2005 Ford Taurus Se(4-dr),(v-6),(o/d),(moonroof)"new Tires"looks&runs Excellent! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford posts decade-best $2.1B profit in Q1 2013

As predicted, Ford has reported that its first quarter of 2013 was a resounding success overall, with a pretax profit of $2.1 billion ($0.41 per share), and a net income of $1.6 billion ($0.40 per share). In fact, Ford made a pretax profit of some $2.4 billion in its home North American market, with that total number being pulled down by losses in South America and Europe. That gaudy North American profit is the strongest result by the automaker since 2000.
Ford's companywide profit for Q1 was down $147 million from one year ago, while the net income number marked an increase of $215 million year over year. Overall, this is Ford's 15th-consecutive profitable quarter.
The bad news from the European market was even worst in Q1 2013 than it was last year. Pretax losses of $462 million - on revenue of $6.7 billion - represented a year-over-year change of -$313 million. In South American, the company reported a loss of $218 million, down from a slim profit of $54 million in Q1 2012. The news was better for Ford Asia Pacific Africa, where a $6 million pretax profit in 2013 showed a year-over-year gain of some $101 million when compared to losses in 2012. Scroll down to read Ford's full press release.

Why Edmunds took a sledgehammer to its 2015 Ford F-150

The discussion around repair bills for the aluminum-bodied 2015 Ford F-150 pickup continued from the beginning of last year to the end, and haven't abated; as an aside, some Tesla Model S owners have been shocked at disquieting repair estimates for minor damage to their aluminum wunder-sedans. Edmunds decided to inject some fact into the fray: it bought a $52,000 long-term 2015 F-150 and clouted it with an eight-pound sledgehammer. Twice. The rear of the bedside took the impacts since it couldn't be replaced, it would have to be repaired. To the pickup's credit, the only reason associate editor Travis Langness hit it twice was that the first sledgehammer blow didn't do as much damage as Edmunds wanted. After the second, the visible damage included the two direct impacts, a few creases, and a cracked taillight, so they drove the pickup to Santa Monica Ford to get an estimate, complete with a fictitious story about how the damage occurred and the mercy plea that Langness was paying for the repair out-of-pocket. In Part 2 Langness hits on some of the details with getting the truck fixed, such as the massively expensive taillight and the list of tools Ford recommends dealers have to work on aluminum. But he was promised he'd have his truck back in seven days, and Santa Monica Ford got it back to him in seven days. In Part 3 we get the bill. It's not small, but it's quite a bit less than it could have been if the service manager had charged Edmunds the official labor rate for aluminum. We're not going to spoil it here, so check out the videos above and below for the beginning and the end, and head over to Edmunds for the complete story about how it all happened and some riffing on the repair numbers. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Related Video:

Consumer Reports criticizes small turbo engines for misleading performance, fuel economy claims [w/video]

Consumer Reports has taken aim at at small-displacement, forced-induction engines, saying the powerplants don't manage to deliver on automaker fuel economy claims. Manufacturers have long held that smaller, turbocharged engines pack all power of their larger displacement cousins with significantly better fuel economy, but the research organization says that despite scoring high EPA economy numbers, the engines are no better than conventional drivetrains in both categories. Jake Fisher, director of automotive testing for Consumer Reports, says the forced induction options "are often slower and less fuel efficient than larger four and six-cylinder engines."
Specifically, CR calls out the new Ford Fusion equipped with the automaker's Ecoboost 1.6-liter four-cylinder engine. The institute's researchers found the engine, which is a $795 option over the base 2.5-liter four-cylinder, fails to match competitors in acceleration and served up 25 miles per gallon in testing, putting the sedan dead last among other midsize options.
The Chevrolet Cruze, Hyundai Sonata Turbo and Ford Escape 2.0T all got dinged for the same troubles, though Consumer Reports has found the turbo 2.0-liter four-cylinder in the BMW 328i does deliver on its promises. You can check out the full press release below. You can also read the full study on the Consumer Reports site, or scroll down for a short video recap.