2011 Lexus Rx450h! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Google self-driving Lexus crashes into a bus

Google's self-driving cars have been in accidents before, but always on the receiving end... at least, until now. The company has filed a California DMV accident report (PDF) confirming that one of its autonomous vehicles (a Lexus RX450h) collided with a bus in Mountain View. The crash happened when the robotic SUV had to go into the center lane to make a right turn around some sand bags – both the vehicle and its test driver incorrectly assumed that a bus approaching from behind would slow or stop to let the car through. The Lexus smacked into the side of the bus at low speed, damaging its front fender, wheel and sensor in the process. This was a minor incident, and we're happy to report that there were no injuries. However, this might be the first instance where one of Google's self-driving cars caused an accident. If so, the Mountain View crew can no longer say it's an innocent dove on the roads -- while this wasn't a glitch, its software made a decision that led to a crash. We've reached out to Google to see if it can elaborate on what happened. No matter what the response, it was always going to be difficult to avoid this kind of incident. Until self-driving cars can anticipate every possible road hazard, there's always a chance that they'll either be confused or make choices with unexpected (and sometimes unfortunate) consequences. However, the hope at this early stage isn't to achieve a flawless track record. Instead, it's to show that self-driving cars can be safer overall than their human-piloted counterparts.Related Video:This article by Jon Fingas originally ran on Engadget, the definitive guide to this connected life. Image Credit: AP Photo/Eric Risberg Green Lexus Safety SUV Autonomous Vehicles Videos California transportation gear

Here We Go Again: Lexus attacks EVs in new ad [UPDATE]

UPDATE: We got a comment from founding member of Plug In America Paul Scott on this ad. It's available below. The last time Lexus attacked plug-in battery vehicles in an ad, it had to apologize. The company is remaining on message, though, and has revisited a hybrid-vehicle advertising campaign that implies that driving a battery-electric vehicle is a big waste of time, because of all the charging you need to do. With the new spot, Lexus once again raised hackles of plug-in vehicle advocates because, once again, the accuracy is questioned. "The ad's message was that a consumer could [drive] a vehicle with advanced technology today, without sacrifice or change in habit." – Lexus spokesman Brian Bolain Lexus is running print ads (click to enlarge) in publications like Wired poking fun at EVs, the International Business Times says. Lexus highlights range anxiety in the spot, comparing the amount of time it takes to fully recharge an EV – and the idea that air conditioning and using the radio can shorten an EV's range – to the fun of just driving a Lexus. "The [print] ad was merely intended to paint a picture of life with a hybrid, which is basically no different from life with a traditional gas-powered vehicle, versus life with an EV, which can have challenges or at least uncertainties," Lexus spokesman Brian Bolain told AutoblogGreen. "In other words, at its core, the ad's message was that a consumer could participate in driving a vehicle with advanced technology today, without sacrifice or change in habit." The campaign picks up where Lexus's previous anti-EV campaign left off this spring. A website promoting Lexus's hybrids (and parent company Toyota's H2 vehicles) claimed that there was a hydrogen refueling infrastructure set up in 20 US states (not anywhere close to true). Plug-in advocates were also quick to note that higher-powered EV recharging systems can allow a plug-in to be recharged in far less than the four hours the Lexus site claimed. Of course, Toyota has a lot more skin in the game when it comes to hybrids and, starting next year, hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles than it does for plug-ins. Through August, the company sold just 842 RAV4 EVs and about 11,500 Toyota Prius Plug-in Hybrids in the US. That compares to almost 19,000 Nissan Leaf EVs and a Tesla Model S count that's likely close to that figure as well (Tesla breaks out neither monthly sales numbers nor US-only sales for the Model S).

Jaguar solution to keyless start could save lives

UPDATED: An earlier version of this story indicated the Jaguar keyless start function was meant as a safety feature, when in fact, it is meant as a convenience one and will not work as described if automatic stop/start is not engaged. Today, The New York Times published an article about more than two dozen deaths related to drivers accidentally leaving their cars running, closing their garages and later succumbing to carbon monoxide that flooded their homes. The reason has been identified as "keyless start" features, or proximity entry and push-button start, where owners don't need to physically handle a key or fob to gain entry into the vehicle or start it. It is the latest, and deadliest, issue raised with this system after those related to security and simple inconvenience (for instance, leaving the car at a valet or car wash with the fob in your pocket). From my personal perspective, The New York Times had a rather harsh "evil carmakers" tone throughout the article. This is not a matter of a known faulty component, as with the GM ignition switch recall. This has as much to do with user error where people leave their car without pressing the "off" button and without noticing the engine is still running. About half of the cars in question are produced by Toyota and Lexus, brands that have offered keyless start longer than most. They are also brands with high rates of elderly owners, who seemingly made up a majority of reported deaths and injuries. One fire department in Florida even started a campaign alerting those in the area of the dangers of leaving your car running when it noticed a correlation between an increase in cars equipped with keyless start and calls related to carbon monoxide poisoning. I see several contributing issues at play, most of which go well beyond this particular issue. First is insufficient training of owners by dealers and/or owners not paying close enough attention during this training. Cars are complicated, but you should at least know how basic functions work. Second, woefully inadequate driver training in this country. Third, and with apologies to the AARP, insufficient testing of elderly drivers and/or insufficiently low standards for elderly drivers. If you don't know you have to shut the car off or cannot hear that an engine is running, perhaps you shouldn't be driving. Fourth, re-examining keyless start systems.