4wd 4dr Touring W/res & Navi New Suv Automatic Gasoline 3.5l V6 Alabaster Silver on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Honda reveals three new turbo VTEC engines, including Civic Type R 2.0L

It's fair to say that in recent years, Honda has been viewed as a laggard when it comes to engine and gearbox development, seemingly missing the boat on direct-injection, forced-induction and high gear-count transmissions, among other things. But under its Earth Dreams banner, the Japanese automaker is showing new vigor, with the latest proof being this trio of just-announced powerplants.
Measuring 1.0-liters, 1.5-liters and 2.0-liters in displacement, this array of three- and four-cylinder engines boasts turbocharging and direct-injection along with the latest iteration of Honda's famed VTEC variable valve timing hardware. "Most suitable for small-to-medium-sized vehicles," the largest engine is said to be good for more than 276 horsepower and will slot into the eagerly awaited Civic Type R, iconic red valve cover and all.
Unfortunately, few other details about the hot Civic's engine or any of the others are being made public at this time, and there's no official word about the engines coming to North American in the Type R or any other model. Given that all the engines are complaint with stringent Euro 6 emissions standards, they figure to be clean enough, and Honda says that these have been developed as global powerplants, so we'd be shocked if they didn't come ashore in new or updated products over the next few years... even if they leave the CTR on the boat.

Why Japan's government is looking to curb its adorable kei car market

Each region around the world has its stereotypical vehicle. The US has the pickup and Europe the five-door hatchback; but in Japan, the kei car reigns supreme. These tiny cars are limited to just 660cc of displacement but they've also come with lower taxes to make them more affordable. To make of the most of their small size, they've often had quite boxy styling like the Honda N-One shown above, and because they're Japanese, they've often had quirky names like the Nissan Dayz Roox. However, if the Japanese government has its way, the future popularity of these little guys might be in jeopardy. The problem facing them is that Japan is an island both literally and figuratively. After World War II, the Japanese government created the class as a way to make car ownership more accessible. The tiny engines generally meant better fuel economy to deal with the nation's expensive gas, and the tax benefits also helped. It's made the segment hugely popular even today, with kei cars making up roughly 40 percent of the nation's new cars sales last year, according to The New York Times. The downside is that these models are almost never exported because they aren't as attractive to buyers elsewhere (if indeed they even meet overseas regulations). So if an automaker ends up with a popular kei model, it can't really market it elsewhere. The government now sees that as a threat to the domestic auto industry. It believes that every yen invested into kei development is wasted, and the production takes up needed capacity at auto factories. The state would much rather automakers create exportable models. To do this, it's trying to make the little cars less attractive to buy, and thus, less attractive to build. The authorities recently increased taxes on kei cars by 50 percent to narrow the difference between standard cars, according to the NYT. If kei cars do lose popularity, it could open the market up to greater competition from foreign automakers. Several companies complained about the little cars stranglehold on the Japanese market last year, but since then, imported car sales there have shown some growth thanks to the improving economy. Featured Gallery 2013 Honda N-One View 20 Photos News Source: The New York TimesImage Credit: Honda Government/Legal Honda Nissan JDM kei kei car

It turns out Takata isn't willing to expand airbag recall nationally after all

There have been "approximately 0.000006 failures per air bag deployment, which is far below the failure rate" of most recalls, Takata claims. Takata has seemingly made an about face following reports that it would expand its regional airbag recall into a nationwide repair effort, issuing a scathing, four-page letter rebutting allegations by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and its Office of Defects while simultaneously attacking the government's handling of the situation. The Japanese supplier claims in its letter that the "currently available, reliable information does not support a nationwide determination of a safety defect," arguing that there were "approximately 0.000006 failures per air bag deployment, which is far below the failure rate in the vast majority of the thousands of recalls," The Detroit News reports. Takata then breaks down the two specific incidents mentioned in NHTSA's original recall request letter, a 2005 Honda Accord and 2007 Ford Mustang. Referencing the two crashes, NHTSA Administrator David Friedman said last month "one incident is an anomaly, but two are a trend." The supplier, though, argues the Honda issue is already being covered by that company's soon-to-be-national recall (more on that in a moment). The company then goes on to point out that neither Takata nor NHTSA has been able to analyze the Mustang's airbag inflator, saying that such a lack of examination meant there was "no way to ascertain what actually occurred during the incident, whether any inflator ruptured, and whether any inflator rupture that may have occurred was related to the incidents that led to the current regional campaigns." Takata alleges that NHTSA has disobeyed its own statutes. Takata also took the opportunity to take a few swipes at NHTSA's behavior during the airbag scandal, saying it was "very surprised to receive" a recall request letter because the ODI had yet to even receive the company's responses to a pair of special orders. It also alleged that NHTSA was disobeying its own statute, which says only manufacturers of vehicles and replacement equipment can "decide in good faith whether their products contain a safety related defect," and that the government can only "issue an initial decision that a safety-related defect exists" to those same entities.