2011 Ford F-350 4x4 Lariat Crew Diesel Dually Diesel Blacked Out on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2015 Ford Mustang potentially 'leaked' by Car and Driver

Few upcoming debuts have been as eagerly anticipated as the all-new Ford Mustang that's expected to debut shortly as the Mustang's 50th anniversary year approaches. Well, Car and Driver magazine would have us wait no longer as it claims to be leaking Ford's new global pony car early.
Of course what you're looking at is just as likely to be a composite rendering based on what C/D projects the new Mustang to look like, but to our eyes it looks spot on. Combining design traits from the Evos Concept with classic Mustang signatures and Ford's Aston-inspired grille treatment, C/D's images - including a complete 360-degree digital navigator - show a Mustang not only for the modern era, but also for global distribution, taking a quintessentially American car to markets its predecessors were never designed for.
Those global considerations are expected to spell the demise of the outgoing Mustang's holdout live rear axle in favor of an independent suspension, and a slight constricting of the exterior dimensions. And thanks to a separate leak, coming from a digital survey, we have apparent confirmation of what will power the new pony car. While the existing 3.7-liter V6 and 5.0-liter V8 engines will apparently carry over with only slight adjustments in output, the survey confirms a new 2.4-liter turbo four will be positioned in between them, offering slightly more power than the V6 but markedly improved fuel economy for a manageable $560 premium over base.

Consumer Reports criticizes small turbo engines for misleading performance, fuel economy claims [w/video]

Consumer Reports has taken aim at at small-displacement, forced-induction engines, saying the powerplants don't manage to deliver on automaker fuel economy claims. Manufacturers have long held that smaller, turbocharged engines pack all power of their larger displacement cousins with significantly better fuel economy, but the research organization says that despite scoring high EPA economy numbers, the engines are no better than conventional drivetrains in both categories. Jake Fisher, director of automotive testing for Consumer Reports, says the forced induction options "are often slower and less fuel efficient than larger four and six-cylinder engines."
Specifically, CR calls out the new Ford Fusion equipped with the automaker's Ecoboost 1.6-liter four-cylinder engine. The institute's researchers found the engine, which is a $795 option over the base 2.5-liter four-cylinder, fails to match competitors in acceleration and served up 25 miles per gallon in testing, putting the sedan dead last among other midsize options.
The Chevrolet Cruze, Hyundai Sonata Turbo and Ford Escape 2.0T all got dinged for the same troubles, though Consumer Reports has found the turbo 2.0-liter four-cylinder in the BMW 328i does deliver on its promises. You can check out the full press release below. You can also read the full study on the Consumer Reports site, or scroll down for a short video recap.

EPA says fuel economy test for hybrids is accurate

The EPA says it stands behind its fuel economy test for hybrid vehicles following controversy about the testing process after Ford C-Max Hybrid customers and automotive journalists alike struggled to achieve 47 miles per gallon, the advertised mpg number, Automotive News reports. Ford responded to the issue almost two weeks ago by claiming that a 1970s-era EPA general label rule was responsible for the inaccurate mileage numbers, rerating the C-Max Hybrid's mpg numbers and offering customers rebates. Ford later said it didn't overstate the C-Max Hybrid's fuel economy and that it was surprised by the low numbers.
Ford technically didn't do anything wrong because it was following the general label rule, but agency regulator Christopher Grundler says the automaker was exploiting a loophole when it came up with the hybrid C-Max numbers, and that the testing process remains accurate. The general label rule allows vehicles that use the same engine and transmission and are in the same weight class to share fuel economy numbers, but it doesn't take into account other factors such as aerodynamic efficiency, which affects hybrids more drastically than non-hybrid vehicles. Ford originally used the Fusion Hybrid economy figures for the C-Max Hybrid and claimed the engineers didn't realize that its aerodynamic efficiency would affect fuel economy as much as it did.