2005 Ford F250 Diesel 4x4 Lariat Fx4 Leather Crew 1 Texas Owner on 2040-cars

Auto blog

How Ford made its 2015 Ford Mustang safer for toupee wearers [w/video]

Ford is ready to tell the story of its 2015 Mustang Convertible, the can't-miss bits being the easier, quicker and quieter roof operation, a more robust roof build for a coupe-like cabin noise, more trunk space, better visibility and reduced in-cabin buffeting. The top release system has been completely redesigned with a single, center-mounted latch on the windshield frame instead of the dual latches of before. The driver can now release the roof without having to lean over into the passenger space, after which the top goes down fully automatically with the press of a button. Ford doesn't say how long it takes to stow, but it's apparently done in half as much time as before, so figure around 8 seconds.
The roof uses a five-bow structure, with the fabric outer and full inner headliner sandwiching ten millimeters of insulation. Detailing work on the top has eliminated "unsightly folds" in the corners when the roof is up and made it more compact when down; its Z-fold assembly is 6.7 inches lower than before at its highest point when put down. Ford says the new electric drive internals make less noise when in operation, and the fully-finished droptop look is achieved with snap-in caps that flank the rear seating and stow in the trunk when not in use (the outgoing Mustang's top was higher and the front when folded and always looked like it was catching air and creating drag).
The compact roof and newly independent rear suspension setup in back means liberated trunk space, 11.4 cubic feet ready to swallow golf bags and tourist swag. You can read a lot more about it in the press release below, check it out in the short video of running footage and learn about the aerodynamic improvements made to the entire Mustang lineup that decrease drag and increase fuel economy.

Ford Police Interceptor with 2.0L EcoBoost rated most fuel-efficient police sedan

Back in September, Ford announced a non-pursuit version of its Police Interceptor Sedan, which swaps out a choice of two V6 engines for a fuel-efficient 2.0-liter EcoBoost inline four-cylinder. This Special Service Police Sedan will be marketed to law enforcement agencies looking to cut fuel costs and don't need the extra power.
For college campuses, detectives and the like, this new police car has now been certified with EPA fuel economy estimates of 20 miles per gallon in the city, 32 mpg on the highway and a combined rating of 24 mpg. These figures represent a decrease of two mpg in city and combined ratings compared to the civilian-spec 2014 Taurus. These police cars still offer active grille shutters for better aerodynamics, although we're guessing agencies upfitting their cars with light bars and push bumpers aren't exactly concerted with aerodynamics. The true benefit of the SSP version is when it's compared against other police sedan options like the Dodge Charger, Chevy Impala, Chevy Caprice and even the V6 Police Interceptor Sedan.
Ford claims the new Police Interceptor Sedan SSP is the most fuel-efficient current option for police departments, saying that this car can save $1,720 per car over three years and almost $260,000 over the same span of time for fleets with 150 vehicles. There is an official press release posted below, and also check out the gallery of images from Ford collected from various police agencies across the US (although none show the 2.0-liter SSP model). Head on over to Ford's Police Interceptor mini-site for even more pictures of the Police Interceptor Sedan and Utility.

After Years Of Delays, Rear Visibility Requirements Move Closer To Reality

Regulations that would require automakers to improve rear-view visibility on all new cars and light trucks are nearing completion after six years of delays. The U.S. Department of Transportation sent its proposed rear-visibility rules to the Obama administration for review on Christmas Day. The White House Office of Management and Budget now must finalize the regulations. The rule are intended to minimize the risk of pedestrian deaths from vehicles in reverse, a type of accident that disproportionately affects children. Already in 2014, two children have died from cars backing over them, driven in each case by the children's father. Specifics of the Transportation Department's proposal are not available during the review, but the rules are expected to compel automakers to install rear-view cameras as mandatory equipment on all new vehicles. That's what safety advocates have wanted all along. Thought they were pleased the proposed ruling had finally been issued, there was some worry Friday the final rules would omit the rear-view camera mandate. "We're encouraged, but we're also a little concerned about speculation the rear-view camera may not be in there," said Janette Fennell, the president and founder of Kids and Cars, a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting children in and around vehicles. "I'm wondering where that might be coming from." On Thursday, The Automotive News had reported the possibility the new standards could offer an alternative to rear-view cameras, such as redesigned mirrors, that improved visibility. The Office of Management and Budget typically completes its reviews of new rules in 90 days, although that can be extended. OMB officials said Friday they do not comment on pending rules. The intent of the rules is to enhance rear visibility for drivers and prevent pedestrian deaths. Approximately 200 pedestrians are backed over in the United States each year, according to estimates from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Accidents Mostly Affect Children Roughly half the victims are children younger than age five. A government analysis concluded approximately half the victims -– 95 to 112 -– could be saved with new regulations. Yet the rules have arrived at a glacial pace. President George W. Bush signed legislation that had been passed with bipartisan Congressional support in 2008. But automakers have fought the idea of adding rear-view cameras, saying it is too expensive.