2013 Xlt Premium New 2l I4 16v Automatic on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford Police Interceptor with 2.0L EcoBoost rated most fuel-efficient police sedan

Back in September, Ford announced a non-pursuit version of its Police Interceptor Sedan, which swaps out a choice of two V6 engines for a fuel-efficient 2.0-liter EcoBoost inline four-cylinder. This Special Service Police Sedan will be marketed to law enforcement agencies looking to cut fuel costs and don't need the extra power.
For college campuses, detectives and the like, this new police car has now been certified with EPA fuel economy estimates of 20 miles per gallon in the city, 32 mpg on the highway and a combined rating of 24 mpg. These figures represent a decrease of two mpg in city and combined ratings compared to the civilian-spec 2014 Taurus. These police cars still offer active grille shutters for better aerodynamics, although we're guessing agencies upfitting their cars with light bars and push bumpers aren't exactly concerted with aerodynamics. The true benefit of the SSP version is when it's compared against other police sedan options like the Dodge Charger, Chevy Impala, Chevy Caprice and even the V6 Police Interceptor Sedan.
Ford claims the new Police Interceptor Sedan SSP is the most fuel-efficient current option for police departments, saying that this car can save $1,720 per car over three years and almost $260,000 over the same span of time for fleets with 150 vehicles. There is an official press release posted below, and also check out the gallery of images from Ford collected from various police agencies across the US (although none show the 2.0-liter SSP model). Head on over to Ford's Police Interceptor mini-site for even more pictures of the Police Interceptor Sedan and Utility.

Motor Trend pits Camaro 1LE vs Mustang with Performance Pack, surprises ensue

With the 2015 Ford Mustang firmly on the scene, the inevitable comparisons with its arch rival, the 2015 Chevrolet Camaro are just starting to trickle out. Over the next several months, you're likely to be inundated by every outlet's muscle car comparison, whether it be the turbocharged Ford against the V6 Chevy, a V8-powered convertible comparo or what we have here, a competition between each vehicle's performance upgrade.
Motor Trend has pitted the Camaro SS 1LE against a Mustang with the GT Performance Pack for a comprehensive series of comparisons on the test stage, street and finally, at Willow Springs with ace Randy Pobst behind the wheel. As per usual, we aren't about to spoil this one for you.
So, hit the play button, have a look and then let us know what you think in Comments.

Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid

It's been a rough time for the official fuel economy figures for the Ford C-Max Hybrid. When the car was released in 2012, Ford made a huge deal about how it would beat the Toyota Prius V, which was rated at 42 combined miles per gallon, 44 city and 40 highway. The Ford? 47 mpg across the board. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? Well, after hearing customer complaints and issuing a software update in mid-2013, then discovering a real problem with the numbers last fall and then making a big announcement last week that the fuel economy ratings of six different 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles would need to be lowered, the C-Max Hybrid has ended up at 40 combined, 42 city and 37 highway. In other words, the Prius trumps it, as daily drivers of those two vehicles have known for a long time. The changes will not only affect the window sticker, but also the effect that the C-Max Hybrid (and the five other Ford vehicles that had their fuel economy figures lowered last week) have on Ford's compliance with greenhouse gas and CAFE rules for model year 2013 and 2014. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? There are two technical answers to that question, which we've got below, as well as some context for how Ford's mistakes will play out in the bigger world of green vehicles. Let's start with Ford's second error, which is easy to do since we documented it in detail last year (the first, needing to do a software update, was also covered). The basic gist is that Ford used the general label rule (completely legally) to test the Fusion Hybrid and use those numbers to figure out how efficient the C-Max Hybrid is. That turned out to be a mistake, since the two vehicles are different enough that their numbers were not comparable, despite having the same engine, transmission and test weight, as the rules require. You can read more details here. Ford's Said Deep admitted that the TRLHP issue is completely separate from the general label error from last year. Now let's move on to last week's announcement. What's interesting is that the new recalculation of the MPG numbers – downward, of course – was caused by a completely separate issue, something called the Total Road Load Horsepower (TRLHP). Ford's Said Deep admitted to AutoblogGreen that the TRLHP issue had nothing to do with the general label error from last year.