Correct Snowshoe White Over Mountain Green, U Code 272 Y Block, 3:31 Gears on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Entry-level F-150 now offers SuperCrew, Sport Package

Ford has made a few notable tweaks to the lower end of its F-150 lineup, giving customers a more affordable version of the four-door SuperCrew body style. The popular SuperCrew could previously only be had on XLT models and above, but Ford has announced that 2014 F-150s with the base STX trim can get the more versatile body.
The STX SuperCrew brings the price of a four-door F-150 down from $34,525 to $33,145. Like the XLT SuperCrew, the STX will be available with the choice of a 5.5- or 6.5-foot bed, while a 5.0-liter V8 can replace the base 3.7-liter V6 for $4,425. Ford has not released pricing on the different bed lengths yet, but opting for the 6.5-foot bed on the XLT raises the price $1,240 and forces buyers into the 5.0-liter V8. We'd expect a similar arrangement on the STX.
The other big news for fans of affordable pickups is the addition of an STX Sport Package on the base-level truck. It adds 20-inch wheels, black exterior accents, black-and-gray cloth seats and decals on the truck's box. The Sport Package is available on all three of the STX's body styles, with Ford listing the price as $980 with current discounts.

Ford family keeps special voting rights

Ford Motor Company has a dual-class stock structure of Class A and Class B shares. The roughly three billion Class A shares are for the general public like you and me, while the roughly 71 million Class B shares are all owned by the Ford family. Each Class A share gets the shareholder one vote, each Class B share is worth 16 votes, the result being that Common Stock holders control about 60 percent of the company while the Ford family controls 40 percent even though it holds far fewer shares. The only way that could ever change would be if the Fords sell their Class B shares, but even so, Class B shares revert to Class A when sold outside the family, so they'd have to sell a whole bunch of them.
A contingent of Class A shareholders think the dual-class system is unfair, and for the past few years a vote's been held during the annual shareholders meeting to end it. It has failed every time, as it just did again during the meeting held this week. A smidge over 33 percent voted to end the dual system, outvoted by the 67 percent who are happy with the way Ford is going - unsurprising in view of a corporate turnaround that will be part of business-class curricula for years to come.
On the sidelines, Ford elected Ellen R. Marram to the post of independent director, the first woman to hold the job. The former Tropicana CEO and 20-year Ford board member replaces retiring board member Irvine Hockaday who helped bring Alan Mulally to the CEO position.

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.