1967 Convertible Lincoln Continental on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Trump did talk to Bill Ford, but the Kentucky plant was never moving to Mexico

President-elect Donald J. Trump has been butting heads with Ford for a while now. A lot of it seems to stem from misunderstanding or misrepresenting facts about how the automaker currently does business and its plans for the future. After a sit-down with executive chairman Bill Ford Jr., the misunderstandings continue, but Trump has apparently convinced the company to make some changes. During his campaign, Trump claimed that Ford was going to fire US workers and move manufacturing to Mexico. That wasn't the case – yes, Ford planned to transfer Focus and C-Max production from Wayne, Michigan, to Cuautitlan, Mexico, but no, that wouldn't mean anyone losing their job. The Wayne plant will continue to operate, and likely busier than before, as it will be the home of the new Bronco and Ranger. So Ford CEO Mark Fields responded with the facts, and then chairman Bill Ford Jr. sat down with Trump over the summer. Things apparently weren't resolved to Trump's satisfaction, so he and Bill Ford spoke on the phone yesterday as he claims in this tweet: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Let's pick that apart. First off, it's not a Lincoln plant, per se – the Louisville Assembly Plant currently builds the Ford Escape and Lincoln MKC, two small crossovers that share a platform. Ford was considering moving MKC production out of Kentucky to Mexico, but it would not have resulted in many lost jobs if any – the union had already agreed to moving the MKC in 2015 negotiations, and taking production of the slow-selling Lincoln out of the plant would open up capacity for more Fords. Be that as it may, Ford has decided not to move MKC production out of the plant, either for political reasons of placation or because it didn't make the greatest deal of business sense, maybe a combination of the two. That means Trump isn't really saving any American jobs in the short term. If anything, this move could keep Ford supply-constrained and result in reduced sales, which in turn brings the company less money and affects the bottom line and all employees. But that's speculation, so we won't tweet it. There is of course the possibility that Ford will be convinced, either by sheer will or by a more attractive trade situation, to invest in increased US production, which could bear fruit later on. We are told by Ford that the two men did in fact speak yesterday.

Lincoln Aviator vs Cadillac XT6 | How they compare on paper

There have been big, three-row family crossovers for quite a while now, but until recently the luxury market hasn't fully embraced them. Sure, you could literally get one with a third row, but unless you were a kid, chances are the term "dungeon-like" was going to be tossed around. Things are changing now, however, as new and redesigned entries are starting to hit the market. We've recently had a chance to get our first drives of the 2020 Lincoln Aviator and 2020 Cadillac XT6, two all-new three-row crossovers from American luxury brands. We also got a turn behind the wheel of the updated 2020 Volvo XC90. However, since none of our editors have yet to drive to drive them all, we wanted to see how they compare on paper, examining their engine specs and interior dimensions. We also included the 2020 Acura MDX, the original three-row luxury crossover, which continues to sell well despite approaching the end of its current generation. That it offers a hybrid model makes it that much more applicable given the Aviator and XC90 also offer gasoline-electric powertrains, albeit of the plug-in variety. 3 Row Luxury Crossovers Powertrains View 1 Photos Non-hybrid MDX has a 5,000-pound max tow rating. How do their performance and fuel economy compare? This one is absolutely no contest. The 400-horsepower Lincoln blows away its competitors despite having a price tag that's similar to the 310-horsepower Cadillac and in between the XC90's T5 and T6 models. At least the Acura is considerably cheaper. Besides the eye-popping output, the estimated 0-60-mph time of 5.5 seconds (gleaned from the mechanically similar Ford Explorer ST) is appreciably quicker than the others. Now, fuel economy is a bit lower, but the efficiency of Volvo's four-cylinder engines are likely more susceptible to varying due to driver differences. It should also be noted that the Cadillac gets the same combined fuel economy estimate as the Aviator despite having 90 fewer horses and 144 fewer pound-feet of torque. Just one of the ways where the XT6's prospects dim in the presence of its cross-Michigan rival. The Cadillac is also not available as a hybrid model. The others are, but are disparate. The Lincoln Aviator Grand Touring and Volvo XC90 T8 are similar in concept: range-topping models that are as much about adding performance as they are fuel economy. Their hefty price tags certainly reflect that as well.

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.