2001 Ford F-350 Super Duty Crew Cab Lariat 4x4 7.3 Diesel on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford previews new C-Max ahead of upcoming debut

Looking at a Ford Focus? These days you can get it as a five-door hatch, a four-door sedan, or... that's all. European buyers don't even get our sedan, but they do get a wagon. And while the three-door hatch, two-door coupe and two-door cabrio have long since ended production, buyers around the world can also get the company's larger C-Max. And now, like the Focus upon which it's based, Ford is preparing to roll out a new version.
The tall wagon (or small minivan, depending on your perspective) is being treated to what Ford says is "an extreme makeover." Details to accompany the teaser image above remain few and far between, but following the spy shots we recently posted, it looks destined for some of the same visual updates as Ford rolled out on the 2015 Focus, with "even more refinement, practicality and technology."
Like the Mercedes B-Class, which is only available Stateside as an EV, American buyers can only get the C-Max in electrified form, either as the C-Max Hybrid or C-Max Energi. Overseas buyers, however, will be able to choose from a range of powertrain options and two wheelbase lengths - the longer of which boasts seven seats and the Grand C-Max name. (Remember when Chrysler did the same with its minivans?) Both are set to debut on September 17, so watch this space. After that, we'll expect to see it on display at the Paris Motor Show.

Junkyard Gem: 1973 Mercury Marquis Brougham 4-Door Pillared Hardtop

Ford's Mercury Division debuted the Marquis in the 1967 model year, as a sporty coupe based on a stretched Ford LTD chassis. When the LTD got an update for 1969, so did the Marquis, and production of that generation of the top-of-the-line Mercury continued through 1978 (the Grand Marquis hit streets the following year). The 1969-1978 Marquis was a big, imposing land yacht, and the Brougham version came absolutely loaded with affordable luxury. Today's Junkyard Gem is a Marquis Brougham from the first year of the Malaise Era, found in a Phoenix self-service car graveyard recently. This car appears to have spent decades sitting outdoors in one of the harshest climates in the country, and so it's in rough shape. The vinyl top received the full thermonuclear treatment and is mostly obliterated by now. The interior got thoroughly cooked as well. Still, its original opulence shines through if you use some imagination. What hurts is that this car was packed with most of the good options, including the mighty 460-cubic-inch (7.5-liter) V8 engine with four-barrel carburetor. The price for the 460 was just $76 in this car, or around $548 in today's money. The base engine was a 429 (7.0-liter). Power numbers were way down for 1973 when compared to a couple of years earlier, partly as the result of tightening emissions standards but mostly due to the switch from gross to net power ratings that began midway during 1971 and was completed by the end of 1972. This engine was rated at 202 horsepower and 330 pound-feet. The only transmission available was a three-speed automatic. We can assume that the original buyer of this car and its single-digit fuel economy had a rough time when the OPEC oil embargo hit in the fall of 1973. Believe it or not, air conditioning was not standard equipment on the '73 Marquis Brougham (you had to move up to a Lincoln for that). This one even has the automatic temperature control feature, adding a total of $508 to the cost of this car (about $3,661 in 2023 dollars). That AM/FM/8-track radio—or, in fact, any radio—was an extra-cost option as well, with a price tag of $363 ($2,616 after inflation). The MSRP for the 1973 Marquis Brougham sedan (known as a "pillared hardtop" thanks to the frameless window glass) was $5,072, which comes to $36,555 in today's dollars. Obviously, its out-the-door cost would have been much higher with all the options.

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.