Ford is seeking government approval to sell the Lincoln Nautilus in the U.S. due to its Chinese software. Get all the latest auto industry news in the Executive Briefing.
Today’s headlines:
+ General Motors and Ford are actively expanding their defense operations to capitalize on the growing military demand and create new opportunities for U.S. manufacturers. More at CBT News.
+ Battery electric vehicle registrations in Europe reached a record 23.6 percent market share in May 2026, with 212,387 units sold across 17 key markets, a 34.4 percent rise. More at Automotive World.
+ Ferrari chief marketing officer Enrico Galliera denied reports that Ferrari is requiring customers to buy the Luce EV to move up the waiting list for the Special Series models. More at The Drive.
+ Porsche Motorsport VP Thomas Laudenbach confirmed that the decision to end the brand’s FIA WEC Hypercar effort remains unchanged, but it is open to a possible return. More at Racer.
+ General Motors could end production of the Silverado 1500 pickup at its Oshawa, Ontario plant, leaving only heavy-duty Silverado 2500 and 3500 rolling down the lines there. More at Motor Illustrated.
+ Stellantis holds a 9.5 percent stake worth $126 million in U.S. solid-state battery startup Factorial Energy and might buy more shares in the future, a SEC filing showed. More at World Auto Forum.
+ The editors at Car and Driver declared the 1,250-hp Corvette ZR1X the quickest production vehicle they have ever tested with a quarter-mile time of 8.9 seconds at 155 mph. More at Car and Driver.
+ A driver told Harris County, Texas investigators that his Tesla was on Autopilot before it left the road, crashed through the brick wall of a home, and killed a 76-year-old woman inside. More at Electrek.
+ Ford Motor Company is seeking government approval to market the China-built Lincoln Nautilus in the United States due to security restrictions on its Chinese software. More at Autoblog.
+ NASCAR and IndyCar veteran AJ Allmendinger confirmed that he plans to continue driving for Kaulig Racing in NASCAR Cup in 2027, saying, “I’m not going anywhere.” More at Yahoo! Sports.
Photo courtesy of Lincoln.
Review the previous MCG Executive Briefing from June 19 here.
Join Mac’s Motor City Garage on Facebook and X to receive notices when every new story is published.
>> denied reports that Ferrari is requiring customers to buy the Luce EV to move up
Does that really matter? I’m sure that I’ve read reports saying that Ferrari requires you to prove your worthiness by requiring you to buy a lesser Ferrari before you qualify for one of the special ones. Does it matter that those are gas rather than electric? If the Luce turns out to be marketable, they’ll add it to the requirements. Imagine the uproar if Ford said that you had to buy a Maverick in order to qualify for an F-150.
>> leaving only heavy-duty Silverado 2500 and 3500 rolling down the lines
I thought they just cancelled the 3500. Is that not the one they co-build with International?
Ford is officially scrambling to save the 2027 Lincoln Nautilus. This exact vehicle has just now become the new poster child for our next Loophole Cascade!! The U.S. Commerce Department’s final rule banning Chinese software in connected vehicles goes into effect for Model Year 2027. Ford plans to begin importing the ’27 Nautilus from its Changan Ford plant in Hangzhou, China, in January. This leaves the company in a desperate race against a ticking regulatory clock. Commerce historically treats loophole requests with a “presumption of denial”, and of course operates under no public disclosure rules for any decisions. If the Commerce Department denies this waiver (or wins the coin flip), Ford will be legally blocked from selling its flagship luxury crossover in its home market…
A “presumption of denial” is a formal review posture used in U.S. import/export controls where the BIS evaluates waiver requests with the expectation that it should be denied unless the applicant overcomes that default with “extraordinary justification.” This is explicitly used for entities or transactions considered national‑security risks under 15 CFR §744.11.
In theory, any automaker importing China‑built connected vehicles for MY2027 must be waivered by BIS including Ford, and potentially Volvo/Polestar, Buick Envista, Chevy Equinox EV, and others if they intend to sell MY2027 units with Chinese‑installed software, but so far no it appears no such waivers have been issued by Commerce.
