2004 Tsx W/ Navigation Heated Leather Sunroof Premium Sound Carfax Certified 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.

2014 Acura RLX

Earlier in the year, I reviewed a powder-blue Volkswagen Beetle Convertible, and I witnessed a group of high-school-aged girls ogling the car as it sat in my driveway. In my head, I found it to be a funny-yet-fitting scene that I didn't think of again until a 2014 Acura RLX showed up in my driveway. This time around, an elderly neighborhood couple stopped to give the big Acura sedan a closer look. The RLX is trying to shed past stereotypes of its predecessor, the Acura RL, just like the Beetle. Hoping to avoid becoming the de facto "grandpa car," Acura has completely reworked - and renamed - its flagship sedan.
As the bookend to the new entry-level ILX, the addition of the 2014 RLX might give Acura its strongest sedan lineup ever as the automaker looks to break the cycle of being a middle-of-the-road luxury brand. Stepping up to the big-boy table isn't going to be easy, though, as the competition keeps getting tougher. Forget cars like the Mercedes E-Class and BMW 5 Series, the Acura RLX is going to have its hands full with the likes of the Cadillac XTS, Lexus GS and Hyundai Genesis, not to mention a strong consortium of lower-priced, mid-luxury sedans like the Hyundai Azera, Toyota Avalon and Chevy Impala. The one thing all of these cars have in common is a reputation for being an old man cruiser.
I spent a week with the new RLX to see if it could shake the stigma of its outdated predecessor or if it would just leave me searching for the nearest early bird specials.

2025 Acura ZDX First Drive Review: First electric Acura or alternative Cadillac?

MONTECITO, Calif. Í– The 2025 Acura ZDX not only looks like an Acura, but it’s arguably one of the best-looking Acuras ever. If weÂ’re talking SUVs, whatÂ’s going to topple it from the podium? The original ZDX? Beneath that skin, however, itÂ’s no secret that the new ZDX rides on General MotorsÂ’ Ultium electric platform, has an interior constructed with General Motors parts, and is even built by General Motors in Tennessee. Ultimately, though, the most GM thing about the ZDX may be this overall assessment of it: This electric SUV provides more performance and features for the money than competitors, but the interior is a real letdown. Sure sounds like any performance Cadillac from the past two decades to me. The trouble for the ZDX is that the competitor it most closely aligns with in terms of price, feature content and EV specs is literally a Cadillac Â… but things have changed. Specifically, the Cadillac Lyriq doesnÂ’t suffer from that whole “interior is a real letdown” thing. Far from it, itÂ’s a reason to buy a Lyriq. Furthermore, the two EVs not only share the same Ultium platform, but their motor offerings are basically the same with power outputs and ranges that closely align. ItÂ’s therefore impossible not to keep coming back to comparisons between the two. Even if the ZDX is a decent value, complete with its $7,500 federal tax credit, why get one instead of the more luxurious Lyriq? In short, it comes with even more features for the money, and boasts the sort of chassis upgrades and handling acumen Cadillac has moved away from with the Lyriq.   So thatÂ’s where that comparison rests, and although IÂ’ll get back into that whole “not really an Acura” angle, letÂ’s take a closer look at the specs that more objectively let the new ZDX stack up well to vehicles that arenÂ’t mechanically related. There are three versions of the ZDX, with no options apart from color and a summer-tire option. Starting at $65,850, including destination but not the federal tax credit, the base ZDX A-Spec becomes the only other rear-wheel-drive Acura besides the first NSX. It produces 358 horsepower and 324 pound-feet of torque, and achieves an EPA-estimated range of 313 miles from its 102-kilwatt-hour battery pack. These specs are roughly equal to the rear-motor Lyriq and Chevy Blazer EV, but they amount to a stronger proposition than anything offered by Hyundai/Kia/Genesis, while comparable luxury models are considerably more expensive.