2014 Toyota Camry Le on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2019 Toyota Corolla Hatchback, Volvos earn IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

It's time for another round-up of recent IIHS crash tested cars. The trio this time include the 2019 Toyota Corolla Hatchback, 2019 Volvo XC90 and 2018 Volvo S90. All three have earned one of the highest ratings from the IIHS, the Top Safety Pick. And all three continue a trend of very safe cars having slightly below-par headlights, preventing them from earning the highest Top Safety Pick+ rating. Of these three cars, the Corolla Hatchback has the most impressive scores. It earned the highest "Good" rating in every single crash test, including the difficult small-overlap passenger-side collision. It also received the top score for access to LATCH anchors for child seats. The standard forward collision prevention technology also brought home the best score possible, stopping the car before a crash at speeds up to 25 mph. The headlights themselves weren't particularly bad either, earning the second-highest score of "Acceptable" with both the standard and optional LED headlights. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Both Volvos shared similar scores to the Corolla Hatchback, with "Good" ratings for all crash tests they participated in, and top rank for their standard forward collision technology. Both vehicles were not tested for the passenger-side small overlap collision, so there is no score in that area. Both also received the "Acceptable" rating for LATCH anchor access. In the headlight department, the XC90 earned "Acceptable" scores for both of its available headlights, and the S90 received an "Acceptable" for its optional lights, while the standard ones were rated as "Marginal." Related Video:

Bring back the Bronco! Trademarks we hope are actually (someday) future car names

Trademark filings are the tea leaves of the auto industry. Read them carefully – and interpret them correctly – and you might be previewing an automaker's future product plans. Yes, they're routinely filed to maintain the rights to an iconic name. And sometimes they're only for toys and clothing. But not always. Sometimes, the truth is right in front of us. The trademark is required because a company actually wants to use the name on a new car. With that in mind, here's a list of intriguing trademark filings we want to see go from paperwork to production reality. Trademark: Bronco Company: Ford Previous Use: The Bronco was a long-running SUV that lived from 1966-1996. It's one of America's original SUVs and was responsible for the increased popularity of the segment. Still, it's best known as O.J. Simpson's would-be getaway car. We think: The Bronco was an icon. Everyone seems to want a Wrangler-fighter – Ford used to have a good one. Enough time has passed that the O.J. police chase isn't the immediate image conjured by the Bronco anymore. Even if we're doing a wish list in no particular order, the Bronco still finds its way to the top. For now (unfortunately), it's just federal paperwork. Rumors on this one can get especially heated. The official word from a Ford spokesman is: "Companies renew trademark filings to maintain ownership and control of the mark, even if it is not currently used. Ford values the iconic Bronco name and history." Trademarks: Aviator, AV8R Company: Ford Previous Use: The Aviator was one of the shortest-run Lincolns ever, lasting for the 2003-2005 model years. It never found the sales success of the Ford Explorer, with which it shared a platform. We Think: The Aviator name no longer fits with Lincoln's naming nomenclature. Too bad, it's better than any other name Lincoln currently uses, save for its former big brother, the Navigator. Perhaps we're barking up the wrong tree, though. Ford has made several customized, aviation themed-Mustangs in the past, including one called the Mustang AV8R in 2008, which had cues from the US Air Force's F-22 Raptor fighter jet. It sold for $500,000 at auction, and the glass roof – which is reminiscent of a fighter jet cockpit – helped Ford popularize the feature. Trademark: EcoBeast Company: Ford Previous Use: None by major carmakers.

Legal approach in $1.2 billion Toyota settlement could impact handling of GM recall cases

In the past, if an automaker did something wrong, they were usually prosecuted by the US government through something called the TREAD Act. Short for Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability and Documentation Act, it basically requires automakers to report recalls in other countries, along with any and all serious injuries or deaths, to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Failing to report or attempting to conceal anything when there's been a death or serious injury constitutes a criminal liability. The idea is that this setup puts the onus on manufacturers to keep NHTSA apprised of safety related issues before they become a problem in the US, thereby allowing the regulator to better protect consumers.
In theory, it sounds like a relatively airtight set of rules for dealing with misbehaving automakers. That didn't stop the US Department of Justice from ignoring TREAD in its prosecution of Toyota's handling of the unintended acceleration recall, though. The result of this new approach, which charged Toyota with wire fraud, was a $1.2 billion settlement. Now, the wire-fraud approach could be used for the expected case between the US government and General Motors, based on the statements of Attorney General Eric Holder, who specifically mentioned "similarly situated companies" when discussing Toyota.