09 Chevy Silverado 1500 Lt 5.3 V8 4x4 Monster Truck 7.5 Inch Lift 35 Inch Tires 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.

2023 J.D. Power Initial Quality Study shows there's less quality than last year

Vehicle inventory, vehicle pricing, and the supply chain are finally showing improvement. Vehicle quality, on the other hand, is still going the wrong way. That's the takeaway from the 2023 J.D. Power Initial Quality Study that found overall problems exceeded last year's record high. The study surveyed owners of 2022-model-year vehicles to assess the average rate of problems per 100 vehicles (PP100) during the first 90 days of ownership. The average figure for the 32 ranked manufacturers in 2020 was about 166 problems per 100 vehicles. In the 2021 IQS, that dropped to an average of 162. For 2022, the average jumped to 180 problems. For 2023, the PP100 is up to an industry average of 192 — an increase of 30 problems per 100 vehicles in just two years. Let's get to the good news first: Dodge reclaimed the crown of having the lowest number of problems per 100 vehicles at 140. Buick won last year with 139 PP100, falling to third this year. Dodge was the first American automaker to top the IQS in 2021. Its return as the least problematic gives parent company Stellantis three wins in four years after Ram was crowned in 2021. It also gives U.S. brands a four-peat after Buick topped the chart in 2022 by having owners report the fewest problems. This year's top 10 is Dodge, Ram, Alfa Romeo, Buick, Chevrolet, GMC, Porsche, Cadillac, Kia, and Lexus. Stellantis gathered a few feathers for its cap, in fact. Maserati showed the largest improvement year-on-year, followed by Alfa Romeo, and Alfa Romeo posted the lowest PP100 among the premium class, beating Porsche and Cadillac. Alfa Romeo has been vocal about working to improve quality, mentioning Lexus as a target. Last year the Japanese brand finished sixth, the Italians finished near the bottom, between Jaguar and Mitsubishi. This year Alfa jumped to third, Lexus dropped to tenth. Ram was the third-best on the list of improvers from 2022 to 2023.   The individual model with the lowest PP100 is the Nissan Maxima. Now for the troublesome bits. In the words of Frank Hanley, senior director of auto benchmarking at J.D. Power, "The industry is at a major crossroad and the path each manufacturer chooses is paramount for its future.

Junkyard Gem: 2003 Chevrolet Tracker

When General Motors created the Geo brand to sell vehicles designed and — in some cases — built by Japanese partners, the first four models were introduced for the 1989 model year: the Metro (Suzuki Cultus), Prizm (Toyota Sprinter), Spectrum (Isuzu Gemini) and Tracker (Suzuki Sidekick). Geo got the axe in 1997, with the Metro, Prizm and Tracker becoming Chevrolets. Of those, the Tracker survived the longest, with U.S.-market sales continuing into 2004. Here's an example of a very late Tracker, found in a North Carolina car graveyard recently. The 1989-1997 first-generation Trackers were based on the Suzuki Sidekick, while the 1998-2004 Trackers had the Suzuki Vitaras (not to be confused with the much grander Grand Vitaras) as their siblings. Production of these trucks for the South American market (as the Chevrolet Vitara) continued in Ecuador all the way through 2014. The Tracker name has also gone onto some versions of the Chevrolet Trax around the world. This one is a base four-door hard top/rear-wheel-drive model, which had an MSRP of $17,330. That's about $29,789 in 2024 dollars. You'll find one in every car. You'll see. The engine is a Suzuki 2.0-liter straight-four rated at 127 horsepower and 134 pound-feet. A five-speed manual was base equipment, but very few American vehicle shoppers wanted three pedals by the middle 2000s. This truck has the Aisin four-speed automatic. We like it loud. It appears that someone associated with this truck graduated from Julius L. Chambers High School last year. In the United States, the Tracker was replaced by the Saturn Vue. If Tracker can handle (unspecified Middle Eastern country), it can survive the jungle back home. Siempre contigo.