Limited 3.5l Cd Awd Power Steering Tires - Front All-season Chrome Wheels Abs on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2022 Rivian R1T vs. 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning vs. GMC Hummer EV Pickup | How they compare on paper

The 2022 Rivian R1T has arrived, ushering in the era of the production electric pickup truck. The Rivian reviews are in, and spoiler alert: They're pretty good. Curious how the new battery-powered truck stacks up to its forthcoming competitors? Well, you've come to the right place. Rivian beat all of Detroit's big automakers to market in the half-ton segment, but probably not by the margin the startup would have liked. Ford's answer is the F-150 Lightning, which is due to enter production early next year, coming hot on the heels of GM's first entry into the space – the GMC Hummer EV pickup – which is scheduled to come off the line late this fall. While all three are pickups, they're aimed at distinctly different buyers, as a perusal of their specifications will reveal. Let's have a look, shall we?   Disclaimer: Before we dive in on this one, we'd like to note that while we've made our best effort to verify the specs provided, the Rivian is brand-new and the others are still in the prototype phase. Some of these figures may be inaccurate or may simply change before production. This is all hypothetical until you can actually cross-shop them anyway, right? Cool. End disclaimer. Let's start with the powertrains. They're all battery-electric trucks engineered on a modular rear-wheel-drive configuration engineered to accommodate (theoretically, anyway) up to four electric drive units. Rivian actually makes the most use of this with a quad-motor setup producing 835 horsepower and 908 pound-feet of torque with its high-output initial model. GMC's three-motor Hummer has the R1T beat with its estimated 1,000-horsepower output, while Ford's (also three-motor) comes in with a far more modest 563 horses. This is an excellent illustration of our above point that these are not all engineered for the same crowd. Ford's F-150, which comes in at a lower price point, is meant to be far more mainstream, as its power output suggests.  This theme continues when we look at the dimensions. Despite the image "Hummer" may conjure, GMC's entry actually needs the shallowest parking space. The Rivian is right behind it, with the work-truck-spec Ford extending more than a foot longer than either. What the Hummer lacks in length, it makes up for in girth. It's the widest by a good 5 inches. The Rivian is only slightly pudgier than the F-150, but it's much closer at that end of the scale.

Consumer Reports: Ford Fusion fun but flawed; Mitsubishi i-MiEV slow, chintzy [w/videos]

Waiting for a Ford compliment from Consumer Reports these days is like waiting for a low-cost new product from Apple. So we weren't really expecting a glowing review of the 2013 Ford Fusion when CR got its hands on the car. The institute's crew bought three different versions of the Fusion (Hybrid, 1.6-liter EcoBoost and a Titanium with the 2.0-liter EcoBoost) to put through its barrage of tests, and while we aren't too surprised by some of the findings, they're still interesting nonetheless.
CR praises the Fusion for its "eye-catching" design and says that the sportier Titanium trim level is the best-handling midsize sedan they've ever tested, but that's about where the good news ends for Ford. The Fusion Hybrid also posted the best-ever fuel economy CR has recorded in a midsize sedan, but the only problem is that their number was 39 miles per gallon combined - far less than Ford's 47 mpg rating for city, highway and combined. As expected, CR also dinged the Fusion for its MyFord Touch, but some of the other gripes about the car include a cramped cabin and poor fit and finish.
Other Ford products tested this time around include the Focus Electric and C-Max Hybrid. Like the Fusion, CR's observed fuel economy of 37 mpg for the C-Max fell well short of Ford's advertised 47-mpg rating, and both cars were criticized for the use of MyFord Touch. CR notes that the Focus Electric's interior is also cramped, with the battery pack taking up a lot of cargo space.

EPA says fuel economy test for hybrids is accurate

The EPA says it stands behind its fuel economy test for hybrid vehicles following controversy about the testing process after Ford C-Max Hybrid customers and automotive journalists alike struggled to achieve 47 miles per gallon, the advertised mpg number, Automotive News reports. Ford responded to the issue almost two weeks ago by claiming that a 1970s-era EPA general label rule was responsible for the inaccurate mileage numbers, rerating the C-Max Hybrid's mpg numbers and offering customers rebates. Ford later said it didn't overstate the C-Max Hybrid's fuel economy and that it was surprised by the low numbers.
Ford technically didn't do anything wrong because it was following the general label rule, but agency regulator Christopher Grundler says the automaker was exploiting a loophole when it came up with the hybrid C-Max numbers, and that the testing process remains accurate. The general label rule allows vehicles that use the same engine and transmission and are in the same weight class to share fuel economy numbers, but it doesn't take into account other factors such as aerodynamic efficiency, which affects hybrids more drastically than non-hybrid vehicles. Ford originally used the Fusion Hybrid economy figures for the C-Max Hybrid and claimed the engineers didn't realize that its aerodynamic efficiency would affect fuel economy as much as it did.