Auto blog

Acura introduces a sleeker self-driving test car

As we creep ever closer to an autonomous-car future, one thing is for certain, most of the driverless cars we see being tested look hideous thanks to all the sensors strapped to the roof. Today Acura introduced its second generation Automated Acura RLX Development Vehicle with updated sensors and a more pleasing aesthetic. Gone is the spinning LIDAR system replaced with a more compact and robust version of the light detection and ranging technology. It's also got updated RADAR, camera, GPS and higher performance GPUs and CPUs as well as what Acura is calling "more intelligent software algorithms to support more complex testing scenarios." Acura and its parent company Honda have been testing autonomous cars at its GoMentum Station in the Bay Area since last year with a specially outfitted RLX (shown in the video above with the spinning LIDAR system). This new car will replace that vehicle. This article by Roberto Baldwin originally ran on Engadget, the definitive guide to this connected life. Green Acura Honda Transportation Alternatives Technology Emerging Technologies Autonomous Vehicles Videos Sedan transportation gear

Who can really claim first mass-produced fuel cell vehicle delivery in US?

Last month, Hyundai said that the initial deliveries of the Tucson Fuel Cell vehicles in California meant that, "For the first time, retail consumers can now put a mass-produced, federally-certified hydrogen fuel cell vehicle in their driveways." But try telling that to Jon Spallino. In 2005, Honda leased a hydrogen fuel cell FCX, a small hatchback, to the Spallino family (as far as we know, he parked it in his driveway). The company did the same thing again in 2008 with the FCX Clarity, a sleek new design based on the FCX Concept, and others signed for the H2 ride as well, including celebrities. No matter how you slice it, Honda has been in the fuel cell delivery market for almost a decade now. Just look at this. Or this. Or this. Oh, and other automakers (General Motors in Project Driveway in 2006 and Mercdes-Benz with the F-Cell in 2010, for example) have delivered fuel cell vehicles in the US as part of short-term test programs. But let's get back to Hyundai's claim. There's little question that the first delivery of a "fuel cell vehicle for the US market" has already taken place (and they were federally certified, too), which means that the debate revolves around the definition of mass-produced and whether "mass production" is about a number or about the process? Let's investigate below. First, lets review Honda's bona fides. We can start with the official version of Honda's fuel cell history, which is missing the pertinent detail that Honda build the Clarity on a dedicated assembly line and established a small network of three dealerships to lease the FCX Clarity in 2008. All of the FCX Clarity vehicles in customer hands in the US were leased through these dealerships. Sure, Honda started with hand-built stacks in its hydrogen vehicles, but went to automated control of some parts and components with series production. "It is good to see others doing today what we've been doing since 2008" – Steve Ellis, Honda Or, as Honda's Steve Elllis put it to AutoblogGreen regarding Hyundai's fuel cell deliveries: "This was exactly as prescribed by the creation of the California Fuel Cell Partnership. It's the very essence of 'co-op-itition.' We at Honda, as do many others, continue to push forward on many technologies, both the battery and the fuel cell. And society is the beneficiary." Then he added, "It is good to see others doing today what we've been doing since 2008." Now, how does Hyundai compare?

Honda underreported 1,729 claims of injuries or deaths since 2003

Among these underreported cases were eight Takata airbag inflator ruptures not submitted. Following an independent audit of its safety reporting procedures, Honda has found massive holes in its methodology and practices that resulted in 1,729 claims of injuries or deaths going unreported to federal authorities dating back to July 2003. The cases should have been submitted to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration as part of its quarterly Early Warning Reports (EWRs) under the TREAD Act, but they fell through the cracks for a variety of reasons. Honda blames the underreporting on three factors: data entry errors, computer coding problems and "an overly narrow interpretation of what constituted a 'written notice' under the TREAD Act." The first two issues were related to the computer program that collected the claims. If employees didn't enter a date in the "written claim received" field, then they were omitted from the EWRs. Also, the company's internal component codes didn't always match those used by NHTSA, and only the ones that were the same were disclosed. Finally, third-party documents, including police reports, were not considered. Honda says the computer error is now corrected, and the company is updating its data entry training. In the future, written and oral claims will be included in EWRs, as well. Among these underreported cases were eight Takata airbag inflator ruptures not submitted in Honda's EWRs, including one death and seven injuries. However, the automaker claims NHTSA was already aware of all of these incidents either from the agency's own records or from the company's notification outside of the EWR process. Unfortunately, this problem could have been stopped much sooner. The issue was first brought to light in 2011 but didn't result in a followup. NHTSA advised the automaker of discrepancies in January 2012, and it still did nothing. This third-party audit wasn't commissioned until September 2014. "Honda acknowledges that it lacked the urgency needed to correct its problems on a timely basis," it says in the announcement. Separately, the Japanese government is starting an investigation, as well. According to Reuters, the Japanese Transport Minister has created a task force to look into the Takata recalls and find out whether Honda under-reported incidents there. Scroll down to read the company's entire statement on the third-party investigation.