2001 Ford Ranger 4x4 Ext.cab...6cyl/auto...exc.cond...priced To Sell on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford earnings take a dive on investment, slowing sales; workers get $6,900 in profit sharing

Ford Motor Company's pre-tax profits for 2014 took a beating, falling to $6.3 billion, a $2.3-billion drop from 2013, while overall revenues fell from $139.4 billion to $135.8 billion. Net income for 2014, meanwhile, plunged 56 percent, from $7.18 billion to $3.19 billion. Yeah, those aren't great numbers. While Ford's figures are largely down across the board, some of the weaker numbers aren't too difficult to explain away. The company launched 24 vehicles across the globe in 2014, including some of its biggest and most important volume models, like the 2015 F-150, as well as iconic offerings like the new Mustang. The result of this is both increased investment as well as a drop in total sales – US market numbers were down 164,000 units compared to 2013. Recall claims and high warranty costs also did a number on the Blue Oval. "2014 was a solid yet challenging year for Ford - with our investments and a record number of new products launched around the world positioning us for strong growth this year and beyond," Ford CEO Mark Fields said in a statement. Ford's 50,180 UAW workers in the United States will receive profit-sharing checks of $6,900. In some markets, Ford's fortunes were impacted by outside factors. Europe, for example, recorded more sales (up 70,000 units) and higher revenues (up $2.2 billion), but still reported a $443-million pre-tax loss. Blame was placed on the crumbling Russian economy, which has suffered from sanctions and slumping oil prices. Despite its troubles last year, the company still seems bullish on 2015. Ford's pre-tax outlook remains unchanged, as the company expects to make anywhere from $8.5 to $9.5 billion on the back of higher revenue from the company's automotive operations. We expect strong growth and improved financial performance in 2015 driven by our investments in new products and capacity," Ford CFO Bob Shanks said of the company's future.

Did a US automaker blow the whistle on Hyundai, Kia fuel economy issue?

In all of the most hotly contested mainstream segments of the motoring universe, the difference of one mile per gallon averaged on a widow sticker can mean the difference between a sale and a walk-off - to say nothing of two or three mpg. So, when Hyundai and Kia were forced to reveal that many of their 40-mpg ratings were actually 38s and 37s, well, it made for big news.
It also, conceivably, made for a competitive disadvantage immediately, when the Korean automakers' products were being shopped versus the guys down the block. And it's that disadvantage that makes a recent story from Automotive News so juicy.
AN is reporting that Margo Oge, former head of the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Transportation and Air Quality, got a tip in 2010 that Hyundai/Kia were "cheating" to get its impressive fuel economy numbers. The tip, said Oge (who retired from the EPA this past September), came from a senior vice president from a domestic automaker. The source was credible enough for Oge to launch an audit of the Hyundai figures, which ultimately lead to the debacle that we reported on a few months ago, and that the Korean company has been trying to bounce back from ever since.

IIHS updates overlap test: 2 SUVs get good marks, 9 fare poorly

Vehicles in crashes keep occupants safe by deforming around the cabin in a way that maintains cabin integrity. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's moderate overlap test, introduced in 1995, has been a huge contributor to improved safety for front-row passengers in a crash. IIHS President David Harkey said, "Thanks to automakers’ improvements, drivers in most vehicles are nearly 50% less likely to be killed in a frontal crash today than they were 25 years ago." In the 'unintentional side effects' column, crash safety has gotten worse for passengers in the back seats. When carmakers reengineered the front crash structure to protect the driver, more crash forces got distributed throughout the rear. IIHS research claims rear passengers have a 46% greater risk of fatal injury than front-row passengers, but back-seaters haven't benefited from the same upgrades in safety as the front row. The IIHS updated its moderate overlap test to address the issue, putting 15 vehicles through the new regime. Two earned good ratings — the 2023 Ford Escape and the 2021-2023 Volvo XC40 — one was acceptable, three were marginal and nine were rated poor. Every one of the crossovers sampled got good marks for all passengers in the original test. That test sees 40% of vehicle's width on the driver's side impacting an aluminum honeycomb barrier at 40 miles per hour. The updated test puts a crash dummy representing small woman or 12-year-old child in the seat behind the driver, the dummy's sensors and grease paint measuring the effectiveness of the restraints and the forces a human body would need to endure. To achieve a good rating, the "measurements must not exceed limits indicating excessive risk of injury to the head, neck, chest, abdomen or thigh." An institute engineer said, "In real-world crashes, chest injuries are the most common serious rear-seat injuries for adults." The sensors and video evidence showed back seat dummies in the Escape and XC40 endured minimal risk of injuries from excessive crash forces, from submarining under the seat belt, or from unwanted interaction with the side curtain airbag.   The Toyota RAV4 scored acceptable. The second-row dummy also endured minimal risk of injury to the chest and lower extremities. However, the lap belt slipped upward in a way that could increase abdominal injuries, and after the dummy's head dipped during crash impact, the head came back up between the rear curtain airbag and rear window.