1966 Ford F250 / Low Fast & Loud on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Car Stories: Owning the SHO station wagon that could've been

A little over a year ago, I bought what could be the most interesting car I will ever own. It was a 1987 Mercury Sable LS station wagon. Don't worry – there's much more to this story. I've always had a soft spot for wagons, and I still remember just how revolutionary the Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable were back in the mid-1980s. As a teenager, I fell especially hard for the 220-horsepower 1989 Ford Taurus SHO – so much so that I'd go on to own a dozen over the next 20 years. And like many other quirky enthusiasts, I always wondered what a SHO station wagon would be like. That changed last year when I bought the aforementioned Sable LS wagon, festooned with the high-revving DOHC 3.0-liter V6 engine and five-speed manual transmission from a 1989 Taurus SHO. In addition, the wagon had SHO front seats, a SHO center console, and the 140-mph instrument cluster with mileage that matched the engine. When I bought it, that number was just under 60,000 – barely broken in for the overachieving Yamaha-sourced mill. The engine and transmission weren't the only upgrades. It wore dual-piston PBR brakes with the choice Eibach/Tokico suspension combo in front. The rear featured SHO disc brakes with MOOG cargo coils and Tokico shocks, resulting in a wagon that handled ridiculously well while still retaining a decent level of comfort and five-door functionality. I could attack the local switchbacks while rowing gears to a 7,000-rpm soundtrack just as easily as loading up on lumber at the hardware store. Over time I added a front tower brace to stiffen things a bit as well as a bigger, 73-mm mass airflow sensor for better breathing, and I sourced some inexpensive 2004 Taurus 16-inch five-spoke wheels, refinished in gunmetal to match the two-tone white/gunmetal finish on the car. That, along with some minor paint and body work, had me winning trophies at every car show in town. And yet, what I loved most about the car wasn't its looks or performance, but rather its history. And here's where things also get a little philosophical, because I absolutely, positively love old used cars. Don't get me wrong – new cars are great. Designers can sculpt a timeless automotive shape, and engineers can construct systems and subsystems to create an exquisite chassis with superb handling and plenty of horsepower. But it's the age and mileage that turn machines into something more than the sum of their parts.

FCA UConnect fiasco could set over-the-air updates back years

Since cars have become more software dependent, most major automakers have been inching toward enabling over-the-air updates to keep vehicle electronics, ranging from infotainment systems to safety features, current. But there are only two car companies — Fiat Chrysler and Ford —± currently doing OTA updates, and on a limited basis. GM CEO Mary Barra announced last summer that the automaker will launch a new EV architecture and infotainment system capable of over-the-air updates "before 2020." The one exception, per usual, is Tesla. Since the release of the Model S almost six years ago, the maverick EV automaker has made routine OTA software updates a core part of its vehicle platforms and value proposition, and has sent out updates for everything from adjusting ride height to enabling Autopilot, largely without incident. When I've asked automakers why they can't do the same thing, I've heard reasons ranging from running afoul of their dealers (and archiac regulation) to security concerns. Automakers like Ford and General Motors say they want to act like tech companies, which routinely send out OTA updates for a wide range of devices, but overall the car industry still moves at a very cautious snail's pace. And when automakers do try to move faster and take more risks — unlike with a smartphone update, which people bitch about but live with — the consequences can be significant when things go wrong. That's the case with Fiat Chrysler America and its recent public-relations nightmare when an OTA update went awry. The update went out at the end of last week for the Uconnect system in late-model vehicles, and it made head units go into a near continuous reboot, which caused owners to not only lose access to entertainment features, but also critical functions like emergency assistance. Almost immediately, owners took to Twitter to express outrage, and FCA was caught flatfooted. A tweet went out on Monday on the UconnectCares Twitter account that read, "Certain 2017 & 2018 Uconnect systems may experience a reboot every 45-60 seconds. Our Engineering teams are investigating the cause and working towards a resolution.

Ford could make as much as $13k profit for every F-150

The Ford F-Series is a perennial member of the US bestseller list with the title in its brawny grasp for over 30 years, and the truck ranks as the top-selling model over $50,000 in the country. It shouldn't come as a shock then that the model is a major buttress of Ford's bottom line. Have you ever wondered just how vital the trucks are to the Blue Oval's health, though? Some math based on recent figures suggests they might be even more important than you think. Automotive News recently did the calculation and came up with that each F-150 sold contributed about $13,333 to the company's profits. That number was based on a statement from Ford CFO Bob Shanks that the automaker could have made another $1 billion in North America for the first quarter with a repeat of last year's sales of the F-150 and Edge, with 60,000 more trucks and 15,000 additional crossovers. If those 75,000 missing vehicles cost the company $1 billion, then they averaged $13,333 each. Also, the F-150 makes up 80 percent of the lost sales, so you might even conclude that each pickup brings even more money into Ford. Automotive News also extrapolates further. Based on a forecast of 800,000 F-Series sales this year, that's about $10.7 billion going into Ford's coffers. Obviously, these figures are far from exact since they are based on a single statement from the automaker's CFO. Autoblog reached out to Ford to see if the numbers were accurate, but the Blue Oval wouldn't comment on vehicle profitability. However, AutoPacific analyst Dave Sullivan suggests these figures could be on the right track, if a bit high. "The rough guess has been $10,000. Obviously that is a little different for a $60k truck vs a regular cab 4x2 work truck, but $10,000 is the ball park that is used," he said to Autoblog. If you ever wonder why Ford might be loathe to bring the smaller Ranger back to the US when it's available elsewhere, these huge profits are likely part of the answer. The Blue Oval has little reason to cut into the sales of a model that makes the brand billions. Related Video: