V6 Suv 3.0l Anti-lock Braking System (abs) Traction Control System Fog Lamps on 2040-cars

Auto blog

More than 800,000 Fords recalled for faulty Takata airbags

The Basics: Ford is recalling about 816,000 Ford, Lincoln, and Mercury vehicles built in the US for faulty passenger-side Takata airbags. The affected vehicles were all built in North America, with 654,695 recalled vehicles in the US and 161,174 vehicles in Canada. A wide variety of cars, trucks, and SUVs are affected. This is a planned expansion of an earlier recall. 2005-09 and 2012 Ford Mustang 2005-06 Ford GT 2006-09 and 2012 Ford Fusion 2007-09 Ford Ranger 2007-09 Ford Edge 2006-09 and 2012 Lincoln Zephyr and Lincoln MKZ 2007-09 Lincoln MKX 2006-09 Mercury Milan The Problem: Like every other Takata recall, the problem rests with faulty airbags that can potentially expel shrapnel, injuring or killing vehicle occupants. Millions of vehicles from dozens of automakers are affected, so don't think that Ford is alone on this one. Injuries/Deaths: Ford stated in a press release that there have been no injuries or death linked to the vehicles in this recall. All in all, 11 deaths and 180 injuries across a variety of automakers have been linked to these Takata airbags. The fix: Ford will contact owners soon, and the affected vehicles will have their airbags replaced by a dealer at no additional charge. If you own one: Wait for contact from Ford, then head to the dealer to get a replacement. If you're wondering if your vehicle is affected, go to this Ford website and enter their Vehicle Identification Number (VIN). The recall reference number is 17S01. Related Video: News Source: FordImage Credit: Associated Press Recalls Ford Lincoln Mercury Auto Repair Ownership Safety Truck Coupe Crossover SUV Sedan airbag Takata airbag recall

Impala SS vs. Marauder: Recalling Detroit’s muscle sedans 

Impala SS vs. Marauder — it was comparo that only really happened in theory. ChevyÂ’s muscle sedan ran from 1994-96, while MercuryÂ’s answer arrived in 2003 and only lasted until 2004. TheyÂ’re linked inextricably, as there were few options for powerful American sedans during that milquetoast period for enthusiasts. The debate was reignited recently among Autoblog editors when a pristine 1996 Chevy Impala SS with just 2,173 miles on the odometer hit the market on Bring a Trailer. Most of the staff favored the Impala for its sinister looks and said that it lived up to its billing as a legit muscle car. Nearly two-thirds of you agree. We ran an unscientific Twitter poll that generated 851 votes, 63.9 percent of which backed the Impala. Muscle sedans, take your pick: — Greg Migliore (@GregMigliore) April 14, 2020 Then and now enthusiasts felt the Impala was a more complete execution with guts. The Marauder, despite coming along later, felt more hacked together, according to prevailing sentiments. Why? On purpose and on paper theyÂ’re similar. The ImpalaÂ’s 5.7-liter LT1 V8 making 260 horsepower and 330 pound-feet of torque was impressive for a two-ton sedan in the mid-Â’90s. The Marauder was actually more powerful — its 4.6-liter V8 was rated at 302 hp and 318 lb-ft. The ImpalaÂ’s engine was also used in the C4 Corvette. The MarauderÂ’s mill was shared with the Mustang Mach 1. You can see why they resonated so deeply with Boomers longing for a bygone era and also captured the attention of coming-of-age Gen Xers. Car and DriverÂ’s staff gave the Marauder a lukewarm review back in ‘03, citing its solid handling and features, yet knocking the sedan for being slow off the line. In a Hemmings article appropriately called “Autopsy” from 2004, the ImpalaÂ’s stronger low-end torque and smooth shifting transmission earned praise, separating it from the more sluggish Mercury. All of this was captured in the carsÂ’ acceleration times, highlighting metrically the differences in their character. The Impala hit 60 miles per hour in 6.5 seconds, while the Marauder was a half-second slower, according to C/D testing. Other sites have them closer together, which reinforces the premise it really was the little things that separated these muscle cars. Both made the most of their genetics, riding on ancient platforms (FordÂ’s Panther and General MotorsÂ’ B-body) that preceded these cars by decades. Both had iconic names.

Ford finds flex-fuel engine design plays big role in emissions output

How bad is ethanol for your engine? There's been a lot of debate on this issue as the US considers upping the biofuel content in the national gasoline supply from 10 percent (E10) to 15 percent (E15). The ethanol industry and some scientists say higher ethanol blends show no "meaningful differences" in new engines while the oil industry says ethanol creates health risks. Researchers working at the Ford Research and Innovation Center decided to take a closer look at how a wide range of gas-ethanol blends - E0, E10, E20, E30, E40, E55 and E80 - affected the emissions coming out of a flex-fuel 2006 Mercury Grand Marquis. To see the full report, printed in the journal Environmental Science & Technology, requires payment, but there is an abstract and Green Car Congress has some more details. The gist is that, "with increasing ethanol content in the fuel, the tailpipe emissions of ethanol, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, methane, and ammonia increased." At least NOx and NMHC emissions decreased. The researchers say that the effects are due to the fuel and "are expected for all FFVs," but that the way that a manufacturer calibrates the engine will affect NOx, THC, and NMOG emissions. It's this last bit that's important, since the researchers found, "Higher ethanol content in gasoline affects several fundamental fuel properties that can impact emissions. ... These changes can have positive or negative effects that can depend on engine design, hardware, and control strategy. In addition to direct emissions impacts, higher ethanol content fuel can also provide more efficient combustion and overall engine operation under part-load conditions and under knock-limited higher-load conditions." So, as we head towards more ethanol in our fuel supply (maybe), manufacturers are going to need to learn how to burn it most efficiently.