2004 Lincoln Navigator Ultimate Sport Utility 4-door 5.4l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford recalling 390,000 cars over door latch woes

Ford is recalling certain Fiesta, Fusion and Lincoln MKZ vehicles due to faulty door latches, marking the latest in what seems to be a recurring issue for the Blue Oval. This is the third door latch recall from Ford in 2015, following a 213,000-unit recall in March and a 205,000-unit recall in January. This one, however, is significantly larger. A total of 390,000 units are affected, including Fusions and MKZs from model years 2013 and 2014, as well as Fiestas from model years 2012 to 2014. A "broken pawl spring tab" is the culprit, potentially keeping doors from latching shut. According to Ford, even if the door does shut, it could come open again without warning. The affected Fiestas were built between February 1, 2012 and May 31, 2013 at the Cuautitlan, Mexico factory. The Fusion and MKZ siblings, meanwhile, were screwed together at Hermosillo Assembly in Mexico between July 1, 2012 to May 31, 2013. Ford is aware of three minor reports of door malfunctions. In two cases, the door bounced back open, quite literally hitting drivers on their way out. In the third case, a door swung open of its own accord while a driver was attempting to park, hitting another vehicle. Ford will notify owners, who will need to report into dealers to have all four latches replaced. Scroll down for the official press release. Related Video: APR 24, 2015 | DEARBORN, MICH. FORD MOTOR COMPANY ISSUES SAFETY RECALL IN NORTH AMERICA FOR DOOR LATCH ISSUE ON FORD FIESTA AND FUSION, LINCOLN MKZ Ford Motor Company is issuing a safety recall for approximately 390,000 2012-2014 Ford Fiesta and 2013-2014 Ford Fusion and Lincoln MKZ vehicles for a door latch issue. The door latch in these vehicles may experience a broken pawl spring tab, which typically results in a condition where the door will not latch. If a customer is then able to latch the door, there is potential the door may unlatch while driving, increasing the risk of injury. Ford is aware of two allegations of soreness resulting from an unlatched door bouncing back when the customer attempted to close it, and one accident allegation when an unlatched door swung open and struck an adjacent vehicle as the driver was pulling into a parking space. Affected vehicles include certain 2012-2014 Ford Fiesta vehicles built at Cuautitlan Assembly Plant, Feb.

What will the next Presidential limo look like?

With recent news that the Secret Service has begun soliciting proposals for a new armored limousine, we've been wondering what the next presidential limo might look like. The current machine, nicknamed "The Beast", has a design based on a car that's no longer sold: the Cadillac DTS. If General Motors gets the job again, which wouldn't be a surprise considering the government still owns a chunk of the company, the next limo's shape would likely resemble the new XTS (below, left). But Cadillac hasn't always been the go-to car company for presidential whips.
Lincoln has actually provided far more presidential limousines throughout history than Cadillac. In fact, the first car modified for Commander-in-Chief-carrying duty was a 1939 Lincoln K-Series called "Sunshine Special" used by Franklin D. Roosevelt, and the last Lincoln used by a president was a 1989 Town Car ordered for George H.W. Bush. If President Obama wanted a Lincoln today, it would likely be an amalgam of the MKS sedan and MKT crossover, as illustrated above.
And what about Chrysler? The only record we could find of a President favoring the Pentastar is Nixon, who reportedly ordered two limos from the company during his administration in the '70s, and then another one, known today as the "K-Car limo," in the '80s after he left office. Obama, however, has a personal - if modest - connection to Chryslers, having owned a 300 himself before he took office. A 300-based Beast (above, right) would certainly earn the U.S. some style points.

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.