2002 Lexus Sc 430 4.3l V8 32v Automatic Rear Wheel Drive Convertible Premium on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Lexus Bladescan is another new headlight safety breakthrough U.S. won't get

Lexus is back at it with innovative lighting technology. The BladeScan headlights available in Europe on the 2020 RX utilize a new mechanism for throwing light further down the road, aiming that light more precisely, and doing so without blinding other road users. Lights from other OEMs with the same capabilities have increased the number of LEDs inside the housing for finer control. The BladeScan module inside the Lexus lights holds the number of LEDs down to 10 on each side of the RX, which Lexus says is a more cost-effective solution. In fact, BladeScan uses fewer LEDs than Lexus' most recent adaptive high-beam system, which has 24 LEDs on each side. The LEDs in the new module are arranged in two rows, eight on top, two on bottom. The diodes are fed information about objects ahead, and adjust their intensity to dim light aimed at an oncoming car, or illuminate a pedestrian by the roadside. However, the LEDs don't shine their light down the road, they shine their strobing light onto two blade-shaped mirrors — hence the name BladeScan — that rotate at high speed. The light reflects off the mirrored blades and into a lens, which orients the beam down the road. Not only is the reflected light easier to handle for oncoming drivers, the system has aim accurate to 0.7 degrees. Lexus' current adaptives are accurate to 1.7 degrees, making BladeScan a 143-percent improvement. That means the new feature can throw even more light into areas that are hard to reach with current lights — Lexus says pedestrian recognition at night has increased from 105 feet to 184 feet. Buyers of the 2020 RX will be able to take advantage when the new crossover goes on sale in Europe later this year. Naturally, U.S. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 means we won't get BladeScan — that goes for you, too, Canada. The now-52-year-old U.S. law mandates a single low beam and a single high beam setting, with no intermediate settings and no activation of high and low beams simultaneously. Toyota, Audi and BMW have been trying for six years to get FMVSS 108 changed to permit new and potentially lifesaving headlight technologies. The automaker wrote in a statement to Carscoops, "Last December, Lexus submitted a petition to NHTSA to allow ADB in the United States. Currently, we await the Agency's decision and hope to see an amendment in FMVSS 108."

Google shares more details on self-driving car accidents

Google has pledged to release monthly reports on the status of its self-driving car program, and says these updates will include information on accidents involving the vehicles. But the company won't release the actual accident reports, a sore point for activists who recently have clamored for the company to be more transparent in the way it tests this promising technology on public roads. "Google is dribbling out bits of information in the hope to silence legitimate calls for full transparency," said John Simpson, privacy director for Consumer Watchdog, a nonprofit that has asked Google to release reports from the 12 accidents the company says it has been involved in over the past six years. "They are testing on public roads, and the public has a right to know exactly what happened when something goes wrong." Under California law, the accident reports are not considered public records. Google has attributed all accidents to human error, and says drivers of the other cars involved caused 11 of the 12 accidents. In eight of those, the Google cars were rear-ended, and the autonomous vehicles were sideswiped in two other crashes. One of the accidents occurred at an intersection when a human driver failed to yield at a stop sign, and in one incident, a Google driver accidentally rear-ended another car while manually driving. Google had previously provided those details. The first monthly report installment sheds new light on which types of self-driving vehicles were involved, directions of travel, locations, and whether the cars were operating in autonomous or manual mode. Update: Google says this information comes directly from the OL 316 forms used to report accidents involving autonomous cars in California, though it has "edited the summaries lightly to protect other drivers' information." But Google still will not release the original OL 316 forms, nor the "traffic collision report" forms used in California to report accidents. Another company that has been involved in a single self-driving car accident, Delphi Automotive, has released this information, which verified its car was not at fault. Regarding Google, Simpson said, "We now know a few more details of what happened. The problem is that it's Google's version and they want us to take their word for it." The Google self-report adds information that goes beyond accidents, with further details on the company's overall program.

Bring back the Bronco! Trademarks we hope are actually (someday) future car names

Trademark filings are the tea leaves of the auto industry. Read them carefully – and interpret them correctly – and you might be previewing an automaker's future product plans. Yes, they're routinely filed to maintain the rights to an iconic name. And sometimes they're only for toys and clothing. But not always. Sometimes, the truth is right in front of us. The trademark is required because a company actually wants to use the name on a new car. With that in mind, here's a list of intriguing trademark filings we want to see go from paperwork to production reality. Trademark: Bronco Company: Ford Previous Use: The Bronco was a long-running SUV that lived from 1966-1996. It's one of America's original SUVs and was responsible for the increased popularity of the segment. Still, it's best known as O.J. Simpson's would-be getaway car. We think: The Bronco was an icon. Everyone seems to want a Wrangler-fighter – Ford used to have a good one. Enough time has passed that the O.J. police chase isn't the immediate image conjured by the Bronco anymore. Even if we're doing a wish list in no particular order, the Bronco still finds its way to the top. For now (unfortunately), it's just federal paperwork. Rumors on this one can get especially heated. The official word from a Ford spokesman is: "Companies renew trademark filings to maintain ownership and control of the mark, even if it is not currently used. Ford values the iconic Bronco name and history." Trademarks: Aviator, AV8R Company: Ford Previous Use: The Aviator was one of the shortest-run Lincolns ever, lasting for the 2003-2005 model years. It never found the sales success of the Ford Explorer, with which it shared a platform. We Think: The Aviator name no longer fits with Lincoln's naming nomenclature. Too bad, it's better than any other name Lincoln currently uses, save for its former big brother, the Navigator. Perhaps we're barking up the wrong tree, though. Ford has made several customized, aviation themed-Mustangs in the past, including one called the Mustang AV8R in 2008, which had cues from the US Air Force's F-22 Raptor fighter jet. It sold for $500,000 at auction, and the glass roof – which is reminiscent of a fighter jet cockpit – helped Ford popularize the feature. Trademark: EcoBeast Company: Ford Previous Use: None by major carmakers.