2007 Honda Civic Ex on 2040-cars

Auto blog

New Land Rover Defender aces Euro crash tests

While the 2020 Land Rover Defender has not yet been crash-test by U.S. safety agencies such as NHTSA or IIHS, we do now have results for Europe's NCAP crash tests and accident-avoidance tests, where the Defender earned the top rating of five stars. The Defender model used for NCAP testing was the 110 variant with right-hand drive. The NCAP regimen includes several different crash tests: an offset front crash test into a moveable barrier with both the vehicle and the barrier traveling at 50 km/hr (31 mph), a front crash test into a full-width fixed barrier at 50 km/hr (31 mph), a side-impact crash test with a barrier traveling at 60 km/hr (37 mph) hitting the driver's door, and a side-impact test where the car strikes a pole at 32 km/hr (20 mph). The Defender's scores for the adult occupant and for a child occupant were both 85%. Additionally, the agency looks at the severity of injuries of the vehicle striking a pedestrian, taking data for a pedestrian's head hitting the hood, and their upper and lower leg being hit by the front of the vehicle. There is also testing of the vehicle's automatic emergency braking system's ability to avoiding hitting a pedestrian and a cyclist under various scenarios. The efficacy of active-safety systems for avoiding collisions with other vehicles is also tested. The Defender's score for protecting pedestrians and cyclists was 71%. The driver assists scored 79%. Results for several European-market cars were released together with those for the Defender, the most noteworthy of which was for the Honda E. The electric city car fared less well than the big Land Rover, garnering a score of four stars overall. In the same battery of test, the Honda E scored 76% for adult occupant protection, 82% for a child occupant, 62% for protecting pedestrians and cyclists, and 65% for its driver assists. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.

2018 Nissan Kicks vs other tiny crossovers: How they compare on paper

Update: As we now have now driven the 2018 Nissan Kicks and have all the specs and figures available, we thought it was time to update this comparison post. The data chart has been updated with final Kicks information as well as changes to competitors made for 2019. Anyone else have "Pumped Up Kicks" by Foster the People stuck in their heads? Well, you do now. I couldn't be the only one. Anyway, the 2018 Nissan Kicks is a thing. It replaces the Nissan Juke, which Mr. Stocksdale thought was a bad idea and Mr. Myself thought was a smart idea. Nevertheless, neither of us were especially pumped up by the Kicks. However, the majority of car buyers are all about SUVs, and this littlest segment of them has been multiplying like Tribbles in the past few years. The Juke was one of the first of these subcompact crossovers, but it was probably too oddball for a mainstream audience (not to mention inefficient) and never really caught on. Newer competitors certainly didn't help. Well, to see how the Kicks compares to those very competitors, lets fire up the Autoblog Comparo Generator 3000 (TM). Specifically, we'll be looking at those subcompact crossovers with similarly small dimensions, especially low prices and/or a disinclination to offering all-wheel drive. We're talking about the Nissan Kicks vs the Toyota C-HR, Hyundai Kona, Kia Soul, Honda HR-V and Jeep Renegade. Now, if you're interested in literally the exact opposite SUV segment, check out our recent Mercedes G-Class comparo. Otherwise, on to the spreadsheet: Dimensions and passenger space In terms of exterior dimensions, the new Kicks is right smack in the middle of the segment. It's virtually the same as the Honda HR-V, yet manages to eek out a few extra cubic feet of cargo space behind its raised back seat. The Honda and its "Magic Seat" still beats it in terms of maximum capacity, but it sure is close. The Kia Soul has the biggest maximum number, but that's largely the result of being a box. Its small behind-the-back-seat cargo number is likely a better indicator of how much you'll be dealing with on a day-to-day basis. And in that day-to-day way, the Kicks is excellent. Backseat legroom seems to be a Kicks downside, as all but the C-HR surpass it. (Seriously, it's almost impressive how large the C-HR is on the outside but cramped inside.) However, the Kicks' tall greenhouse not only allows for ample headroom, but seats that are mounted high off the ground.

Consumer Reports explains its disdain for infotainment

One of the perks of reviewing all manner of cars and trucks is that we're exposed to all the different infotainment systems. Whether Cadillac's CUE, Chrysler's UConnect, BMW's iDrive or MyFord Touch, we sample each and every infotainment system on the market.
Not surprisingly, some are better than others. It seems consumers have come to a similar consensus, with Consumer Reports claiming that Ford and Lincoln, Cadillac and Honda offer the worst user infotainment experiences. Not surprisingly, you won't find much argument among the Autoblog staff.
Take a look below to see just what it is about the latest batch of infotainment systems that grinds CR's gears. After that, scroll down into Comments and let us know if you agree with the mag's views.