2008 Ford F450 Jerr Dan Mpl Self Loader on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Question of the Day: Most degraded car name?

When Ford came up with a not-so-sporty version of the Pinto and slapped Mustang badges on it in 1974, that was a low point for the Mustang name. When Chrysler applied the venerable Town & Country name on perfectly functional but unglamorous minivans, it saddened many of us. But perhaps the biggest demotion for a once-proud model came when, in 1988, General Motors imported a misery-enhancing Daewoo from Korea and called it the Pontiac LeMans. The original Pontiac LeMans was a great-looking midsize car with fairly advanced (for the time) suspension design and engine options including potent V8s and a screaming overhead-cam straight-six. The Daewoo-based Pontiac LeMans was a cramped, shoddy hooptie that served only to ruin the LeMans name forever, while stealing sales from the Suzuki-based Chevrolet Sprint. Sure, using the once-respected Monterey name on the Mercurized Ford Freestar was bad, but Mercury didn't have long to live at that point. I say the downward spiral of the LeMans name was the most agonizing in automotive history. What do you think? Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Auto News Ford Mercury Pontiac Automotive History Classics questions ford pinto names

Ford director says company has big efficiency plans, but no dedicated EV

The annual autofest known as the North American International Auto Show previews a plethora of exciting new products that we'll see and drive later in the year, from tiny urban commuters to family sedans and crossovers to hard-working big pickups and SUVs. It's also a once-a-year cornucopia of auto executives and leaders from around the world. "There will be some really fun stuff that you'll hear about in the future" - Ford's Kevin Layden So, in-between dozens of cool new-product unveilings on rotating stages during the two press days preceding the public show, we auto scribes grab what planned and impromptu interviews we can. Sessions with top industry leaders can be hard to get, but I was able to score a seat in a group session with then-General Motors North America president (now executive VP of global product development) Mark Reuss, and I also managed brief one-on-ones with a trio of vehicle electrification leaders, one each from Ford, BMW and GM, and what they said then remains relevant now. First up is Kevin Layden, Ford's Director of Electrified Powertrain Engineering. ABG: Where will Ford go beyond its current Focus EV and hybrids, and will there be a Ford EV and/or hybrid on its own energy-optimized platform one day. KL: We don't want to do a dedicated electric vehicle with all the development costs borne by a niche product. At the Michigan Assembly plant right now we're building the Focus electric, PHEV and EcoBoost on the same assembly line. Also the C-Max, with both a hybrid and an Energi plug-in, and we use that same power pack in the Fusion Hybrid and Energi. We want to be, "The power of choice" [a Ford marketing slogan], so having that choice for customers is very important. And if I want to sell the Fusion, Focus and C-Max globally, we can use these power packs wherever it makes sense. So as we go forward, you'll see us proliferating the power packs we have today. Then the question is, what do we do next? There will be some really fun stuff that you'll hear about in the future. ABG: Is the efficiency difference between a dedicated ultra-efficient vehicle platform and a shared multi-use platform getting smaller as all platforms get more efficient? KL: Exactly. Were going through aero studies now on wheels and tires and hood sealers on base vehicles. We have full aerodynamic wind tunnel studies going on with the base Focus and C-Max, so all of that [aerodynamic improvement] will be there for EVs.

Ford F-150 extended cab struggles in IIHS small overlap test

Update: Ford issued a statement to Autoblog to clarify the results of the test and dispute the IIHS repair cost estimates. A quote from a Ford representative has been added to the story. See the full statement below the IIHS press release. Of all the vehicles undergoing crash tests this year, few will be as closely watched as the new 2015 Ford F-150. That's not only because it remains the top-selling vehicle in America year after year, but also because it features an aluminum body instead of steel. While the F-150 performed well in the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety test, one factor prompted the institute to undertake a second round of testing that uncovered a problem. Like most full-size pickups, the F-150 is available in several cab styles: the regular two-door, the extended SuperCab and the four-door SuperCrew. The IIHS typically takes the most popular version of a particular model for testing, and in the Ford truck's case that meant the SuperCrew. The F-150 performed well in all the tests the IIHS put it through, including the small overlap test in which the vehicle is driven 40 miles per hour into a five-foot-tall barrier impacting the front left corner of the vehicle. Its overall performance in the tests earned the F-150 a Top Safety Pick rating, missing out on the higher Top Safety Pick + rating only because it doesn't have an automatic braking system. But how do the other versions of Ford's best-seller hold up? Given that even less popular versions of the F-150 still sell more than many other vehicles on the market, the IIHS put an extended cab through the same battery of tests. It performed comparably except in one area: the small overlap test. In that case, the extended cab model's steering column was pushed eight inches into the cabin (dangerously close to the crash test dummy's chest), the dummy's head missed the airbag almost entirely and hit the instrument panel, and the dummy's legs would risk sustaining "moderate" injuries. The reason for the disparity is that "Ford added structural elements to the crew cab's front frame to earn a good small overlap rating and a Top Safety Pick award but didn't do the same for the extended cab," according to the Institute's chief research officer David Zuby. "That shortchanges buyers who might pick the extended cab thinking it offers the same protection in this type of crash as the crew cab.