We Finance 2003 Toyota 4runner Limited V8 4wd Clean Carfax Htdsts Mroof Jbl Drl on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Toyota's Bob Carter says seat heater stop-sale due to inconsequential compliance error

Last week, Toyota let it be known that a number of its more-popular vehicles were subject to a "stop-sale" order due to faulty seat heaters on these vehicles. No injuries were reported, but the problem affected a lot of models, including the 2013 and 2014 Camry, Camry Hybrid, Avalon, Avalon Hybrid, Sienna, Corolla, Tacoma and Tundra. Toyota originally said 50,000 vehicles were involved, but Bob Carter, senior vice president of automotive operations for Toyota Motor Sales, knocked that down to 30,000 during an interview at the Chicago Auto Show this week and said that the problem is not going to have a big impact on Toyota's sales. "It's an important situation but it will have a very minor impact on February sales," he told AutoblogGreen. "Dealers will start receiving new heating elements this week and then we have a process to take out the heating element that was put in and exchange that for the new fabric. It's very simple. It's a quick repair." Quick in this situation means about three hours to swap out the heating elements in two seats, according to Toyota's John Hanson. Since the Avalon also has heated rear seats, that car will require a total of six hours in the shop. Hanson said there was no official timeline for when the exchange program would be completed, "but new vehicles are arriving at some dealerships with the new seat heaters already installed." With a fix already in place, Carter would not comment on whether a recall is likely, saying only, "I'm not the expert on that. We're working with the NHTSA and ultimately it's their decision. We believe it's an inconsequential compliance error that was made by one of our suppliers and we're going to correct it." Featured Gallery 2013 Toyota Camry Hybrid: Review View 23 Photos News Source: Toyota Green Chicago Auto Show Toyota AutoblogGreen Exclusive Hybrid camry hybrid bob carter

IIHS: Drivers safer than passengers in frontal crash test

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety introduced a small overlap frontal crash test in 2012 that replicates what happens when the front corner of a car impacts another object. In the test, vehicles travel at a speed of 40 mph toward a five-foot-tall barrier with 25 percent of the total width of the car striking the barrier on the driver side. One would assume that vehicles with good small overlap front ratings would protect the driver and the passenger equally. But a recent study from the IIHS proves that passengers aren't as protected as drivers. The IIHS conducted the test on seven small SUVs with good driver-side small overlap ratings and only one of the vehicles, the 2016 Hyundai Tucson, performed well enough to be given a good rating. The other SUVs performance ranged from poor to acceptable. After reviewing the results of the test, the IIHS is deliberating whether it should institute a passenger-side rating as part of its Top Safety Pick criteria. "This is an important aspect of occupant protection that needs more attention," states Becky Mueller, lead author of the study and an IIHS senior research engineer. "More than 1,600 right-front passengers died in frontal crashes in 2014." Since the small overlap front test was introduced, 13 automakers have made structural changes to 97 vehicles with roughly three-quarters earning a good rating after the adjustments. The IIHS' test for frontal ratings is completed with a dummy in the driver's seat and with a barrier overlapping the driver's side. Which makes sense, as passengers aren't always riding in a vehicle. "It's not surprising that automakers would focus their initial efforts to improve small overlap protection on the side of the vehicle that we conduct the tests on," states David Zuby, IIHS executive vice president and chief research officer. "In fact, we encouraged them to do that in the short term if it mean they could quickly make driver-side improvements to more vehicles. As time goes by, though, we would hope they ensure similar levels of protection on both sides." As the IIHS' test revealed, there's a massive difference in safety between the two front seats. Increase passenger safety, according to Mueller, would require automakers to strengthen the occupant compartment by using a different type of material or by making it thicker.

Automakers want to stop the EPA's fuel economy rules change, and why that's a shortsighted move

With a Trump Administration looming, the EPA moved quickly after the election to propose finalizing future fuel economy rules last week. The auto industry doesn't like that (surprise), and has started making moves to stop the EPA. Ford CEO Mark Fields said he wanted to lobby Trump to lower the standards, and now the Auto Alliance, a manufacturer group, is saying it will join the fight against cleaner cars. The Alliance represents 12 automakers: BMW, Fiat Chrysler, Ford, GM, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mitsubishi, Porsche, Toyota, VW, and Volvo. Gloria Bergquist, a spokesperson for the Alliance, told Automotive News that the "EPA's sudden and controversial move to propose auto regulations eight months early - even after Congress warned agencies about taking such steps while political appointees were packing their bags - calls out for congressional action to pause this rulemaking until a thoughtful policy review can occur." The EPA was going to consider public comments through April 2017, but then said it would move the deadline to the end of December. That means that it can finalize the rules before President Obama leaves office. The director of public affairs for the Consumer Federation of America, Jack Gillis, said on a conference call with reporters last week when the EPA originally announced its decision that it is unlikely that President Trump will be able to roll back these changes. Gillis also said on the same call that any attempt by the automakers to prevent these changes would be history repeating itself. "These are the same companies that fought airbags, and now promoting the fact that every car has multiple airbags," he said. "These are the same companies that fought the crash-test program, and now are promoting the crash-test ratings published by the government. So, it's clear that they're misperceiving the needs of the American consumer." There are more reasons the Allliance's pushback is flawed. Carol Lee Rawn, the transportation program director for Ceres, said on that call that the automotive industry is a global one, and many automakers are moving to global platforms to help them meet strict fuel economy rules around the world.