2012 Honda Civic Ex-l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

FIA levels F1 playing field for Honda

Formula One may place a high emphasis on technical innovation, but it also demands an equal playing field. So after the FIA regulations handed Mercedes a technical advantage for next season, a loophole was opened up to allow Ferrari and Renault to update their engines throughout the year. That left engine-supplier-to-be Honda in the dust, but now the motorsport governing body has awarded the Japanese automaker the same courtesy. As is often the case, the issue revolves around the specific wording of the regulations. Ferrari and Renault successfully argued that, contrary to its spirit, the letter of the law (or regulations, in any event) didn't actually specify when existing engine suppliers had to complete their revisions for the upcoming championship. The thing is that the rules were more clear when it came to new suppliers, so Honda was told that it would have to complete its design before the start of the season – unlike Ferrari, Renault and Mercedes, which would be allowed to continue development (albeit on a limited basis) throughout the year. Recognizing the inherent injustice of the resulting regulations, the FIA has consented to Honda's request that it be afforded the same opportunities as its rivals. The Japanese manufacturer, which returns to the paddock this season with McLaren, will therefore be allowed to make adjustments to its engines as its first season back on the grid progresses, just like the other engine suppliers. News Source: AutosportImage Credit: McLaren Motorsports Honda McLaren F1 fia regulations

McLaren MP4-X concept shows innovation won't die in F1's future [w/video]

Despite things like turbocharging and kinetic-energy recovery, today's Formula One cars look more or less like the ones that lapped the world's race tracks 20 years ago. Sure, they're much more aero intensive, but the basic look is the same. McLaren, which probably had some serious free time this season considering its misfortunes, has imagined a futuristic F1 car that adopts many innovative and somewhat controversial additions. It's called the McLaren MP4-X, and the most obvious change is the closed cockpit. The death of Jules Bianchi, the accidents involving Maria De Villota and Felipe Massa, and even the death of Ayrton Senna could have all potentially been avoided by adopting a strong closed-cockpit design, like the one advocated here by McLaren. It's also worth pointing out that this design is a boon for aerodynamics. Inside that cockpit, drivers would enjoy an augmented reality display system, sort of like that used by F-35 Lightning II fighter pilots. There'd also be an independent head-up display that McLaren claims could be used to transmit info about race position and flag status. So basically, the kind of data you'd get playing Forza Motorsport or Gran Turismo. Speaking of safety, the MP4-X's entire chassis, beyond the closed roof, would be far safer thanks to the use of "negative-stiffness material structures." Essentially, these materials can soak up the force of an impact and then bounce, for lack of a better term, back into shape. And if you're thinking like we are, this sounds like McLaren wants 900-horsepower bumper cars. Of course, 900 hp is speculation on our end. McLaren is deliberately vague on the powertrain of this concept. Advanced hybrid powertrains aren't surprising, although the team's mention of inductive, wireless charging on tracks sounds like the stuff of Formula E's dreams. In a move that McLaren says "tears up the rulebook," the MP4-X would see a return of ground effects. The underbody would feature enormous venturi tunnels to suck the car to the track. Alongside active aerodynamics that tweak the its shape for turns and straights, this concept McLaren would be both more slippery and offer more downforce than today's cars. There's a lot more on the MP4-X concept than we can talk about here, so head over to McLaren Honda's official website for all the nitty gritty details on this car's advanced systems, including solar cells, advanced tire sensors, and even virtual logos. It all sounds very, very cool.

It turns out Takata isn't willing to expand airbag recall nationally after all

There have been "approximately 0.000006 failures per air bag deployment, which is far below the failure rate" of most recalls, Takata claims. Takata has seemingly made an about face following reports that it would expand its regional airbag recall into a nationwide repair effort, issuing a scathing, four-page letter rebutting allegations by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and its Office of Defects while simultaneously attacking the government's handling of the situation. The Japanese supplier claims in its letter that the "currently available, reliable information does not support a nationwide determination of a safety defect," arguing that there were "approximately 0.000006 failures per air bag deployment, which is far below the failure rate in the vast majority of the thousands of recalls," The Detroit News reports. Takata then breaks down the two specific incidents mentioned in NHTSA's original recall request letter, a 2005 Honda Accord and 2007 Ford Mustang. Referencing the two crashes, NHTSA Administrator David Friedman said last month "one incident is an anomaly, but two are a trend." The supplier, though, argues the Honda issue is already being covered by that company's soon-to-be-national recall (more on that in a moment). The company then goes on to point out that neither Takata nor NHTSA has been able to analyze the Mustang's airbag inflator, saying that such a lack of examination meant there was "no way to ascertain what actually occurred during the incident, whether any inflator ruptured, and whether any inflator rupture that may have occurred was related to the incidents that led to the current regional campaigns." Takata alleges that NHTSA has disobeyed its own statutes. Takata also took the opportunity to take a few swipes at NHTSA's behavior during the airbag scandal, saying it was "very surprised to receive" a recall request letter because the ODI had yet to even receive the company's responses to a pair of special orders. It also alleged that NHTSA was disobeying its own statute, which says only manufacturers of vehicles and replacement equipment can "decide in good faith whether their products contain a safety related defect," and that the government can only "issue an initial decision that a safety-related defect exists" to those same entities.