2010 Shelby Gt500 Convertible on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Our love of SUVs is killing people in the streets

Americans are fond of supersized fast-food meals and colossal convenience-store fountain drinks, even though they're clearly bad for our health and U.S. adults keep getting fatter. We also like large vehicles, and our love affair with SUVs is killing people in the streets. According to a recent investigation by the Detroit Free Press/USA Today, the increase in SUV sales over the past several years coincides with a sharp rise in pedestrian deaths in the U.S. — up 46 percent since 2009, with nearly 6,000 people killed in 2016 alone. With SUV sales surpassing sedans in 2014 and pickups and SUVs currently accounting for 60 percent of new vehicle sales, it's no wonder Ford announced in April plans to cease U.S. sales of almost all passenger cars. And this followed Fiat Chrysler's move to virtually an all-truck, -SUV and -crossover lineup. While the Freep/USA Today investigation found that the simultaneous surge in SUV sales and pedestrian deaths comes down to vehicle size, it also points to a lack of action on the part of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), even though it knew of the dangers SUVs pose to pedestrians. Also blamed are automakers dragging their feet on implementing active safety features. Using federal accident data, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) determined that there was an 81 percent increase in single-vehicle pedestrian fatalities involving SUVs between 2009 and 2016. Freep/USA Today's analysis of the same data by counting vehicles that struck and killed pedestrians instead of the number of people killed showed a 69 percent increase in SUV involvement. As far back as 2001, researchers at Rowan University forecasted a rise in pedestrian deaths as Americans began switching to SUVs. "In the United States, passenger vehicles are shifting from a fleet populated primarily by cars to a fleet dominated by light trucks and vans," the researchers wrote, with light trucks comprising SUVs.

The 24 Hour War: Adam Carolla's new documentary brings the Ford-Ferrari battle back to life

Long before the GoPro or even videotape, races were filmed by guys standing next to the track with 16-millimeter cameras. The images kind of shook, they didn't always hold focus, and over the years all the color has faded out of the film. It all conspires to make the endurance racing battle between Ferrari and Ford in the 1960s seem like ancient history. What Adam Carolla and Nate Adams' new documentary The 24 Hour War does best is make that inter-corporate battle feel as if it happened yesterday. Yeah, if you're an obsessive you've likely seen most of the shaky-cam race footage used here before. But what you haven't seen are the interviews that frame the war and explain the egos and engineering behind the legends. It's not a perfect movie, but it's the sort of movie only fanatics could make. And it's easier to appreciate if you're a fanatic too. The first 25-or-so minutes of the documentary are taken up with histories of both Ford and Ferrari and an overview of how ridiculously deadly motorsports were in the Sixties and earlier. It's all interesting (if familiar) stuff, that could have been handled in about a third the time with some brutal editing. Still, the two protagonists in the story are well drawn: the racing-crazed Enzo Ferrari, who only builds road cars to stay solvent; and Henry Ford II, who after being thrown into the deep end of the Ford Motor Company management in 1943 at the age of 25, wasn't going to be humiliated after Ferrari pulled out of a deal to sell him the sports car maker. With one notable exception, the filmmakers were successful in rounding up practically everyone involved who is still alive for an interview. That includes Dan Gurney, Mario Andretti, Pete Brock, Bob Bondurant, Piero Ferrari, Mauro Forghieri, Carlo Tazzioli, and even Ralph Nader. There are good archival insights from the late Carroll Shelby. But where's A.J. Foyt? After all, he co-drove the stupendous Ford GT40 Mark IV with Dan Gurney to victory at Le Mans in 1967. The interviews make the movie worthwhile, but it cries out for more technical depth about the cars themselves. Yes, the GT40 was complex and engineered practically like a production car, but there's no mention of how the Lola Mk VI and Eric Broadley kicked off the development. There's only a superficial explanation of what made the American-built Mark IV such a leap forward.

Should reflective paint earn automakers EPA credits?

No matter where you look around the world, governments are cracking down on vehicle emissions and aiming for higher fuel economy standards. Generally, automakers are pushing back against the increased regulation, and in the US, General Motors, Ford, and FCA US are looking for new compromises. The Big Three want to the EPA to grant them retroactive emissions credits for using tech that they claim reduces CO2 but not on the government agency's on-road testing. Among these technologies are things like reflective paint and glass, LED lights, ventilated seats, stop/start, and more efficient air conditioning compressors. Starting with the 2014 model year, the automakers can receive credits for a few grams per mile reductions on models with some of these solutions, according to Automotive News. However, the companies are also petitioning the EPA to make the credits apply to earlier vehicles with them, as well. The emissions advantages for systems like stop/start and less polluting AC refrigerants seem fairly obvious. For reflective paint and glass, the belief is that keeping a vehicle interior cooler should mean a lower need for air conditioning and therefore a decrease in CO2. Margo Oge, the former boss of the EPA's Office of Transportation Air Quality, told Automotive News these credits are part of the plan. "That's the whole point of what we tried to establish," she said. "We wanted companies to invest in and develop these technologies." The EPA wants vehicle emissions at the corporate average equivalent of 54.4 miles per gallon fuel economy by 2025, and so far that seems achievable. It will translate to less than 40 mpg on the EPA sticker. In a report last summer, the industry was about 10 grams per mile of CO2 better than the rules required, and that was solely based on 2012 model year vehicles. In an update for 2013, the companies were up to 12 grams per mile beyond targets. News Source: Automotive News - sub. req.Image Credit: Mark Humphrey / AP Photo Government/Legal Green Ford GM Emissions Fuel Efficiency FCA fca us