1970 Ford Bronco Total Frame Up Restoration, 302, 4 Speed, Yellow W/gold Pearl on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2017 Ford Super Duty trucks recalled because the fuel tank could fall off

Bad news from Dearborn. Ford just announced a pair of recalls, including a particularly worrying flaw in the new F-Series Super Duty. According to Ford's official announcement, there are roughly 8,000 of its big trucks on the roads with a missing reinforcement bracket – if it's not there, the fuel tank could separate from the frame. Yes, Ford is basically saying the fuel tank could fall out. We don't need to explain why this would be a very bad thing. Fortunately, no owners have experienced said bad things – Ford claims it's unaware of any fires, injuries, or accidents resulting from the flaws. The Kentucky Truck Plant built the affected pickups between August 10 and September 17. The bulk of the vehicles are in the US – 7,103, to be precise. Another 964 are cruising around the frozen Canadian tundra, while two more are in "federalized territories." The other recall is smaller, but reaches across a broad swath of the Blue Oval's family vehicles. Ford says there are 1,352 Taurus sedans, Flex crossovers, Explorer SUVs – including the Police Interceptor Utility variant – and Lincoln MKTs equipped with the company's 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 that could catch fire. In this case, the danger isn't a detached fuel tank, but an "improperly brazed turbocharger oil supply tube" that could leak and spill engine oil on the turbocharger. Again, Ford isn't aware of any fires, accidents, or injuries due to the flaw. Here's the breakdown of manufacturer dates and location: 2016 Ford Taurus vehicles built at Chicago Assembly Plant, Oct. 18, 2016 to Nov. 2, 2016 2016-17 Ford Flex vehicles built at Oakville Assembly Plant, Oct. 18, 2016 to Nov. 10, 2016 2017 Ford Explorer vehicles built at Chicago Assembly Plant, Oct. 15, 2016 to Nov. 12, 2016 2017 Ford Police Interceptor Utility vehicles built at Chicago Assembly Plant on Nov. 2, 2016 2016-17 Lincoln MKT vehicles built at Oakville Assembly Plant, Oct. 18, 2016 to Nov. 10, 2016 As with the Super Duty recall, most of the affected cars, crossovers, and SUVs are in the US market. There are 126 units in Canada and six in the same "federalized territories" mentioned above. In the case of both recalls, dealers will inspect the affected parts and replace or add them as necessary. Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.

Top torque-to-weight ratios under $100k, $50k and $25k

Horsepower may steal a lot of headlines, but the always-more-complex torque figure is often a critical one for both the workingman and the motoring playboy. The measure of rotational force represents the twist that can liquefy one's tires or haul one's horse trailer. Good stuff.
It follows then, that as with the horsepower-to-weight list that we assembled for you a few months ago, a list of cars that offer the most pound-feet with the fewest pounds to carry, is an interesting one to break down. Sure, there's a big difference in how the torque is applied from a turbocharged six-cylinder in a Swedish luxury sedan and a massive heavy-duty truck's turbo-diesel. But being the car/stat geeks that we are, we think it's kinda neat that those two vehicles rank near each other where torque and weight intersect.
As with the horsepower list, we've given you figures as pounds per every one pound-foot. Again broken down into broad price categories, we've got a mixed bag of 2014 and 2015 models here, too. Every effort has been made to select the most up-to-date prices and specs, and we've also to omitted some '14 cars that won't be re-upped after the ongoing yearly changeover.

NHTSA investigating 500k Ford and Mercury cars for lighting failures

The Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis might be long gone as new models in showrooms, but the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration might check them out yet again for a potential problem. At the urging of North Carolina Consumers Council, the agency may open another investigation into the front lighting control module on vehicles from the 2003-2005 model years, and NHTSA estimates the issue could affect 517,945 vehicles. If the module stops working, it can cause a complete failure of all forward lighting, including the headlights. NHTSA previously investigated the issue in 2008 and 2009 but found no need for a recall, according to Bloomberg. Ford also extended the warranty on the part to 15 years or 250,000 miles. To prompt this new request, the North Carolina Consumers Council received a letter from a woman experiencing the module's failure. Upon further investigation, the council found 604 complaints of this problem on NHTSA's website, including seven crashes. Furthermore, the group has alleged that dealers told customers that the parts to perform the replacement weren't available, despite the extended warranty. According to the government agency, "A defect petition has been opened to evaluate the issue and make a grant or deny decision." Ford spokesperson Kelli Felker tells Autoblog via email, "We will cooperate with NHTSA, as we always do." You can read the council's complete letter to the Feds in PDF format, here. INVESTIGATION Subject : Loss of headlamp/exterior lighting Date Investigation Opened: APR 01, 2015 Date Investigation Closed: Open NHTSA Action Number: DP15002 Component(s): EXTERIOR LIGHTING All Products Associated with this Investigation Vehicle Make Model Model Year(s) FORD CROWN VICTORIA 2003-2005 MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS 2003-2005 Details Manufacturer: Ford Motor Company SUMMARY: The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has received a petition from the North Carolina Consumers Council, Inc. requesting a defect investigation of an alleged defect condition resulting in headlight and/or exterior lighting failure on 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles. The petition letter is attached for review. The petitioner alleges a defect in the lighting control module that powers the headlights which can result in the loss of vehicle headlights and/or all exterior lighting while driving. ODI has previously investigated this issue under PE08-066 which was closed without a defect finding.