Used Ford F 350 Crew Cab Powerstroke Turbo Diesel 4x4 Pickup Trucks We Finance on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy

With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.

Edmunds ranks the best used cars for 2013

When people ask us what car we would recommend for them, it's usually not easy to answer. To make a useful recommendation we must consider which of the numerous vehicle segments fits their needs best, and then choose one of the many vehicles offered in each segment. For some people, new cars don't meet their expectations of value, because they lose so much of it the moment they are purchased and driven off the dealer lot. For them, there's always the used-car market, where great deals can be found, but cars' histories of reliability and maintenance records - and perhaps that Certified Pre-Owned warranty - become ever-important factors playing into purchase choice.
To help out, Edmunds has done us the favor of assembling a list of the best used vehicles money can buy, covering model years 2006-2011, according to what it considers the most important criteria when shopping for used autos: reliability, safety, value and availability. That means unreliable, unsafe, super-expensive or limited-edition models don't appear on the list, but instead cars from each segment that are more likely to satisfy the general population.
There are some real goodies on the list, including but not limited to vehicles such as the capable Honda Fit, the cultish Honda Accord coupe (which can be had with a 240-horsepower V6 and a six-speed manual transmission some years), and the powerful Chevrolet Corvette. While Edmunds' choice of the Volvo C70 for best used convertible baffled us at first (not that it's a bad car), it redeemed itself by stating that the Mazda MX-5 still is an unofficial top choice if you don't require more than two seats.

Porsche, Jaguar continue dominance in 2015 JD Power APEAL study

The top of JD Power's 2015 APEAL Study has not changed much in the last year. Porsche remains No. 1 with Jaguar nipping at its heels, although both premium brands saw their overall score fall compared to 2014. For those that need a refresher, the APEAL Study looks at how "gratifying" a vehicle is to own and drive, rating cars and brands on a 1,000-point scale. The industry average for 2015 has increased from 794 to 798, while the total number of automakers that finished above the curve increased from 16 to 20. While Porsche and Jaguar finished at the top, their scores dropped eight and seven points, respectively, to 874 and 855. The top "non-premium" brand was Mini, which scored an impressive 825, up from 795. If the BMW-owned British marque is still a bit too premium for your tastes, last year's non-premium winner, Hyundai, did climb five points and is this year's runner up. At the opposite end of the scale, Smart sits at the very bottom of the rankings, with a score of 683 (it didn't appear on the 2014 rankings). Fiat also dropped, from fourth worst in 2014 to second worst in 2015, despite the 500 being named most appealing city car. Subaru made an impressive climb, from third worst to seventh, falling just 10 points shy of the industry average and two points south of the non-premium average. In the individual vehicle segments, eight brands earned multiple awards, with Ford, Chevrolet, and Porsche earning three apiece. Surprise segment victories included the new Ford Expedition, which beat out Chevy's popular Suburban. The Infiniti QX80 bested the likes of the Cadillac Escalade and Range Rover for best large luxury SUV, and the Dodge Challenger beat its muscle car rivals from Ford and Chevy. Most of the victories, though, were quite predictable. The Mazda6 and CX-5 took wins for the midsize sedan and compact SUV categories respectively, while the Volkswagen Golf captured the compact car win. The Ford F-150 won the large pickup category, while the Porsche Cayman was named most appealing compact premium sporty car. Check out the official release on the 2015 APEAL Study, available below, from JD Power. 2015 U.S. APEAL Study Results The latest safety-related technologies are among the drivers of customer satisfaction with new vehicles, according to the J.D. Power 2015 U.S.