18/26/21 with front-wheel drive or 17/25/20 when powering all four wheels. Every powertrain gets a six-speed automatic. Sales for the latest Edge begin this spring starting at $28,100, plus $895 destination on all models. Upgrading to the Sport pushes the price up to $38,100. Performance and Power: 2015 Ford Edge Sport Certified as Highest-Performing Edge Yet • 2015 Ford Edge Sport is the most powerful Edge yet, thanks to a 2.7-liter EcoBoost® V6 making 315 horsepower and 350 lb.-ft. of torque • All-new Edge Sport, re-engineered from the ground up, features special sport-tuned suspension, specific Sport styling for exterior and interior, and a long list of available driver-assist technologies • Scheduled to go on sale this spring, pricing for 2015 Ford Edge starts at $28,100; Edge Sport starts at $38,100 – only a $500 increase from 2014 DEARBORN, Mich., Feb.

European jury picks finalists for 2015 Car of the Year

There are countless Car of the Year awards handed out each year, and naturally, Europe has its own way of doing things. Every year, a panel of jurists representing seven publications in seven different languages and seven different countries get together to name their joint Car of the Year. The panel released a list of 32 candidates back in July, and it has now whittled that list down to seven nominees. The list consists of the BMW 2 Series Active Tourer, the Citroen C4 Cactus (shown), the Ford Mondeo, the Mercedes-Benz C-Class, the Nissan Qashqai, the Renault Twingo and the Volkswagen Passat. Of those seven, only two are available in the US – those being the Mondeo (sold Stateside as the Fusion) and the C-Class. The Passat is an entirely different model in North America, the Qashqai isn't offered here, Citroen and Renault don't even participate in our market and the BMW 2 Series is represented here only by the completely different coupe and convertible. Expect the one and only recipient of the 2015 Car of the Year award to be announced at the Geneva Motor Show this coming March, and while you're waiting, you can place your guesses for the eventual winner in Comments. Featured Gallery 2015 European Car of the Year: Nominees News Source: CaroftheYear.org BMW Ford Mercedes-Benz Nissan Volkswagen Citroen Renault car of the year nissan qashqai citroen c4 cactus bmw 2 series active tourer

Is it time for American carmakers to give up on dual-clutch transmissions? [w/poll]

Last week, in the midst of Detroit's first days seeking relief in Chapter 9 of the bankruptcy code, Automotive News contributor Larry P. Vellequette penned an editorial suggesting that American car companies raise the white flag on dual clutch transmissions and give up on trying to persuade Americans to buy cars fitted with them. Why? Because, Vellequette says, like CVT transmissions, they "just don't sound right or feel right to American drivers." (Note: In the article, it's not clear if Vellequette is arguing against wet-clutch and dry-clutch DCTs or just dry-clutch DCTs, which is what Ford and Chrysler use.) The article goes on to state that Ford and Chrysler have experimented with DCTs and that both consumers and the automotive press haven't exactly given them glowing reviews, despite their quicker shifts and increased fuel efficiency potential compared to torque-converter automatic transmissions.
Autoblog staffers who weighed in on the relevance of DCTs in American cars generally disagreed with the blanket nature of Vellequette's statement that they don't sound or feel right, but admit that their lack of refinement compared to traditional automatics can be an issue for consumers. That's particularly true in workaday cars like the Ford Focus and Dodge Dart, both of which have come in for criticism in reviews and owner surveys. From where we sit, the higher-performance orientation of such transmissions doesn't always meld as well with the marching orders of everyday commuters (particularly if drivers haven't been educated as to the transmission's benefits and tradeoffs), and in models not fitted with paddle shifters, it's particularly hard for drivers to use a DCT to its best advantage.
Finally, we also note that DCT tuning is very much an evolving science. For instance, Autoblog editors who objected to dual-clutch tuning in the Dart have more recently found the technology agreeable in the Fiat 500L. Practice makes perfect - or at least more acceptable.