• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Auto Trends Magazine

Car reviews, industry news, & advice.

TOP SAFETY PICK

Quick Stop: IIHS Begins Rating Rear Crash Prevention Systems

February 23, 2018 by admin 1 Comment

Lets’ face it: rearview cameras may have helped you avoid a catastrophe, perhaps just missing the child hidden behind your vehicle or enabling you to spot a vehicle zipping by as you back out. Quick intervention on your part saved the day, but it may not always be enough to mitigate every future accident. Soon, saving the day may require electronic intervention, something few vehicles currently include, but more will likely offer in the coming years. Indeed, rear crash prevention systems go one step further by hitting the brakes if you don’t heed warnings.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) — representing a consortium of auto insurance companies and other stakeholders — routinely tests most new vehicles, assigning each with a score based on crashworthiness and other factors. Such factors include front crash prevention and lighting systems, what can help prevent accidents in the first place. Thus, you can now add rear crash prevention to the mix, specifically rear autobrake systems, as the IIHS has begun testing them.

IIHS rear crash prevention ratings

Rear Crash Avoidance Technologies

Several technologies comprise rear crash prevention systems, including parking sensors to warn drivers when a vehicle or object is too close to the car. Further, these technologies include rear cross-traffic alert, using sensors to detect a moving object, such as another vehicle crossing your path as you back up. The third technology is rear automatic emergency braking, what automatically stops your vehicle if you don’t react fast enough.

“Let’s face it. Some days we all could use help backing up, whether that’s in a garage with pillars that obscure your view, in a crowded mall parking lot or on a busy downtown street,” says David Zuby, the Institute’s executive vice president and chief research officer. “The systems we rate in our first batch of tests will help reduce the chances of a backing fender-bender.”

Six 2017 model year vehicles with rear autobrake systems were tested by IIHS engineers to determine how they functioned when put through the paces. Those vehicles were the BMW 5 series sedan, Cadillac XT5 SUV, Infiniti QX60 SUV, Jeep Cherokee SUV, Subaru Outback wagon and the Toyota Prius hatchback.

Scoring the Players

For this test the Institute developed a three-tier rating codification, assigning scores of superior, advanced or basic. The rating formulation measures how well rear autobrake-equipped vehicles respond with a succession of car-to-car and car-to-pole tests, employing different approach angles. Additional factors included parking sensor and rear cross-traffic alert availability.

Two vehicles received the Institute’s top score: the Subaru Outback and Cadillac XT5. Both models had the optional rear autobrake, parking sensors and rear cross-traffic alert. The Jeep Cherokee, BMW 5 Series, Infiniti QX60 and the Toyota Prius earned an advanced rating with this available equipment.

So, how does the IIHS assign a rating? Specifically, the ratings evaluate the rear crash prevention systems’ ability to prevent damage in low-speed crashes, not their ability to mitigate injuries in crashes.

IIHS and Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) research has determined that the technology works, reducing the number of such crashes reported to police by 78 percent — citing a General Motors’ study. Indeed, in August 2017 the HLDI reported that rear autobrake systems from GM and Subaru reduce the number of crashes reported to insurers. Certainly, cars equipped with such systems will also cost less to insure.

Rear Autobrake Systems

The Institute skews its new rating program toward rear autobrake systems as these do the best job in preventing accidents. The other two systems get partial credit, but scoring is clearly weighted to systems that actively prevent an accident.

To obtain a superior rating, vehicles outfitted with a rear autobrake system must avoid a crash or at least substantially reduce its speed in many of the test scenarios, involving multiple runs at about 4 mph. Points are assigned based on the number of runs that either avoid or barely hit the target by reducing speeds to under 1 mph. To achieve an advanced rating, vehicles must have autobrake and avoid an accident or reduce its speed in at least in some of the scenarios. A basic rating is assigned to vehicles without autobrake, but still equipped with parking sensors and rear cross-traffic alert.

