Autoblog http://www.autoblog.com Autoblog http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autoblog.com/media/feedlogo.gif Autoblog http://www.autoblog.com en-us Copyright 2009 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/<![CDATA[REPORT: Ford loses appeal in rollover case, must pay $55M]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/01/ford-loses-appeal-in-roll-over-case-must-pay-55m/http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/01/ford-loses-appeal-in-roll-over-case-must-pay-55m/http://www.autoblog.com/2009/12/01/ford-loses-appeal-in-roll-over-case-must-pay-55m/#commentsFiled under: , , ,



According to The Detroit News, the Supreme Court has let stand a ruling that Ford Motor Company is at fault for a 2002 rollover crash involving a 1997 Ford Explorer and the Dearborn, MI-based automaker must pay $55 million in punitive damages. Benetta Buell-Wilson's Explorer rolled over four-and-a-half times after she swerved to avoid debris. When the roof collapsed on her neck, it severed her spinal cord and left her paralyzed.

Ford unsuccessfully argued that it shouldn't be punished due to the fact that the Explorer complied with federal safety standards when it was built. Buell-Wilson was originally awarded $369 million in damages, but a pair of California courts cut down the total value of damages to $82.6 million.

[Source: The Detroit News]

REPORT: Ford loses appeal in rollover case, must pay $55M originally appeared on Autoblog on Tue, 01 Dec 2009 09:29:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>benetta buell-wilsonBenettaBuell-wilsonfordford explorerFordExplorerrolloversupreme courtSupremeCourtTue, 01 Dec 2009 09:29:00 EST<![CDATA[IIHS tests roof strength on microcars, Smart Fortwo comes out on top]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/21/iihs-tests-roof-strength-on-microcars-smart-fortwo-comes-out-on/http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/21/iihs-tests-roof-strength-on-microcars-smart-fortwo-comes-out-on/http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/21/iihs-tests-roof-strength-on-microcars-smart-fortwo-comes-out-on/#commentsFiled under: , , , , , , , , , ,

IIHS microcar roof tests - Click above for high-res image gallery

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has just tested the latest batch of the smallest cars on the market to determine the strength of their roofs in the event of a rollover accident. Coming out on top with a "good" rating was the Smart Fortwo, which isn't all that surprising - due in large part to the runabout's diminutive size, Daimler put lots of effort into the design of its so-called Tridion safety cell.

Somehow, we're equally as unsurprised that the Chevy Aveo scored the lowest of the six automobiles tested. Chevy's least expensive car earned a "marginal" rating from the Institute. Sitting in between those two bookends were the Honda Fit, Hyundai Accent, Mini Cooper, and Toyota Yaris, all of which scored "acceptable" ratings.

It's interesting to note that the Smart Fortwo fared quite a bit better in this kind of test than in the Institute's series of frontal offset crash tests versus a Mercedes-Benz C-Class sedan. Click past the break for the official press release.


Gallery: IIHS microcar roof tests

iihs-roof-smartiihs-roof-smart-2iihs-roof-aveoiihs-roof-aveo-2

[Source: Insurance Institute for Highway Safety]

Continue reading IIHS tests roof strength on microcars, Smart Fortwo comes out on top

IIHS tests roof strength on microcars, Smart Fortwo comes out on top originally appeared on Autoblog on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 09:58:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>chevy aveochevy aveo crash testchevy aveo roof testChevyAveoChevyAveoCrashTestChevyAveoRoofTesthonda fithonda fit crash testHondaFitHondaFitCrashTesthyundai accenthyundai accent crash testHyundaiAccentHyundaiAccentCrashTestiihsinsurance instituteinsurance institute for highway safetyinsurance institute for highway safety crash testInsuranceInstituteInsuranceInstituteForHighwaySafetyInsuranceInstituteForHighwaySafetyCrashTestmini coopermini cooper crash testMiniCooperMiniCooperCrashTestrolloverrollover caserollover protectionrollover testRolloverCaseRolloverProtectionRolloverTestsmartsmart fortwosmart fortwo crashsmart fortwo crash resultssmart fortwo crash t...smart fortwo roofsmartcarSmartFortwoSmartFortwoCrashSmartFortwoCrashResultsSmartFortwoCrashT...SmartFortwoRooftoyota yaristoyota yaris crash testToyotaYarisToyotaYarisCrashTestFri, 21 Aug 2009 09:58:00 EST<![CDATA[REPORT: Ford Explorer suit draws to close; lawyers big winners, plaintiffs less so]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/04/report-ford-explorer-suit-draws-to-close-lawyers-big-winners/http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/04/report-ford-explorer-suit-draws-to-close-lawyers-big-winners/http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/04/report-ford-explorer-suit-draws-to-close-lawyers-big-winners/#commentsFiled under: , , , ,



As another costly Ford Explorer rollover lawsuit finally bogs to a close, the attorneys have again emerged standing on top of the flotsam. This suit, filed in California on behalf of consumers in four states who leased or bought 1991 to 2001 Ford Explorers, alleged the rollover problems associated with their vehicles diminished resale values (the lawsuit excluded personal injuries or wrongful death claims). The final settlement, authorized by a Sacramento County Superior Court Judge, awarded each of the class members $500 discount coupons towards the purchase of a new Ford SUV, or $300 towards another Ford vehicle.

