2009 Hyundai Sonata Limited! Beautiful Smoky Brown Gray Sedan Fully Loaded Nice! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

The last Hyundai V8 car is already here

Hyundai will end production of V8-powered cars this year, if a new report out of South Korea proves true. It would make the 5.0-liter unit found in the current Genesis G90 sedan the final Hyundai Tau V8. According to South Korean website Daum, the updated Genesis G90, expected later this year, will no longer have the 420-horse, 383 lb-ft V8 available as an option. The top-grade engine will, moving forward, be the 3.5-liter twin-turbo V6, good for 380 horsepower and edging out the V8 with 391 pound-feet of torque.  In addition, the V8 was discontinued for the updated Kia K9 recently. We knew that model as the Kia K900 in the U.S., and dropping the V8 was a moot point for us because the entire model was eliminated for 2021. We thought that the V8 might be on its way out when we saw the 2022 Genesis G90 testing under heavy camouflage. It's not surprising, considering the entire industry is moving toward smaller, forced-induction engines. According to Daum, the G90 will be redesigned with an eye toward weight reduction, chassis rigidity, and a lower center of gravity. An electric version, likely called the eG90, is expected as well. It'll almost certainly receive the quad headlight signature of two thin lines on either side of a large crest grille as well. Going even further, the site claims that the G90 will feature a rear-wheel steering system to improve cornering and high-speed stability. The V6-powered 2022 Genesis G90 is expected to debut later this year, and the electric version will follow at a later date. Related video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.

Why Toyota's fuel cell play is one big green gamble

Imagine going to the ballet on Saturday evening for an 8 pm performance. The orchestra begins warming up shortly before the show, but it turns out the star performer isn't ready at the appointed time. The orchestra keeps playing, doing its best to keep the audience engaged and, most importantly, in the building. It keeps this up until the star finally shows and is ready to dance ... which turns out to be ten years later. That's a Samuel Beckett play. It's also how many observers, analysts, alt-fuel fans and alt-fuel intenders feel about the arrival of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (FCVs) – the few of them who are still in the building, that is. Toyota's hydrogen development timeline rivals that of the US space program. In fact, within the halls of Toyota alone, research on FCVs has been going on for nearly 22 years, meaning that one company's development timeline for FCVs rivals that of the US space program – it was 1945 when Werner von Braun's team began re-assembling Germany's World War II V2 rockets and figuring out how to launch them into space and it wasn't until 1969 when a man set landing gear down on that sunlit lunar quarry. The development of the atom bomb only took half as long, and that's if we go all the way back to when Leo Szilard patented the mere idea of it, in 1934. Carmakers didn't give up on hydrogen in spite of the public having given up on carmakers ever making something of it, so there was a good chance that hydrogen criers announcing the mass-market adoption of periodic chart element number two one would eventually be right. Now is that time. And Toyota, not alone in researching FCVs but arguably having done the most to keep FCVs in the news, isn't even going to be first to market. That honor will go to Hyundai, surprising just about everyone at the LA Auto Show with news of a hydrogen fuel cell Tucson going on sale in the spring. The other bit of thunder stolen: while Toyota's talking about trying to get the price of its offering down to something between $50,000 and $100,000, Hyundai is pitching its date with the future at a lease price of $499 per month ($250 more than the lease price of a conventional Tucson), free hydrogen and maintenance, and availability at Enterprise Rent-A-Car if you just want to try it out. We've seen and driven Toyota's offering and we all know its success doesn't depend on cross-shopping, showroom dealing and lease sweeteners.

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.