1970 Boss 302, 4:30 Drag Pak, Lime Metallic Green on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Weekly Recap For 6.24.16 | Autoblog Minute

Leaked photos of the 2017 Porsche Panamera, and spy shots of the Jeep Wrangler and Ford Fiesta ST. Senior Producer Chris McGraw reports on this edition of Autoblog Minute. Ford Jeep Porsche Autoblog Minute Videos Original Video ford fiesta st fiesta st

Ford exec reveals new F-150 Raptor packs 450 horsepower

Between the new GT supercar, Shelby GT350R muscle car and F-150 Raptor off-roader, Ford had quite the array of performance machinery on display at the Detroit Auto Show earlier this month. One thing it didn't reveal about any of the three, however, is how much power they'd pack, but a senior executive at the Blue Oval automaker has reportedly let the cat out of the bag when it comes to the Raptor. During a televised interview during the Rolex 24 at Daytona this past weekend, Ford's product development chief Raj Nair is said to have revealed that the new F-150 Raptor will offer 450 horsepower. That's pretty impressive from a 3.5-liter turbocharged V6, and would put the new Raptor out ahead of the 411 hp produced by the 6.2-liter naturally aspirated V8 in the previous SVT Raptor. That doesn't give us the whole picture, though, because in a vehicle this big especially, torque will play a huge factor. The outgoing Raptor offered 424 pound-feet of twist, and the existing 3.5-liter EcoBoost engine is already producing 420 lb-ft – so it seems fairly safe to assume the new Raptor will eclipse those figures as well, but we'll have to wait for official word to find out for sure. Related Video:

Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid

It's been a rough time for the official fuel economy figures for the Ford C-Max Hybrid. When the car was released in 2012, Ford made a huge deal about how it would beat the Toyota Prius V, which was rated at 42 combined miles per gallon, 44 city and 40 highway. The Ford? 47 mpg across the board. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? Well, after hearing customer complaints and issuing a software update in mid-2013, then discovering a real problem with the numbers last fall and then making a big announcement last week that the fuel economy ratings of six different 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles would need to be lowered, the C-Max Hybrid has ended up at 40 combined, 42 city and 37 highway. In other words, the Prius trumps it, as daily drivers of those two vehicles have known for a long time. The changes will not only affect the window sticker, but also the effect that the C-Max Hybrid (and the five other Ford vehicles that had their fuel economy figures lowered last week) have on Ford's compliance with greenhouse gas and CAFE rules for model year 2013 and 2014. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? There are two technical answers to that question, which we've got below, as well as some context for how Ford's mistakes will play out in the bigger world of green vehicles. Let's start with Ford's second error, which is easy to do since we documented it in detail last year (the first, needing to do a software update, was also covered). The basic gist is that Ford used the general label rule (completely legally) to test the Fusion Hybrid and use those numbers to figure out how efficient the C-Max Hybrid is. That turned out to be a mistake, since the two vehicles are different enough that their numbers were not comparable, despite having the same engine, transmission and test weight, as the rules require. You can read more details here. Ford's Said Deep admitted that the TRLHP issue is completely separate from the general label error from last year. Now let's move on to last week's announcement. What's interesting is that the new recalculation of the MPG numbers – downward, of course – was caused by a completely separate issue, something called the Total Road Load Horsepower (TRLHP). Ford's Said Deep admitted to AutoblogGreen that the TRLHP issue had nothing to do with the general label error from last year.