2013 Ford F-150 Stx Supercab 6 Pass Cruise Ctrl 14k Mi Texas Direct Auto on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford and Mercedes join Renault in French emissions investigation

The French government is investigating certain models from Ford, Mercedes-Benz, and Renault because they allegedly produce more nitrogen oxide than the country's pollution rules allow, according to Automotive News, citing a French newspaper. After VW's emissions scandal, French regulators began checking more vehicles for evidence of defeat devices and excessive real-world pollution. According to Automotive News, the Mercedes S350 allegedly showed inconsistent results across these tests, and a Ford C-Max had NOx levels five times over the limit. The Renault Captur crossover, Espace, and an unnamed utility vehicle also had results that were too high. The French testing for this investigation includes an on-road emissions check that's not part of the EU's normal evaluations, which some automakers claim is unfair. "Unofficial on-road testing has varying conditions and can produce significantly different results," a Ford of Europe spokesman told Automotive News. Renault representatives met with French officials on January 18 to explain the situation. The company later submitted a plan to recall 15,800 examples of the diesel Captur, and said it would offer a voluntary software upgrade for about 700,000 other vehicles, according to Automotive News. Representatives from Ford and Mercedes will meet with the government soon, too. Renault's stock price plunged last week after investors heard that French regulators searched three of the automaker's sites as part of the emissions investigation. The stockholders feared an environmental scandal like the one currently embroiling Volkswagen. There's one major difference – as of now, there's no evidence Renault equipped any of the polluting models with defeat devices. Related Video:

Thieves still love older Hondas and pickups most, says NICB [w/video]

No one wants to have their car stolen, but a new study by the National Insurance Crime Bureau has some bad news for older Honda owners and pickup drivers. Fortunately, it has better news for drivers overall. The group is reporting that according to preliminary data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, thefts were down 3.2 percent in 2013 (versus 2012) to fewer than 700,000 cars. That's the lowest figure since 1967. That's also less than half of the peak of over 1.66 million thefts in 1991. "The drop in thefts is good news for all of us," says NICB President and CEO Joe Wehrle. "But it still amounts to a vehicle being stolen every 45 seconds and losses of over $4 billion a year."
Honda drivers might not find it such good news with older Accord and Civic models topping this year's theft study. Toyota and Dodge can't really celebrate, either, with two models each on the list, as well. Overall, this year's list was split evenly between foreign and domestic models, which were mostly pickups.
The 10 most likely vehicles to be stolen in 2013 were:

Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy

With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.