2003 Acura Mdx Touring on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Honda tags Civic, Accord, HR-V, Fit and more in fuel pump recall

American Honda Motor Company's recent issues with fuel pumps continue, as a new recall affects a large number of Honda and Acura vehicles from the 2018-2020 model years. The recall covers a total of 136,057 vehicles, including select 2018-2019 Acura NSX, 2019 Acura RDX, RLX, and RLX Sport Hybrid models, as well as 2018-2019 Honda Accords, Civic Hatchbacks, Civic Type Rs, HR-Vs, 2019-2020 Insights, and 2019 Fits.  National Highway Traffic Safety Administration campaign No. 20V314000, published May 28, 2020, states that the low-pressure fuel pump inside the fuel tanks of the aforementioned vehicles could falter or completely fail. Should the low-pressure fuel pump fail, the car could stall, regardless of its state of motion. Recall documents reveal fuel pump might fail due to swelling of the fuel pump motor impeller, which would cause the pump to seize. This issue is the result of a problem with how the parts were manufactured. These "lower density impellers" were "exposed to production solvent drying for longer periods of time." This caused some impellers to have surface cracking, which resulted in "excessive fuel absorption," which warps the impellers. Here's a breakdown of how many vehicles of each type were potentially affected:  2018-2019 Acura NSX: 146 2019 Acura RDX: 34,405 2019 RLX: 124 2019 RLX Sport Hybrid: 206 2018-2019 Honda Accord: 11,227 2018-2019 Civic Hatchback: 24,235 2018-2019 Civic Type R: 1,785 2018-2019 HR-V: 39,676 2019-2020 Insight: 14,959 2019 Fit: 9,294 Honda will notify owners to schedule an appointment with local dealerships. The fuel pump assembly on all affected vehicles will be replaced for free. For more information, visit NHTSA. Related Video:

2016 Acura MDX gets 9-speed transmission, added refinement

It's a car we barely think about until Acura announces it's done something to it, but the MDX is rather popular with those questing for a crossover. For 2016 the third-generation, luxury three-row people-carrier gets a slightly higher MSRP, but better standard equipment and options to go with it. The big change is that the nine-speed automatic transmission with tighter ratios and faster gear shifts, as well as its push-button gear selector, has finally migrated from the top-dog RL sedan. So too the upgraded twin-clutch Super Handling All-Wheel Drive, paired here with the unchanged 290-horsepower, 3.5-liter six-cylinder. We thought adding three more cogs was supposed to make for better fuel economy, but in some cases the EPA ratings on the 2016 MDX have gone down by one mile per gallon. The base 2015 MDX is rated at 20 city, 28 highway, 23 combined; the 2016 is rated 19 city, 27 highway, 22 combined. Add SH-AWD on the 2015 and you're looking at 18 city, 27 highway, 21 combined; on the 2016 that's 18 city, 26 highway, 21 combined. If you add idle-stop to those models you restore the city and combined ratings, but still lose that extra mile on the highway. On the options list is a group of safety and driver assistance features grouped under the AcuraWatch rubric. You can add the whole kit for $1,500 to the base model, but some of its features like Lane Keep Assist and Forward Collision Warning, which you can also option on the 2015 model, are added with the Technology Package. The full suite, which includes model-firsts like Road Departure Mitigation and Rear Cross Traffic Monitor, is standard once you step up to the Advance Package. Other tech treats get baked into all trims, like the easy entry/exit driver's seat slides back 1.4 inches when you're getting in and out, the TPMS fill assist that sounds a beep when you've inflated the tires to the correct pressure, Siri Eyes Free voice recognition and a frameless rearview mirror. The price to get in on all this is $42,865, a a $1,100 bump over the 2015 model, but that's not a blanket increase across the lineup: the MDX with the Technology Package, for instance, has only gone up $250. The upper limit comes with the MDX SH-AWD with idle stop and the Advance, Entertainment & AcuraWatch Plus Packages for $57,080, a $100 increase over the top-of-the-line 2015 trim. The press release below has plenty of details.

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.