1967 Mini Moke Austin Mini Moke 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.

Mini may have overexpanded, some models may not be replaced

Surprise, surprise. According to Edmunds, Mini may be looking to reduce the number of vehicles in its range, which has recently expanded to include a total of seven offerings (not to mention the copious varieties of configurations found within each line). When Mini relaunched in the early 2000s, it did so with one model, the Cooper Hardtop, and has since added the Convertible, Clubman, Countryman, Coupe, Roadster and Paceman. It looks like those ambitions of expanding the range to include up to 10 models may have been a bit optimistic.
"When we start to replace models, I think you will see that we won't replace every model exactly," Jim McDowell, Vice President of Mini USA, told Edmunds in an interview. The brand's core models right now are the Hardtop and Countryman, and of the roughly 66,200 vehicles that Mini sold in the United States last year, these two vehicles accounted for some 75 percent of total sales.
McDowell declined to mention any specific models that may not be replaced in the lineup's next generation, though our best guess is that ultra-niche vehicles like the Coupe (pictured) or Clubman. As for replacing some of the current models with new products, the only clear gap we can see in the brand's lineup is a smaller car like the Rocketman concept, though we've been told several times that a mini-Mini isn't going to happen. Be sure to let us know what Mini models you'd like to see kept or axed in Comments below.

Production Mini Rocketman still in the cards, but not without a partner

There's not really any way around it - the new Mini Hardtop isn't all that mini. Considering its supposed to be the smallest model in the brand's lineup, this is hardly desirable. It's good news, then, that rumors are cropping up of a smaller Mini, based on the well-received Rocketman Concept that debuted in 2011 at the Geneva Motor Show.
The report, which comes from our friends at AutoGuide, claims that a production Rocketman is still on the radar of Mini's product chief, Pat McKenna, despite being officially on hold. As Mckenna explained it to AG, "the only way it would happen would be if it was a partnership with another company."
See, the problem is that Mini's current UKL platform, which underpins the new Hardtop along with the future Mini range, is too large for the tiny Rocketman. And since developing new platforms isn't as easy as popping down to the shops for a gallon of milk (nor as cheap), it makes the need for an ally to split the costs a necessity. Success, so far, has been limited.