1957 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz Convertible on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

Even if GM does close all 5 of those plants, it'll still have too many

DETROIT — General Motors' monumental announcement on Monday that it will close three car assembly plants and two powertrain plants in North America and slash its workforce will only partially close the gap between capacity and demand for the automaker's sedans, according to a Reuters analysis of industry production and capacity data. Sales of traditional passenger cars in North America have been declining for the past six years and are still withering. After GM ends production next year at factories in Michigan, Ohio and Ontario, it will still have four U.S. passenger-car plants — all operating at less than 50 percent of rated capacity, according to figures supplied by LMC Automotive. In comparison, Detroit-based rivals Ford and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles will have one car plant each in North America after 2019. The Detroit Three are facing rapidly dwindling demand for traditional passenger cars from U.S. consumers, many of whom have shifted to crossovers and trucks. Passenger cars accounted for 48 percent of retail light-vehicle sales in the United States in 2014, according to market researchers at J.D. Power and Associates. This year, sedans will account for less than a third of light vehicle sales. That shift in turn has left most North American car plants operating far below their rated capacities, while many SUV and truck plants are running on overtime. The collapse in passenger-car demand is a challenge for nearly all automakers in the United States, including Japan's Toyota and Honda, which have the top-selling models in the compact and midsize car segments. Toyota executives said last month they are evaluating the company's U.S. model lineup. But Toyota also plans to build compact Corolla sedans at a new $1.6 billion factory it is building in Alabama with partner Mazda. The obstacles facing GM in its plans to close more auto factories became apparent on Tuesday as U.S. President Donald Trump threatened to block payment of government electric vehicle subsidies to GM. While it is not certain that Trump unilaterally has the power to do that, he made it clear he intends to use his office to pressure the company to keep open a small car plant in Ohio that GM says will stop building vehicles in March.

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.