The IIHS also tested vehicles to determine how much damage they sustained without autobrake active. The Cadillac XT5 backed into a pole, sustaining $3,477 in damage. The Subaru Outback backed into a 2016 Chevrolet Cruze, the estimated damage to both vehicles came to $1,899 —$1,159 for the Outback and $740 for the Cruze.

No Impact Yet on Crash Test Ratings

With another test part of the IIHS equation, the Institute hasn’t said how or whether such systems and ratings will impact its overall ratings. Right now, automakers vie for two coveted ratings — Top Safety Pick and Top Safety Pick+ — the latter made more difficult to obtain in recent years as the IIHS raises it grading criteria.


See Also — Automated Driving? IIHS Researchers Detect Ambivalence

Chart copyright the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. All rights reserved.

Filed Under: Special Tagged With: accident prevention, autobrake, CRASH TESTING, IIHS, parking sensors, rear crash prevention, rear cross-traffic alert, TOP SAFETY PICK

TriPrius: 2016 Toyota Prius

July 18, 2016 by admin 5 Comments

2016 Toyota Prius
This 2016 Toyota Prius is part of a #TriPrius marketing campaign for the Raleigh, NC area.

This week, one of my fleet vehicles is none other than a 2016 Toyota Prius Four. Unlike the other vehicles I typically test, this one is being reviewed as part of a Toyota Triangle campaign from Southeast Toyota Distributors, LLC.

Along with nine other drivers, we’re showing off the Prius to everyone we know in the Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel Hill, NC, area (Research Triangle Park). Therefore, instead of my usual journalism perspective, I’m very much wearing my promoter hat.

Toyota isn’t paying me for my comments, but there is a good chance that if I make enough noise through a #TriPrius campaign, a local charity will benefit. More details to follow.

As for the 2016 Toyota Prius, it is all-new this year. Now in its fourth generation, the hybrid electric vehicle Prius offers the edgiest design yet as evidenced by the photos I’ve included here.

2016 Toyota Prius

A full review of this model will follow at a later date. Meanwhile, let’s take a look at some of the history and highlights of the Toyota Prius:

1. Released in 1997. Although the US did not see the first Toyota Prius until late in 1999 for the 2000 model year, this model went on sale in Japan in 1997. The first-generation model was sold through 2003 and was a compact. Beginning in 2004, a larger second-generation model rolled out and in 2010 the third-generation Prius was introduced. As mentioned, 2016 marks the start of the fourth-generation model.

2. The top-selling hybrid model. Thus far, Toyota has sold more than 5.7 million Prius models worldwide. It remains the best-selling hybrid model in the US and is joined by other hybrid Toyota models, including the RAV4 Hybrid, Avalon Hybrid, and the Camry Hybrid.

2016 Toyota Prius

3. Fuel economy is better than ever. Always seeking to maintain an innovative edge, the 2016 Prius is EPA-rated at 54 mpg in the city and 50 mpg on the highway for a combined 52 mpg. A special Prius Two Eco edition raises fuel economy to 58 mpg in the city and 53 mpg on the highway for a combined 56 mpg. That’s the best gas mileage you’ll find on any car sold in the US — not bad for a five-passenger vehicle the EPA classifies as a midsize model!

4. Six trim levels offered. Leave it to Toyota to come up with easy to remember trim levels for the Prius line. The base trim is called the Prius Two and it is followed by the Two Eco, Three, Three Touring, Four, and the Four Touring. The base price comes in at $24,200 and rises to $30,000 for the Four Touring. Choose every conceivable package and option such as the Premium Convenience Package ($1,705), LED Illumination Package ($349), and a dual USB power port rear seat charge station ($119), and you’ll load up your vehicle accordingly.

2016 Toyota Prius

5. Nifty tech features for your consideration. Have you ever forgotten and regretted not bringing your charge cord with you? I have. Now you don’t have to keep one handy as the 2016 Prius comes with a Qi charging dock. Standard with the Prius Three trims on up, a charge indicating light tells you when it is at work. Other tech features include available automatic high beams, Siri Eyes Free, dual 4.2-inch thin film transistor multi-information display panels, and a 10-speaker Premium JBL audio system standard on the Prius Four.

6. Your safety is a priority. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has recognized the Prius with its Top Safety Pick+ award, its highest honor. This means the 2016 Prius achieved the institute’s highest score in all five crashworthiness categories. It also received a superior grade for its available front crash prevention system. All models come equipped with a driver and front passenger advanced airbag system, as well as driver and front passenger front seat-mounted side airbags, passenger seat cushion airbag, a driver’s knee airbag, and front and rear curtain shield airbags. The two “touring” models also include Toyota Safety Sense-P (TSS –(P)) – representing a pre-collision system with pedestrian detection, lane departure alert with steering assist, automatic high beams and full-speed dynamic radar cruise control.

2016 Toyota Prius

TriPrius: 2016 Toyota Prius

A full review of the 2016 Toyota Prius will be published by the end of this month. Meanwhile, if you’re on Twitter you can find my updates via @theautowriter, where I share photos, industry news, and other snippets related to the auto industry.

See Also — Performance + Efficiency = 2016 Toyota RAV4 Hybrid

2016 Toyota Prius Four photos copyright Auto Trends Magazine.

2016 Toyota Prius

Filed Under: Automotive News Tagged With: #TRIPRIUS, 2016 TOYOTA PRIUS, CHAPEL HILL, DURHAM, hybrid, IIHS, NC, QI, Raleigh, safety, SOUTHEAST TOYOTA, Technology, TOP SAFETY PICK, Toyota RAV4 Hybrid

IIHS: A Surge in Top Safety Pick Awards For 2015

January 1, 2015 by admin Leave a Comment

The number of vehicles that have received the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s (IIHS) two top safety awards has surged from 39 in 2014 to 71 in 2015. For the third consecutive year the IIHS raised the crash and safety testing bar for car manufacturers and quite a few companies have met that challenge by responding in kind. The IIHS is funded by numerous insurance companies and organizations — thus, its crash test scores can have a bearing on your insurance rates.

“This is the third year in a row that we are giving automakers a tougher challenge to meet,” says IIHS President Adrian Lund. “The quest for TOP SAFETY PICK and TOP SAFETY PICK+ awards is driving improvement in the small overlap front crash test and getting manufacturers to offer automatic braking technology on more and more vehicles.”

Eleven More Winners

IIHS top safety pickFor 2015, the IIHS tightened its safety testing criteria for its TOP SAFETY PICK+ award, while maintaining its requirements for the standard TOP SAFETY PICK honor. Despite the more rigorous stipulation for its top criteria award, the IIHS added 11 more vehicles to its top list. The top performers are now required to have a front crash prevention system that earns an advanced or superior rating instead of the previous basic rating.

Specifically, TOP SAFETY PICK+ awarded vehicles are now equipped with an autobrake system that slows down or stops the vehicle at speeds of 12 mph, 25 mph or both without driver intervention.

“Although forward collision warning on its own is a valuable feature, we decided to tighten our criteria to encourage manufacturers to offer autobrake. Systems that don’t require a driver response to avoid or mitigate a crash have the most potential for reducing crashes,” stated Lund. However, for 2015 some 2014 TOP SAFETY PICK+ winners have lost their plus signs, yet still finished as TOP SAFETY PICK winners.

Both awards criteria are coveted by manufacturers and may be used for advertising purposes. For 2015, 33 models are TOP SAFETY PICK+ winners and another 38 garnered the Institute’s TOP SAFETY PICK award.

Crash Test Categories

The IIHS tests vehicles in several categories to include: head restraint, roof strength, side impact crashes as well as a “moderate overlap front” test. New since 2012 is a “small overlap front” test that has proven to be a much stiffer challenge for manufacturers to satisfy. Notably, that test simulates what takes place when the front corner of a vehicle strikes another vehicle or an object such as a tree or a utility pole.

The Institute acknowledges that the new testing criteria is a difficult one because the crash force sidesteps most of a vehicle’s energy-absorbing structure. Yet, the IIHS says that small overlap crashes are common in actuality, therefore the Institute has been pushing car manufacturers to “look for solutions.”

Honda and Toyota Improvements

Honda is one manufacturer that has successfully found a solution for one of its models, namely its popular CR-V compact utility vehicle. When first tested for the new criteria in 2012, it received a marginal score. As a result of this lower score, Honda’s engineers modified the vehicle’s structure to coincide with the release of its all-new, 2015 edition. The latest test showed a reduction in intrusion from the previous one foot to five inches. More importantly, the test dummy’s head remained on the front airbag until it rebounded. In the earlier test the dummy’s head barely made contact with the airbag before sliding off as the steering column shifted to the right.

Toyota is another manufacturer that successfully improved one of its models. In an earlier test of the Prius V, the Institute said that this vehicle was “one of the worst performers ever in the small overlap test.” Whereas the earlier test recorded much intrusion and significant “injuries” to the dummy, the 2015 model showed a sharp improvement. Toyota made changes to the vehicle’s structure and also lengthened the side curtain airbag.

In the end, the driver and vehicle occupants are the winners when car manufacturers make the Institute’s recommended changes. Manufacturers can contain these costs by incorporating engineering changes as either revised or all-new models are brought to the market.

For a list of current qualifiers, visit the this page on the IIHS website.

Photo courtesy of the IIHS.

Filed Under: Automotive News Tagged With: CRASH TESTS, Honda CR-V, IIHS, insurance, INSURERS, SMALL OVERLAP FRONT, TOP SAFETY PICK, TOYOTA PRIUS V

IIHS Small Car Ratings: Only the Mini Cooper Countryman Shines

July 31, 2014 by admin 3 Comments

IIHS awards the Chevrolet Volt with its Top Safety Pick+ rating.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) regularly conducts crash tests for most new passenger vehicles. These tests include a variety of categories such as a small overlap front crash test representing its latest measurement in automotive crashworthiness. Funded by the auto insurers, the IIHS offers critical information that is given careful scrutiny by car manufacturers, consumer groups as well as by media.

Small Overlap Crash Test

Mini CountrymanThis week, the IIHS supplied the results for 12 cars put through the Institute’s small overlap front crash test. Only one model, the Mini Cooper Countryman, received a good rating. Good is the Institute’s highest mark followed by acceptable, marginal and poor.

The 2014 small cars tested this time around were: the Chevrolet Volt, Ford C-Max Hybrid, Mitsubishi Lancer, Scion FR-S, Subaru BRZ, Scion xB, Hyundai Veloster, Fiat 500L, Nissan Juke, Nissan Leaf and the Mazda 5. The Volt, C-Max, Lancer, FR-S and BRZ achieved acceptable scores. The xB and Veloster were rated marginal. The remaining models came in poor.

The IIHS introduced a small overlap front crash test in 2012, replicating “what happens when the front corner of the vehicle collides with another vehicle or an object such as a tree or utility pole.” For the test, “25 percent of the vehicle’s front end on the driver’s side strikes a rigid barrier at 40 mph.” It is considered a more difficult test than the IIHS’ own moderate overlap test as well as the head-on crash test conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

Whereas a head-on test demonstrates how front-end crush zones hold up, that area is bypassed with the small overlap front crash test. Instead, the test provides a good indicator of how the occupant department will hold up.

IIHS Good Rating: Mini Cooper Countryman

In the small overlap test, the main structures of the vehicles front-end crush zone are bypassed, making it hard for the vehicle to manage crash energy. The occupant compartment can collapse as a result, severely injuring or killing the person.

