Ford Mustang None on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Weekly Recap: Hackers demonstrate auto industry's vulnerability

There's always been a certain risk associated with driving, and this week cyber security came into focus as the latest danger zone when researchers demonstrated how easily they could hack into a 2014 Jeep Cherokee from across the country. The incident raised concerns over the vulnerability of today's cars, many of which double as smartphones and hot spots. During the now-infamous experiment, Chris Valasek and Charlie Miller infiltrated the Jeep's cellular connection and were able to control the infotainment system, brakes, and other functions. The hackers told the Jeep's maker, FCA US, of their findings last year, the company devised a software fix. Though Valesek and Miller hacked a Cherokee (like the one shown above), several FCA products, including recent versions of the Ram, Grand Cherokee, Dodge Durango, and Viper were also affected, illustrating potentially wide exposure that could reverberate across the sector. "For the auto industry, this is a very important event and shows that cyber-security protection is needed even sooner than previously planned," Egil Juliussen, senior analyst and research director for IHS Automotive, wrote in a research note. "Five years ago, the auto industry did not consider cyber security as a near-term problem. This view has changed." Hours after the Cherokee hacking incident was publicized on Tuesday, Sens. Ed Markey (D-Mass) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn) introduced legislation to direct the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Federal Trade Commission to establish national standards for automotive cyber security. The bill also would require vehicles to have a cyber-rating system to alert consumers how well their cars' privacy and security are defended. "Drivers shouldn't have to choose between being connected and being protected," Markey said in a statement. "We need clear rules of the road that protect cars from hackers and American families from data trackers." Though FCA and its Jeep Cherokee were in the spotlight this time, they were just the latest to showcase how automotive technology has advanced faster than safety and regulatory measures. IHS forecasts 82.5 million cars will be connected to the internet by 2022, which is more than three times today's level. "Cyber-security will become a major challenge for the auto industry and solutions are long overdue," Juliussen said.

Lexus tops JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study again, Buick bests Toyota

It shouldn't surprise anyone, but Lexus has once again taken the top spot in JD Power's Vehicle Dependability Study. That'd be the Japanese luxury brand's fourth straight year at the top of table. The big news, though, is the rise of Buick. General Motor's near-premium brand beat out Toyota to take second place, with 110 problems per 100 vehicles compared to Toyota's 111 problems. Lexus owners only reported 89 problems per 100 vehicles. Besides Buick's three-position jump, Scion enjoyed a major improvement, jumping 13 positions from 2014. Ram and Mitsubishi made big gains, as well, moving up 11 and 10 positions, respectively. In terms of individual segments, GM and Toyota both excelled, taking home seven segment awards each. The study wasn't good news for all involved, though. A number of popular automakers finished below the industry average of 147 problems per 100 vehicles, including Subaru, (157PP100), Volkswagen (165PP100), Ford/Hyundai (188PP100 each) and Mini (193PP100). The biggest losers (by a tremendous margin, we might add) were Land Rover and Fiat, recording 258 and 273 problems per 100 vehicles. The next closest brand was Jeep, with 197PP100. While the Vehicle Dependability Study uses the same measurement system as the Initial Quality Survey, the two metrics analyze very different things. The VDS looks at problems experienced by original owners of model year 2012 vehicles over the past 12 months, while the oft-quoted IQS focuses on problems in the first 90 days of new-vehicle ownership. Like the IQS, though, the VDS has a rather broad definition of what a problem is. Because of that, a low score from JD Power is no guarantee of extreme unreliability, so much as just poor design. In this most recent study, the two most reported problems focused on Bluetooth connectivity and the voice-command systems. The former leaves plenty of room for user error due to poor design (particularly true of the Bluetooth systems on the low-scoring Fords, Volkswagens and Subarus), while the second is something JD Power has already confirmed as being universally terrible. That makes means that while these studies are important, they shouldn't be taken as gospel when it comes to automotive reliability. News Source: JD PowerImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Jeremy Korzeniewski / AOL Buick Fiat Ford GM Hyundai Jeep Land Rover Lexus MINI Mitsubishi RAM Scion Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Auto Repair Ownership study

NHTSA upgrades Ford floor mat unintended acceleration probe

According to a Bloomberg report, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has upgraded an investigation into complaints of unintended acceleration lodged against Ford vehicles. The investigation began in June of 2010 when just three complaints had been received and it only concerned the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan, but this was at a time when the phrase "unintended acceleration" made grown men go pale. With 49 additional complaints received since then, the investigation has been reclassified as an engineering analysis - the last phase before a recall - and it has been expanded to include the Lincoln MKZ, making for a total of "around 480,000" units affected between the three sedans from the 2008 to 2010 model years.
The ostensible cause is that floor mats are trapping the accelerator pedal, but according to a Ford statement at the time, the entrapment is due to owners placing the optional all-weather floor mats, or aftermarket floor mats, on top of the car's standard floor mats. NHTSA has backed up that assessment, pinning the blame on "unsecured or double stacked floor mats."
On the face of it, it would appear that NHTSA has upgraded the status not because of Ford's error, but owner error, and Ford has stated publicly that it is "disappointed" in NHTSA's move. On top of NHTSA still being skittish after that other unintended acceleration debacle, it could be seen to be taking its time investigating all of the variables: it's reported that Ford changed its accelerator pedal design in 2010, a "heel blocker" in the floorpan has been considered a potential culprit in how the floor mats could be trapping the pedal, some drivers have said the floor mats weren't anywhere near the pedal, and according to a report in the LA Times, in "a letter sent by Ford to NHTSA in August 2010, the automaker said it found three injuries and one fatality that 'may have resulted from the alleged defect.'"