2014 Ford Fusion Se on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Junkyard Gem: 1991 Mercury Capri

Ford has gotten a lot of use out of the Capri name in the United States. First, there was the Lincoln Capri in the 1950s, followed by the Ford Capri Mk1 (which was sold by Mercury dealers in the USA but never actually badged as a Mercury). Then came the 1979-1986 Mercury Capri, built on the very successful Fox Platform and essentially a clone of the Mustang. Finally, in 1991, the Australian Ford Capri came to the United States. Here is an example of this rare car that I spotted in a Northern California self-service yard not long ago. Mechanically speaking, the 1991-1994 Capri was a Mazda 323 under the skin, complete with a member of the same B-series engine family that went into such cars as the Miata and Ford Escort. So, for a few years in the early 1990s, car shoppers who wanted a sporty Mazda convertible could choose between a Miata and a Capri. The Capri had front-wheel-drive, but could be had with factory turbocharging. These cars were reliable and fun, but had a tough time competing with the Miata in the showroom battles. You'll see the occasional example now and then, but most of the 1991-1994 Capris have met the same fate that awaits this one. Related Video:

Detroit Three's lucrative pickup war intensifies as Ram makes big gains

DETROIT — The battle for profits from sales of large pickup trucks is intensifying among the Detroit Three automakers as sales of small cars in the United States shrivel. For decades Ford has had the single best-selling truck brand in its F-Series trucks. General Motors' Chevrolet brand was a solid No. 2, and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles' Ram was a distant third. Now, that hierarchy may be in flux. Sales figures for December and the fourth quarter released on Thursday show Ram tied with GM's Chevy for the No. 2 spot, as sales of the redesigned Ram pickup surged, fueled in part by demand for an optional 12-inch (30.48 cm) dashboard screen. Chevy not long ago held second place to Ford by a wide margin. GM executives said on Thursday they are bullish on their new GMC and Chevy trucks for 2019.Related: How the Detroit Three's pickups compare on paper 2019 Ram 1500 Laramie review 2019 Chevy Silverado 2.7L four-cylinder review 2019 Ford F-150 2.7L EcoBoost review "There's no doubt this segment (pickup trucks) is one of the epicenters of the auto wars," said Sandor Piszar, director of marketing for Chevrolet at GM. "It's been that way forever, and we wouldn't have it any other way." On Wall Street, investors give electric car leader Tesla a higher valuation than any of the Detroit automakers. But in the nation's heartland, big pickups remain far more popular and profitable than any electric car — and most other consumer vehicles of any kind. Large pickups generate at least $17,000 a vehicle in pretax profit for GM, the company has indicated in disclosures to investors. By contrast, many Detroit Three sedans are so unprofitable, their manufacturers have decided not to build them anymore. 'Hotly contested' Sustaining sales and pricing in the large-pickup segment will be critical in a year when most forecasters expect overall U.S. car and light truck sales to fall. Ford's U.S. sales chief, Mark LaNeve, on Thursday called the F Series "the backbone of our franchise" during a conference call, and added the "segment will continue to be strong, but hotly contested" in 2019. Automakers are banking on pickup truck sales to stay strong even if U.S. interest rates continue to rise. Rising interest rates translate into higher monthly car payments and are expected to deter some buyers in 2019. GM has said 27 percent of Chevrolet and GMC trucks — which can haul trailers by day and substitute for a luxury sedan by night — sell for more than $55,000.

Weekly Recap: Marchionne's Manifesto again calls for industry consolidation

Sergio Marchionne isn't taking no for an answer. Despite public rebuffs from General Motors and Ford, the leader of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles continues to push for consolidation within the auto industry. His latest assertion came Wednesday when he said a combination of FCA with another automaker could net savings of $5 billion or more annually. No, this isn't about selling his company, he claimed, it's about cutting costs. Put simply, the auto industry wastes money, Marchionne said during FCA's earnings conference call. Companies invest billions to develop basic components that all cars use, but many consumers don't care how they work or recognize the differences. "About half of this is really relevant in terms of positioning the car in the marketplace," he said. "The other half, in our view, is stuff which is neither visible to the consumer nor is it relevant to the consumer." In 2014, top automakers spent more than $100 million on product development, FCA estimated. Marchionne said consolidation could save up to $1 billion on powertrains alone, noting that almost every automaker offers four- and six-cylinder engines. Not everyone has to make their own, he contended. "The consumer could not give a flying leap whose engines we are using because they are irrelevant to the buying decision." That's pretty provocative for enthusiasts, but less so for average consumers. Still, there are major differences in power and efficiency ratings, even among similar engines. Skeptics could argue consolidation would also weaken competition and reduce choices for car buyers. Marchionne stressed his presentation, curiously entitled Confessions of a Capital Junkie, wouldn't require closing factories or dealerships. It's not his final "big deal" as CEO, intent to sell FCA, or a way to elevate his company up the automotive food chain. He claims he wants to fundamentally change the industry and its habit for burning cash. "The horrible part about this, and the thing that I find most offensive, is that the capital consumption rate is duplicative," he said. "It doesn't deliver real value to the consumer and it is in its purest form, economic waste." Other News & Notes Ford Profits dip in first quarter Ford profits fell $65 million to $924 million in the first quarter, hampered by slight dips in revenue and sales.