The Mini Cooper Countryman gave a solid performance, says Joe Nolan, the Institutes senior vice president for vehicle research. The Countryman’s safety cage held up reasonably well. The safety belts and airbags worked together to control the test dummy’s movement, and injury measures indicate a low risk of any significant injuries in a real-world crash this severe.

Obtaining a good rating is difficult, but not impossible, as the Mini Cooper Countryman has demonstrated. The Institute looks at several factors when assigning a grade for the small overlap test, including how well the occupant department resists intrusion, the influence that safety belts have in preventing a driver from pitching too far forward and the effectiveness that side curtain airbags have in protecting an occupant’s head. Cabin structures that collapse can cause seats to move forward and force airbags out of position, worsening an already precarious situation.

Collapse of the occupant compartment is the downfall for four small cars in this group, including the Fiat 500L, Mazda 5, Nissan Juke and Nissan Leaf, Nolan explains. A sturdy occupant compartment allows the restraint systems to do their job, absorbing energy and controlling occupant motion.

Cabin Structural Collapse Likely

The Institute found a number of structural problems present in cars that were assigned a poor rating. In the Mazda 5, a section of the occupant compartment buckled. In the Fiat 500L, the driver’s survival space was compromised as the steering wheel was knocked to the side, thereby causing the airbag to shift out of position too. The test dummy’s head slammed into the A-pillar. The Mazda 5 also has the distinction of being the only 2014 model year vehicle to finish with a marginal rating in side impact crash testing.

Two of the electrified vehicles in the test — Chevrolet’s Volt and Nissan’s Leaf — have been tested since hitting the market in 2011. Those early models received top ratings in the IIHS’ other four tests — side impact, head restraint, moderate overlap front and roof strength. In the latest test the Volt held up “reasonably well,” but the Leaf experienced significant intrusion resulting in a poor rating.

The Latest Ratings

Following the latest testing, the IIHS updated its overall grades for these models. The Mini Cooper Countryman, Ford C-Max Hybrid, Mitsubishi Lancer, Scion FR-S and Subaru BRZ each were recognized as Top Safety Picks. The Chevrolet Volt took the higher Top Safety Pick+ category as it was the only one of the top achievers with a front crash prevention system.


See Also — IIHS Top Safety Pick+ — The Current Qualifiers

Photo courtesy of Mini USA.

Filed Under: Automotive News Tagged With: AIRBAGS, Chevrolet Volt, CRASH TEST, IIHS, MINI COOPER COUNTRYMAN, safety, SMALL OVERLAP FRONT CRASH, TOP SAFETY PICK

IIHS Top Safety Pick+ — The Current Qualifiers

April 30, 2014 by admin 2 Comments

— This list is current as of May 7, 2014 —

Crash test performance is important to consumers, providing a way for them to compare the safety performance of various models. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) conducts crash tests for many of the vehicles you might consider and assigns these models with a rating.

Top Safety Pick+ Ratings

The highest ratings offered are Top Safety Pick and Top Safety Pick+, the latter qualifier added in 2013. To achieve its now top rating a vehicle must meet two criteria:

1. Meet the top safety pick vehicle requirements, including earning “good ratings in the moderate overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraint tests, as well as a good or acceptable rating in the small overlap front test.”

2. Earn a “basic, advanced or superior rating for front crash prevention.”

Vehicles that meet the advanced both criteria are assigned a Top Safety Pick+ rating.

As of April 2014, very few models have achieved the IIHS’ top rating. By category, the following vehicles qualify with some exceptions noted.

Minicars

No winners.

Top Safety Pick+: 2014 Toyota Prius (select models).

Top Safety Pick+ — 2014 Toyota Prius (select models).

Small cars

2014 Honda Civic 4-door — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

2014 Mazda 3 — applies only to optional front crash prevention models and to vehicles built after October 2013; hatchback and sedan body styles included.

2014 Toyota Prius — applies only to optional front crash prevention models. Applies only to vehicles built after November 2013.

