2006 Ford F250 Diesel 4x4 Lariat Fx4 Leather Crew Texas Truck on 2040-cars

Auto blog

New autonomous testing ground in Michigan will help battle bad weather

If one of the big weaknesses of autonomous vehicles is their ability to navigate in the snow, consider this a trial by fire. The American Center for Mobility says it has opened its $110 million driverless car testing facility on the site of a former General Motors assembly plant in Michigan, with Toyota and auto supplier Visteon the first to begin testing this week. The ACM proving ground is a 500-acre site at historic Willow Run in Ypsilanti Township, near Ann Arbor. It's one of 10 sites designated by the U.S. Department of Transportation as pilot proving ground sites to test AV technologies. It features a variety of simulated environments to test driverless cars, including a 2.5-mile highway loop, two double overpasses, intersections, roundabouts and a 700-foot curved tunnel. It also opens just as the region experiences a series of snowstorms and the first frigid temperatures of the season. That ability to test autonomous vehicles in a wide variety of weather conditions is important, as autonomous vehicle sensors have struggled to handle cold, wet and snowy conditions. Google parent Alphabet in October said its Waymo division was expanding its winter testing operations to Michigan, making it the sixth state where it's testing its driverless car systems. In a Medium blog post, Waymo CEO John Krafcik wrote that "This type of testing will give us the opportunity to assess the way our sensors perform in wet, cold conditions. And it will also build on the advanced driving skills we've developed over the last eight years by teaching our cars how to handle things like skidding on icy, unplowed roads." Waymo also opened a development center in suburban Detroit in 2016, working with Fiat Chrysler to integrate its autonomous technology into Chrysler Pacifica hybrid minivans. Visteon began testing and validating its DriveCore autonomous driving platform to evaluate algorithms, vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure technology and other systems. Toyota used the facility Wednesday to begin orientation and driver training. ACM has so far secured $110 million to construct the first two phases from founders Ford, Hyundai America Technical Center, Toyota and Visteon, and says it expects to announce more investment soon.

For EV drivers, realities may dampen the electric elation

The Atlantic, a decades-old monthly journal well-regarded for its intelligent essays on international news, American politics and cultural happenings, recently turned its attention to the car world. A piece that ran in The Atlantic in October examined the excesses of the GMC Hummer EV for compromising safety. And now in its latest edition, the magazine ran a compelling story about the challenges of driving an electric vehicle and how those experiences “mythologize the car as the great equalizer.” Titled “The Inconvenient Truth About Electric Vehicles,” the story addresses the economics of EVs, the stresses related to range anxiety, the social effects of owning an electric car — as in, affording one — and the overarching need for places to recharge that car. Basically, author Andrew Moseman says that EV life isn't so rosy: “On the eve of the long-promised electric-vehicle revolution, the myth is due for an update. Americans who take the plunge and buy their first EV will find a lot to love Â… they may also find that electric-vehicle ownership upends notions about driving, cost, and freedom, including how much car your money can buy. "No one spends an extra $5,000 to get a bigger gas tank in a Honda Civic, but with an EV, economic status is suddenly more connected to how much of the world you get to see — and how stressed out or annoyed youÂ’ll feel along the way.” Moseman charts how a basic Ford F-150 Lightning electric truck might start at $55,000, but an extended-range battery, which stretches the distance on a charge from 230 miles to 320, “raises the cost to at least $80,000. The trend holds true with all-electric brands such as Tesla, Rivian, and Lucid, and for many electric offerings from legacy automakers. The bigger battery option can add a four- or five-figure bump to an already accelerating sticker price.” As for the charging issue, the author details his anxiety driving a Telsa in Death Valley, with no charging stations in sight. “For those who never leave the comfort of the city, these concerns sound negligible," he says. "But so many of us want our cars to do everything, go everywhere, ferry us to the boundless life we imagine (or the one weÂ’re promised in car commercials),” he writes. His conclusions may raise some hackles among those of us who value automotive independence — not to mention fun — over practicalities.

2020 Ford Explorer safer than old model; crash test ratings short of Top Safety Pick

The 2020 Ford Explorer three-row crossover has improved on the outgoing model in many ways. According to the IIHS, it has also improved in a number of safety categories, but not enough to earn a Top Safety Pick award. The culprit is not the headlight performance for once. The Explorer's headlights were given an "Acceptable" rating, which would be sufficient for Top Safety Pick, if not Top Safety Pick +. Where the Ford falls short is in the front small overlap driver-side crash test, in which it got the second highest "Acceptable" rating. The IIHS requires a "Good" rating in this category, whereas an "Acceptable" rating on the passenger side would be, well, acceptable for Top Safety Pick. According to IIHS, Ford will be reviewing the results to figure out what the issue is, and it will likely make revisions to future Explorers to improve the result. Other than the one test, the Explorer performed admirably. It received a "Good" rating in all other crash categories except the passenger-side small overlap that was not tested. Both its standard and optional forward collision prevention systems had the highest "Superior" ratings, with the standard one preventing a collision with a car at speeds of up to 25 mph, and the optional one avoiding a collision at 12 mph, and "nearly" preventing one at 25 mph. Headlights are rated as "Acceptable" and so is access to child seat LATCH anchors. Also worth noting is that the Explorer's crash test ratings apply to its luxurious twin the 2020 Lincoln Aviator, meaning it also doesn't get a Top Safety Pick rating. The forward collision system performed the same as in the Ford, and the only difference between the two was in headlight performance. The Lincoln's standard headlights, included on the base, Reserve and Grand Touring trims, have the second-lowest "Marginal" rating, but the optional headlights for those trims, and the standard ones on the Black Label trim, received the "Good" rating. Among three-row Explorer competitors, the Honda Pilot, Hyundai Santa Fe XL, Kia Telluride, Nissan Pathfinder and Toyota Highlander all have a Top Safety Pick. The Hyundai Palisade, Mazda CX-9, Subaru Ascent, and the slightly smaller Kia Sorento and Volkswagen Tiguan all have a Top Safety Pick +. As for Lincoln Aviator competitors, the Cadillac XT6, Infiniti QX60, Lexus RX and Volvo XC90 get a Top Safety Pick. The Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class and two-row-only BMW X5 get the Top Safety Pick + rating. Related Video: