2013 Suburban Lt 4wd, 20-in Alloys, Sat Radio, Sunroof, 2.95% Apr Financing! 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.

GM under fire from safety advocates over braking problem caused by recall fix

Safety experts are lambasting General Motors over what they say is the automaker’s slow notification of owners of certain 2019 sedans and trucks that a recall fix could cause power braking to fail and increase the risk of a crash, the Detroit Free Press reports.  GMÂ’s original recall in December targeted about 550,000 Cadillac CT6 sedans and Chevrolet Silverado 1500 and GMC Sierra 1500 pickups, all from the 2019 model year, over potentially defective electronic stability control and antilock brakes. In that case, GM said the errors would not show up as a diagnostic warning on the instrument cluster. But after GM had done recall work on 162,000 vehicles, about 1,700 owner have complained that their power brakes didnÂ’t work after they had the recall done and then used the OnStar app to start their vehicle. GM then issued a supplemental fix for customers whoÂ’d already had their vehicles serviced. In this case, a diagnostic warning should illuminate saying either “Service Brake Assist” or “Service ECS,” which GM says is a signal that a customer should not drive the vehicle and instead call their dealer, which will tow the vehicle and have it repaired. Safety advocates say the automaker hasnÂ’t gone far enough to protect customers. “The fact that you could potentially start a vehicle and not have brakes is a pretty risky proposition,” Sean Kane, president of the Safety Research and Strategies, which works on auto issues for plaintiffs and governmental organizations, told the Freep. “The fact that they wouldnÂ’t notify owners (sooner) is pretty stunning.” GM told the Freep it was required to notify the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and file paperwork before it notified customers about the original recall, which was made Dec. 12. It then had to investigate and resolve the problem created by its original recall fix before alerting customers. GMÂ’s call center and dealers are contacting the remaining 900 customers who havenÂ’t yet had the update made to the original recall repair. GM also hired a vendor to send recall letters to the 550,000 customers affected by the original recall notifying them about the update. There are no known injuries or deaths related to the problem. Read the Freep story here.

2021 BMW M3 and M4 vs all the high-powered sport sedans and coupes

Should you have a found a way to get past that schnoz, you've probably digested some of the basic specs for the all-new 2021 BMW M3 sedan and M4 coupe specs. They're plenty impressive. There's also, basically, two sets of them thanks to the regular and Competition versions that differ in engine output and transmission type.  But how do they compare to other ultra sport sedans and coupes? Well, we were wondering that too, so we fired up the Autoblog Comparison Spreadsheet Generator 5000 (aka me chained to my computer in a dark basement).  Sadly, there are surprisingly few competitors for the 2021 BMW M3. Rival sedans include the Mercedes-AMG C 63 and the Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio, along with the Audi RS 5 Sportback sedan/coupe/hatchback thing. There's no more Lexus IS F, the Cadillac CT4 Blackwing has yet to arrive and Jaguar doesn't offer a spicy XE R.  Happily, there are more coupe rivals for the 2021 BMW M4, including the two-door versions of the AMG and Audi as well as the Lexus RC F. I also included the Ford Shelby GT350 and Chevrolet Camaro SS 1LE. On paper, they align incredibly well. On the street and on a track, I can personally attest that these Americans are fully capable of keeping up and/or bettering the fancy-pants luxury brands (and let's not forget there are even more powerful, hardcore versions available). If they don't align in terms of price or prestige, whatever. OK, let's get to the spreadsheet. Let's start with the coupes and note that I didn't bother listing the dimensions for the M4 Competition and C 63 S as they are identical to their "lesser" siblings.  I won't bother burning words explaining what you can see on the chart. Instead, I'll point out a few things that stood out to me. First, BMW M comes awfully close to matching the output of AMG's twin-turbo V8 despite having two fewer cylinders. Similarly, Audi manages to better the 0-60 time of the M4 Competition and tie the C 63 S despite being WAY down on power. It's not like it weighs less. Magic? Second, and speaking of 0-60 times, remember the importance that transmission and drivetrain make with them. It's not just horsepower and torque. An automatic will be quicker and easier to launch than a manual, while all-wheel drive provides more instantaneous and beneficial grip.