1929 Ford Model A Station Wagon on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Automotive Grade Linux will be the backbone of your connected car

Creating a backend for a secure, reliable, and expandable infotainment system is costly and time consuming. The Linux Foundation, a non-profit organization, has set out to promote and advance the Linux operating system in commercial products. Automotive Grade Linux, or AGL, is a group within the Foundation that seeks to apply a Linux backend to a number of automotive applications in a variety of vehicles from various suppliers and manufacturers. AGL's goal is to create a common, unifying framework that allows developers and manufacturers to easily implement applications across platforms. Currently, the focus is on infotainment systems, but AGL has plans for instrument clusters, heads-up displays, and eventually active safety software. At CES, a display from Panasonic showed a completely digital and customizable dashboard that allows information and apps to be moved from the gauge cluster to the infotainment screen and back, all through the use of gesture and touch controls. Although the organization has been around for five years, it's really only been in the past three that the group has been working hand in hand with automakers and suppliers. The first two OEMs to participate, Toyota and Jaguar Land Rover, have since been joined by Mazda, Suzuki, Ford, and, as of this week, Daimler. The latter is important as until now most of AGL's partner's have been based in Japan or the US. Other partners include suppliers Denso, Renesas, Continental, Qualcomm, and Intel. AGL want's to supply roughly 80 percent of the backend, allowing partners to then finish and refine the Linux system for each individual application. Think of how the Android operating system is refined and customized for individual smartphones from Samsung, LG, and Motorola. While the final product looks different, developers can have an application that will work across all AGL systems. Because it is open source, anyone can use and develop for AGL. You can even go onto the group's website and download a copy right now. There is also a software development kit available that helps facilitate app creation on the platform. Vehicle development cycles take roughly five years, so there currently are no cars that run an AGL backbone available for consumers. AGL Executive Director Dan Cauchy says products should be hitting the market later this year, with even more coming in 2018. Right now, the industry is relatively fragmented when it comes to infotainment and related systems.

The 1965 Ford Mustang could have looked a lot different

The 1965 Ford Mustang is unquestionably an automotive design icon, and nearly every generation of Mustang has some connection to that original car. Because it's such a universally-known vehicle, we were amazed to see all the different designs that were being considered. Head of Ford's archives Ted Ryan recently shared photos of design proposals for the original Mustang on Twitter that he and Jamie Myler found, and we reached out to them to find out more. As Ryan initially noted, the photos were taken on August 19, 1962, and they are proposals for the Ford Mustang. Apparently Ford had committed to doing a Falcon-based youth-oriented car at this point, and it did have plans to launch the car in 1964 for the 1965 model year. But after having little success with early design proposals, the company asked all of its design studios — the Advanced Studio, Lincoln-Mercury Studio and Ford Studio — to submit proposals. With only about two years before the planned launch, Ford was understandably short on time, and it's believed that the studios only had a month to create and present these designs. Lincoln-Mercury design proposal View 8 Photos The majority of the designs, a total of five, came from the Advanced Studio, and part of this was because they already had a couple of concept designs in reserve it could present. Two other models representing three design possibilities came from Lincoln-Mercury, and just one model with two options came from Ford. The Advanced Studio proposals are shown in the gallery at the very top of this article, and the Lincoln-Mercury and Ford proposals are in the gallery directly above this paragraph. The Advanced Studio's most radical design is the one that was clearly related to the Mustang I concept that would be shown later that year with huge wraparound rear glass, turbine-inspired bumpers and enormous side scoops. The other proposals from the studio were more conservative, featuring simple lines, grilles reminiscent of the Falcon, and one even borrowing the jet-thruster-style taillights made famous on the Thunderbird. Lincoln-Mercury had some impressively bold designs, particularly its fastback that had buttresses to extend the shape all the way to the tail. This car had two different side trim possibilities. The other Lincoln-Mercury design was toned down a bit, but had two interesting possibilities for side detailing, as well as some crisp, low-profile tail fins.

Tier 1 suppliers call GM the worst OEM to work with

Among automakers with a big US presence, General Motors is the worst to work for, according to a new survey from Tier 1 automotive suppliers, conducted by Planning Perspectives, Inc.
The Detroit-based manufacturer, which has been under fire following the ignition switch recall and its accompanying scandal, finished behind six other automakers with big US manufacturing operations. Suppliers had issues with trust and communications, as well as intellectual property protection. GM was also the least likely to allow suppliers to raise their prices in the face of unexpected increases in material cost, all of which contributed to 55 percent of suppliers saying their relationship with GM was "poor to very poor."
GM's cross-town competitors didn't fare much better. Chrysler finished in fifth place, ahead of GM and behind Dearborn-based Ford, which was passed for third place this year by Nissan. Toyota took the top marks, while Honda captured second place.