No Reserve 2004 Ford Freestar Limited Mini Passenger Van 4-door 4.2l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Nuclear-powered concept cars from the Atomic Age

In the 1950s and early 60s, the dawn of nuclear power was supposed to lead to a limitless consumer culture, a world of flying cars and autonomous kitchens all powered by clean energy. In Europe, it offered the then-limping continent a cheap, inexhaustible supply of power after years of rationing and infrastructure damage brought on by two World Wars.
The development of nuclear-powered submarines and ships during the 1940s and 50s led car designers to begin conceptualizing atomic vehicles. Fueled by a consistent reaction, these cars would theoretically produce no harmful byproducts and rarely need to refuel. Combining these vehicles with the new interstate system presented amazing potential for American mobility.
But the fantasy soon faded. There were just too many problems with the realities of nuclear power. For starters, the powerplant would be too small to attain a reaction unless the car contained weapons-grade atomic materials. Doing so would mean every fender-bender could result in a minor nuclear holocaust. Additionally, many of the designers assumed a lightweight shielding material or even forcefields would eventually be invented (they still haven't) to protect passengers from harmful radiation. Analyses of the atomic car concept at the time determined that a 50-ton lead barrier would be necessary to prevent exposure.

10 most memorable cars and SUVs of 2019

It's no surprise that a car reviewer will drive a large number of cars over the course of a year. Indeed, when the clock strikes midnight on Dec 31, I will have driven 75 new cars, trucks and SUV this year (and one old Peugeot) over the course of weekly evaluation loans and first drive events. That sure seems like a lot. Some definitely got more attention than others, and some came and went without leaving much of an impression – I completely forgot I drove a Kia Forte. Yet in the spirit of this day, I thought I'd pick the 10 that I would love to see under the Christmas tree tomorrow morning. You know, just in case you were looking to get me something. I'll also throw in a couple disappointments that were memorable for the wrong reasons. They'd get sent back to the store on Boxing Day. Lexus LC 500 Pictured below and resplendent in its Flare Yellow metallic paint, the car that would reach highest on my list is the divine Lexus LC 500. As a devout lover of GT cars, the LC ticks all the boxes. Muscular and characterful engine? V8, check. Beautifully made and memorable interior? It's gorgeous, to hell with Remote Touch. Check. Comfortable and reasonably practical? Superb seats and, uh, yeah. Makes me want to stand there and stare at it? You bet. Though I long figured my heart would say LC but my head "Porsche 911," after this go-around, that's no longer the case. LC, pretty please. 2020-lexus-lc500-f34-2 View 19 Photos Polestar 1 I actually feel lucky that I got to drive the Polestar 1. Only 150 will be produced each year, and it's a far more special thing than it would initially appear. And that's despite initially appearing to be a beautiful, classic two-door GT car with a roof so rakish it's only possible because it's made of carbon fiber. That itÂ’s a massively powerful plug-in hybrid with more all-electric range than any other PHEV is a thick dollop of whipped cream on a slice of Toscakaka. You know, Swedish dessert, Swedish car. Fine, I'll stick to Ikea references.  Polestar1_Launch_SanFrancisco-0014 View 44 Photos Volvo V60 Cross Country Speaking of Sweden, did I drive this car off the road there? Sure did! And despite this, the V60 Cross Country scratches that certain wagon itch and looks sensational to boot. I wish it were available with the T8 plug-in hybrid powertrain, but it's best not to get greedy at Christmas.

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.