2011 Tacoma Double Cab Trd Sport 4x4 Auto Toyota Certified Clean Carfax Video on 2040-cars

Auto blog

IIHS: Drivers safer than passengers in frontal crash test

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety introduced a small overlap frontal crash test in 2012 that replicates what happens when the front corner of a car impacts another object. In the test, vehicles travel at a speed of 40 mph toward a five-foot-tall barrier with 25 percent of the total width of the car striking the barrier on the driver side. One would assume that vehicles with good small overlap front ratings would protect the driver and the passenger equally. But a recent study from the IIHS proves that passengers aren't as protected as drivers. The IIHS conducted the test on seven small SUVs with good driver-side small overlap ratings and only one of the vehicles, the 2016 Hyundai Tucson, performed well enough to be given a good rating. The other SUVs performance ranged from poor to acceptable. After reviewing the results of the test, the IIHS is deliberating whether it should institute a passenger-side rating as part of its Top Safety Pick criteria. "This is an important aspect of occupant protection that needs more attention," states Becky Mueller, lead author of the study and an IIHS senior research engineer. "More than 1,600 right-front passengers died in frontal crashes in 2014." Since the small overlap front test was introduced, 13 automakers have made structural changes to 97 vehicles with roughly three-quarters earning a good rating after the adjustments. The IIHS' test for frontal ratings is completed with a dummy in the driver's seat and with a barrier overlapping the driver's side. Which makes sense, as passengers aren't always riding in a vehicle. "It's not surprising that automakers would focus their initial efforts to improve small overlap protection on the side of the vehicle that we conduct the tests on," states David Zuby, IIHS executive vice president and chief research officer. "In fact, we encouraged them to do that in the short term if it mean they could quickly make driver-side improvements to more vehicles. As time goes by, though, we would hope they ensure similar levels of protection on both sides." As the IIHS' test revealed, there's a massive difference in safety between the two front seats. Increase passenger safety, according to Mueller, would require automakers to strengthen the occupant compartment by using a different type of material or by making it thicker.

Mazda3 sales off to rocky start despite massive critical acclaim

Like just about every other auto publication we've seen, we loved the way the Mazda3 drove when we reviewed it a few months ago, but those glowing reviews apparently aren't helping its sales. The new compact may be falling victim to a sales war between the Toyota Corolla and Honda Civic, with the newcomer getting squeezed out by those with more established names and bigger marketing budgets.
According to Automotive News, Mazda3 sales have fallen every month since last August, and its sales are down 27 percent in the first two months of 2014. It certainly isn't helping that the entire compact segment is down five percent this year as well.
The biggest problem for the new model seems to be its price compared to rivals. Mazda is not offering the incentives that are on the hood of competitors. With the previous generation, the company offered more than $2,700 on the hood to move them out, but the current model only carries about $1,233 in markdowns, according to AN.

Bibendum 2014: Former EU President says Toyota could lose 100,000 euros per hydrogen FCV sedan

Pat Cox does not work for Toyota and we don't think he has any secret inside information. Still, he's the former President of the European Parliament and the current high level coordinator for TransEuropean Network, so when he says Toyota is likely going to lose between 50,000 and 100,000 euros ($66,000 and $133,000) on each of the hydrogen-powered FCV sedans it will sell next year, it's worth noting. That was just one highlight of Cox's presentation at the 2014 Michelin Challenge Bibendum in Chengdu, China today, which addressed the main problem of using more H2 in transportation: cost. The EU has a tremendous incentive to find an alternative to fossil fuels, since Europe today is 94 percent dependent on oil for its transportation sector and 84 percent of that 94 percent dependency is imported oil. The tab for that costs the EU a billion euros a day, Cox said, on top of the environmental costs. To encourage a shift away from petroleum, European Directive 2014/94 requires each member state to develop national policy frameworks for the market development of alternative fuels and their infrastructure. For the member states that choose to fulfill 2014/94 by developing a hydrogen market – and to be clear, Cox said, it's not an EU diktat that they do so, since a number of other alternatives are also allowed – the aim is to have things in place by the end of 2025. The plans don't even have to be submitted until the end of 2016. The long lead time is due to a quirk in a hydrogen economy. In hydrogen infrastructure, "the first-mover cost is not the first-mover advantage, but the firstmover disadvantage." – Pat Cox In deploying a hydrogen infrastructure, Cox said, "the first-mover cost is not the first-mover advantage, but the first-mover disadvantage, and high risk." That's why the EU and member states will financially support the early stages, but everyone agrees that "if this is to work, it will have to be ultimately and essentially a commercially viable and commercially driven infrastructure roll-out." Since 1986, European Union research programs have spent 550 million euros on hydrogen-related and fuel-cell-related research, including methods of hydrogen storage and distribution as well as improved fuel cells vehicles, Cox said. Expensive problems remain to be solved. At a conference in Berlin, Germany this past summer, Cox said, the unit cost of the refueling stations was identified as the main problem.