1950 Ford F4 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Chris Harris pits Fiesta ST against Mercedes G63 AMG in 0-60 battle... sort of

Vehicle performance tests are serious business, with reputations made or broken by things like braking distance, top speed, and lateral g-forces. King of the metrics, though, is the 0-60 run, which for unknown reasons has become the benchmark for what truly makes a car a performance machine.
Now, Chris Harris from Drive has turned the whole idea behind the sprint to 60 on its ear. Taking a new Ford Fiesta ST, Harris asks a simple question: would the ST be quicker to 60 on its own, or on a trailer being towed by a Mercedes-Benz G63 AMG?
It's a fair question, really. The Fiesta Harris tested hit 60 in 7.2 seconds on a slightly uphill section of runway. It should be noted that Harris quotes his ST at 182 horsepower, which is about 15 ponies less than what we're getting in the US, so these numbers might not hold up all that well against an American model. The G63 AMG, meanwhile, is a 536-horsepower monster, powered by a twin-turbo V8 that, able to propel the big SUV to 60 mph in just 5.2 seconds without towing a Fiesta.

8 car technologies designed to keep you safe

Technologies are always advancing forward, especially in your vehicle. As more safety technologies are being introduced into the market, it can be hard to keep track of everything. So here are 8 technologies designed to keep you safe on the road. Want more coverage? Head over to http://bit.ly/2CcOngW Ford Kia Mercedes-Benz Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Volvo Autoblog Minute Videos Original Video FCA automatic emergency braking

After Years Of Delays, Rear Visibility Requirements Move Closer To Reality

Regulations that would require automakers to improve rear-view visibility on all new cars and light trucks are nearing completion after six years of delays. The U.S. Department of Transportation sent its proposed rear-visibility rules to the Obama administration for review on Christmas Day. The White House Office of Management and Budget now must finalize the regulations. The rule are intended to minimize the risk of pedestrian deaths from vehicles in reverse, a type of accident that disproportionately affects children. Already in 2014, two children have died from cars backing over them, driven in each case by the children's father. Specifics of the Transportation Department's proposal are not available during the review, but the rules are expected to compel automakers to install rear-view cameras as mandatory equipment on all new vehicles. That's what safety advocates have wanted all along. Thought they were pleased the proposed ruling had finally been issued, there was some worry Friday the final rules would omit the rear-view camera mandate. "We're encouraged, but we're also a little concerned about speculation the rear-view camera may not be in there," said Janette Fennell, the president and founder of Kids and Cars, a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting children in and around vehicles. "I'm wondering where that might be coming from." On Thursday, The Automotive News had reported the possibility the new standards could offer an alternative to rear-view cameras, such as redesigned mirrors, that improved visibility. The Office of Management and Budget typically completes its reviews of new rules in 90 days, although that can be extended. OMB officials said Friday they do not comment on pending rules. The intent of the rules is to enhance rear visibility for drivers and prevent pedestrian deaths. Approximately 200 pedestrians are backed over in the United States each year, according to estimates from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Accidents Mostly Affect Children Roughly half the victims are children younger than age five. A government analysis concluded approximately half the victims -– 95 to 112 -– could be saved with new regulations. Yet the rules have arrived at a glacial pace. President George W. Bush signed legislation that had been passed with bipartisan Congressional support in 2008. But automakers have fought the idea of adding rear-view cameras, saying it is too expensive.