2005 Chevy Silverado Crew Z71 4x4 Bedliner Tow 65k Mi! Texas Direct Auto 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.

A car writer's year in new vehicles [w/video]

Christmas is only a week away. The New Year is just around the corner. As 2014 draws to a close, I'm not the only one taking stock of the year that's we're almost shut of. Depending on who you are or what you do, the end of the year can bring to mind tax bills, school semesters or scheduling dental appointments. For me, for the last eight or nine years, at least a small part of this transitory time is occupied with recalling the cars I've driven over the preceding 12 months. Since I started writing about and reviewing cars in 2006, I've done an uneven job of tracking every vehicle I've been in, each year. Last year I made a resolution to be better about it, and the result is a spreadsheet with model names, dates, notes and some basic facts and figures. Armed with this basic data and a yen for year-end stories, I figured it would be interesting to parse the figures and quantify my year in cars in a way I'd never done before. The results are, well, they're a little bizarre, honestly. And I think they'll affect how I approach this gig in 2015. {C} My tally for the year is 68 cars, as of this writing. Before the calendar flips to 2015 it'll be as high as 73. Let me give you a tiny bit of background about how automotive journalists typically get cars to test. There are basically two pools of vehicles I drive on a regular basis: media fleet vehicles and those available on "first drive" programs. The latter group is pretty self-explanatory. Journalists are gathered in one location (sometimes local, sometimes far-flung) with a new model(s), there's usually a day of driving, then we report back to you with our impressions. Media fleet vehicles are different. These are distributed to publications and individual journalists far and wide, and the test period goes from a few days to a week or more. Whereas first drives almost always result in a piece of review content, fleet loans only sometimes do. Other times they serve to give context about brands, segments, technology and the like, to editors and writers. So, adding up the loans I've had out of the press fleet and things I've driven at events, my tally for the year is 68 cars, as of this writing. Before the calendar flips to 2015, it'll be as high as 73. At one of the buff books like Car and Driver or Motor Trend, reviewers might rotate through five cars a week, or more. I know that number sounds high, but as best I can tell, it's pretty average for the full-time professionals in this business.

GM cutting back on powertrain warranty citing lack of interest

Generally, when a manufacturer offers a long, high-mileage warranty, it's a sign that it stands behind its products. On top of that, it's generally a selling point for consumers, who can rest easy knowing that any catastrophic failures will be picked up by the manufacturer. Considering those facts, it does seem rather strange that General Motors is slashing the mileage warranty on model year 2016 vehicles from Chevrolet and GMC. Instead of offering consumers a 100,000-mile warranty, GM will now only offer a powertrain warranty up to 60,000 miles. The five-year warranty period, though, remains unchanged. GM will also cut the number of free services being offered to Chevy and GMC owners, as well as Buick drivers, from four to two. "Through research, we have determined that when purchasing a new vehicle, included maintenance and warranty rank low on the list of reasons why consumers consider a particular brand over another," explained a memo sent to dealers by Chevrolet VP Brian Sweeney and his GMC counterpart, Duncan Aldred, and obtained by Automotive News. "As a result, we have benchmarked our competitors, reviewed our current offerings and have concluded the following modifications to align closely with our customers' needs and expectations." While the move might seem odd, Sweeney and Aldred are right – according to Automotive News, Ford, Honda and Toyota each offer a five-year, 60,000-mile powertrain warranty. As for what the money saved by trimming the powertrain warranty will go towards, a GM spokesperson simply told AN that the company will "reinvest the savings we will realize into other retail programs," some of which have been requested by consumers. What are your thoughts? Would a 40,000-mile reduction in a new vehicle's powertrain really turn you off from buying one? Even if it matched its competitors? Is GM better off spending its money elsewhere? Have your say in Comments. Featured Gallery 2016 Chevrolet Equinox View 10 Photos News Source: Automotive News - sub. req.Image Credit: Chevrolet Chevrolet GM GMC Auto Repair Maintenance Ownership warranty