2015 Nissan Frontier on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Nissan BladeGlider Concept shows its inner DeltaWing

Just like the DeltaWing and ZEOD RC racecars, it takes seeing the Nissan BladeGlider concept live to get a true appreciation for its design. But that doesn't mean it's any less weird. The wedge-shaped, three-seat concept car hit the stage today at the Tokyo Motor Show, and Nissan says the car is an "exploratory prototype" for a future production model.
The BladeGlider is defined by its design with front wheels that are just about three feet apart, while the rear has a more conventional track. Opening the scissor doors reveals a center driving position flanked by two passenger seats with a cockpit-inspired design. Although no power figures were revealed for the conceptual vehicle, Nissan does say that the BladeGlider is an all-electric vehicle with its battery pack mounted toward the rear of the car helping to provide a 30/70 weight distribution front to rear.
Check out our live images of the BladeGlider as well as the Nissan press release below.

Mercedes considering Mexico for CLA production

Would you buy a Mercedes-Benz if it were made in Mexico? That's what the German outfit is wondering, as it considers localizing production of the its new budget model at a factory operated by Nissan, of which the automaker is a joint-venture partner.
According to a report from Automotive News, moving production of American-spec CLAs from Hungary to Mexico would protect Mercedes from currency fluctuations. "Mexico is the best location for the United States," Daimler Chairman Dieter Zetsche told AN. The CLA is also expected to become the brand's volume model in the US market, which makes North American production a logical move.
In the event that Mercedes approves the plan, Nissan would expand the capabilities at its Aguascalientes, Mexico plant, allowing production to begin in 2018.

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.