While the attorneys argued the lawsuit was valued at $500 million (assuming that nearly one million consumers would flock to dealerships and cash-in those nifty coupons for new Fords), the settlement is really only costing the automaker about $27 million. All told, the attorneys will pocket an impressive $25 million of the bounty, while another $950,000 is donated to the Automotive Safety Research Institute for "research into protecting passengers in rollover accidents." The balance (at most $846,500) will go to the 1,693 class members who applied for the $500 certificates before the April 2008 cutoff. In case you were wondering... as of this June, only 75 of the vouchers ($37,500 worth) had been redeemed.

[Source: The Associated Press (via Yahoo) | Image: Alex Wong/Getty]

REPORT: Ford Explorer suit draws to close; lawyers big winners, plaintiffs less so originally appeared on Autoblog on Tue, 04 Aug 2009 09:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>500 Coupon500CouponAttorneyAttorney feesAttorneyFeesford explorerFord Explorer LawsuitFordExplorerFordExplorerLawsuitLawsuitLawyerrolloverSacramentoSUV rolloverSuvRolloverTue, 04 Aug 2009 09:30:00 EST<![CDATA[IIHS to raise the roof on crush standards]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2009/02/06/iihs-to-raise-the-roof-on-crush-standards/http://www.autoblog.com/2009/02/06/iihs-to-raise-the-roof-on-crush-standards/http://www.autoblog.com/2009/02/06/iihs-to-raise-the-roof-on-crush-standards/#commentsFiled under: ,



The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has commissioned a study that seems to indicate that a dramatic increase in roof safety is in order. The group's resulting newly proposed standards would require a vehicle's roof to withstand two-times the specific vehicle's weight. According to the IIHS, this change could reduce the risk of fatalities in a single vehicle rollover by more than 20%.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration also supports the tougher standards, though the Bush Administration had allowed three separate deadlines to pass without updating its requirements, which have remained the same since they were first instituted in 1973. Those initial rules standards require that the roof of a vehicle be capable of withstanding 1.5 times the vehicle weight.

So far, automakers have supported this standard, although they are requesting that the new requirements for roof strength be phased in gradually, partially over concerns of rising vehicle weight that negatively impacts fuel economy.

[Source: Detroit News]

IIHS to raise the roof on crush standards originally appeared on Autoblog on Fri, 06 Feb 2009 10:58:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>iihsiihs rolloveriihs rollover studyiihs testingIihsRolloverIihsRolloverStudyIihsTestingrolloverrollover standardsRolloverStandardsroof crushroof standardsroof strengthroof strength standardsRoofCrushRoofStandardsRoofStrengthRoofStrengthStandardsFri, 06 Feb 2009 10:58:00 EST<![CDATA[Bush administration needs more time for new roof strength rule]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2008/10/03/bush-administration-needs-more-time-for-new-roof-strength-rule/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/10/03/bush-administration-needs-more-time-for-new-roof-strength-rule/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/10/03/bush-administration-needs-more-time-for-new-roof-strength-rule/#commentsFiled under: ,

If you've been following the ongoing roof strength regulation saga, this will likely come as no surprise. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters has again asked for an extension to rewrite the government's vehicle roof strength rule. We've been reporting on this for more than three years, and the delays never seem to end (of course, we can assume the big cheese in Washington have more pressing issues on their plates these days). Rewriting the legislation set back in the 1970s isn't as simple as specifying stronger roof pillars. Beefing up the roof will add weight - potentially making a vehicle more top heavy and likely increasing the possibility of a rollover. The new rules will need to address these concerns, and take into account new safety technologies (curtain airbags, stability control, etc...) that are on our current-generation models. While each previous request for an extension included new deadline dates, this latest appeal didn't. A wise move considering the administration's track record on this issue.

