2002 Mercedes-benz Sl-class Silver Arrow Edition on 2040-cars

Auto blog

McLaren, Red Bull and Ferrari call for unfreezing F1 engines

Formula One is a hugely expensive sport. Not only do you have enormous salaries and logistical expenses, as you would in any other sport, but each team also spends huge sums developing their own chassis from the ground up – and so too do the participating automakers in developing the engines. One of the ways the series organizers mitigate those costs is by freezing development. So once the new crop of V6 turbo hybrid powertrains were developed, that was it. But now three of the of the sport's leading teams are calling on the FIA to unfreeze engine development. Their reason? Unfair advantage. There's little question that Mercedes did the best job of developing its "power unit" to meet the new regulations that took effect at the beginning of this past season. That's how the Mercedes team won all but three of the grands prix this season and finished with at least one car on the podium at every single race. It's also a big part of how the teams that bought their engines from Mercedes this season managed to consistently outperform the other non-works-supported teams. That clear advantage is why Red Bull, Ferrari and now McLaren are calling for engine development to be unfrozen. Their argument is that, under the current locked-down status quo, their engine suppliers (Renault, Ferrari and Honda, respectively) cannot possibly catch up. So unless the FIA and Formula One Management want the next few seasons to be the kind of absolute blow-outs that this past season was, these leading teams argue, the powers that be are going to have to make some changes. For its part, Mercedes naturally counters that unfreezing engine development would send costs spiraling out of control. But then of course it stands to lose the most by re-opening engine development. If those three teams, however, closely intertwined as they are with the three other engine suppliers participating in next year's championship, manage to solicit enough support from the other customer teams and bring the matter to a vote, Mercedes may very well find itself out-numbered. News Source: ESPNImage Credit: Patrick Baz/AFP/Getty Motorsports Ferrari McLaren Mercedes-Benz F1 engine

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.

Honda, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Mercedes also under diesel emissions scrutiny

The controversy over Volkswagen's diesel emissions scandal isn't limited to the US. In Europe, where diesel engines are far more popular, the issue is shining a harsh light on the NEDC emissions test. As already known, the evaluation does a poor job of reflecting real-world production of NOx, and it appears a significant number of automakers are affected. The Guardian in the UK has been reporting on real-world test results from a company called Emissions Analytics. After the latest round of checks, vehicles from Mercedes-Benz, Honda, Mazda and Mitsubishi were found to generate far more NOx than they should. The newspaper also published similar results for Renault, Nissan, Hyundai, Fiat, Volvo, Jeep, Citroen, VW, and Audi. On average, the figures are about four times over the limit of producing the pollutant. Unlike VW and its defeat device, these automakers aren't actually breaking the rules. The vehicles perform up to the NEDC lab test for emissions, but those results simply aren't translated to the street. "The VW issue in the US was purely the trigger which threw light on a slightly different problem in the EU - widespread legal over-emissions," Nick Molden from Emissions Analytics said to The Guardian. A big fight to decide the future of this issue appears to be on the horizon. Automakers claim that they can't meet the next round of tightening emissions regulations and are asking for compromises. Although, spokespeople for Mercedes and Honda told The Guardian that the brands would be in favor of the stricter rules. Meanwhile, some European governments began backtracking their support of diesels well before this scandal came to light. The added scrutiny certain hasn't helped the future of the oil-burner. Related Video: