1989 Jeep Grand Wagoneer 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.

Best car infotainment systems: From UConnect to MBUX, these are our favorites

Declaring one infotainment system the best over any other is an inherently subjective matter. You can look at quantitative testing for things like input response time and various screen load times, but ask a room full of people that have tried all car infotainment systems what their favorite is, and you’re likely to get a lot of different responses. For the most part, the various infotainment systems available all share a similar purpose. They aim to help the driver get where they're going with navigation, play their favorite tunes via all sorts of media playback options and allow folks to stay connected with others via phone connectivity. Of course, most go way beyond the basics these days and offer features like streaming services, in-car performance data and much more. Unique features are aplenty when you start diving through menus, but how they go about their most important tasks vary widely. Some of our editors prefer systems that are exclusively touch-based and chock full of boundary-pushing features. Others may prefer a back-to-basics non-touch system that is navigable via a scroll wheel. You can compare it to the phone operating system wars. Just like some prefer Android phones over iPhones, we all have our own opinions for what makes up the best infotainment interface. All that said, our combined experience tells us that a number of infotainment systems are at least better than the rest. WeÂ’ve narrowed it down to five total systems in their own subcategories that stand out to us. Read on below to see our picks, and feel free to make your own arguments in the comments. Best infotainment overall: UConnect 5, various Stellantis products Ram 1500 Uconnect Infotainment System Review If thereÂ’s one infotainment system that all of us agree is excellent, itÂ’s UConnect. It has numerous qualities that make it great, but above all else, UConnect is simple and straightforward to use. Ease of operation is one of the most (if not the single most) vital parts of any infotainment system interface. If youÂ’re expected to be able to tap away on a touchscreen while driving and still pay attention to the road, a complex infotainment system is going to remove your attention from the number one task at hand: driving. UConnect uses a simple interface that puts all of your key functions in a clearly-represented row on the bottom of the screen. Tap any of them, and it instantly pulls up that menu.

FCA seeking new trial in Jeep fire case, calls $150M judgement 'grossly excessive'

Fiat Chrysler Automobiles is fighting back after a Decatur County, GA jury ordered the company to pay $150 million to the family of a four-year-old boy that was killed after a 1999 Jeep Grand Cherokee crashed and caught fire. The company is requesting the judge reduce the award, and should Walden's family not agree to the lower sum, that a new trial be held. The Detroit Free Press reports that FCA would be forced to pay $120 million over the death of young Remington Walden, with an extra $30 million being paid to the boy's family. Neither figure sits well with the automaker, though, which called the fine "grossly excessive," and claimed it was in violation of Georgia state law. The judgment stems from FCA's long-running problem with the fuel tanks of certain Jeep models built in the 1990s and 2000s. According to the newspaper, FCA argues that the jury was biased after the Waldens' attorneys played on the their passions and pushed for a big award, saying the wrongful death award was 11 times more than any appeals court has ever upheld. FCA said attorneys for the plaintiffs told the jury to base the settlement on Sergio Marchionne's total compensation, $68 million. FCA also claims in its motion that the young boy's suffering was brief. "A $30-million pain-and-suffering award for what plaintiffs acknowledge was at most one minute of suffering is irrational," the motion, which was obtained by The Detroit Free Press, read. "Where such plainly improper arguments are immediately followed by irrational and stunningly excessive damage awards, there can be no doubt that the jury acted from passion and prejudice." Jim Butler, the attorney for the Waldens, has called the motion "nonsense," although he said the family will accept whatever figure the judge sets.