9k Mi 2012 White Acura Rdx Sat Radio Tech Pkg Loaded Autoamerica 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.

Honda trademarks ZSX, could be for baby NSX

While there have been many rumors dating back to 2008 about a mid-engined sports car from Honda, last year's report was provided the most detail about what seemed to be a scaled-down version of the NSX hybrid supercar. Honda may have added some fuel to the rumor-fire by recently filing a trademark application for "ZSX," reports Australia's Performance Drive. The trademark application was sent to the European Union Intellectual Property Office late last month and is obviously close to the NSX nomenclature. The Australian outlet also reports that an unnamed source within Honda claims the ZSX, whatever it may be, could be revealed as early as next year. The anonymous employee also claims that the ZSX will be offered as a coupe and a hard-top convertible variant, with both being powered by the automaker's 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder engine from the Honda Civic Type R. Just like the NSX, the ZSX is rumored to get electric motors on the front and rear axles. Previous reports match the unnamed source's claims, as the ZSX was expected to be a replacement for the Honda S2000 that ended production in 2009. It now sounds like it'll be more of a mini-NSX, with rumors pointing towards one electric motor powering the rear wheels, while two motors would be on the front axle. Patents from last year, which are pictured above, match the rumors of a mid-engined sports car. The ZSX trademark is for Europe only as of right now, while the automaker's previous patents and trademarks included the US, as well. Only time will tell if "ZSX" really stands for a sports car, or if Honda actually goes through with its plans. Remember, Nissan ditched similar plans for a small rear-wheel-drive sports car recently. Related Video: Featured Gallery Honda ZSX Patent News Source: EUIPO, Performance DriveImage Credit: autovisie Green Acura Honda Coupe Hybrid Performance trademark rumor honda nsx

Acura MDX Luggage Test: How much fits behind the third row?

The Acura MDX shares its platform with the Honda Pilot, but that fact is really only obvious when you look at their rear seat floor plans. Both offer the unique, removable second-row middle seat, which means that buyers don't have to decide whether they want max capacity and a second-row bench, or the pass-through convenience of second-row captain's chairs. Both also boast a two-level cargo floor behind the third row, which is always a benefit here in Luggage Test land. But! The MDX does not have nearly as much room back there, regardless of whether you take advantage of the two-level floor's lower level (why wouldn't you?).  The MDX has two cargo volume specs for behind the third row: 16.3 and 18.1 cubic-feet. I think it's safe to assume the expanded number is with the floor in its lower position. The Pilot has 18.6 with the floor in place, and either 22.4 or 21.8 with the lower position. The latter's is the Pilot TrailSport's, which is what I conducted the luggage test on. Meanwhile, in the three-row luxury SUV realm, the current king of the castle is the Lexus TX. Telling you right now, the MDX ain't cracking that nut, but what about everything else I've tested? Let's see. Here is the space in question. Note that the floor does not need to be removed; it actually slides down, tucked just below that plastic trim, and rests upon the lower floor. Now, this obviously does raise the bottom floor by an inch versus removing the floor board entirely, so much like cargo covers in two-row vehicles, I decided to test with and without the floor inside. As with every Luggage Test, I use two midsize roller suitcases that would need to be checked in at the airport (26 inches long, 16 wide, 11 deep), two black roll-aboard suitcases that just barely fit in the overhead (24L x 15W x 10D), and one smaller green roll-aboard that fits easily (23L x 15W x 10D). I also include my wife's fancy overnight bag just to spruce things up a bit (21L x 12W x 12D). Well, I can safely say that the MDX's cargo area is narrower than the Pilot's (above right). I could not fit the same bags* head-to-head in the MDX as I could in the Pilot (* green bag is the blue bag's equally sized replacement). The underfloor area seems to be the same length, but it is considerably narrower.  As such, it's obvious the MDX won't be able to hold as many bags, or at least the same bags, as the Pilot could.  First, with the floor stored in its lower position inside the MDX. Two options.