1964 Ford Falcon Futura 6cyl. Manual on 2040-cars

Auto blog

The next-generation wearable will be your car

This year's CES has had a heavy emphasis on the class of device known as the "wearable" – think about the Apple Watch, or Fitbit, if that's helpful. These devices usually piggyback off of a smartphone's hardware or some other data connection and utilize various onboard sensors and feedback devices to interact with the wearer. In the case of the Fitbit, it's health tracking through sensors that monitor your pulse and movement; for the Apple Watch and similar devices, it's all that and some more. Manufacturers seem to be developing a consensus that vehicles should be taking on some of a wearable's functionality. As evidenced by Volvo's newly announced tie-up with the Microsoft Band 2 fitness tracking wearable, car manufacturers are starting to explore how wearable devices will help drivers. The On Call app brings voice commands, spoken into the Band 2, into the mix. It'll allow you to pass an address from your smartphone's agenda right to your Volvo's nav system, or to preheat your car. Eventually, Volvo would like your car to learn things about your routines, and communicate back to you – or even, improvise to help you wake up earlier to avoid that traffic that might make you late. Do you need to buy a device, like the $249 Band 2, and always wear it to have these sorts of interactions with your car? Despite the emphasis on wearables, CES 2016 has also given us a glimmer of a vehicle future that cuts out the wearable middleman entirely. Take Audi's new Fit Driver project. The goal is to reduce driver stress levels, prevent driver fatigue, and provide a relaxing interior environment by adjusting cabin elements like seat massage, climate control, and even the interior lighting. While it focuses on a wearable device to monitor heart rate and skin temperature, the Audi itself will use on-board sensors to examine driving style and breathing rate as well as external conditions – the weather, traffic, that sort of thing. Could the seats measure skin temperature? Could the seatbelt measure heart rate? Seems like Audi might not need the wearable at all – the car's already doing most of the work. Whether there's a device on a driver's wrist or not, manufacturers seem to be developing a consensus that vehicles should be taking on some of a wearable's functionality.

Inside Ford's high-tech climate chamber

There are two ways an automaker can test its vehicles in extreme climates: it can send said vehicle around the world – from Death Valley to the Arctic Circle – in search of the harshest weather, or it can recreate those conditions in an enclosed environment. We're sure that many automakers undertake some combination of both, but in this latest video clip, Ford shows us around inside it's state-of-the-art climate chamber. At its Driveability Test Facility in Allen Park, MI – inaugurated in 2010 just across the street from the Roush Technology Center – Ford can simulate all sorts of extreme conditions. It can drop the temperature down to -40 degrees Fahrenheit or raise it up to 130, and take it up to a simulated 12,000 feet above sea level or drop it down to 280 feet below. blast it with 150-mile-per-hour winds. It can control the level of humidity, approximate the intensity of the sun and even blast the test vehicle with artificial snow, just like your favorite ski resort. The facility strikes us as an engineering feat as impressive as some of the vehicles it's used to test, but don't take our word for it – scope it out for yourself in this brief two-minute video clip, which even includes some helpful tips for winter driving this holiday season and beyond. News Source: Ford via YouTube Plants/Manufacturing Ford Videos Michigan winter

Tier 1 suppliers call GM the worst OEM to work with

Among automakers with a big US presence, General Motors is the worst to work for, according to a new survey from Tier 1 automotive suppliers, conducted by Planning Perspectives, Inc.
The Detroit-based manufacturer, which has been under fire following the ignition switch recall and its accompanying scandal, finished behind six other automakers with big US manufacturing operations. Suppliers had issues with trust and communications, as well as intellectual property protection. GM was also the least likely to allow suppliers to raise their prices in the face of unexpected increases in material cost, all of which contributed to 55 percent of suppliers saying their relationship with GM was "poor to very poor."
GM's cross-town competitors didn't fare much better. Chrysler finished in fifth place, ahead of GM and behind Dearborn-based Ford, which was passed for third place this year by Nissan. Toyota took the top marks, while Honda captured second place.