Cls500 4-doo Coupe Cd Air Conditioned Seats Air Conditioning Alarm System Am/fm 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.

Daimler boss says fuel cell vehicles will be disappointing for at least 10 years

Daimler AG CEO Dieter Zetsche is pretty confident about the imminence of self-driving cars. Hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles? Not so much. He didn't even get into the possibility of self-driving fuel-cell vehicles, but we're okay taking future technologies one at a time. Zetsche, in an interview from the Detroit Auto Show last week, said the automotive industry is about a decade away from avoiding disappointing experiences with production fuel-cell vehicles, In Auto News says. Zetsche was quick to note that the Mercedes-Benz parent entered into a fuel-cell partnership with Ford and Nissan early last year in an effort to split costs and speed things along, with the expectation that the group would develop something together by 2017, but even that won't be able to smooth things out fully. Toyota and Hyundai have said they'd have their own production vehicles on the road sooner than that. Multi-corporation-partnerships notwithstanding, Zetsche bemoaned the high costs, lack of vehicle volume and minimal refueling infrastructure as the proverbial roadblocks to more rapid development and adoption of fuel-cell vehicles. As it is, the US has just 10 publicly accessible hydrogen refueling stations, eight of which are in Southern California, according to the US Department of Energy. As for autonomous automobiles, Zetsche was more upbeat. Daimler already has what it calls the "Distronic" cruise control system that includes an automatic braking feature and has successfully driven a car 60 miles with "with relatively modest adjustments to the existing onboard technology." Featured Gallery Mercedes-Benz F-Cell View 9 Photos News Source: In Auto News Green Mercedes-Benz Hydrogen Cars

Why all of this year's F1 noses are so ugly [w/video]

If you're a serious fan of Formula One, you already know all about The Great Nosecone Conundrum of 2014. Those given to parsing each year's F1 regulations predicted the strong possibility of the so-called "anteater" noses as far back as early December 2013. Highly suggestive visual evidence first came after Caterham's crash test in early January, with further proof coming as soon as Williams showed a rendering of the FW36 challenger for this year's championship. That car earned a name that wasn't nearly so kind as "anteater."
Casual followers of the sport - or anyone who gets the feed from this site - probably don't know what's happening, except to wonder why the current year's F1 cars are led by appendages that would make Cyrano de Bergerac feel a whole lot better about himself.
The short answer to the question of ugsome F1 noses is "FIA regulations and safety." The reason there are various kinds of ugsome noses is simpler: engineers. The same boffins who have given us advances including carbon fiber monocoques, six-wheeled cars, double diffusers and Drag Reduction Systems are bred to do everything in their power to exploit every possible freedom in the regulations to make the cars they're building go faster - the caveat being that those advances have to work within the overall philosophy of the whole car.