2006 Tacoma Double Cab 4.0l V6 Automatic 4x4 Sr5 Package 1-owner Carfax Video on 2040-cars

Auto blog

JLR shares backstage 'No Time to Die' Range Rover Sport SVR carnage

James Bond's latest adventures will take him to Norway and Scotland, as seen in the trailer for the upcoming "No Time to Die." Somewhere along the way, the British spy encounters a pair of Range Rover Sport SVRs, the ultimate high-performance SUV from JLR's Special Vehicle Operations division in one of the movie's centerpiece car chases. Now, the company has given us a behind-the-scenes look at its filming, and the automotive carnage that ensues. The filmmakers wanted to take a Bond action sequence off-road, and chose the Range Rover Sport SVR as the the bad guys' pursuit vehicle. Armed with a JLR product placement deal (Bond drives a new Defender in another part of the movie) the henchmen had no qualms picking one of the most expensive things on the menu. Unfortunately, that also makes is a bit hard to watch when machines that start at $115,000 are totaled as they careen through the air or roll onto their roofs. The SVRs share a 5.0-liter supercharged V8 with the Jaguar F-Type SVR and are the most powerful vehicles in the Land Rover portfolio. With 575 horsepower and 516 pound-feet of torque on tap, translating to a 0-60 time of 4.3 seconds, they're the perfect weapon for chasing a super-spy down a dirt road. As for Bond himself, 007 makes his escape in a decades-old yellow Toyota Land Cruiser Prado. Specifically, it's a 90-series, a smaller version built from 1996 to 2002 that was never sold in the U.S. but remains popular in other parts of the world. The most powerful engine had just 190 horsepower from a 3.4 liter V6 shared with the similar-era 4Runner. Despite the power discrepancy, Bond manages to dispatch the Range Rovers in spectacular fashion. Wait, this is a Range Rover promo, right? "All the stunts are for real, there's nothing that's CGI'ed," said Neil Layton, the film's action vehicle coordinator. "So to make the cars more dramatic on the screen, we had to turn off a lot of safety feature aids that's on there." Interestingly, another non-JLR product shows up in the video as well. The camera car is a blacked out (to minimize reflection in other cars) Ford F-150 Raptor outfitted with a massive rooftop boom. "No Time to Die" is hits the screens on October 8. Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.

These are the cars with the best and worst depreciation after 5 years

The average new vehicle sold in America loses nearly half of its initial value after five years of ownership. No surprise there; we all expect that shiny new car to start depreciating as soon as we drive it off the lot. But some vehicles lose value a lot faster than others. According to data provided by iSeeCars.com, trucks and truck-based sport utility vehicles generally hold their value better than other vehicle types, with the Jeep Wrangler — in both four-door Unlimited and standard two-door styles — and Toyota Tacoma sitting at the head of the pack. The Jeep Wrangler Unlimited's average five-year depreciation of 30.9% equals a loss in value of $12,168. That makes Jeep's four-door off-roader the best overall pick for buyers looking to minimize depreciation. The Toyota Tacoma's 32.4% loss in initial value means it loses just $10,496. The smaller dollar amount — the least amount of money lost after five years — indicates that Tacoma buyers pay less than Wrangler Unlimited buyers, on average, when they initially buy the vehicle. The standard two-door Jeep Wrangler is third on the list, depreciating 32.8% after five years and losing $10,824. Click here for a full list of the top 10 vehicles with the least depreciation over five years. On the other side of the depreciation coin, luxury sedans tend to plummet in value at a much faster rate than other vehicle types. The BMW 7 Series leads the losers with a 72.6% drop in value after five years, which equals an alarming $73,686. BMW's slightly smaller 5 Series is next, depreciating 70.1%, or $47,038, over the same period. Number three on the biggest losers list is the Nissan Leaf, the only electric vehicle to appear in the bottom 10. The electric hatchback matches the 5 Series with a 70.1% drop in value, but since it's a much cheaper vehicle, that percentage equals a much smaller $23,470 loss. Click here for a full list of the top 10 vehicles with the most depreciation over five years.

Toyota settles first wrongful death suit related to unintended acceleration

Toyota's sales seem to have rebounded from the unintended acceleration issues from 2009 and 2010, but the automaker is far from done dealing with this situation. Following a settlement worth up to $1.4 billion for economic loss to affected vehicle owners, Toyota has settled rather than going to trial in a wrongful death lawsuit stemming from an accident in Utah in 2010 that left two passengers dead. This isn't the first case in which Toyota has settled, but it was the first among a consolidated group of cases being held in Santa Ana, CA.
According to The Detroit News, this case was scheduled to take place next month, and it was for a November 2010 incident in which Paul Van Alfen and Charlene James Lloyd were killed in a Camry when, based on findings by the Utah Highway Patrol, the accelerator got stuck causing the car to speed out of control and hit a wall; the terms of the settlement were not announced.
The article says that while Toyota will settle on some cases, it doesn't plan on settling on all of them as it still wants to be able to "defend [its] product at trial." This will probably be the case in suits claiming that software for the drive-by-wire accelerator was the cause of an accident in a Toyota or Lexus vehicle. The question of whether or not the electronic accelerator played any role in this problem has been a hot-button topic since the beginning. Toyota has issued recalls in the past to attempt to prevent unintended acceleration caused by trapped floor mats and faulty accelerator pedals, but it also says driver error was to blame in some instances.