Sport W/vsa Hatchback 1.5l Nav Cd 1st Row Lcd Monitors: 1 Abs Brakes Spoiler 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.

2015 Honda Civic Type R prototype

With a name like Earth Dreams, you'd be forgiven for assuming that Honda's new family of turbocharged VTEC engines is more about environmental credentials than performance. And to a large degree they are - particularly in 1.0- and 1.5-liter forms. But the 2.0 is another beast altogether.
Thanks to a high-output turbocharger, direct injection, a high-performance cooling system and, of course, variable valve timing, Honda's new 2.0-liter four produces upwards of 280 horsepower while still complying with upcoming Euro 6 emissions standards. Although actual output has yet to be confirmed, that preliminary figure already compares favorably with the Ford Focus ST (252 hp) and Mazdaspeed3 (274 hp) and rests comfortably in between the Volkswagen GTI (270 hp) and Golf R (296 hp).
Although Honda has already shoehorned the smaller 1.5-liter turbo four and 1.0-liter turbo three-cylinder engines into an Acura ILX and another Civic hatchback, the home it gave the 2.0 betrays more than an engine swap. What you see here is essentially the next Civic Type R, following a long line of Honda hot hatches. With this latest model, the Japanese automaker is targeting the front-drive lap record at the Nürburgring that belongs to the Renaultsport Megane Trophy and before that, to the lightweight Megane R26.R. A tall order, to be sure, so we headed to Honda's R&D center in Tochigi, Japan, to take it out for a ride.

New Land Rover Defender aces Euro crash tests

While the 2020 Land Rover Defender has not yet been crash-test by U.S. safety agencies such as NHTSA or IIHS, we do now have results for Europe's NCAP crash tests and accident-avoidance tests, where the Defender earned the top rating of five stars. The Defender model used for NCAP testing was the 110 variant with right-hand drive. The NCAP regimen includes several different crash tests: an offset front crash test into a moveable barrier with both the vehicle and the barrier traveling at 50 km/hr (31 mph), a front crash test into a full-width fixed barrier at 50 km/hr (31 mph), a side-impact crash test with a barrier traveling at 60 km/hr (37 mph) hitting the driver's door, and a side-impact test where the car strikes a pole at 32 km/hr (20 mph). The Defender's scores for the adult occupant and for a child occupant were both 85%. Additionally, the agency looks at the severity of injuries of the vehicle striking a pedestrian, taking data for a pedestrian's head hitting the hood, and their upper and lower leg being hit by the front of the vehicle. There is also testing of the vehicle's automatic emergency braking system's ability to avoiding hitting a pedestrian and a cyclist under various scenarios. The efficacy of active-safety systems for avoiding collisions with other vehicles is also tested. The Defender's score for protecting pedestrians and cyclists was 71%. The driver assists scored 79%. Results for several European-market cars were released together with those for the Defender, the most noteworthy of which was for the Honda E. The electric city car fared less well than the big Land Rover, garnering a score of four stars overall. In the same battery of test, the Honda E scored 76% for adult occupant protection, 82% for a child occupant, 62% for protecting pedestrians and cyclists, and 65% for its driver assists. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.