Cadillac Eldorado Eldorado 2-door Coupe on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Super Cruise’s failsafes

Even though Super Cruise is not a fully autonomous system, it incorporates redundancies like those used in aircraft to ensure failsafe operation. Before taking off on a 700-mile, 11-hour test drive of the system — and putting my life in its hands without my hands on the wheel — I sat down with Daryl Wilson, lead development engineer for Super Cruise, to get a deep dive into the system and its critical safety backups. Autoblog: First, what makes Super Cruise different from similar systems? Wilson: The key differentiator for Super Cruise is hand-free driving. It's an industry first in that respect. Our competitors require the driver at minimum to place their hands on the wheel with some frequency to ensure that the car knows that the driver is there. We don't. Two key technologies allow us to do this. One is our Driver Attention System, which is our methodology for making sure the driver is engaged with the vehicle and engaged with the road. This is a driver assist system, not a fully autonomous system. So it requires driver engagement. We use an infrared camera that constantly monitors the driver's face to determine the direction they're looking. We're looking for the driver to be what we call on-road — not on the center stack, not to left or right or down. That's all done by the tracking of the face. We also track that the eyes are open. It's infrared because at night you need to illuminate the face and you can't be shining a light into the driver's face. Then we have our lidar mapping that provides a foundation for control and redundancy to ensure safe performance. Autoblog: How does the mapping act as a redundant feature? Wilson: This system is only for use on divided, controlled access highways. What I mean by a divided highway is something more than a painted line between you and oncoming traffic. Whether that's a grassy area in between the lanes or a concrete barrier, anything that separates you from oncoming traffic. That's the divided highway part. The controlled access part is entrance ramps and exit ramps. Not with roads that cross at grade, with traffic crossing at the same level. To do that we geofenced these roads to ensure that operation is only allowed in these conditions. We don't just recommend you use it there; we ensure that you only use it there.

2019 Cadillac XT4 vs. other compact luxury crossovers: How they compare

After years of every other luxury car maker stocking their showrooms with trendy crossovers, Cadillac is finally joining the fray. Its latest addition is the 2019 Cadillac XT4, a tidy little crossover that proudly bears signature Caddy designs such as the tall slender taillights. And based on our first drive of the car, it impresses in many ways, such as its refined engine, classy interior and excellent ride quality. View 39 Photos That's good news for the little Cadillac, but it needs to stand out in a big segment. To see if it has any other areas where it shines, or maybe some where it's a bit dim, we decided to compare its specifications with those of four of the segment's bestselling compact crossovers, the Lexus NX 300, Acura RDX, Audi Q5 and BMW X3. And for good measure, we threw in the XT4's crosstown rival, the Lincoln MKC. View 15 Photos Here's a chart showing each of these vehicles' vital stats, including horsepower, torque, fuel economy, cargo space, passenger space and price. Further analysis follows. If you'd like to compare any of these vehicles with other luxury crossovers, be sure to check out Autoblog's Car Finder and Compare tools. Also, this is solely a comparison of basic specifications, and for more in-depth information on these cars, be sure to follow the links to our full reviews. And don't be afraid to check these cars out in person at their respective dealerships. Engines, transmissions and fuel economy With the exception of the Lincoln MKC's optional 2.3-liter engine, every competitor here resorts to the same type of engine, a turbocharged 2.0-liter four-cylinder, for its propulsion. And unsurprisingly, they make similar power, in the mid-200 horsepower and mid-200 lb-ft of torque range. Of the 2.0-liter engines, the standout is the Acura RDX, which produces a hearty 272 horsepower and 280 pound-feet of torque. It's second in power only to the Lincoln's optional turbo 2.3, which makes 285 horsepower and 305 pound-feet of torque. The bottom of the pack is the Lexus with 235 horsepower and 258 pound-feet of torque, but the next least powerful crossover is the Cadillac XT4, with just two more ponies than the Lexus, and the same amount of torque. View 22 Photos Though the Cadillac is nearly the least powerful, it does get to claim the best fuel economy numbers, rated at 24 mpg in the city, 30 on the highway, and 26 combined with front-wheel drive.

Here are a few of our automotive guilty pleasures

It goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway. The world is full of cars, and just about as many of them are bad as are good. It's pretty easy to pick which fall into each category after giving them a thorough walkaround and, more important, driving them. But every once in a while, an automobile straddles the line somehow between good and bad — it may be hideously overpriced and therefore a marketplace failure, it may be stupid quick in a straight line but handles like a drunken noodle, or it may have an interior that looks like it was made of a mess of injection-molded Legos. Heck, maybe all three. Yet there's something special about some bad cars that actually makes them likable. The idea for this list came to me while I was browsing classified ads for cars within a few hundred miles of my house. I ran across a few oddballs and shared them with the rest of the team in our online chat room. It turns out several of us have a few automotive guilty pleasures that we're willing to admit to. We'll call a few of 'em out here. Feel free to share some of your own in the comments below. Dodge Neon SRT4 and Caliber SRT4: The Neon was a passably good and plucky little city car when it debuted for the 1995 model year. The Caliber, which replaced the aging Neon and sought to replace its friendly marketing campaign with something more sinister, was panned from the very outset for its cheap interior furnishings, but at least offered some decent utility with its hatchback shape. What the two little front-wheel-drive Dodge models have in common are their rip-roarin' SRT variants, each powered by turbocharged 2.4-liter four-cylinder engines. Known for their propensity to light up their front tires under hard acceleration, the duo were legitimately quick and fun to drive with a fantastic turbo whoosh that called to mind the early days of turbo technology. — Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski  Chevrolet HHR SS: Chevy's HHR SS came out early in my automotive journalism career, and I have fond memories of the press launch (and having dinner with Bob Lutz) that included plenty of tire-smoking hard launches and demonstrations of the manual transmission's no-lift shift feature. The 260-horsepower turbocharged four-cylinder was and still is a spunky little engine that makes the retro-inspired HHR a fun little hot rod that works quite well as a fun little daily driver.