[Source: Automotive News - sub. req'd]

Bush administration needs more time for new roof strength rule originally appeared on Autoblog on Fri, 03 Oct 2008 09:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>crashcrash testCrashTestcrushMary PetersMaryPetersNHTSArollrolloverroof regulationsRoofRegulationsTransportation SecretaryTransportationSecretaryFri, 03 Oct 2008 09:30:00 EST<![CDATA[Feds to release new roof-strength regs in July]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2008/05/27/feds-to-release-new-roof-strength-regs-in-july/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/05/27/feds-to-release-new-roof-strength-regs-in-july/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/05/27/feds-to-release-new-roof-strength-regs-in-july/#commentsFiled under: , ,

While rollover resistance is improving, current vehicle roof strength regulations date back nearly 35 years. With that in mind, Congress will be taking a careful look at federal regulators as they work on upgrading the standards early next month before they unveil a final regulation at the end of July. Current standards require a vehicle under 6,000 pounds to withstand a force of 1.5 times the vehicle weight without crushing and striking the head of a belted average-size adult male. In August 2005, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) proposed toughening that standard to 2.5 times the vehicle weight (and adding it should cover all vehicles under 10,000 pounds). Safety advocates, however, have argued that the standard should be 3 to 3.5 times the vehicle weight.

According to the NHTSA, increasing the crush resistance to 3 times the vehicle weight would cost automakers at least $1.1 billion more that it would to meet the 2.5 standard. Automakers have shown resistance to the proposals too. They have asked for more time to comply with the toughened rules, and that some vehicles (such as the Jeep Wrangler) be exempt. They have also pointed out that increased roof strength means added weight -- counterproductive in their continued efforts to meet stringent fuel economy standards.

[Source: The Detroit News, Photo from Volvo]

Feds to release new roof-strength regs in July originally appeared on Autoblog on Tue, 27 May 2008 13:27:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>CrashFederalFlipNational Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationNationalHighwayTrafficSafetyAdministrationNHTSARegulationsRollRolloverRulesTue, 27 May 2008 13:27:00 EST<![CDATA[IIHS studies effectiveness of roof strength: Surprise! It matters]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/12/iihs-studies-effectiveness-of-roof-strength-surprise-it-matter/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/12/iihs-studies-effectiveness-of-roof-strength-surprise-it-matter/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/12/iihs-studies-effectiveness-of-roof-strength-surprise-it-matter/#commentsFiled under: , ,



There's been considerable debate between automakers, legislators and safety advocates over how roof strength correlates to deaths in rollover crashes. The majority of the focus has appropriately been heaped on SUVs, whose high center of gravity makes them more prone to rollovers, particularly when they leave the road.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has just released a study that proves that more roof strength can reduce injuries by some 39 to 57 percent when compared to the weaker models it tested. The IIHS used the same roof strength test as the feds on a group of SUVs that currently meet the government's roof requirements. At the top of the heap was the 2000-2004 Nissan Xterra that was able to withstand almost 12,000 pounds of force, while the lowest ranked vehicle, the 1999-2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee, lost its head(room) after 6,500 pounds of force was applied to the roof.


[Source: IIHS]

IIHS studies effectiveness of roof strength: Surprise! It matters originally appeared on Autoblog on Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:58:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>iihsiihs rollover studyIihsRolloverStudyinsurance institute for highway safetyInsuranceInstituteForHighwaySafetyrolloversuvWed, 12 Mar 2008 16:58:00 EST<![CDATA[NHTSA increases roof rigidity requirements]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/26/nhtsa-increases-roof-rigidity-requirements/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/26/nhtsa-increases-roof-rigidity-requirements/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/26/nhtsa-increases-roof-rigidity-requirements/#commentsFiled under:



Vehicle roof crush standards have not been significantly revised since 1971. The current requirements say one side of a vehicle's roof must support at least 1.5 times the total vehicle weight. However, the strength requirements reach a maximum at 5,000 lbs, whether or not the calculated standard is greater. The regulations also do not apply to convertibles or vehicles weighing more than 6,000 lbs. In 2005, a proposal was created to revise the requirement to 2.5 times the total vehicle weight on one side of the vehicle. Now that proposal has been altered, since NHTSA says it is feasible to distribute the test to press on both sides of a vehicle's roof. It has also been proposed to increase the standards to cover vehicles up to 10,000 lbs. An active rollover test is ruled out though, due to repeatability issues and lack of variable control. To appease Congress, NHTSA must put a revised standard in place by April 2009.

While updating safety standards is always a good thing, the issued statements relating to the proposal leave some questions. It is not stated whether the testing weight cap of 5,000 lbs will be increased along with the maximum tested vehicle weight. These days, many automobiles weigh in at upwards of 4,000 lbs. 2.5 times a 4,000-lb vehicle falls well above the 5,000-pound limit. There is also still no mention of convertible safety. Hopefully the full proposal is more detailed than the points touched upon in this piece.

