Great Paint, Garage Kept, 292 Cid, Rebuilt, Am/fm/cd, 3-speed On The Tree, Nice! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford Explorer, Expedition next to go aluminum?

Ford made some serious waves when it unveiled the latest F-150. Instead of making its bodywork out of steel, like just about every other truck on the market, Ford went with aluminum. And you can bet the F-150 won't be the last Ford model to go with the lightweight alloy construction, either.
Our compatriots at Edmunds report that Dearborn is considering replacing two of its most popular SUVs with aluminum versions. One candidate is the Expedition, which would make sense considering that the current model (like the two preceding generations and the fullsize Bronco before it) is based on the F-150's underpinnings. Another is the Explorer, which was traditionally based on the Ranger pickup but went with a car-like unibody chassis in its current iteration. If the Explorer does go the way of aluminum, don't expect it to be a part of its very next update, which is likely due too soon for such major changes.
It would stand to reason that, if the Expedition were to go aluminum, so would the next-generation Lincoln Navigator. Ditto the MKT together with the Explorer. But those aren't likely to be the only models in contention for aluminum construction. Like any other automaker, Ford is under pressure to steadily reduce its carbon emissions and improve its fuel economy figures, prompting it to look at a whole range of measures - including more efficient engines, lower rolling-resistance tires, active aerodynamics and lightweight construction. Expect aluminum to play a big part in that equation moving forward.

Is this the 2017 Ford F-250 and its all-new aluminum body?

We don't have much to go on, but our friends at Jalopnik have uncovered a completely undoctored photo (used with permission) of what appears to be the 2017 Ford F-250 Super Duty. There's no indication of what's under the boxy new sheetmetal – our bet, like that of Jalopnik, is that the 6.2-liter gasoline-powered V8 will join the latest torque-monster of a 6.7-liter PowerStroke V8 – but we're still left with lots of time to work out the details. For now, we see the same kind of upright and in-your-face styling that we've come to expect from the Ford Super Duty, including more chrome than a '60s Cadillac up front and huge headlight clusters that cut deeply into the side bodywork. We also note plenty of glass making up the large greenhouse, which should be a boon for visibility. Of course, the big news is the actual metal that the body is stamped from. We're expecting to see lots of aluminum, with the heavy-duty pickup following the smaller, lighter-duty F-150 into the lightweight realm for increased fuel savings and greater pulling and hauling capabilities. Stay tuned for more. Related Video: News Source: JalopnikImage Credit: Jalopnik Ford Truck Future Vehicles Off-Road Vehicles ford f-250 autoblog black

Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy

With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.