2012 Kia Optima Sedan 2.4l Automatic Ex on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.

Kia debuts Forte 5-door with available 201-HP turbo engine

The US-bound 2014 Kia Forte first showed up in sedan form back at the LA Auto Show last year, but Kia unveiled the hatchback version of the car today at the Chicago Auto Show. Unlike the current Forte five-door the 2014 will feature styling that is distinct from its sedan counterpart, but the big news is it will also get a few extra ponies under the hood.
Since the Forte five-door will only be offered in EX and SX trim, the sedan's 1.8-liter inline-four is not offered on this model. The base engine in the EX is the 2.0-liter direct-injected four, producing 173 horsepower and 154 pound-feet of torque. Those looking for more power should check out the Forte SX, which uses the 1.6-liter turbocharged engine currently found in the Hyundai Veloster Turbo. This engine produces 201 hp and 195 lb-ft, and it can be paired to either a six-speed manual or automatic transmission; the latter of which is optional and comes with paddle shifters.
Aside from the obvious styling changes required for the added cargo area, the 2014 Kia Forte five-door gets numerous design elements to set it apart from the sedan. The face of the new hatchback will get a much smaller tiger-nose grille than the sedan, but it will get a larger lower intake, which we can't help but compare to the Mitsubishi Lancer Evo. Kia also gave the Forte dual exhaust outlets and LED taillights, and the SX model will get stylish 18-inch wheels. Inside, the five-door design allows the Forte to increase its cargo volume to 23.2 cubic feet, and the cabin can also be equipped with features such as heated front seats, ventilated driver's seat, navigation, leather seating and dual-zone climate control.

2018 Kia Stinger vs. other luxury hatchbacks compared by the numbers

Ten years ago, if you had told us that one of the many new luxury segments to develop would be sedan-style hatchbacks, we'd have said you'd lost your mind. And yet, here we are today with not one, but four cars competing in just such a niche upscale segment: The Kia Stinger, Buick Regal Sportback, BMW 3 Series Gran Turismo and Audi A5. That's just in one size and price bracket. Two of the manufacturers listed here make larger versions of each luxury hatchback. We aren't entirely sure how it happened, but we're not going to complain, because we love the idea of a car with almost no compromise: luxury features, sporty performance, and plenty of practicality. Try Autoblog' s Car Finder to search for your next new vehicle. One of the reasons we're taking a look at these cars right now is that Kia has recently released pricing for its entry in the segment, the Stinger and Stinger GT. Buick wasn't far behind with the Regal Sportback and Regal GS, nor was Audi with the A5 and S5. So it seemed like an appropriate moment to look at the numbers and see which come out ahead or behind, with victors in each category highlighted with bold and underlined text. What we found when comparing these cars' statistics is that each one has a clear area of expertise. For performance, it's hard to beat the four-cylinder Kia Stinger and the V6 Stinger GT. The four-banger has the most horsepower of the four cars, and is just behind on torque. The V6 has the most power and torque among the six-cylinder versions. The Stingers are also the second lightest of the group when equipped with rear-wheel drive, though they fall to third with all-wheel drive. Space is a split between the Buick Regals and BMW 3 Series Gran Turismos. The Buicks have the most cargo space with the rear seats up or folded by a significant margin. The BMW on the other hand generally offers more space for passengers. It's up to you what's most important. Compare these and other potential new vehicle purchases using our tool. When it comes to cost, nothing can beat the four-cylinder Regal's base price of under $26,000. But if a V6 is what you're after, the Stinger GT is the cheapest. Neither matches the Audi A5 and S5 for fuel economy, though. Both Audis have the highest numbers for city, highway, and combined EPA estimates. Related Video: