2007 Toyota Highlander Limited Sport Utility 4-door 3.3l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

What would you drive in 1985?

Bereft of live baseball games to watch, I've turned to the good ship YouTube to watch classic games. While watching the 1985 American League Championship Series last night, several of the broadcast's commercials made its way into the original VHS recording, including those for cars. "Only 8.8% financing on a 1985 Ford Tempo!" What a deal! That got me thinking: what would I drive in 1985?  It sure wouldn't be a Tempo. Or an IROC-Z, for that matter, despite what my Photoshopped 1980s self would indicate in the picture above. I posed this question to my fellow Autobloggists. Only one could actually drive back then, I was only 2 and a few editors weren't even close to being born. Here are our choices, which were simply made with the edict of "Come on, man, be realistic."  West Coast Editor James Riswick: OK, I started this, I'll go first. I like coupes today, so I'm pretty sure I'd drive one back then. I definitely don't see myself driving some badge-engineered GM thing from 1985, and although a Honda Prelude has a certain appeal, I must admit that something European would likely be in order. A BMW maybe? No, I'm too much a contrarian for that. The answer is therefore a 1985 Saab 900 Turbo 3-Door, which is not only a coupe but a hatchback, too. If I could scrounge up enough Reagan-era bucks for the ultra-cool SPG model, that would be rad. The 900 Turbo pictured, which was for auction on Bring a Trailer a few years ago, came with plum-colored Bokhara Red, and you're damn sure I would've had me one of those. Nevermind 1985, I'd probably drive this thing today.   Associate Editor Byron Hurd: I'm going to go with the 1985.5 Ford Mustang SVO, AKA the turbocharged Fox Body that everybody remembers but nobody drives. The mid-year update to the SVO bumped the power up from 175 ponies (yeah, yeah) to 205, making it almost as powerful (on paper, anyway) as the V8-powered GT models offered in the same time frame. I chose this particular car because it's a bit of a time capsule and, simultaneously, a reminder that all things are cyclical. Here we are, 35 years later, and 2.3-liter turbocharged Mustangs are a thing again. Who would have guessed?

Is 120 miles just about perfect for EV range?

When it comes to battery-electric vehicles, our friend Brad Berman over at Plug In Cars says 40 miles makes all the difference in the world. That's the approximate difference in single-charge range between the battery-electric version of the Toyota RAV4 and the Nissan Leaf. It's also the difference between the appearance or disappearance of range anxiety. The 50-percent battery increase has zapped any lingering range anxiety, Berman writes. The RAV4 EV possesses a 40-kilowatt-hour pack, compared to the 24-kWh pack in the Leaf. After factoring in differences in size, weight and other issues, that means the compact SUV gets about 120 miles on a single charge in realistic driving conditions, compared to about 80 miles in the Leaf. "The 50 percent increase in battery size from Leaf to RAV has zapped any lingering range anxiety," Berman writes. His observations further feed the notion that drivers need substantial backup juice in order to feel comfortable driving EVs. Late last year, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), along with the Consumers Union estimated that about 42 percent of US households could drive plug-in vehicles with "little or no change" in their driving habits, and that almost 70 percent of US commuters drive fewer than 60 miles per weekday. That would imply that a substantial swath of the country should be comfortable using a car like the Leaf as their daily driver - with first-quarter Leaf sales jumping 46 percent from a year before, more Americans certainly are. Still, the implication here is that EV sales will continue to be on the margins until an automaker steps up battery capabilities to 120 or so miles while keeping the price in the $30,000 range. Think that's a reasonable goal to shoot for?

Toyota, Mazda drop Takata as Mitsubishi, Subaru weigh options

It's not a very good time to be Takata right now. Fresh on the heels of longtime partner Honda ditching them, Toyota and Mazda have both come out and said they will not use the company's airbag inflators if they continue to rely on ammonium nitrate. Bloomberg reports that Subaru and Mitsubishi are also contemplating a divorce. "The inflator using ammonium nitrate produced by Takata will not be adopted by Toyota," President Akio Toyoda said during a briefing today. "What's most important above anything else is the safety and peace of mind of customers." Mazda echoed that position, simply saying it "will not use Takata airbag inflators which contain ammonium nitrate in our new cars." When you lose three huge OEM accounts in as many days, it's certainly going to have a deleterious effect on your fortunes. In Takata's case, that's meant a staggering 39-percent drop in their share price over the last three days. Yesterday alone, the company saw a 6.2-percent fall, Bloomberg reports. As the business publication reports, though, Takata isn't going down without a fight. The company is "considering some plans to survive," including a fundraising plan that will see it potentially offer up additional shares for sale. Still, at least one analyst doesn't see whatever company survives staying involved in the airbag inflator business. "I really don't see how they're going to be able to survive as an inflator manufacturer," Valient Market Research founder Scott Upham told Bloomberg. "When your major clients publicly come out and say that they're not going to use your products anymore, it makes this very difficult to sustain your business." News Source: Automotive News - sub. req.Image Credit: Carlos Osorio / AP Honda Mazda Mitsubishi Subaru Toyota Safety supplier