2003 Ford Taurus Ses on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2020 Ford Explorer nabs IIHS Top Safety Pick+ rating after updates

The 2020 Ford Explorer has been named a Top Safety Pick+ by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, the agency's best rating. The redesigned Explorer initially fell short of that mark, however, only making the grade after Ford introduced a running change to the vehicle's design starting in May 2020 — a change made to the 2020 Lincoln Aviator as well. To achieve a Top Safety Pick+ award, a vehicle must have a Good performance rating in all six of the agency's crash tests. It also must have Acceptable or better ratings for all of its available headlamps and must earn Advanced or Superior ratings for its automated collision avoidance systems in tests of their performance against pedestrians and other vehicles. The 2020 Explorer initially achieved only an Acceptable performance in the IIHS's driver's-side small-overlap crash test, as the agency found a risk of injury to the driver's left foot due to intrusion into the footwell. Ford subsequently modified the design of the front subframe in a running change to Explorers and to Lincoln Aviators built after May 2020. The modified Explorer was re-tested, and this time the model achieved a Good performance in the driver's small-overlap test. That, combined with a Superior performance in both tests of the standard collision-avoidance system plus Acceptable ratings for both headlight systems, pushed the 2020 Explorer over the goal line to Top Safety Pick+. The Aviator, which shares the Explorer's platform, has received the same modification and achieves the same crashworthiness ratings. However, its standard headlights are judged Marginal, and therefore the 2020 Aviator achieves only the Top Safety Pick rating (even though its optional curve-adaptive LED headlights are judged Good). Related Video:

Road & Track names its 2013 Performance Car of the Year

Road & Track recently staged its first annual Performance Car of the Year test, pitting 13 new and updated performance cars against each other on track, then graduating the top six to a road test before picking a winner. Additionally, the magazine staff picked the best automobiles of the year in eight categories.
But first, let's cover the PCotY segment. Here's the list of cars brought to the comparison test: Audi R8 V10 Plus; BMW 435i; BMW M6 Competition Package; Chevrolet Corvette Stingray Z51; Ferrari F12 Berlinetta; Ford Fiesta ST; Jaguar F-Type V8 S; Jaguar XFR-S; Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG S-Model Wagon; Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG Black Series; Mini John Cooper Works GP; Nissan GT-R Track Edition; and Porsche Cayman S.
To find out the results of the comparison, head over to Road & Track's website or check the press release below, where you'll also find the magazine's top-rated vehicles in eight categories. Want more? Head over to the 2013 PCotY hub. But before you do that, take a stab at guessing the winner of PCotY (we'll give you one hint: it isn't a Porsche).

2016: The year of the autonomous-car promise

About half of the news we covered this year related in some way to The Great Autonomous Future, or at least it seemed that way. If you listen to automakers, by 2020 everyone will be driving (riding?) around in self-driving cars. But what will they look like, how will we make the transition from driven to driverless, and how will laws and infrastructure adapt? We got very few answers to those questions, and instead were handed big promises, vague timelines, and a dose of misdirection by automakers. There has been a lot of talk, but we still don't know that much about these proposed vehicles, which are at least three years off. That's half a development cycle in this industry. We generally only start to get an idea of what a company will build about two years before it goes on sale. So instead of concrete information about autonomous cars, 2016 has brought us a lot of promises, many in the form of concept cars. They have popped up from just about every automaker accompanied by the CEO's pledge to deliver a Level 4 autonomous, all-electric model (usually a crossover) in a few years. It's very easy to say that a static design study sitting on a stage will be able to drive itself while projecting a movie on the windshield, but it's another thing entirely to make good on that promise. With a few exceptions, 2016 has been stuck in the promising stage. It's a strange thing, really; automakers are famous for responding with "we don't discuss future product" whenever we ask about models or variants known to be in the pipeline, yet when it comes to self-driving electric wondermobiles, companies have been falling all over themselves to let us know that theirs is coming soon, it'll be oh so great, and, hey, that makes them a mobility company now, not just an automaker. A lot of this is posturing and marketing, showing the public, shareholders, and the rest of the industry that "we're making one, too, we swear!" It has set off a domino effect – once a few companies make the guarantee, the rest feel forced to throw out a grandiose yet vague plan for an unknown future. And indeed there are usually scant details to go along with such announcements – an imprecise mileage estimate here, or a far-off, percentage-based goal there. Instead of useful discussion of future product, we get demonstrations of test mules, announcements of big R&D budgets and new test centers they'll fund, those futuristic concept cars, and, yeah, more promises.