1969 Ford Fairlane Base 5.8l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford recalls Explorer and Lincoln MKC for fire hazard

The Basics: Ford will recall 5,536 examples of the 2016 Explorer and 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC. The Explorers have build dates between October 20, 2014, and January 28, 2016, at the Chicago Assembly Plant. The MKCs are from between November 25, 2013, and January 25, 2016, at the Louisville Assembly Plant. In total, there are 3,129 total affected examples of the 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC and 2,407 examples of the 2016 Ford Explorer. Of these, 1,543 are in the US and 3,993 are in Canada. The Problem: The combination of the engine block design and the block heater in these vehicles can cause the part to overheat when plugged in. Injuries/Deaths: None reported, but there are two cases of underhood fires in Canada. If you own one: Ford will begin notifying owners during the week of May 16, company spokesperson John Cangany tells Autoblog. Related Video: Ford issues safety recall for certain 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC and 2016 Ford Explorer vehicles to replace engine block heaters Ford is issuing a safety recall for approximately 5,500 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC and 2016 Ford Explorer vehicles to remove the heaters and replace them with an updated design. The engine block design, coupled with the particular block heater installed in these vehicles, causes the unit to be susceptible to overheating when the vehicle is parked and the block heater is plugged in –increasing the risk of an underhood fire. Ford is aware of two reports of underhood fires in Canada, but is not aware of any accidents or injuries related to this issue. Affected vehicles include certain 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC vehicles built at Louisville Assembly Plant, Nov. 25, 2013 through Jan. 25, 2016 and certain 2016 Ford Explorer vehicles built at Chicago Assembly Plant, Oct. 20, 2014 through Jan. 28, 2016. There are 5,536 vehicles affected by the issue, including 3,129 2015-2016 Lincoln MKC and 2,407 2016 Ford Explorer vehicles, with 1,543 of the affected vehicles in the United States and federalized territories and 3,993 in Canada. Dealers will remove and replace the engine block heater with an updated design and, if needed, replace the cord at no cost to the customer.

Ring Brothers shows 1965-66 Mustang fastback carbon fiber body

We covered one of Ring Brothers' more extreme SEMA builds yesterday, the De Tomaso Pantera-based ADRNLN, but if that well-executed but over-the-top Italian-American exotic is too much for you, then perhaps this Ring Brothers 1965 Ford Mustang fastback with a carbon-fiber body suits your tastes better.
What the performance-parts manufacturer is showcasing with the Mustang is the carbon-fiber body itself, which is fashioned around the 1965-66 fastback. It can be bought from the company and bonded to the skin and unibody as a do-it-yourself project, or you can take your Mustang to Ring Brothers and have the body installed there. The fenders, doors and quarter panels are two-inches wider than stock, and Ring Brothers offers a custom widebody chassis to those who want the complete package.
The show car looks sharp in person lowered on HRE wheels, and we appreciate the bare front end so we can see the supercharged V8 and front coilover suspension, though the details on those performance upgrades are slim. Also note the custom independent rear suspension setup at the rear.

Is it time for American carmakers to give up on dual-clutch transmissions? [w/poll]

Last week, in the midst of Detroit's first days seeking relief in Chapter 9 of the bankruptcy code, Automotive News contributor Larry P. Vellequette penned an editorial suggesting that American car companies raise the white flag on dual clutch transmissions and give up on trying to persuade Americans to buy cars fitted with them. Why? Because, Vellequette says, like CVT transmissions, they "just don't sound right or feel right to American drivers." (Note: In the article, it's not clear if Vellequette is arguing against wet-clutch and dry-clutch DCTs or just dry-clutch DCTs, which is what Ford and Chrysler use.) The article goes on to state that Ford and Chrysler have experimented with DCTs and that both consumers and the automotive press haven't exactly given them glowing reviews, despite their quicker shifts and increased fuel efficiency potential compared to torque-converter automatic transmissions.
Autoblog staffers who weighed in on the relevance of DCTs in American cars generally disagreed with the blanket nature of Vellequette's statement that they don't sound or feel right, but admit that their lack of refinement compared to traditional automatics can be an issue for consumers. That's particularly true in workaday cars like the Ford Focus and Dodge Dart, both of which have come in for criticism in reviews and owner surveys. From where we sit, the higher-performance orientation of such transmissions doesn't always meld as well with the marching orders of everyday commuters (particularly if drivers haven't been educated as to the transmission's benefits and tradeoffs), and in models not fitted with paddle shifters, it's particularly hard for drivers to use a DCT to its best advantage.
Finally, we also note that DCT tuning is very much an evolving science. For instance, Autoblog editors who objected to dual-clutch tuning in the Dart have more recently found the technology agreeable in the Fiat 500L. Practice makes perfect - or at least more acceptable.