1963/64 Fairlane K Code Sports Coupe on 2040-cars

Auto blog

More 2015 Ford Mustang pricing information leaks [UPDATE]

The big news this morning was that the 2015 Ford Mustang would start at $24,425, including its destination pricing. The big news this afternoon is, well, bigger.
Mustang6G.com has come up with what it claims is pricing info for the entire Mustang line, rather than just the V6. That means we know all about the EcoBoost and GT prices now, which, when combined with the dealer order sheets we reported on last week, gives us our clearest look yet at how the Mustang can be outfitted (we're still a bit short on pricing info for some standalone options, like paint premiums and such).
The base EcoBoost starts at $25,995, while the GT rings up at $32,925.

This unique '64 Mustang was Edsel Ford II's first car

You probably had the same dream when you were a teenager. Your sixteenth birthday is coming up, or Christmas, or maybe both, and all you want is a muscle car to call your own. That dream has come true for some, and one of them was none other than Edsel Ford II.
Henry Ford's great grandson turned 16 on December 27, 1964 - two days after Christmas and eight months after the original Mustang went on sale. And that's just what was waiting for him in the driveway, courtesy of his father (and reigning chief executive) Henry Ford II.
The specially-prepared pony car had a pearlescent cream paintjob with narrow blue racing stripes, functional hood scoop, chrome trim, Euro-spec fender-mounted mirrors, a blue leather and aluminum interior, a monogrammed fuel cap... and a 289-cubic-inch V8 under the hood.

After Years Of Delays, Rear Visibility Requirements Move Closer To Reality

Regulations that would require automakers to improve rear-view visibility on all new cars and light trucks are nearing completion after six years of delays. The U.S. Department of Transportation sent its proposed rear-visibility rules to the Obama administration for review on Christmas Day. The White House Office of Management and Budget now must finalize the regulations. The rule are intended to minimize the risk of pedestrian deaths from vehicles in reverse, a type of accident that disproportionately affects children. Already in 2014, two children have died from cars backing over them, driven in each case by the children's father. Specifics of the Transportation Department's proposal are not available during the review, but the rules are expected to compel automakers to install rear-view cameras as mandatory equipment on all new vehicles. That's what safety advocates have wanted all along. Thought they were pleased the proposed ruling had finally been issued, there was some worry Friday the final rules would omit the rear-view camera mandate. "We're encouraged, but we're also a little concerned about speculation the rear-view camera may not be in there," said Janette Fennell, the president and founder of Kids and Cars, a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting children in and around vehicles. "I'm wondering where that might be coming from." On Thursday, The Automotive News had reported the possibility the new standards could offer an alternative to rear-view cameras, such as redesigned mirrors, that improved visibility. The Office of Management and Budget typically completes its reviews of new rules in 90 days, although that can be extended. OMB officials said Friday they do not comment on pending rules. The intent of the rules is to enhance rear visibility for drivers and prevent pedestrian deaths. Approximately 200 pedestrians are backed over in the United States each year, according to estimates from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Accidents Mostly Affect Children Roughly half the victims are children younger than age five. A government analysis concluded approximately half the victims -– 95 to 112 -– could be saved with new regulations. Yet the rules have arrived at a glacial pace. President George W. Bush signed legislation that had been passed with bipartisan Congressional support in 2008. But automakers have fought the idea of adding rear-view cameras, saying it is too expensive.