Ford F-450 S/a Flatbed Pickup Truck 7.3l Diesel Standard Cab Manual 5 Spd Dually on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2015 Ford Expedition stays the course, adds EcoBoost power

The era of the body-on-frame, fullsize SUV is rapidly vanishing in favor of smaller, unibody crossovers. However, Ford still sees life in the segment with the reveal of the updated 2015 Expedition, now available (solely) with the company's 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6. The new truck will make its public debut at the 2014 DFW Auto Show in Dallas on February 19.
The loss of the previous 5.4-liter V8 in favor of Ford's 3.5-liter, direct-injected, twin-turbocharged V6 engine might rankle some of the Expedition's fans, but Ford claims that the change gives the SUV better fuel economy, more power and increased low-end torque than before. Unfortunately, official engine specifications won't be released until later this year, but Ford says engine output will be similar to the 365 horsepower and 360 pound-feet of torque that this powerplant produces in other applications. The EcoBoost is mated to a six-speed automatic transmission, and the SUV now uses electrically assisted power steering, for an even greater fuel economy advantage. Ford claims this also allows for better maneuverability at low speeds and better feel at high speeds.
Exterior styling is basically unchanged for 2015. The front end has the same three-bar chrome grille and headlight design, but the lower air dam gets added chrome and LED lamps. The rear gets more brightwork on the hatch, and there's a chrome-tipped exhaust pipe. As before, Ford is offering the Expedition in two wheelbase lengths - 119 inches and 131 inches. A new, optional, continuously controlled damping system alters suspension settings constantly based on 46 parameters and offers comfort, normal and sport modes (just like the Expedition's sister, the recently refreshed and decidedly less-attractive Lincoln Navigator).

Ford, Volvo, Google, Uber and Lyft form self-driving alliance

Five companies arguably leading the worldwide effort to develop autonomous cars said Tuesday they're forming an organization to lobby the federal government to better prepare America's roads for self-driving technology. The founding members include some of the biggest companies in the automotive, autonomous, and ride-sharing realms – Ford, Google, Lyft, Uber and Volvo. Operating as the "Self-Driving Coalition for Safer Streets," they aim to work with lawmakers and regulators to clarify a disparate set of rules and regulations at both the state and federal levels that could hinder the deployment of autonomous cars. "The U.S. risks losing its leading position due to the lack of federal guidelines for the testing and certification of autonomous vehicles." – Hakan Samuelsson David Strickland, a former administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration who issued the first set of autonomous-related policies in that role (pictured below), will serve as the group's counsel and spokesperson. "The best path for this innovation is to have one clear set of federal standards, and the Coalition will work with policymakers to find the right solutions that will facilitate the deployment of self-driving vehicles," he said in a written statement. In January, Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx said his department would accelerate efforts to craft such federal standards. Those efforts include holding two public hearings on standards, the second of which is scheduled to be held Wednesday in Palo Alto, California. Foxx signaled the intent to deliver them by June. Google has been leading the efforts to ensure such standards are national in scope, warning their cars could run afoul of state-specific laws should they cross state borders or if standards varies between the federal efforts and regional ones. The complexity of such efforts was underscored recently, when NHTSA agreed that Google's software could be considered the driver of a vehicle for the purpose of meeting federal motor vehicle standards, an interpretation that would conflict with preliminary California rules that mandate a licensed driver operate a self-driving car that comes equipped with human controls like a steering wheel and brakes. At South By Southwest last month, Jennifer Haroon, Google's self-driving car business leader, said the company couldn't accomplish its goals under those regulations.

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.