2011 Ford Mustang Gt Prem 5.0 6-spd Leather Rear Cam 8k Texas Direct Auto on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Weekly Recap: Jaguar takes a leap with price cut, new strategy

Jaguar was one of the famous automotive props and plotlines in the now-iconic drama Mad Men. There's a scene where the show's protagonist, Don Draper, deftly undercuts an influential Jaguar dealer by indicating that get-me-in-the-door local radio spots would be an effective way to sell cars like the slinky E-Type. The British executives think this is folly – Draper knows they will – and his advertising strategy wins out over the dealer's approach to move the metal. Jaguar's not doing that, but half a century later in the real world the company is launching plans to make its cars more attainable to new and younger customers like Millenials. These aren't coupons, but this is a leap for Jaguar, which has long banked on sexy styling and its rich motorsports history to overshadow its past mechanical flaws. Put simply, Jaguar is addressing the reasons why people, especially the younger set, don't buy its cars. The 2017 XE will start at $35,895 when it launches next spring – which makes it an attractive buy for a successful, relatively young person. When it's time to move up, the redesigned XF will be more attainable, coming in at $52,895, which is $5,275 less than the 2015 model. The flagship XJ sedan and the enthusiast-oriented F-Type sports car will also get thousands of dollars worth of added standard features, and Jag is actively pitching them as a better value than their competitors. "The Jaguar brand is on the eve of a major transformation that will see it dramatically increase its presence in the United States luxury marketplace with an expanded lineup, pricing focused on the core of the luxury market, and an all-new ownership package with best-in-class coverage," Joe Eberhardt, CEO of Jaguar Land Rover North America, said in a statement. The brand's quality and reliability dings have also lurked in the back of buyers' minds for decades, though that's an outdated notion. Jaguar placed third in J.D. Power's Initial Quality Study in June and was the top-ranked luxury brand in J.D. Power's Customer Service Index in March. Not content, the company is rolling out an enhanced program called Jaguar EliteCare that launches on 2016 models. It offers a five-year, 60,000-mile limited warranty, the longest among its competitors, with free scheduled maintenance during that period. The plan also covers roadside assistance and connectivity features.

Ford faces class-action lawsuit for selling vehicles without brake override systems

A total of 20 Ford customers are suing the automaker in a class-action lawsuit for selling vehicles "vulnerable to unintended acceleration." According to Reuters, the suit names 30 models built between 2002 and 2010 with electronic throttle control systems but without a brake override system. Those include the 2004-2012 F-Series pickups and the 2005-2009 Lincoln Town Car. Adam Levitt, a partner with the law firm of Grant & Eisenhofer says the plaintiffs in the case want "to be compensated for their economic losses by having overpaid for cars that contained defects." Levitt contends that the plaintiffs would not have bought their vehicles or paid less for them had they known there was no brake override system in place.
Ford began installing brake override systems in its vehicles beginning in 2010. In response to the lawsuit, Ford has pointed to research by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that indicated that unintended acceleration is mostly caused by driver error, saying in a statement that, "NHTSA's work is far more scientific and trustworthy than work done by personal injury lawyers and their paid experts."
Belville et al v. Ford Motor Co. will be heard in US District Court in the Southern District of West Virginia.

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.