1997 Ford F-250 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Lincoln MKC recalled because start button located too close to touchscreen [UPDATE]

UPDATE: Ford spokesperson Kelli Felker responded to our questions and let us know that the fix for the push-button start on the 2015 MKC has the switch moved to the top of the of the column of gear shift buttons instead of the bottom. Owners should be notified about both campaigns "toward the end of February." After massive campaigns from General Motors and to fix Takata airbag inflators, 2014 will undoubtedly go down as The Year Of The Recall. And with little time to spare, Ford is getting in just under the wire to adding two more to its yearly total. The larger of the campaigns is actually one of the most bizarre campaigns we've heard of all year. Lincoln is recalling 13,574 units of its 2015 MKC compact crossover in North America to move the location of the push-button ignition switch on the dashboard. According to the automaker's announcement: "Due to the switch's close proximity to other controls, occupants are inadvertently shutting off the engine while driving." The button is located near the bottom of the touchscreen, which can apparently make it possible to hit by mistake. Back when Autoblog first drove the new MKC in June, we came away very impressed, but noted: "... we're still not completely sold on the aforementioned pushbutton transmission selector ... it still seems somewhat gimmicky and it can't be operated by feel alone, as you might when shifting a traditional console-mounted lever from Park to Drive." According to Lincoln, there have been no reported accidents or injuries stemming from this button misapplication. Of the affected vehicles, there are 11,144 in the US, 2,033 in Canada and 397 in Mexico. To fix the problem, dealers are moving the button to a different location and reprogramming the powertrain control module. According to Automotive News, models built since September already have a different layout. The change was reportedly done to match the rest of the Lincoln lineup. The second recall covers 12,205 units of the 2014 Ford Escape (2015 model year pictured below) and 2015 Lincoln MKC in North America because of a problem with nickel plating on the fuel pump. The issue can cause the pump to seize, which can cause the crossovers not to start or stall while driving. The automaker is not aware of any accidents or injuries related to this fault. Dealers are replacing the fuel deliver module to fix the situation. Of the affected vehicles, there are 9,038 in the US, 3,074 in Canada and 93 in Mexico.

1914 Ford Model T at Historic Greenfield Village | AutoblogVR

We drive all of the newest and most sophisticated cars, but a 102-year-old Ford is one of our recent favorites. Senior Editor Alex Kierstein headed to historic Greenfield Village in Dearborn, MI, to learn to drive a Model T in the latest AutoblogVR segment. Kierstein picks up the Model T fairly quickly, despite its controls. Though they were designed more than a century ago to be simple and easy to use, driving a Model T is complicated and counter-intuitive to the modern motorist. But by the end of his lesson, Kierstein has it all figured out and is enjoying himself. In our other new segment, Detroit Manufacturing, Senior Editor Greg Migliore showcases the city''s industrial might. He tours a modern Fiat Chrysler factory that churns out Dodge Durangos and Jeep Grand Cherokees and then wanders the ruins of the mythical Packard Plant. There's also some tasty and unexpected twists in this VR episode. Each week, new episodes will launch on the AutoblogVR App. We'll preview them here on Autoblog, but for the full immersive experience, head over to the app, which you can download for free from the App store and Google Play. Be sure to try it with a cardboard viewer, too! Ford Jeep Automotive History Driving Classics Videos VR Original Video Detroit ford model t tour 360video

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.