2005 Toyota Solara Sle Convertible 2-door 3.3l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Why Lexus shies away from plug-in hybrids

Lexus may have softened its stance a bit from the anti plug-in vehicle ads the Toyota luxury badge ran last year, but at least one executive from the company casts a pretty critical eye towards the concept as a way to cut both emissions and refueling costs. In fact, Lexus doesn't really buy the fact that buyers of plug-in hybrids are really looking to save both gas and the environment, Green Car Reports says, citing an interview at the recent New York Auto Show with Lexus executive Mark Templin. Templin also said hydrogen fuel-cell technology may be a better way to edge towards zero emissions. Templin decried plug-in hybrid technology because it adds weight to vehicles, which contributes to poor emissions figures in the process. He added that plug-in vehicle buyers are motivated more by potential tax credits and solo driving rights in high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes than cutting back on fuel use. Last summer, Lexus ran an supposedly tongue-in-cheek print ad poking fun at how long it takes to charge a plug-in vehicle and how using air conditioning can shorten a car's charging range. Last spring, Lexus had to backpedal from an anti-electric ad it ran that had serious mistakes about hydrogen infrastructure. News Source: Green Car Reports Green Lexus Toyota Hybrid PHEV

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.

10 automakers sued over keyless ignitions

Keyless ignition has rapidly proliferated throughout the auto industry to become a fairly normal feature on new cars. It's supposed to offer the convenience of keeping the fob in your pocket and just pressing a button to drive away. However, ten major automakers are now being sued in US District Court over claims that the system is dangerous, Reuters reports. The suit alleges that people are forgetting to shut off the engine, and the lack of an idle timer is the cause for 13 deaths by carbon monoxide poisoning and multiple injuries. The suit currently includes 28 plaintiffs, according to Reuters, but the lawyers are asking for class-action status to potentially add many more. The case goes after a major swath of the industry, including BMW, Daimler, FCA, Ford, General Motors, Honda, Hyundai, Nissan, Toyota, and Volkswagen, plus their related brands like Acura, Infiniti, Mini, and Lexus. In all, over five million vehicles are affected. The assertion here is that people walk away from their vehicle without shutting it off because they believe the engine shuts off automatically. If parked in a garage, carbon monoxide can build up, leading to poisoning. The lawyers claim automakers know this is a problem and also cite 27 complaints to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration about the issue, according to Reuters. The plaintiffs are asking for an automatic shut-off and damages from the companies. These concerns have come up before, though. Toyota previously faced a lawsuit over a carbon monoxide death after a woman accidentally left her Lexus running. Also earlier this year, GM recalled 64,186 examples of the 2011-2013 Chevrolet Volt because owners weren't shutting them off. The problem resulted in two injuries, and the company released a software update to limit the idling time.