Limited Low Miles 4 Dr Suv Gasoline 3.5l V6 Fi Dohc 24v Blizzard Pearl on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Toyota Land Cruiser vs Lexus LX 570 Suspension Flex Test

There’s no need to explain the Toyota Land Cruiser, one of ToyotaÂ’s earliest successful products. The 2020 Toyota Land Cruiser Heritage Edition celebrates some 60 years of popularity of a vehicle that has survived the segmentÂ’s “mall wagon” phase and the rise of crossovers. Its already-sterling reputation has received an additional recent push from the rise of overlanding — an outdoor pastime that has always existed but only recently got a press agent. By comparison, the Lexus LX is a more recent development. Debuting in 1996, the LX 450 was little more than an 80-series Land Cruiser with cladding, a Lexus badge and a higher price. The amount of styling differentiation and luxury specialization has increased over the years to the point that the newest LX 570 actually seems like a completely different vehicle. In truth, the 2020 Lexus LX 570 and the 2020 Toyota Land Cruiser are both 200-series Land Cruisers under the skin. They share the same thirsty 5.7-liter V8 engine and the same frame that features a double-wishbone suspension at the front, a five-link coil spring suspension at the rear and a 112.2-inch wheelbase in the middle. The styling is strikingly different, of course, but so are the hidden details of their suspensions. The Land Cruiser employs a simple set of coil springs and shock absorbers, but with an interconnected pair of automatically disconnecting stabilizer bars called KDSS (Kinetic Dynamic Suspension System). The Lexus, on the other hand, has fixed stabilizer bars and coil springs, but its “shocks” are really hydraulic cylinders that perform height adjustments and transmit suspension movements via piping to remote electronically-adjustable damper valves mounted along the frame rails. All of the above begs a question: Which of them will go farther up my RTI ramp and, by extension, offer better suspension articulation in an authentic off-road situation? Right away, the very approach to the ramp demonstrates a huge difference and a serious issue for the LX. Its normal cruising height (there is a lower height, but this isnÂ’t that) doesnÂ’t provide enough approach clearance to attempt the ramp. The front spoiler contacts the nasty grating before the tire does. ItÂ’s a close-run thing, but from this point on, clearance gets SMALLER as the left front suspension compresses on the way up. If it's touching now, itÂ’s only going to get worse if I go forward.

Toyota responds to video of Highlander ramming house [w/video]

There are, as they say, two sides to every story, so after we posted a video on Monday showing what an owner claimed to be a case of unintended acceleration causing her Toyota Highlander to crash into a house twice, Toyota reached out to us revealing some additional information about the incident.
Following this crash, which took place back in November, Toyota had this Highlander inspected and pulled data from its Event Data Recorder (EDR), or Black Box as we've come to call it. Not only was this the first time we've seen a claim of unintended acceleration like this caught on video, but now, also a first, we have actual data showing what the vehicle itself recorded during this frightening ordeal.
Brian Lyons, Toyota Communications Manager for Safety and Quality, first gave us some information about the Highlander in question, including the fact that it was a 2012 model. The 2012 Highlander came from the factory with a brake override system, meaning it was not part of the company's initiative in 2010 to add the system to all 2011 models. Also, after looking at the data from the EDR, he said - as many of you pointed out in the comments for the previous post - that the "brake pedal was never touched." In the video, you can see that the crossover's brake lights never come on, and the EDR's data backs this up.

Hello, Siri? Please don't crash the car

Hands on the wheel and eyes on the road? You could still be distracted while driving. Voice-recognition software that many automakers tout as a safer alternative to handheld devices can still divert drivers' attention, a new study published by AAA found. Researchers noted that workload ratings were the highest on their scales when participants in the study used Siri. The technology is alluring because it allows drivers to do things like change the radio station or compose a text message without removing their hands from the wheel or their gaze from the road. But many of those tasks increase a driver's cognitive workload. Depending on the situation, that can be dangerous. "It's especially problematic, because you can be distracted and not know it," J. Peter Kissinger, president of the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, told Autoblog. "That's the nature of mental distraction. It's hard to appreciate. ... Often, you don't know you're distracted until it's too late." There's significant variation in the results of the study. Simple, single-task car commands for operations like changing the radio station caused minimal increases in workload, about the same as listening to an audio book. Composing information using speech-to-text technology was more burdensome, and using menu-based functions caused a high level of cognitive workload. Siri-based interactions posed the highest levels of distraction, according to AAA. Researchers noted that workload ratings were the highest on their scales when participants in the study used Siri, and two of the three simulator crashes they observed during the study of 36 participants came while the subjects were interacting with Siri. The subjects weren't looking at nor making contact with their iPhones during these interactions. "Common issues involved inconsistencies in which Siri would produce different responses to seemingly identical commands," the researchers wrote. "In other circumstances, Siri required exact phrases to accomplish specific tasks and subtle deviations from that phrasing would result in a failure. ... Some participants also reported frustration with Siri's occasional sarcasm and wit." It wasn't just the complexity of the task that caused variations in level of distraction – the variations could also be dependent on the particular make and model of the car being tested.