1997 Nissan Pickup 2wd Regular Cab Xe on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford F-150, Chevy Silverado, Toyota Tundra flunk IIHS headlight test

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety put pickup truck headlights to the test and found that the majority of them were equipped with subpar units. The 2017 Honda Ridgeline was the only truck to earn a rating of "good." The large pickup truck test was comprised of the: 2016 to 2017 GMC Sierra, 2017 Nissan Titan, 2016 Ram 1500, 2016 to 2017 Chevrolet Silverado, 2016 to 2017 Ford F-150, and 2016 to 2017 Toyota Tundra. The Sierra's headlights earned a rating of "acceptable," the headlights found on the Titan and Ram 1500 were found to be "marginal," and the ones on the Silverado, F-150, and Tundra were rated as "poor." IIHS claims the F-150 was the most disappointing out of the large pickup trucks as both its halogen and optional LED headlights failed to provide adequate visibility during testing. The Ridgeline (which earned a "good rating"), is usually considered a midsize or small truck, though IIHS included it in the field of large pickups. The headlights on the 2016 Chevrolet Colorado, 2016 GMC Canyon, 2016 Nissan Frontier, and 2016 to 2017 Toyota Tacoma, which made up the small pickup truck group, all earned a rating of "poor." The IIHS claimed the Colorado had the worst headlights of any truck that was tested, as the base vehicle's units were only able to illuminate up to 123 feet in front of the car. The Ridgeline's headlights, for reference, were able to illuminate up to 358 feet in front of the vehicle. To conduct its test, the IIHS utilizes a special tool to measure how far light is projected out of the headlights in different driving situations. The trucks' headlights were tested in a straight line and in corners, while vehicles with high-beam assist were given extra praise. The headlights on the pickup trucks also mimic the testing that was done on small SUVs and cars earlier this year. Next year, automakers will need to fit their vehicles with headlights that earn a rating of either good or acceptable to earn the IIHS Top Safety Pick+. Related Video:

Nissan: We lose money on each Leaf replacement battery

Nissan has been playing its cards pretty close to its chest when it comes to the production costs for Leaf battery packs. The company recently put a price on replacement batteries for customers at $5,500 plus the requirement to return the old battery. If the decommissioned battery is worth $1,000 to Nissan, as they have stated, that means the battery costs about $6,500 to make, right? Maybe even less if Nissan wants to turn a profit, as automakers are wont to do? Wrong.
Green Car Reports spoke to Nissan about these battery costs, and found that the automaker actually loses money on selling the replacement battery for the Leaf at the current price. Jeff Kuhlman, Nissan's vice president of global communications said, "Nissan makes zero margin on the replacement program. In fact, we subvent every exchange." All you English majors will know that "subvent" is a fancy way to say "subsidize." Kuhlman added, though, "We have yet to sell one battery as part of the program."
The fact that Nissan offers its replacement batteries for less than it costs to manufacture them is telling of a company both cares about what its customer needs and is dedicated to the success of its product. In this case, both of those things encourage people to give up fossil fuels and adopt electric mobility, which is heartening. As more people switch to battery-powered driving, though, battery technology should become better and cheaper, and the scale of production should cause manufacturing costs to decrease. Eventually, Nissan could easily see itself breaking even selling the Leaf battery replacements.

Renault, Nissan limit French government interference

Renault and Nissan are taking action to limit the influence that one can exercise over the other's operations. The measures, announced by both automakers after meetings of their respective boards in Paris and Tokyo, aim to keep each other at arm's length. But more than that, they seek to cap the degree of influence which the French government can bring to bear on either automaker. The steps are being taken in response to investment moves by the French state. While the government's investment arm – known as the Agence des Participations de l'Etat (or state participation agency) – previously controlled 15 percent of Renault's shares, it increased its holdings this April to 19.73 percent. The action sparked concerns at Renault that the French government would attempt to dictate operating procedures to both automakers, potentially to favor production in France over other locations. Given that Renault holds a 43-percent stake in Nissan, the Japanese automaker grew concerned over potential French state interference as well. To assuage those concerns, Renault, Nissan, and the French government came to an agreement with three vital clauses. Most importantly, despite its nearly 20-percent holdings, the French government will be granted only 17.9 percent of voting rights in Renault (to be extended up to 20 percent under certain exceptional circumstances). Renault (and by extension the French government) will also be prevented from interfering in Nissan's governance. With those measures in place, Nissan will not seek more voting rights based on the 15-percent stake which it, in turn, holds in Renault. Having successfully concluded the deal and hedged against the threat of government interference, the Renault board reasserted its confidence in Carlos Ghosn. Through the unique terms of their alliance, Ghosn serves as chairman and CEO of both Renault and Nissan. The two cooperate closely and share resources extending far beyond their chief executive, but remain distinct companies rather than merge, as Fiat and Chrysler have. Renault Board approves alliance stability covenant between Renault and Nissan As early as 16th April 2015, the Renault Board of Directors unanimously reiterated that the sustainability, success and resilience of the Alliance since its very inception in 1999 were based on a balance of shares held by Renault and Nissan.