1972 F100 Pickup. 351w 325 H.p. Orange Pearl,w/white Pearl Roof. Very Clean on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Toyota fears supplier pressure in Australia with GM pull out

With Ford and General Motors both announcing an end to production in Australia, the country's auto industry is in a bad way. With the exit of two big players, there's increased concern that a third Australian manufacturer, Toyota, will be forced out, as well.
"We are saddened to learn of GM Holden's decision. This will place unprecedented pressure on the local supplier network and our ability to build cars in Australia," Toyota Australia said in a statement. The GM closure of Holden production will be the direct end to 2,900 jobs, but will also force a dramatic reduction in the size of the country's supplier network, as there will simply be fewer cars to build.
In the same statement, Toyota Australia said it would work with suppliers and local government to figure out whether continuing production Down Under was even feasible. According to Automotive News, a representative for the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union told reporters it was "highly likely" that Toyota would also close up shop within the next few years.

Ford hit by lawsuit over hybrid technology from, surprise, Paice

The name Paice will be familiar to anyone who's been deep in the weeds of hybrid history, but it will probably be new to anyone who simply drives one. The key part of the story is something called "HyperDrive," which is the name given to a gas-electric powertrain technology developed by Alex Severinsky and patented in 1994. HyperDrive is a way to get the energy from both the electric battery and the engine into the wheels, seamlessly. The patents are held by Paice, which is an unusual company (its HQ is a house in a retirement community, right by a golf course) that does nothing but litigate. You can read more on Paice here. The latest case targets Ford and the hybrid and plug-in versions of the C-Max and Fusion models as well as the Lincoln MKZ. Paice claims that it held "over 100 meetings and interactions with Ford" between 1999 and 2004, and gave the automaker, "detailed information about the hybrid technology that Paice had developed." The suit also alleges that: For more than five years, Paice answered inquiries from multiple departments within Ford, believing in good faith that a business relationship between Paice and Ford would be mutually beneficial and advance the acceptance of Paice's technology. ... After years of Ford learning the details of Paice's hybrid drivetrain technology, Ford elected not to enter into a business relationship with Paice. The suit is officially known as, "Paice LLC v. The Ford Motor Co., 14-492, U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland (Baltimore)" and you can read the PDF here. Ford told AutoblogGreen, "we do not comment on pending litigation." Toyota settled a similar patent-infringement case in 2010 and now pays Paice almost $100 for every hybrid it sells. Paice is still in court against Hyundai and Kia. In 2010, Ford also settled with Paice but they agreed to keep negotiating on other issues until at least January 1, 2014. With that date now in the past, it didn't take long for Paice to file papers to get the two sides back before a judge. That's where it appears to be most comfortable.

Ford faces class-action lawsuit for selling vehicles without brake override systems

A total of 20 Ford customers are suing the automaker in a class-action lawsuit for selling vehicles "vulnerable to unintended acceleration." According to Reuters, the suit names 30 models built between 2002 and 2010 with electronic throttle control systems but without a brake override system. Those include the 2004-2012 F-Series pickups and the 2005-2009 Lincoln Town Car. Adam Levitt, a partner with the law firm of Grant & Eisenhofer says the plaintiffs in the case want "to be compensated for their economic losses by having overpaid for cars that contained defects." Levitt contends that the plaintiffs would not have bought their vehicles or paid less for them had they known there was no brake override system in place.
Ford began installing brake override systems in its vehicles beginning in 2010. In response to the lawsuit, Ford has pointed to research by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that indicated that unintended acceleration is mostly caused by driver error, saying in a statement that, "NHTSA's work is far more scientific and trustworthy than work done by personal injury lawyers and their paid experts."
Belville et al v. Ford Motor Co. will be heard in US District Court in the Southern District of West Virginia.