2004 Chevrolet Suburban 1500 Lt on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Chevy Volt 'acceptable,' Nissan Leaf 'poor' in new IIHS safety tests

Ford C-Max Hybrid also scored "acceptable" rating. With US Nissan Leaf sales up almost 30 percent during the first half of the year, the only thing that might be able to stop the battery-electric vehicle is a good, stiff barrier. Unfortunately, thing's aren't always pretty when that happens in the real world, according to new tests from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). Things with the Chevrolet Volt extended-range plug-in are a little bit rosier, though. The two plug-in vehicles were part of a batch of a dozen vehicles that just went through the IIHS's "small overlap" test, in which the driver's side front corner of the vehicle is crashed into a rigid barrier at 40 miles per hour. Out of the dozen, only the Mini Cooper Countryman was given a "good" rating. Five vehicles, including the Volt and the Ford C-Max Hybrid, were rated "acceptable," two were "marginal" and two, including the Leaf, were "poor." Plug-in vehicles are unique in the crash-test context because of their relatively large battery sizes. In the Volt's case, the driver had a "low risk" of injury, said the IIHS. But the Leaf's crash substantially pushed back the instrument panel and steering column, creating a scenario where the driver was "likely" to sustain leg injuries. The batteries in both the Leaf and the Volt passed safety tests specifically targeted at things like thermo and electrical properties and overall integrity. "Nissan is proud of the Leaf's 'Good' rating in all other IIHS tests, a 4-star NCAP rating from NHTSA and its IIHS Top Safety Pick rating in all previous years since the car's release," the company said in an e-mail sent to AutoblogGreen. "As for the performance of the 2014 Leaf in the 'small overlap frontal test,' Nissan will continue to review these and other results from the IIHS 'small overlap frontal test' as we seek opportunities for improvement." Check out the IIHS's press release and small car crash-test video footage below. Range of ratings: Small car ratings run the gamut in challenging small overlap front test The Mini Cooper Countryman is the only small car to earn a good rating among the latest group of 12 cars subjected to the Institute's small overlap front crash test. Two electric models and a hybrid also are in the mix, with varied results. The electric-powered Chevrolet Volt (with a gasoline engine "range extender") earns an acceptable rating, while its battery-electric rival, the Nissan Leaf, earns a poor rating.

Junkyard Gem: 1986 Chevrolet Sprint Plus

General Motors sold second- and third-generation Suzuki Cultuses with Geo or Chevrolet Metro badging in the United States from 1989 through 2001 model years, and we've all seen plenty of those cars on the street over the years. The first-generation Cultus was sold here as well, with Chevrolet Sprint badges, and I've found a rare example of the Sprint five-door hatchback in a Northern California car graveyard. The Chevy Sprint first appeared on the West Coast as a 1985 model, then became available everywhere in the United States for the 1986 through 1988 model years (in Canada, it was sold as the Pontiac Firefly). It was available here as a hatchback with three or five doors; for 1986 only, the five-door was badged as the Sprint Plus. Soon enough, The General would be selling many more Asian-built cars with Detroit badges here. Isuzu I-Marks were sold as Chevrolet/Geo Spectrums starting in the 1986 model year, while Daewoo provided the Pontiac LeMans two years later. Under the hood, a 1.0-liter three-cylinder rated at 48 horsepower. The five-door Sprint cost $5,580 in 1986, which was $200 more than the three-door (those prices would be $15,445 and $14,891 in 2023 dollars). I've documented seven discarded Sprints prior to this one (including an extremely rare Turbo Sprint), and all of them were three-doors; we can assume that price was the most important factor for Sprint buyers. Gasoline prices were crashing hard during the middle 1980s, but memories of gas lines and odd-even-day fuel rationing from 1979 remained strong. What cars competed with the '86 Sprint on sticker price? Well, there was no way to undercut the hilariously affordable (and terrible) Yugo GV, which cost $3,990. The much bigger (but still pretty bad) Hyundai Excel listed at $4,995, while Toyota would sell you a sturdy (but zero-fun) Tercel starting at $5,448. Even the wretched Chevy Chevette — yes, it was still available in 1986 — cost $5,645. The original buyer of this car was willing to shell out an extra $395 to get an automatic instead of the base five-speed manual. That's about $1,093 in today's money. This car must have been slow. By the end, the doors were held shut with duct tape, but it still stayed alive until age 37. 53 miles per gallon on the highway! It does everything. The camels of the highway.

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.