1998 Nissan Quest Gxe. on 2040-cars

Auto blog

IIHS: High numbers of drivers treat partially automated cars as fully self-driving

WASHINGTON — Drivers using advanced driver assistance systems like Tesla Autopilot or General Motors Super Cruise often treat their vehicles as fully self-driving despite warnings, a new study has found. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), an industry funded group that prods automakers to make safer vehicles, said on Tuesday a survey found regular users of Super Cruise, Nissan/Infiniti ProPILOT Assist and Tesla Autopilot "said they were more likely to perform non-driving-related activities like eating or texting while using their partial automation systems than while driving unassisted." The IIHS study of 600 active users found 53% of Super Cruise, 42% of Autopilot and 12% of ProPILOT Assist owners "said that they were comfortable treating their vehicles as fully self-driving." About 40% of users of Autopilot and Super Cruise — two systems with lockout features for failing to pay attention — reported systems had at some point switched off while they were driving and would not reactivate. "The big-picture message here is that the early adopters of these systems still have a poor understanding of the technologyÂ’s limits," said IIHS President David Harkey. The study comes as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is scrutinizing Autopilot crashes. Since 2016, the NHTSA has opened 37 special investigations involving 18 deaths in crashes involving Tesla vehicles and where systems like Autopilot were suspected of use. Tesla did not respond to requests for comment. Tesla says Autopilot does not make vehicles autonomous and is intended for use with a fully attentive driver who is prepared to take over. GM, which in August said owners could use Super Cruise on 400,000 miles (643,740 km) of North American roads and plans to offer Super Cruise on 22 models by the end of 2023, did not immediately comment. IIHS said advertisements for Super Cruise focus on hands-free capabilities while Autopilot evokes the name used in passenger airplanes and "implies TeslaÂ’s system is more capable than it really is." IIHS in contrast noted ProPILOT Assist "suggests that itÂ’s an assistance feature, rather than a replacement for the driver." NHTSA and automakers say none of the systems make vehicles autonomous. Nissan said its name "is clearly communicating ProPILOT Assist as a system to aid the driver, and it requires hands-on operation.

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.

Panoz and DeltaWing suing Nissan over BladeGlider concept

Similarity is bound to occur in an industry where most of the products follow the same basic formula. But once in a while a new design comes along that doesn't quite reinvent the wheel, but comes pretty damn close. The DeltaWing project was one such design - and Nissan, the car's designers allege, stole that design.
After the DeltaWing proposal was rejected by the IndyCar series, its creators took it to Le Mans and brought Nissan on board to supply the power. Nissan subsequently pulled out of the program and came out with the ZEOD RC hybrid racer (right), bearing a suspiciously similar design with an unusually narrow front track at the end of a long nose cone, and a wider track at the back. The Japanese automaker then displayed the BladeGlider concept (below, right) at the Tokyo Motor Show, envisioning a translation of the same formula into road-going form.
The similarity did not escape Don Panoz, who - after making sports and racing cars under his own name and founding the now-defunct American Le Mans Series - was a central figure in bringing the original DeltaWing to life. Now Panoz has filed a lawsuit against Nissan, soliciting the courts to issue a cease-and-desist order on both the ZEOD RC and BladeGlider projects, naming Nissan motorsport chief Darren Cox and Ben Bowlby (who defected to Nissan from the DeltaWing program) as part of the suit.