2012 Lexus Gx460 Premium Sport Utility 4-door 4.6l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Lexus launches supercharged LX 570 in Middle East

The Lexus LX SUV is a very muscular, old-school vehicle. Based on the Toyota Land Cruiser, it's still a big, body-on-frame SUV, but inside it offers acres of leather and luxury tech. The brand's Kuwaiti distributor is taking it machismo even further for the local market with the new LX 570 Supercharger.
As the name suggests, the upgraded SUV grafts a supercharger onto the LX 570's 5.7-liter V8 to boost it to 450 horsepower, from 383 hp in the naturally aspirated version in the US (or 362 hp in the standard Kuwaiti version), and it uses the same six-speed automatic as the standard model. To signal the improved strength, much of exterior chrome is replaced with black trim. It also wears special 20-inch wheels and a rear spoiler. The interior is fitted with crimson leather seats and red-accented carpet. It also gets an aluminum sill plate that says "Supercharger." Like the standard Kuwait-spec LX 570, it has two fuel tanks with a total combined capacity of 36.46 gallons, which should help satiate the likely thirsty, forced-induction V8.
The LX 570 Supercharger won't be rumbling down streets outside of the Middle East, though. According to Lexus spokesperson Bill Kwong, this is a project by the distributor in the region. The supercharged engine also has "issues with emissions" in the US, especially in California, he told Autoblog. Too bad, it would be an interesting Range Rover alternative.

What's in a trademark? Sometimes, the next iconic car name

The United States Patent and Trademark Office is a treasure trove for auto enthusiasts, especially those who double as conspiracy theorists.
Why has Toyota applied to trademark "Supra," the name of one of its legendary sports cars, even though it hasn't sold one in the United States in 16 years? Why would General Motors continue to register "Chevelle" long after one of the most famous American muscle cars hit the end of the road? And what could Chrysler possibly do with the rights to "313," the area code for Detroit?

Jaguar solution to keyless start could save lives

UPDATED: An earlier version of this story indicated the Jaguar keyless start function was meant as a safety feature, when in fact, it is meant as a convenience one and will not work as described if automatic stop/start is not engaged. Today, The New York Times published an article about more than two dozen deaths related to drivers accidentally leaving their cars running, closing their garages and later succumbing to carbon monoxide that flooded their homes. The reason has been identified as "keyless start" features, or proximity entry and push-button start, where owners don't need to physically handle a key or fob to gain entry into the vehicle or start it. It is the latest, and deadliest, issue raised with this system after those related to security and simple inconvenience (for instance, leaving the car at a valet or car wash with the fob in your pocket). From my personal perspective, The New York Times had a rather harsh "evil carmakers" tone throughout the article. This is not a matter of a known faulty component, as with the GM ignition switch recall. This has as much to do with user error where people leave their car without pressing the "off" button and without noticing the engine is still running. About half of the cars in question are produced by Toyota and Lexus, brands that have offered keyless start longer than most. They are also brands with high rates of elderly owners, who seemingly made up a majority of reported deaths and injuries. One fire department in Florida even started a campaign alerting those in the area of the dangers of leaving your car running when it noticed a correlation between an increase in cars equipped with keyless start and calls related to carbon monoxide poisoning. I see several contributing issues at play, most of which go well beyond this particular issue. First is insufficient training of owners by dealers and/or owners not paying close enough attention during this training. Cars are complicated, but you should at least know how basic functions work. Second, woefully inadequate driver training in this country. Third, and with apologies to the AARP, insufficient testing of elderly drivers and/or insufficiently low standards for elderly drivers. If you don't know you have to shut the car off or cannot hear that an engine is running, perhaps you shouldn't be driving. Fourth, re-examining keyless start systems.