1991 Acura Integra, No Reserve on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Acura files for Integra Type S trademark

It's only been a couple of weeks since Acura dropped the news bomb that it was bringing back the Integra. In that time, though, the company has quickly applied to trademark the name "Integra Type S" with the US Patent and Trademark Office. The filing, discovered by CarBuzz, was submitted on Aug. 20, a little less than a week after the Integra revival was announced. Curiously, it's under the category of "Apparel and headwear, namely, caps, hats, T-shirts, shirts, sweatshirts, knit shirts, polo shirts, jackets and vests," rather than automobiles.   It seems unlikely, though, that Acura would trademark Integra Type S for shirts and hats if it didn't plan on building a car to go along with it. So the Integra may come in standard and hotted up versions. The last time Acura offered an Type S in North America, it wasn't officially called that. During Acura's switch to an alphanumeric naming convention, the Integra name was dropped in favor of RSX, built from 2002-06. There, the Type S moniker, while not as hard-core as the previous-generation Integra Type R, still meant a considerable bump in performance. Regular RSX models had 160 horsepower, but the RSX Type S cranked out 200 to 210, depending on the year. The Type S was also available exclusively with a manual transmission, and had improved suspension and brakes. While a similar improvement in hardware would be more than welcome on an Integra Type S, we don't want to get too excited over what could just be a logo on a T-shirt. The wouldn't be the first time in recent memory a carmaker trademarked a familiar name for swag. Earlier this year Nissan trademarked Fairlady Z — the original name for the Nissan Z-car — for usage on anything from cuff links to wall clocks. Meanwhile, Ford stepped in and trademarked the name Skyline for the category of cars and trucks. So Acura should probably just go ahead and get the trademark for cars, even if it doesn't plan on offering it at all.  

Acura RDX Luggage Test | How much cargo space?

The Acura RDX is considered a compact luxury SUV, but there's actually very little that's compact about it. When lined up against its competitors, you can see that it enjoys a clear dimensional advantage. In fact, the RDX is pretty close to the Lexus RX, with an identical rear legroom figure and considerably more cargo space with the back seat raised. Obviously, I'll be addressing the latter here. On paper, Acura provides several cargo numbers calling out specific SAE measurement standards for each one. Basically, it has 31.1 cubic-feet behind its back seat when you include its underfloor storage and 29.5 cubic-feet when you don't. Even that smaller number is superior to everything in the segment save the Volvo XC60 (29.7), while the Lexus RX apparently has a seems-way-too-small 18.4.   Let's see what that size advantage means. It's obvious that this is a comparatively deep and wide space with plenty of air above the back seat line for bulkier items. Note that the cargo cover was not present in this test vehicle, so I couldn't test capacity with it in place. As in every luggage test, I use two midsize roller suitcases that would need to be checked in at the airport (26 inches long, 16 wide, 11 deep), two roll-aboard suitcases that just barely fit in the overhead (24L x 15W x 10D), and one smaller roll-aboard that fits easily (23L x 15W x 10D). I also include my wife's fancy overnight bag just to spruce things up a bit (21L x 12W x 12D). There you go, all the bags fit easily. This is pretty much identical to the Lexus RX (below left) and a much easier fit than the Mercedes GLC, which is  one of the only other compact luxury models I've tested. Both of these examples are more capacious than their specs would indicate. However, this is not the end of the RDX story. Remember when I mentioned that it has 31.1 cubic-feet when including its underfloor storage? Well, that might actually be underselling the extra space gained. First, I like that the floor flips back and rests flat so you can easily use the extra space. You can also fully remove the floor piece to gain access to the aft bin, which is deeper but oddly shaped.  Here are my four largest bags standing up, with sufficient rear visibility maintained, and you still have the full-width section of the cargo area including the underfloor bin. What can you fit there? How about a 38-quart cooler and the remaining two bags stacked haphazardly around it.

Kia leads J.D. Power's Vehicle Dependability Study for 2022

For the first year ever, Kia leads J.D. Power's annual Vehicle Dependability Study with a score of 145 problems per 100 vehicles. Buick (147) and Hyundai (148) round out the top three. The highest premium brand on the list is Genesis, with a score of 148. It's common for so-called "mass market" brands to lead this particular study, according to J.D. Power, as "premium" brands "typically incorporate more technology in their vehicles, which increases the likelihood for problems to occur" and aren't necessarily built to a higher standard that less-expensive brands. The highest-rated single nameplate is the Porsche 911. It's the third time out of the past four years and the second year in a row that Porsche's quintessential sports car has taken top honors. Porsche as a brand sits in seventh place (162) just behind Lexus (159) and ahead of Dodge (166). At the very bottom of the list is Land Rover with a dismal score of 284; the SUV specialist held the same unfortunate distinction on last year's list. Ram (266), Volvo (256), Alfa Romeo (245) and Acura (244) also performed poorly. The overall industry average score sits at 192 — mass market brands average a score of 190 while premium brands sit 14 points lower at 204. While Tesla is unofficially included in some of J.D. Power's results, the agency says the sample size it has access to for this study is too small to include. As has been the case for the past several years, infotainment systems dominate the list of problems reported by owners. Popular (or unpopular, depending on your point of view) complaints include built-in voice recognition (8.3 PP100), Android Auto/Apple CarPlay connectivity (5.4 PP100), built-in Bluetooth system (4.5 PP100), not enough power plugs/USB ports (4.2 PP100), navigation systems difficult to understand/use (3.7 PP100), touchscreen/display screen (3.6 PP100), and navigation system inaccurate/outdated map (3.6 PP100). While problems with the car's infotainment and technology packages are indeed bothersome, it's important to remember that such issues aren't usually leaving owners stranded with an immovable vehicle like a broken transmission or blown engine would. Culling infotainment complaints from the results would reduce the average problem-per-100-vehicle score by a staggering 51.9 points. The vehicles included in this study are from the 2019 model year. That means owners have had three years to get to know their cars and trucks. It's the 33rd year that J.D.