1960 Ford Thunderbird Base Hardtop 2-door 5.8l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford builds USAF Thunderbirds Edition Mustang for charity

Each year since 2008, Ford has created a one-off Mustang to celebrate military aviation, and the cars have been auctioned off at the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) Gathering of Eagles charity event to raise money to inspire the next generation of aviators. This year's charity car is the 2014 Ford Mustang GT US Air Force Thunderbirds Edition, which also helps celebrate 60 years of Thunderbirds air show excellence.
Of all the EAA charity cars, this Thunderbirds Edition is the most in depth. Painted to match the F-16 Tomcat fighter jets used by Thunderbirds, this Mustang also gets a widebody kit and 22-inch Forgiato wheels to go with the cockpit's Recaro bucket seats, rear-seat delete and modified navigation screen and gauge cluster. Even the Mustang's projector puddle lights have been changed to show an aircraft silhouette - rather than the Mustang's galloping horse logo - when the doors are open.
Themes for previous EAA charity cars include the Blue Angels, SR-71 Blackbird and the Red Tails as well as the F-22 Raptor-inspired AV8R and AV-X10 "Dearborn Doll" models. Scroll down for the press release for the 2014 Ford Mustang GT US Air Force Thunderbirds Edition, and be sure to check out our galleries for all six aviation-themed Mustangs.

MotorWeek finds nice things to say about the 1993 Ford Probe

This latest in MotorWeek's series of Retro Reviews continues its recent trend of remembering the massive glut of sports coupes that hit the market in the '90s. While vehicles like the Mitsubishi 3000GT, Mazda RX-7, and Ford Mustang all enjoy solid reputations down to this day, the 1993 Ford Probe, well... doesn't. As you'll soon see, though, the show's opinion suggests the coupe's second generation isn't really all that bad. Turns out they just weren't particularly sporty. Ford and Mazda developed the Probe together, and the Japanese company supplied both the base 115-horsepower 2.0-liter four-cylinder and the 164-hp 2.5-liter V6 in the GT trim. The original's pseudo-angular look gave way to a much smoother shape for the second generation. Of course, pop-up headlights remained, which were a design hallmark for many of this era's sports coupes. After driving it, MotorWeek proclaims the Probe is "a winner" and considers the handling a "delight." That's not a big surprise, considering that in those days, a car had to be really bad not to get a decent review from Television's Original Automotive Magazine. However, the show hints at some of the reasons the coupe isn't so well remembered today. Even the GT reportedly suffers from soft springs and lots of understeer, which sounds like exactly the opposite anyone hoping to drive the coupe enthusiastically would want. To sum it all up, we're sure you're just as happy as we are that Ford went back on its initial plan to shelve the Mustang in favor of the front-drive Probe. Related Video:

Report: GM struggling to market turbo technology

In the automotive realm, marketing can sometimes prove just as important as the actual product. Take, for instance, Ford's well regarded EcoBoost technology, which couples turbocharging with direct injection to produce more horsepower and reduce fuel consumption. Would it surprise you to hear that General Motors has had similar technology on the market for over three years?
It's true. GM's first turbocharged, direct injected powerplants hit the market for the 2007 model. The 2.0-liter Ecotec mills put down an impressive 260 horsepower and a matching 260 pound-feet of torque, and they were lauded by the press in the engine bays of the Pontiac Solstice, Saturn Sky, Chevrolet Cobalt SS and Chevrolet HHR SS. But few people outside a core group of enthusiasts actually remember this fact.
Says Uwe Grebe, executive director of GM's global advanced engineering, "We didn't have a badge and say, 'This is the most important thing we will put on all our brochures.'" Ford, however, did just that, and it's EcoBoost engines are right at the tips of all our tongues when we discuss today's most advanced powerplants. So, how does The General fix its mistake?