Wrecked 2002 Ford Excursion Limited 4x4 7.3 Diesel on 2040-cars

Auto blog

U.S. automakers unite in opposition to possible Trump vehicle tariffs

WASHINGTON — The U.S. auto industry urged President Donald Trump's administration on Monday not to saddle imported cars and auto parts with steep tariffs, after the U.S. Commerce Department sent a confidential report to the White House late on Sunday with its recommendations for how to proceed. Some trade organizations also blasted the Commerce Department for keeping the details of its "Section 232" national security report shrouded in secrecy, which will make it much harder for the industry to react during the next 90 days Trump will have to review it. "Secrecy around the report only increases the uncertainty and concern across the industry created by the threat of tariffs," the Motor and Equipment Manufacturers Association said in a statement, adding that it was "alarmed and dismayed." "It is critical that our industry have the opportunity to review the recommendations and advise the White House on how proposed tariffs, if they are recommended, will put jobs at risk, impact consumers, and trigger a reduction in U.S. investments that could set us back decades." Representatives from the White House and the Commerce Department could not immediately be reached. The industry has warned that possible tariffs of up to 25 percent on millions of imported cars and parts would add thousands of dollars to vehicle costs and potentially devastate the U.S economy by slashing jobs. Administration officials have said tariff threats on autos are a way to win concessions from Japan and the EU. Last year, Trump agreed not to impose tariffs as long as talks with the two trading partners were proceeding in a productive manner. "We believe the imposition of higher import tariffs on automotive products under Section 232 and the likely retaliatory tariffs against U.S. auto exports would undermine - and not help - the economic and employment contributions that FCA, US, Ford Motor Company and General Motors make to the U.S. economy," said former Missouri Governor Matt Blunt, the president of the American Automotive Policy Council. Some Republican lawmakers have also said they share the industry's concerns. In a statement issued on Monday, Republican Congresswoman Jackie Walorski said she fears the Commerce Department's report could "set the stage for costly tariffs on cars and auto parts." "President Trump is right to seek a level playing field for American businesses and workers, but the best way to do that is with a scalpel, not an axe," she added.

Big electric trucks won't save the planet, says the NYT

When The New York Times decides that an issue is an issue, be prepared to read about it at length. Rarely will a week passes these days when the esteemed news organization doesn’t examine the realities, myths and alleged benefits and drawbacks of electric vehicles, and even The Atlantic joins in sometimes. That revolution, marked by changes in manufacturing, consumer habits and social “consciousness,” may in fact be upon us. Or it may not. Nonetheless, the newspaper appears committed to presenting to the public these pros and cons. In this recently published article titled, “Just How Good for the Planet Is That Big Electric Pickup Truck?”—wow, thatÂ’s a mouthful — the Times focuses on the “bigness” of the current and pending crop of EVs, and how that impacts or will impact the environment and road safety. This is not what news organizations these days are fond of calling “breaking news.” In October, we pointed to an essay in The Atlantic that covered pretty much the same ground, and focused on the Hummer as one particular villain, In the paper and online on Feb. 18, the Times' Elana Shao observes how “swapping a gas pickup truck for a similar electric one can produce significant emissions savings.” She goes on: “Take the Ford F-150 pickup truck compared with the electric F-150 Lightning. The electric versions are responsible for up to 50 percent less greenhouse gas emissions per mile.” But she right away flips the argument, noting the heavier electric pickup trucks “often require bigger batteries and more electricity to charge, so they end up being responsible for more emissions than other smaller EVs. Taking into consideration the life cycle emissions per mile, they end up just as polluting as some smaller gas-burning cars.” Certainly, itÂ’s been drummed into our heads that electric cars donÂ’t run on air and water but on electricity that costs money, and that the public will be dealing with “the shift toward electric SUVs, pickup trucks and crossover vehicles, with some analysts estimating that SUVs, pickup trucks and vans could make up 78 percent of vehicle sales by 2025." No-brainer alert: Big vehicles cost more to charge. And then thereÂ’s the safety question, which was cogently addressed in the Atlantic story. Here Shao reiterates data documenting the increased risks of injuries and deaths caused by larger, heavier vehicles.

Is Tesla's next project an F-150 competitor? [w/poll]

What's the future look like for Tesla after it launches the Model X CUV and possibly a smaller, sub-Model S sedan? Would you believe a pickup truck? Yes, Tesla could be looking to use its EV know-how to take the fight to Ford and the F-150, based on comments made by company founder Elon Musk.
"If you're trying to replace the most gasoline miles driven, you have to look at what people are buying," Musk said during an impromptu Q&A session following a speech at Business Insider's Ignition conference. "[The F-150 is] the best selling car in America. If people are voting that's their car, then that's the car we have to deliver."
And while the idea of electric pickup may sound kind of absurd to some, Musk makes a very valid point - if Tesla's goal is to replace gas miles with electrical miles, it simply can't afford to ignore pickups.