To clarify, there is NO public evidence that any 2027MY waivers have been issued so far. In other words, Ford’s ’27 Nautilus isn’t just a Commerce Dept regulatory test case, it’s our first visible sign of a much larger Loophole Cascade forming beneath the surface…
Relax everybody. As we all know by now, just like absurd USDOT–State DOT NEPA MOU’s are routinely exploited because all federal authority was delegated to local political hacks/special interests with no more federal verification, these Commerce Dept BIS import “controls” are easily exploited the same way, because both mechanisms rely totally on self‑certification documentation without any physical inspections or review.
Like everything else now, critical American public safety is simply loopholed into ineffectiveness by aggressive interpretation and/or word salads by career government attorneys and bureaucrats, just like the proverbial mommy intentionally leaving the lid off of the cookie jar in her kitchen full of rats.
Different actors, same vulnerability: self intetests and loophole interpretation replaces all verification.
American highway safety is most vulnerable to loophole cascades because of more layers of government, more lawyers, more contractors, more lobbyist, more politics, more locations therefore more opportunities for hijinks with no actual federal verification any more.
American aviation has the strongest safety culture, but is not immune to safety loophole games, see the Boeing 737 MAX ODA failures. FAA has since famously tightened oversight.
Domestic rail and maritime safety are showing similar patterns like East Palestine, Ohio and Francis Scott Key Bridge for example, because self‑certification loopholes are routinely exploited now.
Be advised, “loophole-lawyered” public safety vulnerabilities are not hypothetical, they already exist more and more in varying degrees across all American transportation.
Citizen data audits can override NEPA Assignment:
I‑45 in Texas proves it.
Westway proves it.
Illiana proves it.
South Mountain proves it.
I‑70 Denver proves it.
When the citizen data is stronger than the DOT data, an honest and ethical FHWA steps in, even under NEPA Assignment!
FYI, Ford has just re-recalled MY2018–2020 F-150 trucks (NHTSA ID 26V373000) due to ANOTHER incorrectly performed previous SAFETY DEFECT recall. The original 2020 recall (NHTSA 20V‑097, Ford 20C03) required Ford dealers to reprogram the body control module so DRLs would dim properly during daytime use. According to the NTSHA, an audit later found that many trucks marked as repaired never actually received the software update, prompting this re-recall. Up to 91,198 Ford trucks may still have the original safety defect causing daytime running lights to stay at full brightness, blinding other drivers, increasing glare, and crash risk…
Clinical Rant by Lex Idiodata
EV and AV platforms continue deploying ABS‑mediated, software‑controlled blended braking (regenerative plus friction) without a single FMVSS defining coordination timing, torque‑split behavior, transition latency, or failure‑mode response. There is no mandated test data, no independent verification, and even no requirement to disclose how these systems behave when regen collapses, friction is split or delayed, or if anything goes wrong.
In stunning contrast, American railroads have used blended dynamic and friction braking for generations, operating under 49 CFR Part 229, with explicit requirements for brake timing, predictable transitions, fail‑safe operation, inspection intervals, and event‑recorder accountability. Railroads treats blended braking as a critical safety regulated engineering discipline, not a revenue stream.
And the “Global Warming” absurdity just doesn’t stop with passenger EV/AVs, American big rigs, governed by FMVSS 121, get no blended‑braking standards either. The current rules define air‑brake timing and ABS behavior, but says nothing about regen‑friction coordination, even as heavy hybrid and electric big rigs in service now have far greater kinetic energy at stake.
This regulatory silence is not just grossly negligent, every EV, AV, bus, and big rig on American roads still carries the same American FMVSS certification sticker on the door jamb, implying compliance with braking safety standards that do not exist for any regen/ABS blended brakes. It fraudulantly certifies compliance with standards that were never written.
And this is the real catastrophe of the “Global Warming” AV/EV fad whose true stopping power depends entirely on opinions that no American regulatory safety agency has ever defined, reviewed, or required, not until enough American blood is spilled on American highways.
— Lex Idiodata
A wise man once said “only a fool defends an obvious truth”- nice user name, Lex!
The massive 2025 Ford EBB Safety Defect Recall, NHTSA #25V488- Ford recalls over 312,000 vehicles—including 2025 F-150s, Broncos, Rangers, and Expeditions due to a critical electronic brake booster defect. According to mr. internet, normal everyday voltage fluctuations triggered an over-current monitoring limit, causing the electronic brake booster motor to completely shut down while driving. Later design flaws identified internal resistor mismatches in the integrated circuits that forced the system into an erroneous fail-safe mode.
