Ex-l Clean Carfax Heated Seats Dealer Serviced Florida Leather Alloy Low Reser on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford F-150, Chevy Silverado, Toyota Tundra flunk IIHS headlight test

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety put pickup truck headlights to the test and found that the majority of them were equipped with subpar units. The 2017 Honda Ridgeline was the only truck to earn a rating of "good." The large pickup truck test was comprised of the: 2016 to 2017 GMC Sierra, 2017 Nissan Titan, 2016 Ram 1500, 2016 to 2017 Chevrolet Silverado, 2016 to 2017 Ford F-150, and 2016 to 2017 Toyota Tundra. The Sierra's headlights earned a rating of "acceptable," the headlights found on the Titan and Ram 1500 were found to be "marginal," and the ones on the Silverado, F-150, and Tundra were rated as "poor." IIHS claims the F-150 was the most disappointing out of the large pickup trucks as both its halogen and optional LED headlights failed to provide adequate visibility during testing. The Ridgeline (which earned a "good rating"), is usually considered a midsize or small truck, though IIHS included it in the field of large pickups. The headlights on the 2016 Chevrolet Colorado, 2016 GMC Canyon, 2016 Nissan Frontier, and 2016 to 2017 Toyota Tacoma, which made up the small pickup truck group, all earned a rating of "poor." The IIHS claimed the Colorado had the worst headlights of any truck that was tested, as the base vehicle's units were only able to illuminate up to 123 feet in front of the car. The Ridgeline's headlights, for reference, were able to illuminate up to 358 feet in front of the vehicle. To conduct its test, the IIHS utilizes a special tool to measure how far light is projected out of the headlights in different driving situations. The trucks' headlights were tested in a straight line and in corners, while vehicles with high-beam assist were given extra praise. The headlights on the pickup trucks also mimic the testing that was done on small SUVs and cars earlier this year. Next year, automakers will need to fit their vehicles with headlights that earn a rating of either good or acceptable to earn the IIHS Top Safety Pick+. Related Video:

2019 VW Jetta vs. 2019 Honda Civic vs. 2019 Kia Forte: How they compare

The 2018 Detroit Auto Show was dominated by trucks, but there were also two all-new and completely redesigned compact sedans introduced: the 2019 VW Jetta and the 2019 Kia Forte. Follow their respective links to read our first driving impressions of each, but in short, both compacts are better positioned to steal potential customers away from the segment-leading 2019 Honda Civic, which itself was updated for 2019. Besides taking a look their specs and photos, I had the chance to go between them all here in Detroit, crawl around their interiors, sit in the backseats and figure out which of these not-especially-compacts, which all grew with their latest redesigns might have a practicality advantage. We also have full specifications on each model, which are laid out in the handy chart below. Exterior design There's honestly a little bit of the previous-generation Jetta visible in the 2019 Forte profile — especially around the doors and greenhouse. The Jetta, meanwhile, has the same sort of radically swept-back roofline as the Civic that's become all the rage throughout the automotive industry. The 2019 Jetta is also a little more visually interesting than the car it replaced, though neither the Jetta nor the Forte were as radically transformed as the Civic was two years ago. Alright, let's go to the slideshows. View 20 Photos 2019 Kia Forte View 61 Photos View 28 Photos Engines and transmissions The 2019 Jetta, 2019 Forte and 2019 Civic have considerably different powertrain options, with additional choices possible once the VW and Kia go deeper into their lifespans. Both the Forte and Civic rely on naturally aspirated four-cylinder engines in base specification, with the Civic's 2.0-liter engine making more power and a smidgen more torque than the Kia's. The Jetta goes the turbocharged small-displacement route with its 1.4-liter engine. It makes the same power as the Forte, but smacks down both in the torque department. It makes roughly 50 more pound-feet of twist than both naturally aspirated engines. The Honda Civic is the only one to offer an optional engine, which follows in the footsteps of the Jetta as a turbocharged 1.5-liter four-cylinder. Its 174 horsepower is ahead of the others by nearly 40 ponies. However, its 162 pound-feet of torque still falls short of the Jetta. Impressively, all three sedans still offer a manual transmission option, and all of them are six-speed units.

Honda Project 2&4 is our kind of sidecar sideshow [w/video]

Honda makes cars and Honda makes bikes. It makes a whole lot of other things, too, but those are the two areas of expertise that have given rise to the thoroughly enticing Project 2&4 concept. It's one of the smallest vehicles unveiled here at the 2015 Frankfurt Motor Show, but also among the most enticing. The result of a global in-house design competition, Project 2&4 was envisioned by the company's motorcycle studio in Asaka and brought to fruition with help from the automotive studio in Wako. It's powered by the 1.0-liter V4 engine Honda developed for MotoGP competition, driving 212 horsepower and 87 pound-feet of torque through a six-speed, dual-clutch transmission. With less than 900 pounds to motivate, that adds up to blistering performance of the kind we'd give most anything to experience firsthand. The 14,000-rpm redline would be enough to make our heart sing all on its own, but the novelty of Project 2&4 is its design. As you can see, it hands the driver's seat and controls off the side, with room for a hold-on-for-dear-life passenger seat on the other side. The neo-retro styling is inspired by the company's RA272 grand prix racer from the Sixties, but gives up on the center driving position for an altogether more original configuration. The result looks ready to take on the likes of the Ariel Atom and BAC Mono... to say nothing of the curbs of Suzuka and Fuji. If only Honda were (able) to put it into production.