2013 Volkswagen Passat Tdi Se on 2040-cars

Auto blog

VW readying CC Shooting Brake?

This was bound to happen. Volkswagen's relentless drive for big volume has the brand mining seemingly every niche it can find for additional sales worldwide. And with its CLS Shooting Brake, fellow countryman Mercedes-Benz has already shown that a wagon based off of a "four-door coupe" can look dead sexy and command extra dollars. So it follows that the Volkswagen CC (whose existence is all but directly attributable to the success of the original CLS sedan) will also get a load-lugging variant. That's according to the UK's Autocar, which notes that the five-door will come in the CC's next generation.
According to the report, the next CC will be available in front and all-wheel drive variants with the usual assortment of gas and diesel four-cylinders found in the Wolfsburg empire, with the possibility of a gas plug-in hybrid model, too. The rakish estate will ride atop VW's MQB architecture, a shorter variant of which is also found underneath the new Golf. The scalable chassis is set to spread like kudzu throughout the company's lineup, but the CC probably won't happen until after the launch of the next European-market Passat in 2015.
Will we get it in North America? Hard to say. Volkswagen sells the standard CC saloon here, but not in particularly large numbers, and when the company moved to a North American-specific Passat, it dumped the wagon variant. The traditional VW estate apparently continues to pick up sales momentum abroad, however, making the CC Shooting Brake a seemingly natural fit for buyers who still want the utility of a two-box form but can afford to sacrifice a bit of cargo room in the name of style.

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.

Suzuki and VW finalize their divorce

The rocky divorce between Suzuki and Volkswagen is finally over after working its way through the International Court of Arbitration since 2011, according to the Japan Times. In the final settlement to end the companies' disputes, Suzuki agreed to pay VW an undisclosed amount for not living up to the agreement to use the German automaker's diesel engines. While they won't disclose the exact sum, Suzuki said in a statement that the money "will not have any significant impact" on its 2015 fiscal year results, which will end in March. The arbitration court took the biggest step to end this transcontinental partnership in August 2015 when the body ruled VW needed sell its 19.9-percent stake in Suzuki. However, the Japanese company wasn't entirely off the hook because VW was still allowed to sue for damages over the diesel engine issue. This latest decision finally clears up that dispute. Like most marriages, the union between VW and Suzuki began with stars in both parties' eyes. The Germans paid $2.8 billion to buy 19.9 percent of the Japanese company in December 2009. VW was supposed to get greater access to the auto market in India, and Suzuki hoped to capitalize on access to its partner's advanced technology. By 2011, rumors started percolating that things were contentious behind closed doors. VW allegedly tried to assert control over Suzuki's operations, and the Japanese company reportedly wasn't happy with its access to the German tech. Suzuki even bought diesel engines from Fiat, rather than VW. Later that year, company CEO Osamu Suzuki announced he would end the alliance, and they started working through arbitration. Notification Concerning Resolution of Arbitration by Settlement As Suzuki has reached a settlement regarding the arbitration that Suzuki filed with the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce on 24 November 2011, Suzuki informs you of the following: 1. History from the Request for Arbitration to the Settlement As announced in the "Notification Concerning Arbitration Award" dated 30 August 2015, the Tribunal indicated that it would address the issue of alleged damages arising from Suzuki's breach of the agreement claimed by Volkswagen AG ("VW") in a further stage of the arbitration proceedings. Suzuki reached a settlement with VW in regard to such arbitration proceedings on 10 February 2016. Accordingly, the arbitration proceedings have been concluded. 2.