No Reserve! 31k Actual Mile1972 Chevrolet Corvette 4 Speed Red/black Florida on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

Safety group pans GM’s new Marketplace in-dash shopping

When it comes to our cars, is the Internet of Things a godsend? Or a hidden menace that will create more problems than it will solve? On the same day General Motors announced it will equip newer-model cars with its in-dash Marketplace e-commerce app, a prominent safety group was shooting it down. National Safety Council President Deborah Hersman tells Bloomberg the technology will only contribute to distracted driving and hurt efforts to stem the tide of rising auto fatalities, which grew 5.6 percent to more than 37,000 in the U.S. in 2016. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says distracted driving was responsible for 3,477 fatalities and 391,000 injuries in 2015, the most recent year for which it has data. "There's nothing about this that's safe," Hersman told Bloomberg. "If this is why they want WiFi in the car, we're going to see fatality numbers go up even higher than they are now." Marketplace, developed with IBM, will allow drivers — or more often, one hopes, their passengers — to order coffee or food, find gas stations and reserve hotel rooms from their dashboard screens. The technology is set to be uploaded automatically to nearly 1.9 million GM vehicles model-year 2017 and later that are equipped with WiFi hotspots and compatible systems. By the end of 2018, about 4 million Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac vehicles will be equipped with Marketplace. The app will debut with a limited number of participating retailers, including TGI Fridays, Shell, Exxon Mobil and Starbucks, with more likely to join later. Online retail giant Amazon is also partnering with automakers such as Ford to bring e-commerce capabilities inside the car through its Alexa personal assistant. While convenience is nice, one other thing is becoming clear as the IoT wedges its way into our cars: It's taking aim at some decidedly first-world problems.Related Video: Image Credit: GM Buick Cadillac Chevrolet GM GMC Technology Infotainment in-car entertainment marketplace e-commerce

Impala SS vs. Marauder: Recalling Detroit’s muscle sedans 

Impala SS vs. Marauder — it was comparo that only really happened in theory. ChevyÂ’s muscle sedan ran from 1994-96, while MercuryÂ’s answer arrived in 2003 and only lasted until 2004. TheyÂ’re linked inextricably, as there were few options for powerful American sedans during that milquetoast period for enthusiasts. The debate was reignited recently among Autoblog editors when a pristine 1996 Chevy Impala SS with just 2,173 miles on the odometer hit the market on Bring a Trailer. Most of the staff favored the Impala for its sinister looks and said that it lived up to its billing as a legit muscle car. Nearly two-thirds of you agree. We ran an unscientific Twitter poll that generated 851 votes, 63.9 percent of which backed the Impala. Muscle sedans, take your pick: — Greg Migliore (@GregMigliore) April 14, 2020 Then and now enthusiasts felt the Impala was a more complete execution with guts. The Marauder, despite coming along later, felt more hacked together, according to prevailing sentiments. Why? On purpose and on paper theyÂ’re similar. The ImpalaÂ’s 5.7-liter LT1 V8 making 260 horsepower and 330 pound-feet of torque was impressive for a two-ton sedan in the mid-Â’90s. The Marauder was actually more powerful — its 4.6-liter V8 was rated at 302 hp and 318 lb-ft. The ImpalaÂ’s engine was also used in the C4 Corvette. The MarauderÂ’s mill was shared with the Mustang Mach 1. You can see why they resonated so deeply with Boomers longing for a bygone era and also captured the attention of coming-of-age Gen Xers. Car and DriverÂ’s staff gave the Marauder a lukewarm review back in ‘03, citing its solid handling and features, yet knocking the sedan for being slow off the line. In a Hemmings article appropriately called “Autopsy” from 2004, the ImpalaÂ’s stronger low-end torque and smooth shifting transmission earned praise, separating it from the more sluggish Mercury. All of this was captured in the carsÂ’ acceleration times, highlighting metrically the differences in their character. The Impala hit 60 miles per hour in 6.5 seconds, while the Marauder was a half-second slower, according to C/D testing. Other sites have them closer together, which reinforces the premise it really was the little things that separated these muscle cars. Both made the most of their genetics, riding on ancient platforms (FordÂ’s Panther and General MotorsÂ’ B-body) that preceded these cars by decades. Both had iconic names.