The human experience of these software failures are brutal- your brake pedal “Goes Hard” without the electric motor amplifying your foot pressure, the pedal feels like pressing against a solid concrete block with no decelleration. In some complaints, the pedal suddenly dropped significantly further down before catching, feeling completely disconnected and spongy. To keep the vehicle from completely sailing through an intersection or into stopped traffic, the vehicle’s computer brain might desperately trigger the electric parking brakes to try and drag the rear wheels to a stop.
FYI, the NTSB never examined whether this Ford EBB reboot defect was the root cause that prevented BlueCruise from braking in the two fatal ADAS crashes they investigated!! That is a glaring investigative OMISSION…
Ford BlueCruise issues its braking commands through the Electronic Brake Booster (EBB).
If the EBB faults, reboots, or enters fail‑safe, BlueCruise cannot apply the brakes. When the Electronic Brake Booster hits the over‑current or voltage‑glitch condition described in the recall, it typically sets internal DTCs, but these codes live inside the EBB module, not the EDR. They are only visible if a technician scans the car, the module is preserved after the crash or someone actually interrogates the EBB. According to their docket, the NTSB did not do this in either BlueCruise crash.
Because the EDR does not log EBB faults, resets, or any internal failures even during Ford BlueCruise operation or airbag deployment, the EDR cannot show any EBB malfunctions, that’s why the NTSB could not find this EBB defect in either BlueCruise they crash investigated.
The NTSB’s aviation and railroad crash investigations aren’t irrationally shackled and handcuffed to anything like the archaic FMVSS and NHTSA’s pathetic rulemaking, blocking the NTSB from digging into subsystem failures, data logs, design flaws, and certification breakdowns. The NTSB is boxed in by a huge, contrived regulatory void: no FMVSS for brake‑by‑wire, no FMVSS for ADAS braking, no FMVSS for regen blended braking, and no mandatory data recorders for any tech failures. These are lethal loopholes where automated‑safety system failures leave no trace and no safety standard is violated, but the blame always defaults to the human driver.
American aviation and rail can’t hide deadly safety defects and the constant tech failures the way motor vehicle automation does, because the “system” is designed (“rigged”) this way.
All the unregulated tech has infinite excuses because all it’s incentives reward narratives, not outcomes.
■If a bridge collapses → engineers are liable
■If a plane crashes → NTSB investigates
■If a drug harms people → FDA intervenes
■If ADAS misbehaves → “the human driver should have been paying attention”
Tech is the only major industry where every failure is externalized, and all success is internalized. That’s why the excuses and sob stories are endless so ADAS failures always get reframed as:
■”Unexpected driver behavior”
■”Rare scenario”
■”Sensor occlusion”
■“Driver inattention”
■”Non‑representative conditions”
■“User misuse”
■”Beta feature”
■”Driver should have intervened sooner”
Every one of those is a legal loophole shield, not an engineering explanation. And because FMVSS doesn’t regulate the tech there’s no federal standard to measure these failures against. So all these tech failures are your fault, the human driver.
NHTSA’s ODI worked best when it was run by someone who actually knows engineering and safety-related defect investigation: failure mode identification, root cause determination and failure mode effects analysis.
ODI’s lethal failures today, especially around ADAS fatalities, software‑defined braking disasters, and the endless list of unregulated EV safety defects are tied directly to the fact that ODI leadership doesn’t come from defect investigation, automotive industry engineering, field analysis or any failure‑mode expertise. It comes from policy, rulemaking and R&D, all good friends of the automtive industry, not oversight or enforcement. I was an eyeball witness at VRTC when gov’t lawyers, interns and politics hijacked ODI in the early days of Global Warming…
The Logic of the New Administrative Dark Ages…
This is exactly why carbon “logic” deserves to be mocked. It represents a total abdication of responsibility by the expert, managerial and ruling classes. When engineers, planners, and corporations no longer feel obligated to build things that are inherently safe, honest, or functional, they rely on carbon culture’s alchemy of rent‑seeking, compliance‑theater to do all the heavy lifting for them. The message carbon culture sending is quite clear: We have secured our grant funding, we have protected ourselves from lawsuits. We have checked every box, if our system fails you, it is all your fault for participating.