1996 Ford E-350 Extended Cargo Van Bin Package - Ready To Work! Good Value on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

Autoblog Technology of the Year Award Special | Autoblog Podcast #758

This episode of the Autoblog Podcast features Editor-in-Chief Greg Migliore, Road Test Editor Zac Palmer and Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski. The trio begin by discussing the 2022 Technology of the Year award. Ford's Onboard Scales and Smart Hitch hauling/towing tech as tested in the F-150 Lightning won this year. Why the Ford won, how testing went down and Ford's competition — including the GMC Hummer EV and Genesis GV60 — are discussed. After diving through the Technology of the Year award testing, the three take on this week's news. A mysterious vehicle based on the Corvette (that isn't a Corvette) is supposedly on its way. Audi is giving us "Performance" versions of the RS 6 Avant and RS 7 Sportback. Plus, we discuss a recent study that provides data for the 10 longest lasting vehicles on the road today. After the news, the crew dive into the cars they've been driving this week. Greg's been behind the wheel of a Nissan Pathfinder, while Jeremy and Zac have been driving some plug-in hybrids, including the Lexus NX 450h+ and Autoblog's long-term BMW 330e xDrive. Send us your questions for the Mailbag and Spend My Money at: Podcast@Autoblog.com. Autoblog Podcast #758 Get The Podcast Apple Podcasts – Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast in iTunes Spotify – Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast on Spotify RSS – Add the Autoblog Podcast feed to your RSS aggregator MP3 – Download the MP3 directly Rundown 2022 Autoblog Technology of the Year finalists and winner News Mysterious Corvette Audi RS 6 Avant Performance and RS 7 Sportback Performance revealed 10 longest lasting vehicles on the road today Cars we're driving 2022 Nissan Pathfinder SV 2022 Lexus NX 450h+ 2022 BMW 330e xDrive Long-Term tester Feedback Email – Podcast@Autoblog.com Review the show on Apple Podcasts Autoblog is now live on your smart speakers and voice assistants with the audio Autoblog Daily Digest. Say “Hey Google, play the news from Autoblog” or "Alexa, open Autoblog" to get your favorite car website in audio form every day. A narrator will take you through the biggest stories or break down one of our comprehensive test drives. Related video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Green Podcasts Ford Genesis GM GMC Technology Technology of the Year Truck Crossover SUV Electric Hybrid Luxury Off-Road Vehicles Performance Sedan

American automakers fall in latest Fortune 500 rankings

Not that it means anything beyond bragging rights, but if you're fixated on the positions of domestic automakers on the annual Fortune 500 list, both General Motors and Ford are still on it but they've slipped a couple of notches. The list ranks American companies and they're ordered solely by revenue. GM, fifth last year, came in seventh, while Ford fell from ninth to tenth even though both companies saw small gains in annual revenue.
GM's $152.3 billion in revenue was less than a third of that of the first company on the list: Wal-Mart, which regained the title from Exxon Mobil. Berkshire Hathaway and Apple are the firms that moved GM down. Ford, displaced by energy company Valero, had $134.3 billion in revenue.
On a side note, profitability isn't a factor, but both GM and Ford were down in this year's list compared to last year's: GM declined from $9.2 billion to $6.2 billion, Ford fell from $20.2 billion to $5.6 billion. If profits were included, Exxon Mobil would probably still be king: although the energy company made almost $20 billion less in revenue than Wal-Mart's $469.2 billion, it posted $44.9 billion in profit compared to Wal-Mart's $17 billion.