1953 Ford F100 Frame-off Restoration, 351w, C-6, 9", Ifs on 2040-cars

Auto blog

180,000 new vehicles are sitting, derailed by lack of transport trains

If you're planning on buying a new car in the next month or so, you might want to pick from what's on the lot, because there could be a long wait for new vehicles from the factory. Locomotives continue to be in short supply in North America, and that's causing major delays for automakers trying to move assembled cars.
According to The Detroit News, there are about 180,000 new vehicles waiting to be transported by rail in North America at the moment. In a normal year, it would be about 69,000. The complications have been industry-wide. Toyota, General Motors, Honda and Ford all reported experiencing some delays, and Chrysler recently had hundreds of minivans sitting on the Detroit waterfront waiting to be shipped out.
The problem is twofold for automakers. First, the fracking boom in the Bakken oil field in the Plains and Canada is monopolizing many locomotives. Second, the long, harsh winter is still causing major delays in freight train travel. The bad weather forced trains to slow down and carry less weight, which caused a backup of goods to transport. The auto companies resorted to moving some vehicles by truck, which was a less efficient but necessary option.

Motor Trend pits Subaru WRX vs. Ford Focus ST

The Ford Focus ST has enjoyed a relatively calm, if brief, reign in the world of hot hatches. With nothing else in the class (in the States, at least) but the aging Mazdaspeed3 and Subaru Impreza WRX and the slow-selling Volkswagen Golf R, the Blue Oval's 252-horsepower five door has been the go-to vehicle for those that don't need the high-octane lunacy (and expense) of the rally bred Subaru Impreza WRX STI and Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X.
Now, though, as the new Subaru WRX (it's not an Impreza anymore, though, neither is it a hatchback...) starts to arrive at dealers, the Focus ST appears to be under threat for the first time. Naturally, Motor Trend is here to figure out which one is the best, with another one of its Head 2 Head videos. Host Jonny Lieberman puts both cars through their paces, going above and beyond, quite literally, at the very end of the video.
Have a look below and let us know what you think of MT's verdict in Comments.

EPA says fuel economy test for hybrids is accurate

The EPA says it stands behind its fuel economy test for hybrid vehicles following controversy about the testing process after Ford C-Max Hybrid customers and automotive journalists alike struggled to achieve 47 miles per gallon, the advertised mpg number, Automotive News reports. Ford responded to the issue almost two weeks ago by claiming that a 1970s-era EPA general label rule was responsible for the inaccurate mileage numbers, rerating the C-Max Hybrid's mpg numbers and offering customers rebates. Ford later said it didn't overstate the C-Max Hybrid's fuel economy and that it was surprised by the low numbers.
Ford technically didn't do anything wrong because it was following the general label rule, but agency regulator Christopher Grundler says the automaker was exploiting a loophole when it came up with the hybrid C-Max numbers, and that the testing process remains accurate. The general label rule allows vehicles that use the same engine and transmission and are in the same weight class to share fuel economy numbers, but it doesn't take into account other factors such as aerodynamic efficiency, which affects hybrids more drastically than non-hybrid vehicles. Ford originally used the Fusion Hybrid economy figures for the C-Max Hybrid and claimed the engineers didn't realize that its aerodynamic efficiency would affect fuel economy as much as it did.