1966 Ford Ranchero on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford forced to recall Escape over fire risk yet again

Recalls happen. Automakers hope they won't, but they do. And that's alright, for the most part, because cars are designed (and to a large degree still made) by humans, and humans make mistakes. So we forgive them, as long as the problem is resolved. Only in the case of the Ford Escape, the problem seems to keep coming back.
That's why Ford is calling in the Escape yet again due to fire concerns. The issue revolves around problematic fuel lines in 9,469 units manufactured between October 5, 2011, and July 11, 2012, all of which use the 1.6-liter EcoBoost inline four-cylinder engine.
As you yourself may recall, the Escape was subject to a string of recalls last year that resulted in a $17 million fine. One of them was over this very same issue, which Ford apparently didn't rectify the first time around. Let's hope this time is the last time.

Has the 2015 Ford Mustang gained hundreds of pounds?

Automakers face competing interests when it comes to developing a new generation of vehicle. On the one hand, companies want to build their cars to be safer and better handling, with more equipment and maybe even larger dimensions over the model it's replacing. On the other hand, they strive to keep weight down to the benefit of both performance and fuel consumption. Usually something has to give, and in the case of the new 2015 Ford Mustang, those efforts may have resulted in a weight penalty of two or three hundred pounds.
This according to Blue Oval modifier Steeda Autosports, which states that "the 2015 Mustang ended up gaining 200-300 pounds in this remake". Despite the Mustang not being on the market yet, it would appear the leading Ford aftermarketer has been given early access to the 2015 model to help jumpstart its tuning efforts (a rather common development among trusted tuners). If Steeda's assertion is accurate, that would make the challenge of getting the new pony car up to speed for both Ford and aftermarket customizers like Steeda that much greater.
We're waiting for official word from Ford on the veracity of Steeda's claim, but if true, it's bound to be a bit of disappointing news for legions of Blue Oval performance enthusiasts. Watch this space for more.

Nuclear-powered concept cars from the Atomic Age

In the 1950s and early 60s, the dawn of nuclear power was supposed to lead to a limitless consumer culture, a world of flying cars and autonomous kitchens all powered by clean energy. In Europe, it offered the then-limping continent a cheap, inexhaustible supply of power after years of rationing and infrastructure damage brought on by two World Wars.
The development of nuclear-powered submarines and ships during the 1940s and 50s led car designers to begin conceptualizing atomic vehicles. Fueled by a consistent reaction, these cars would theoretically produce no harmful byproducts and rarely need to refuel. Combining these vehicles with the new interstate system presented amazing potential for American mobility.
But the fantasy soon faded. There were just too many problems with the realities of nuclear power. For starters, the powerplant would be too small to attain a reaction unless the car contained weapons-grade atomic materials. Doing so would mean every fender-bender could result in a minor nuclear holocaust. Additionally, many of the designers assumed a lightweight shielding material or even forcefields would eventually be invented (they still haven't) to protect passengers from harmful radiation. Analyses of the atomic car concept at the time determined that a 50-ton lead barrier would be necessary to prevent exposure.