1997 Ford F800 Box Truck Cab Chassis 5.9l Diesel, Only 34,741 Miles!! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Experts wonder if aluminum F-150 gives Ford a real advantage

There's no doubt that Ford is taking a risk in producing the body of its upcoming new F-150 pickup truck in aluminum. What is up for debate, however, is whether aluminum was a wise risk to take in the first place. Wards Auto took the opportunity to poll some experts on the subject of aluminum versus steel in the automotive sector, with somewhat unsurprising results.
Richard Schultz, a project consultant at Ducker Worldwide, which bills itself as "a leading aluminum industry consultant (though they also deal in steels), suggests that the potential drawbacks to aluminum - higher costs, lower supply - aren't really impediments to the auto industry's increased acceptance of the lightweight metal.
Similarly, Randall Scheps, global automotive marketing director for Alcoa, a massive aluminum producer, counters claims that aluminum is less safe for vehicle occupants, suggesting that the use of aluminum can actually increase safety as it could potentially allow for larger vehicles with more crush space than steel.

UK's Loughborough University improving Ford's 1.0-litre EcoBoost engine

How much does it cost for college students to study zero emissions vehicles? At Loughborough University in the UK, a new Advanced Propulsion Centre (APC) is being built at a cost of a billion pounds ($1.7 billion US). The school has just announce that it will fund a number of grad student positions and is creating a new Chair in Advanced Propulsion Systems, which sounds like a fun job to us. We're weird like that. There will be a total of four professor-type positions in the new Center, including the chair, all focused on teaching students about low-carbon vehicle technologies, specifically electric and hybrid ones. The school is investing 1.5 million pounds ($2.5 million) for the new positions. There is a bigger picture as well, a 26-million pound ($44 million) Advanced Combustion Turbocharged Integrated Variable-valvetrain Engine (ACTIVE) project, which uses funds not only from the school but also from Ford and others. The point of ACTIVE is to study Ford's 1.0-liter EcoBoost engine and "improve further its efficiency and ensure it exceeds 2020 emission regulations." This is already a popular engine for the automaker, and it will need to stay at the bleeding edge of efficiency to remain as important in 2020 as it is today. Loughborough University has been working with automakers on advanced energy technologies for years, for example with Rolls-Royce and fuel cells in 2007 and the Lotus Hotfire engine in 2008. University invests GBP1.5M in advanced propulsion research to advance zero emissions vehicles challenge Loughborough University is investing GBP1.5M over five years in strategic research appointments, inspired by the global challenge to develop the new advanced propulsion technologies required for the move to zero emission vehicles. These appointments reinforce the University's world-class research in low-carbon vehicle technologies, adding new dimensions concerned with electric and hybrid drives. Four appointments will be made, including a Chair in Advanced Propulsion Systems, supported by a number of PhD studentships. The GBP1.5M investment is part of the University's commitment to the recently announced Advanced Propulsion Centre (APC) to support the development of new supply chains for low carbon vehicles. APC is an initiative established by the Automotive Council that will see GBP1 billion of investment from government and industry over the next 10 years.

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.