1949 Ford F1 Pickup on 2040-cars

Auto blog

EPA says fuel economy test for hybrids is accurate

The EPA says it stands behind its fuel economy test for hybrid vehicles following controversy about the testing process after Ford C-Max Hybrid customers and automotive journalists alike struggled to achieve 47 miles per gallon, the advertised mpg number, Automotive News reports. Ford responded to the issue almost two weeks ago by claiming that a 1970s-era EPA general label rule was responsible for the inaccurate mileage numbers, rerating the C-Max Hybrid's mpg numbers and offering customers rebates. Ford later said it didn't overstate the C-Max Hybrid's fuel economy and that it was surprised by the low numbers.
Ford technically didn't do anything wrong because it was following the general label rule, but agency regulator Christopher Grundler says the automaker was exploiting a loophole when it came up with the hybrid C-Max numbers, and that the testing process remains accurate. The general label rule allows vehicles that use the same engine and transmission and are in the same weight class to share fuel economy numbers, but it doesn't take into account other factors such as aerodynamic efficiency, which affects hybrids more drastically than non-hybrid vehicles. Ford originally used the Fusion Hybrid economy figures for the C-Max Hybrid and claimed the engineers didn't realize that its aerodynamic efficiency would affect fuel economy as much as it did.

Ford Mustang Mach-E fails Sweden's moose test

The infamous moose test has claimed another casualty. This time it's the Ford Mustang Mach-E AWD Long Range, which was tested in an electric four-way alongside the Tesla Model Y, Hyundai Ioniq 5 and Skoda Enyaq iV (an electric utility vehicle closely related to the Volkswagen ID.4 that is sold in the United States). According to the Swedish testers at Teknikens Varld, Ford's electric car not only failed to hit the speed necessary for a passing grade, it didn't perform well at slower speeds, either. To pass the outlet's moose test, a car has to complete a rapid left-right-straight S-shaped pattern marked by cones at a speed of at least 72 km/h (44.7 miles per hour). The test is designed to mimic the type of avoidance maneuver a driver would have to take in order to avoid hitting something that wandered into the road, which in Sweden may be a moose but could just as easily be a deer or some other member of the animal kingdom elsewhere in the world, or possibly a child or car backing into the motorway. Not only is the maneuver very aggressive, it's also performed with weights belted into each seat and more weight added to the cargo area to hit the vehicle's maximum allowable carrying capacity. The Mustang Mach-E only managed to complete the moose test at 68 km/h (42.3 mph), well below the passing-grade threshold. Even at much lower speeds, Teknikens Varld says the Mach-E (which boasts the highest carrying capacity and was therefore loaded with more weight than the rest of the vehicles tested in this quartet) is "too soft in the chassis" and suffers from "too slow steering." Proving that it is indeed possible to pass the test, the Hyundai and Skoda completed the maneuver at the 44.7-mph figure required for a passing grade and the Tesla did it at 46.6 mph, albeit with less weight in the cargo area. It's not clear whether other versions of the Mustang Mach-E would pass the test. It's also unknown if Ford will make any changes to its chassis tuning or electronic stability control software, as some other automakers have done after a poor performance from Teknikens Varld, to improve its performance in the moose test. Related video:

Ford recalls 300,000 Crown Vics over lighting module

The Basics: Ford is recalling 312,814 units of the Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis sedans from the 2003-2005 model years. They were built at the St. Thomas Assembly Plant between Oct. 3, 2001, and Aug. 2, 2005. Ford says 296,004 of those units are located in the United States, with another 14,714 in Canada and 2,096 in Mexico. The Problem: The solder joints on the lighting control module could crack, depriving the headlamps of the power they need to light the way ahead. That could increase the risk of a crash, particularly at night and in other low-visibility situations. Injuries/Deaths: Ford reports that it is aware of 11 accidents that resulted from the problem, leading to one injury described as "minor." The Fix: The manufacturer is instructing dealers to replace the entire lighting control module. If You Own One: Make sure your headlights are working before getting under way. If they're not, avoid driving under low-light conditions, including at night, in heavy precipitation, or in fog. Ford Issues Three Safety Recalls and One Safety Compliance Recall in North America DEARBORN, Mich., Dec. 22, 2015 – Ford Motor Company is issuing three safety recalls and one safety compliance recall in North America. Details are as follows: Ford Motor Company issues safety recall for certain 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles to replace lighting control module Ford Motor Company is issuing a safety recall for approximately 313,000 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles to replace a lighting control module. The solder joints on the module could crack and interrupt power to the headlamps – increasing the risk of crash at night. Ford is aware of 11 reports of accidents and one report of a minor injury related to this issue. Affected vehicles include certain 2003-2005 Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis vehicles built at St. Thomas Assembly Plant, Oct. 3, 2001 through Aug. 2, 2005. There are a total of 312,814 vehicles that might be affected in North America, including 296,004 in the United States and federalized territories, 14,714 in Canada and 2,096 in Mexico. Dealers will replace the lighting control module at no cost to the customer. Ford issues safety recall for certain 2016 Ford F-650 and F-750 vehicles to replace rear air brake chamber Ford is issuing a safety recall for 177 2016 Ford F-650 and F-750 vehicles to replace the rear air brake chamber.