1998 Ford E-150 Regency Conversion Handicap Lift All Power Clean Hwy Miles on 2040-cars

Auto blog

NHTSA opens investigation into Ford Explorer PI brakes

This year more than most, it's pleasant when we can string together a few days without word of an automaker or the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announcing a bunch of new recalls. It's seemingly been a little quiet on this front lately (barring a spider-related Suzuki issue revealed early today), but now we have word of the government safety agency opening a Preliminary Evaluation into the 2013 Ford Explorer Police Interceptor, a probe that could potentially affect an estimated 20,000 vehicles.
The issue being investigated concerns failures of the front brake hose on the vehicle that show "small splits in the hoses near the body side ferrule of the hose assembly," according to the agency, and the issue could result in longer stopping distances. The feds have reports of 13 malfunctions affecting 11 Explorer units. However, it's important to note that all of the incidents come from a single, unnamed metropolitan police fleet that operates 46 of them. According to The Detroit News, the failures generally took place between December and July.
NHTSA is investigating further to find if this is a more widespread issue than just this one fleet. Ford spokesperson Kelli Felker confirmed to us, "We are cooperating with NHTSA on this investigation, as we always do." Scroll down to read the agency's report.

Nuclear-powered concept cars from the Atomic Age

In the 1950s and early 60s, the dawn of nuclear power was supposed to lead to a limitless consumer culture, a world of flying cars and autonomous kitchens all powered by clean energy. In Europe, it offered the then-limping continent a cheap, inexhaustible supply of power after years of rationing and infrastructure damage brought on by two World Wars.
The development of nuclear-powered submarines and ships during the 1940s and 50s led car designers to begin conceptualizing atomic vehicles. Fueled by a consistent reaction, these cars would theoretically produce no harmful byproducts and rarely need to refuel. Combining these vehicles with the new interstate system presented amazing potential for American mobility.
But the fantasy soon faded. There were just too many problems with the realities of nuclear power. For starters, the powerplant would be too small to attain a reaction unless the car contained weapons-grade atomic materials. Doing so would mean every fender-bender could result in a minor nuclear holocaust. Additionally, many of the designers assumed a lightweight shielding material or even forcefields would eventually be invented (they still haven't) to protect passengers from harmful radiation. Analyses of the atomic car concept at the time determined that a 50-ton lead barrier would be necessary to prevent exposure.

Toyota again claims Corolla outsold Focus worldwide

Toyota isn't convinced the Ford Focus was the best-selling nameplate globally last year. Bloomberg reports that for the second time in seven months, both Toyota and Ford are laying claim to the title. Ford cites R.L. Polk & Co. data that says the automaker moved some 1.02 million Focus models in 2012 compared to just 872,774 Toyota Corolla units. But Toyota says the actual figure is closer to 1.16 million Corolla models.
Last year, Ford said it took the sales crown through the fist half of 2012 based on information from IHS Automotive, but Toyota pointed out those numbers left out models like the Corolla-based Matrix and Auris, as well as the Corolla Fielder and Scion xB-based Corolla Rumion. Whether or not Toyota's belief that all these cars should be counted in the Corolla bucket is accurate or not is seemingly up for debate... as is the question of why it matters so much to both parties.
This time around, Ford is holding the line that the Focus is the "best-selling nameplate," with Erich Merkle, a US sales analyst with Ford saying the company's figure is, "a pure number that is verified by a third party." Toyota, meanwhile, has requested clarification from Polk.