2007 Lincoln Mkx Base Sport Utility 4-door 3.5l 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.

Ford recalls over 680,000 Ford Fusions, Mondeos, and Lincoln MKZs for seat belt pretensioners

Update: We spoke with a Ford representative who said that owners will be notified by mail during the week of January 16 . Dealers will also have the fix available at the same time. Owners can bring in their vehicles to dealers for an evaluation in the mean time. The main text has been updated to reflect this. The Basics: Ford is recalling 680,872 2013-2016 Ford Fusions, 2015-2016 Ford Mondeos, and 2013-2015 Lincoln MKZ s for an issue with front driver-side and passenger-side seat belt pretensioners. The Problem: The seat-belt pretensioners did not have sufficient insulation applied. When the pretensioners are activated, the heat generated can cause the cables connected to the belts to separate, which in turn can prevent the seat belts from effectively restraining the occupant. This can lead to injuries. Injuries/Deaths: Ford reports two accidents and two injuries have occurred that are related to this recall. The fix: A dealer technician will inject an insulation coating around the pretensioner. This should effectively keep the heat away from the cables, ensuring the seat belt will properly restrain the user in a collision. If you own one: Affected owners will be notified by mail on the week of January 16. Dealers will have the fix available that week, and owners will be able to bring in their vehicles for the fix to be implemented free of charge. Related Video:

Ford faces class-action lawsuit for selling vehicles without brake override systems

A total of 20 Ford customers are suing the automaker in a class-action lawsuit for selling vehicles "vulnerable to unintended acceleration." According to Reuters, the suit names 30 models built between 2002 and 2010 with electronic throttle control systems but without a brake override system. Those include the 2004-2012 F-Series pickups and the 2005-2009 Lincoln Town Car. Adam Levitt, a partner with the law firm of Grant & Eisenhofer says the plaintiffs in the case want "to be compensated for their economic losses by having overpaid for cars that contained defects." Levitt contends that the plaintiffs would not have bought their vehicles or paid less for them had they known there was no brake override system in place.
Ford began installing brake override systems in its vehicles beginning in 2010. In response to the lawsuit, Ford has pointed to research by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that indicated that unintended acceleration is mostly caused by driver error, saying in a statement that, "NHTSA's work is far more scientific and trustworthy than work done by personal injury lawyers and their paid experts."
Belville et al v. Ford Motor Co. will be heard in US District Court in the Southern District of West Virginia.