Midsize Moderately Priced Cars

2014 Chevrolet Malibu — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

2014 Ford Fusion — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

2014 Honda Accord 2-door — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

2014 Honda Accord 4-door — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

2014 Mazda 6 — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

2014 Subaru Legacy — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

2014 Subaru Outback — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

Top Safety Pick+ -- 2014 Ford Fusion (select models).

Top Safety Pick+ — 2014 Ford Fusion (select models).

Midsize Luxury/Near Luxury Cars

2015 Audi A3 — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

2014 Infiniti Q50 — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

2014 Lincoln MKZ — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

2014 Volvo S60 — all models.

Large Luxury Cars

2014 Acura RLX — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

2015 Hyundai Genesis — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

2014 Volvo S80 — all models.

Small SUVs

2014 Mazda CX-5 — applies only to optional front crash prevention models. Applies only to vehicles built after October 2013.

2014 Mitsubishi Outlander — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

2014 Nissan Rogue — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

2014 Subaru Forester — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

Top Safety Pick+ -- 2014 Subaru Forester (select models).

Top Safety Pick+ — 2014 Subaru Forester (select models).

Midsize SUVs

2014 Chevrolet Equinox — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

2014 GMC Terrain — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

2014 Toyota Highlander — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

Midsize Luxury SUVs

2014 Acura MDX — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

2014 Mercedes M Class — applies only to vehicles built after August 2013.

2014 Volvo XC60 — all models.

Top Safety Pick+ -- 2014 Toyota Highlander (select models).

Top Safety Pick+ — 2014 Toyota Highlander (select models).

Minivans

2014 Honda Odyssey — applies only to optional front crash prevention models.

Safety Rating Considerations

Achieving a Top Safety Pick+ rating should result in lower auto insurance costs for consumers. The time to check what your rate will be should be done before you make your purchase. Insurance rates can vary by hundreds of dollars annually between like models.

You should also know that the ratings are assigned with the vehicle category in mind. That simply means larger and heavier vehicles provide better protection than smaller and lighter models across the board.

Please note that as of April 2014 Auto Trends now includes IIHS safety ratings with the vehicle specifications for every new car review posted to this site.


See Also — IIHS Outlines 5 Components for Safer Teen Driving

Filed Under: Automotive News Tagged With: auto insurance, CRASH TESTING, IIHS, INSURER, safety, TOP SAFETY PICK

Primary Sidebar

Recent Posts

  • 4 Car Upholstery Cleaning Tips
  • The 14 Brands of Stellantis
  • Peugeot May Not Return to the U.S. Market After All
  • Next-Generation Sedona Minivan Will Be Renamed the Kia Carnival
  • GM Launches BrightDrop, Its Commercial EV Brand

Recent Comments

  • Temporary Repair Steps and Tips for Windshields — Auto Trends Magazine on 4 Car Upholstery Cleaning Tips
  • Pandemic Times: Car Disinfecting Tips — Auto Trends Magazine on 4 Car Upholstery Cleaning Tips
  • How to Detail Your Car Like a Professional — Auto Trends Magazine on 4 Car Upholstery Cleaning Tips
  • 4 Car Upholstery Cleaning Tips — Auto Trends Magazine on How to Detail Your Car Like a Professional
  • 4 Car Upholstery Cleaning Tips — Auto Trends Magazine on Product Review: Dyson DC31

Archives

  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008

Categories

  • Auto Parts
  • Auto Shows
  • Automotive Career
  • Automotive News
  • Book Reviews
  • Car Tips
  • Classics & Discontinued Models
  • Commentary
  • Commercial Vehicles
  • Concept Vehicles
  • Dealers
  • Engineering & Technology
  • Fleet
  • Fun News
  • Maintenance & Repairs
  • Motorsport
  • New Car Reviews
  • New Models
  • Ownership Experience
  • Product Reviews
  • Special
  • Specifications
  • Uncategorized

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

New!
Check out our Jobs Board!

via GIPHY

Subscribe to Auto Trends

Subscribe in a reader

Social Media

Visit our social media pages:
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
Pinterest

Where is Matt Currently Published?

