2-door Manual Hatchback 2.0l Cd 1st Row Lcd Monitors: 1 4 Wheel Disc Brakes on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Volkswagen Group looks to add ridesharing brand to portfolio

Volkswagen is rapidly trying to put the ongoing diesel scandal behind it at the Paris Motor Show with the unveiling of the automaker's electric I.D. Concept. In addition to unveiling the EV, the automaker also announced that it established a yet-to-be-named subsidiary for ridesharing purposes. The new brand will be VW Group's 13th, and will add mobility services to in the form of a carpooling service, similar to that of Uber and Lyft. This will include teaming up with Gett – a cab-hailing startup that operates in roughly 70 cities worldwide, which includes New York City, that was previously known as GetTaxi. Earlier this year, VW invested $300 million in the company. In addition to ridesharing, VW Group claims it is also hard at work on its own shuttle service as the brand aims to become a leader in urban mobility services by 2025. The name of the 13th brand and more information on the subsidiary will be released in November. VW Group also announced plans to give Gett drivers in Moscow, Russia "preferential terms" on a Volkswagen Polo, Volkswagen Jetta, Skoda Octavia, or Skoda Rapid. VW Group's 13th brand sounds similar to Mercedes-Benz's Vision Van Concept, which the automaker would allow consumers to lease and purchase the vehicle, as well as rent its services on a short-term basis. While the Vision Van Concept is a commercial vehicle that has delivery drones on the roof to aid deliveries, VW Group's shuttle service sounds more like autonomous buses to ferry people around. Now that diesels are dead, Volkswagen has quickly embraced the future, where autonomous and electric vehicles coexist. Related Video: Related Gallery Volkswagen I.D. Concept: Paris 2016 View 16 Photos News Source: Volkswagen Green Paris Motor Show Volkswagen Skoda Autonomous Vehicles Electric vw diesel scandal ridesharing 2016 paris motor show gett

10 automakers sued over keyless ignitions

Keyless ignition has rapidly proliferated throughout the auto industry to become a fairly normal feature on new cars. It's supposed to offer the convenience of keeping the fob in your pocket and just pressing a button to drive away. However, ten major automakers are now being sued in US District Court over claims that the system is dangerous, Reuters reports. The suit alleges that people are forgetting to shut off the engine, and the lack of an idle timer is the cause for 13 deaths by carbon monoxide poisoning and multiple injuries. The suit currently includes 28 plaintiffs, according to Reuters, but the lawyers are asking for class-action status to potentially add many more. The case goes after a major swath of the industry, including BMW, Daimler, FCA, Ford, General Motors, Honda, Hyundai, Nissan, Toyota, and Volkswagen, plus their related brands like Acura, Infiniti, Mini, and Lexus. In all, over five million vehicles are affected. The assertion here is that people walk away from their vehicle without shutting it off because they believe the engine shuts off automatically. If parked in a garage, carbon monoxide can build up, leading to poisoning. The lawyers claim automakers know this is a problem and also cite 27 complaints to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration about the issue, according to Reuters. The plaintiffs are asking for an automatic shut-off and damages from the companies. These concerns have come up before, though. Toyota previously faced a lawsuit over a carbon monoxide death after a woman accidentally left her Lexus running. Also earlier this year, GM recalled 64,186 examples of the 2011-2013 Chevrolet Volt because owners weren't shutting them off. The problem resulted in two injuries, and the company released a software update to limit the idling time.

In wake of Volkswagen scandal, cheating may actually get easier

The three crises that rollicked the auto industry in recent months – a rising death toll related to the General Motors ignition-switch defect, the Jeep Cherokee hack and now the Volkswagen cheating scandal – all have one thing in common. Outsiders discovered the problems. In the new matter of Volkswagen rigging millions of cars to outsmart emissions tests, researchers at West Virginia University and the International Council on Clean Transportation first spotted irregularities. In the hacking of a Jeep Cherokee, it was independent cyber-security researchers Chris Valasek and Charlie Miller who found and reported cellular vulnerabilities that allowed them to control a car from halfway across the country. And lest we forget in the case of General Motors, it was a Mississippi mechanic and Florida engineer who first made connections between non-deploying airbags and faulty GM ignition switches that had been altered over time. They worked on behalf of Brooke Melton, a 29-year-old Georgia woman killed in a Chevy Cobalt. "That argument is built on a whole string of trusts, and now it is clear that we should absolutely not be trusting." - Kyle Wiens Amid the Volkswagen scandal, the role these independent third parties played in unearthing life-threatening problems is important to highlight, not only because it shines a light on the ethical indifference corporations paid to life-and-death problems of their creation. The role of the independents is noteworthy because, just as their contributions never been more relevant in protecting the driving public, they could soon be barred from the automotive landscape. Since May, a little-known but critically important process has been playing out before an office within the Library of Congress, which will soon decide whether independent researchers and mechanics can continue to access vehicle software or whether that software, which runs dozens of vehicle components, is protected by copyright law. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act criminalizes measures taken to circumvent security devices that protect copyrighted works. When the DMCA was signed into law in 1998, it was intended to protect the likes of movies from being pirated and companies from ripping off software. At the time, few had a clue that some 17 years later cars would essentially be mobile software platforms run by millions of lines of code that potentially fall under the law's jurisdiction.