2012 Prius Three 1.8l I4 16v Front Wheel Drive Hatchback on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Toyota celebrates 30 years of 4Runner with... incentives?

Many Americans view their 30th birthdays as significant milestones, even though the average life expectancy here is more than 2.5 times that age. So you might think Toyota would be keen to party over the 30th anniversary of its 4Runner, since most models don't even live to half that age. You can put that idea away unless you consider discounts of $500 to $1,000 something worthy of cake and kazoos, since it appears that's all the birthday SUV will get. That's right, not even a trim-and-tape special edition or so much as a sticker. We asked Toyota for comment and were told they had "No other 30th anniversary 4Runner items to announce at the time."
So, about those incentives: they climb from $500 on the SR5 and Trail editions to $750 on Premium models and $1,000 on the Limited trims. Toyota says they're available at dealerships now and will last for the entire year. There's a press release below with a little more background, and there's a sad violin playing somewhere in the distance.
Disappointed, party of one, your table is now ready...

MotorWeek remembers retro icons, Supra and NSX

It's easy to poke a joke here and there about John Davis, the long-time host of MotorWeek. His voice is so monotonous that, from time to time, if you closed your eyes, you may think it's generated via a computer. But you have to give him and the rest of the show a lot of credit. The program has been on the air for decades, giving people direct, straight-down-the middle automotive reviews.
MotorWeek's massive back catalog of reviews are slowly making their way onto YouTube, and they provide a fascinating chance to look back on how performance cars rank against their contemporaries from back in the day. Two recent additions include the show's old looks at the 1986 Toyota Supra, the dawn of the third-generation model, and the now-iconic 1991 Acura NSX.
Both reviews are interesting in their own way. These days you hear nary a negative word about the original NSX, but MotorWeek isn't afraid to point out a few flaws. And the Supra really shows the progress of suspension tuning in the intervening decades because it has some serious body roll in the corners. Scroll down to check out both videos and get a blast from the automotive past.

Ford fights back against patent trolls

Some people are just awful. Some organizations are just as awful. And when those people join those organizations, we get stories like this one, where Ford has spent the past several years combatting so-called patent trolls. According to Automotive News, these malicious organizations have filed over a dozen lawsuits against the company since 2012. They work by purchasing patents, only to later accuse companies of misusing intellectual property, despite the fact that the so-called patent assertion companies never actually, you know, do anything with said intellectual property. AN reports that both Hyundai and Toyota have been victimized by these companies, with the former forced to pay $11.5 million to a company called Clear With Computers. Toyota, meanwhile, settled with Paice LLC, over its hybrid tech. The world's largest automaker agreed to pay $5 million, on top of $98 for every hybrid it sold (if the terms of the deal included each of the roughly 1.5 million hybrids Toyota sold since 2000, the company would have owed $147 million). Including the previous couple of examples, AN reports 107 suits were filed against automakers last year alone. But Ford is taking action to prevent further troubles... kind of. The company has signed on with a firm called RPX, in what sounds strangely like a protection racket. Automakers like Ford pay RPX around $1.5 million each year for access to its catalog of patents, which it spent nearly $1 billion building. "We take the protection and licensing of patented innovations very seriously," Ford told AN via email. "And as many smart businesses are doing, we are taking proactive steps to protect against those seeking patent infringement litigation." What are your thoughts on this? Should this patent business be better managed? Is it reasonable that companies purchase patents only to file suit against the companies that build actual products? Have your say in Comments.