The Carolinian (new car reviews)
NAPA Know How Blog
On the Road Again

Pages

  • About
  • Authors List
  • Automotive Brochures
  • Contact
  • Industry Jobs
  • Write
    • Style Guide

Categories

Recent Posts

  • 4 Car Upholstery Cleaning Tips
  • The 14 Brands of Stellantis
  • Peugeot May Not Return to the U.S. Market After All
  • Next-Generation Sedona Minivan Will Be Renamed the Kia Carnival
  • GM Launches BrightDrop, Its Commercial EV Brand
  • The Refreshed and Handsome
    Lexus IS 350 F Sport
  • What We Know About the All-New 2021 Jeep Grand Cherokee L
  • The All-New and Formidable 2021 Nissan Rogue Crossover
  • Fuel-Efficiency and AWD Champion: 2021 Toyota RAV4 Hybrid
  • Midsize Performance Master: 2021 Hyundai Sonata N-Line
  • Performance Hatchback: The All-New 2021 Mazda Mazda3 Turbo!
  • NACTOY Finalists For 2021 Offer Familiar and Futuristic Choices
  • Super Trooper: Nissan Titan Pickup
  • Behind the Wheel of the Popular 2021 Toyota Corolla Sedan
  • Lucid Motors Completes Arizona Factory
  • A Robust Turbodiesel Comes to the Chevrolet Silverado 1500
  • Mid-Engine Masterpiece: The Eighth-Generation Chevrolet Corvette Stingray
  • Compact Performance:
    2021 Cadillac CT4-V
  • All-Wheel Drive Supplies the Nissan Altima With a Competitive Edge
  • Return of the Toyota Venza!
  • Lexus Brings a Convertible to the Gorgeous LC 500 Line
  • Stellantis Logo Revealed by Peugeot, Fiat Chrysler Ahead of Spring Merger
  • Preview: 2021 Nissan Rogue Crossover
  • How to Fix a Broken Rivian Vehicle
  • Cadillac Gets Most Things Right
    With the XT6 Crossover
  • The High Potency Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat Redeye Widebody Coupe
  • The All-New Chevrolet Trailblazer Forges Urban Paths
  • The Small Infiniti QX50 is Big on Tech and Engineering Features
  • Toyota Brings the TRD Treatment to the Midsize Camry Sedan
  • The Kia K5 Outclasses Most Competitors, Including the Departing Optima
  • Can the Toyota RAV4 TRD Off-Road Handle Tough Terrain?
  • Subaru WRX Showcases Its Performance Chops
  • Infiniti Overhauls QX80 Trims and Makes This Important Safety Feature Standard
  • Ford F-250 Super Duty and a Trail-Stomping Tremor Package
  • A Cut Above: Mazda’s Mazda3
  • The Highly Efficient Hyundai Ioniq
  • Volkswagen Atlas Revels in its Strengths
  • General Motors Deepens Partnership With Honda, Takes Stake in Nikola
  • Smart Concept: Jeep Grand Wagoneer
  • More Than an Encore: Buick Encore GX
  • Got a Recall? There’s an App for That.
  • Refreshed Nissan Titan Makes Its Case
  • BMW M235i: Not Your Typical Coupe
  • Hot Stuff: Lexus RC F Sport Coupe
  • Will the Electric Vehicle Boom Create New-Found Dependencies for Foreign Minerals?
  • Rumors? We Got Them!
  • About Bollinger Motors, EV Startup
  • Raptor Fighter: Ram 1500 TRX!
  • White Space Wonder: 2020 Nissan Rogue Sport
  • About the 2021 Genesis GV80
January 2021
S M T W T F S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  
« Dec    

Copyright © 2021 · News Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in