Gt Premium Convertible Hood Scoop Htd Seat Polished Wheels 2009 Ford Mustang 45k 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.

Ford recalls 2020-21 Explorer and Lincoln Aviator, 2021 E-Series

Ford announced safety recalls for the 2020-2021 Explorer and Lincoln Aviator along with the 2021 E-Series early Monday. The recalls address entirely different issues.  In the case of the 2020-2021 Ford Explorer and Lincoln Aviator, that issue is motor mount hardware. Specifically, the fasteners that secure the passenger-side motor mount may back out. In Ford's words, this can result in a "loss of power," which is the entirely predictable result of an engine parting ways with the vehicle it powers.  As alarming as that may sound, owners should not have to worry about anything extreme, as the passenger side mount is only one of multiple, and Ford says it is not aware of any incidents that have occurred with vehicles in customer hands. Ford says it impacts only about 1400 examples of the Explorer and Aviator in the States (plus two in Mexico and 65 in Canada) that were built at Chicago Assembly Plant between July 28 and 30, 2020. Ford is in the process of alerting its owners to the recall, and those with affected models will have their mount hardware replaced by their local Ford dealerships free of charge.  The 2021 E-Series is being recalled for a potential heat management issue resulting from improperly aligned thermal insulation on the underside of its engine cover. In vehicles where this insulation was not properly installed so that it reaches all the way to the edges of the cover, the resulting heat bleed can cause high in-cabin surface temperatures, and direct contact them could result in burns.  This is the larger of the two recalls, as Ford says it covers nearly 33,000 examples sold in the United States and Canada. Fortunately, as with the above issue, Ford says it has not been made aware of any customer incidents. Ford says the remedy is a set of insulation patches for the exposed areas.  Related Video:

Nuclear-powered concept cars from the Atomic Age

In the 1950s and early 60s, the dawn of nuclear power was supposed to lead to a limitless consumer culture, a world of flying cars and autonomous kitchens all powered by clean energy. In Europe, it offered the then-limping continent a cheap, inexhaustible supply of power after years of rationing and infrastructure damage brought on by two World Wars.
The development of nuclear-powered submarines and ships during the 1940s and 50s led car designers to begin conceptualizing atomic vehicles. Fueled by a consistent reaction, these cars would theoretically produce no harmful byproducts and rarely need to refuel. Combining these vehicles with the new interstate system presented amazing potential for American mobility.
But the fantasy soon faded. There were just too many problems with the realities of nuclear power. For starters, the powerplant would be too small to attain a reaction unless the car contained weapons-grade atomic materials. Doing so would mean every fender-bender could result in a minor nuclear holocaust. Additionally, many of the designers assumed a lightweight shielding material or even forcefields would eventually be invented (they still haven't) to protect passengers from harmful radiation. Analyses of the atomic car concept at the time determined that a 50-ton lead barrier would be necessary to prevent exposure.