1969 Ford Galaxie 500 Convertable on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Autoblog's Editors' Picks: Our complete list of the best new vehicles

It's not easy to earn an “EditorsÂ’ Picks” at Autoblog as part of the rating and review process that every new vehicle goes through. Our editors have been at it a long time, which means weÂ’ve driven and reviewed virtually every new car you can go buy on the dealer lot. There are disagreements, of course, and all vehicles have their strengths and weaknesses, but this list features what we think are the best new vehicles chosen by Autoblog editors. We started this formal review process back in 2018, so there's quite of few of them now. So what does it mean to be an EditorsÂ’ Pick? In short, it means itÂ’s a car that we can highly recommend purchasing. There may be one, multiple, or even zero vehicles in any given segment that we give the green light to. What really matters is that itÂ’s a vehicle that weÂ’d tell a friend or family member to go buy if theyÂ’re considering it, because itÂ’s a very good car. The best way to use this list is is with the navigation links below. Click on a segment, and you'll quickly arrive at the top rated pickup truck or SUV, for example. Use the back button to return to these links and search in another segment, like sedans. If youÂ’ve been keeping up with our monthly series of the latest vehicles to earn EditorsÂ’ Pick status, youÂ’re likely going to be familiar with this list already. If not, welcome to the complete list that weÂ’ll be keeping updated as vehicles enter (and others perhaps exit) the good graces of our editorial team. We rate a new car — giving it a numerical score out of 10 — every time thereÂ’s a significant refresh or if it happens to be an all-new model. Any given vehicle may be impressive on a first drive, but we wait until itÂ’s in the hands of our editors to put it through the same type of testing as every other vehicle that rolls through our test fleet before giving it the EditorsÂ’ Pick badge. This ensures consistency and allows more voices to be heard on each individual model. And just so you donÂ’t think weÂ’ve skipped trims or variants of a model, we hand out the EditorsÂ’ Pick based on the overarching model to keep things consistent. So, when you read that the 3 Series is an EditorsÂ’ Pick, yes, that includes the 330i to the M3 and all the variants in between. If thereÂ’s a particular version of that car we vehemently disagree with, we make sure to call that out.

2015 Ford Mustang EcoBoost

Earlier this week, Ford invited us to Charlotte, NC, to ride in an all-new 2015 Mustang fitted with its turbocharged 2.3-liter EcoBoost four-cylinder. It's the first forced-induction, four-cylinder ponycar for the Blue Oval since the sun set on the 1986 Mustang SVO. We jumped at the opportunity, as only a handful of people have ever been in the passenger seat of this new car, and most automotive media won't get as close as we did until this fall.
As we revealed in our Deep Dive, Ford will slot this new turbocharged four as premium powerplant between its naturally aspirated 3.7-liter V6 and the naturally aspirated 5.0-liter V8. At last mention, the automaker said the direct-injected, all-aluminum engine will develop 305 horsepower and 300 pound-feet of torque, returning the best fuel economy of the three powerplants in the process. History buffs will note that those figures are appreciably stouter than the 200 horses and 240 lb-ft that the '86 SVO realized out of the same displacement, and the latter's figures were hugely impressive at the time. On paper, the new EcoBoost four looks to be a good fit for most owners who want to balance performance with efficiency - we were eager to see how it felt from the passenger seat.
Riding Notes

Ford not backing down on MPG-based marketing strategy

The Blue Oval may have to back off a bit from the green messaging. Ford has had to lower fuel-economy ratings on a number of 2013 and 2014 model-year vehicles, namely its hybrids. And that may force the US automaker to rethink some of its marketing strategy, Automotive News reports. Ford has spent much of the year pushing its fuel-efficiency improvements, with everything from a Super Bowl ad saying its Fusion Hybrid gets "almost double" the fuel efficiency of an average vehicle (after the recalculation, it's now more like 75 percent better) to claiming the Fiesta is the most fuel-efficient non-hybrid in the US (it's actually the Mitsubishi Mirage) to stating the C-Max Hybrid gets better fuel economy than the Toyota Prius V (it doesn't). Nonetheless, Ford doesn't plan on changing its mpg marketing emphasis anytime soon, the company said in an e-mailed statement to AutoblogGreen. "Providing customers great fuel economy is a key part of our Ford vehicle DNA." "Providing customers great fuel economy is a key part of our Ford vehicle DNA," the company said. "We will continue to highlight our vehicles features and attributes in our advertising and marketing, which includes fuel economy and fuel-saving technologies like EcoBoost and hybrids." Earlier this month, Ford said it would lower the fuel-economy ratings of models such as the C-Max, Fusion and Lincoln MKZ Hybrids as well as most of the Fiesta line because of mistakes in the company's internal testing data. It was the second change for the C-Max Hybrid. The good news for Ford is that its fleetwide fuel economy is up almost 40 percent from a decade ago, compared to an improvement of around 23 percent for Toyota. Still, while sales of Ford hybrids and plug-ins are about even with last year through the first five months of 2014, C-Max Hybrid sales have plunged 49 percent from a year earlier. Earlier this year, Ford admitted that the first fuel economy downgrade had a negative effect on sales and we can find proof in the numbers. Before that the change was announced, in August 2013, Ford was consistently selling over 2,000 – and sometimes over 3,000 – C-Max Hybrids a month. In September, it dropped to 1,424, then to 1,438 in October. It didn't climb back above 2,000 until May 2014. The second mpg adjustment was announced in June.