2001 Ford Expedtion Xlt 4x4 Leather Sunroof 7 Passenger No Reserve Auction on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford C-Max Commercial Brings Cadillac 'Poolside' Ad Down To Earth

If we had tried to predict the first video response to the controversial Poolside video for the Cadillac ELR, we would not have thought it would center on compost. But, hey, it's always nice to be reminded that the real world is sometimes better than fiction. Instead of the chic swagger of 'Poolside,' 'Anything Is Possible' is all about getting dirty. The new short in question is called Upside: Anything Is Possible and it promotes two things: Detroit Dirt and the Ford C-Max Energi. As in the ELR ad, Ford's plug-in C-Max only makes an appearance at the tail end of the spot, but instead of the chic swagger of Poolside, Anything Is Possible is all about getting dirty. The ad stars Pashon Murray, co-founder of Detroit Dirt, which takes natural waste from around Detroit, composts it into soil and then spreads that around "forgotten parcels" of Detroit to create urban farms. Detroit Dirt gets its bio-waste from a lot of sources, including the Detroit Zoological Society (all that herbivore manure has to go somewhere), Ford and General Motors, but this particular ad was the idea of Ford's PR agency, Team Detroit. It was a frenetic shoot, filmed with an LA-based director right after a big winter storm blew through Detroit, and Murray couldn't be happier with the result. "This was Ford Motor Company pushing my story, letting me tell the story that I believe in," Murray tells AutoblogGreen. "I get to help push this car and I get to tell my story." She says that the Team Detroit and Ford had to agree on the message, "from my understanding, [YouTube] is where they wanted to start, not where they wanted to finish." The ad is already getting a positive response on Twitter, so we won't be surprised if it shows up in more places soon. "It's not saying Ford is better than GM. It's telling the story of a black woman who's working hard in Detroit." As Detroit Dirt has off-screen support from both GM and Ford, it's unsurprising to hear Murray say that the video "is not a rivalry thing." She notes that the ad agency Team Detroit came to her and offered to tell the Detroit Dirt story using the framework of the GM ad. "It's a parody on this commercial, but it's not saying Ford is better than GM," she said. "It's telling the story of a black woman who's working hard in Detroit." What is that story? It's about urban farming, recovery and recycling. Murray tells us that for the last seven or eight years, she's been dedicated to sustainability.

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.

We compare 2021 Ford Bronco and Bronco Sport specifications to their ritzy Land Rover competiton

The 2021 Bronco and Bronco Sport are the spearheads for Ford's new 4x4 sub-brand, with the former taking the fight directly to the Jeep Wrangler and the latter providing Ford with a more rugged alternative to the Escape. We've already looked at how the new Bronco and Bronco Sport compare to their mainstream competition, but we'd like to see how the Bronco stacks up to another hotly anticipated returning nameplate: the Land Rover Defender.  Not to leave its little sibling in the cold, I decided to browse Land Rover's lineup and see what might be a suitable counterpoint to the Bronco Sport. For better or worse, I found an almost-perfect fit in the Range Rover Evoque. So, how do these new American 4x4s compare to the Old Country's more-expensive alternatives? Let's dig in, starting with the big boys.  As you might expect from the Bronco's robust credentials, it holds its own here against the more-expensive Brit. The Defender's higher price point brings along a good bit of power advantage with both engines, but that's to be expected. The Defender also has that trick adjustable-height suspension that the Bronco lacks, giving it an edge in practicality, and it can also tow quite a bit more.  On the flip side, there are quite a few advantages to going with the Ford, including a greater number of choices in terms of powertrain. The available manual transmission on four-cylinder Broncos is a nice bonus, for instance, as is the option of getting either the base 2.3-liter or the optional 2.7-liter engine with either wheelbase. The Defender is a bit more restrictive in this regard offering only the inline-six on the short-wheelbase model. As an added bonus, the Bronco is a convertible. That may not necessarily be a "plus" for all shoppers, but it's certainly an added bit of versatility (and potential appeal) the Defender lacks. And of course, the Bronco can be had for as little as $30,000, whereas the Land Rover starts at $50,000. Now, on to the less-rugged siblings. The specs here are actually a little tighter in most respects, but the powertrain story is almost identical. The Evoque checks in where the Bronco Sport tops out, and the Range Rover gets an optional high-output variant of the 2.0-liter turbocharged four.