[Source: Auto News, Sub. Req'd]

NHTSA increases roof rigidity requirements originally appeared on Autoblog on Sat, 26 Jan 2008 18:17:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>NHTSARolloverRoofSafetySat, 26 Jan 2008 18:17:00 EST<![CDATA[Ford settling class-action lawsuits related to rollovers]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2007/11/29/ford-settling-class-action-lawsuits-related-to-rollovers/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/11/29/ford-settling-class-action-lawsuits-related-to-rollovers/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/11/29/ford-settling-class-action-lawsuits-related-to-rollovers/#commentsFiled under: , , ,

FoMoCo is on the brink of settling a class-action lawsuit brought by owners claiming that Ford's Explorer was prone to rolling over. The settlement covers approximately one million people in California, Connecticut, Illinois and Texas who've owned 1991 through 2001 Explorers.

Ford's spokesperson, Kristen Kinley, believes that "the settlement is fair and reasonable," but declined to given an estimate of how much Ford would be shilling out to slighted owners. However, vouchers are expected to be issued to owners in the four states that would allow them to put $500 towards a new Explorer or $300 for another Ford, Lincoln or Mercury product.

[Source: Detroit News]

Ford settling class-action lawsuits related to rollovers originally appeared on Autoblog on Thu, 29 Nov 2007 08:03:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>californiaconnecticutexplorerfordford explorer rolloverFordExplorerRolloverillinoisrolloversettlementtexasThu, 29 Nov 2007 08:03:00 EST<![CDATA[NHTSA head says crash standards should be higher]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2007/09/24/nhtsa-head-says-crash-standards-should-be-higher/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/09/24/nhtsa-head-says-crash-standards-should-be-higher/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/09/24/nhtsa-head-says-crash-standards-should-be-higher/#commentsFiled under: ,

Nicole Nason, head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), maintains that the crash standards that have been on the books since 1973 are due for a revision. Recognizing the 9 out of 10 vehicles routinely score either four- or five-stars on the administration's tests, she's seeking to increase the standards for front- and side-impacts, along with more stringent testing of rollover protection.

The move is due to what some feel are antiquated testing measures, as well as the assertion that automakers engineer vehicles specifically to perform well on the current tests. Increased rollover protection is apparently one of the major goals of the administration, and Nason is planning on rewriting a 2005 proposal that would increase roof strength. However, she concedes that it will only save approximately 100 lives per year.

Automakers have contended for some time that the technological saturation point for crash protection is getting closer, and that driver behavior needs to be addressed. Nason maintains that vehicles should be able to overcome mistakes by the user, saying, "The future of automotive safety is crash avoidance technology." Why these two goals can't be addressed simultaneously is anyone's guess.

[Source: Automotive News - Sub. Req.]

NHTSA head says crash standards should be higher originally appeared on Autoblog on Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:53:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>crash test changescrash test revisioncrash testsCrashTestChangesCrashTestRevisionCrashTestsimpact testsImpactTestsnational highway traffic safety administrationNationalHighwayTrafficSafetyAdministrationncapnhtsanicole nasonNicoleNasonrevisionrolloverrollover protectionRolloverProtectionMon, 24 Sep 2007 09:53:00 EST<![CDATA[SUVs improve rollover safety]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2007/08/29/suvs-improve-rollover-safety/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/08/29/suvs-improve-rollover-safety/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/08/29/suvs-improve-rollover-safety/#commentsFiled under: , ,



New safety ratings issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for 2007 model year SUVs reveal the former deathtraps are now much less likely to suffer from a rollover at high speed. Rollovers account for 10,000 deaths in the U.S. every year, which is 30% of all vehicle related deaths in the country despite rollovers accounting for only 3% off all crashes.

The ratings describe the likelihood of an SUV entering a rollover and are ranked on a scale of five stars, five being the safest. The latest findings show that more than half of the 2007 model-year SUVs scored a four-star rating in the rollover tests, compared with just one model back in 2001. One of the new features that have lead to the improved safety levels is electronic stability control, now standard on 86% of new SUVs.

Pickup trucks fared even better than SUVs, with 74 out of the 89 vehicles tested scoring a four star rating. Surprisingly, no SUV or pickup has ever scored a five star rating in these particular safety tests.

[Source: Detroit News]

SUVs improve rollover safety originally appeared on Autoblog on Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:28:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>rolloverWed, 29 Aug 2007 15:28:00 EST<![CDATA[Roof strength regs delayed again]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2007/05/30/roof-strength-regs-pushed-back-until-september/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/05/30/roof-strength-regs-pushed-back-until-september/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/05/30/roof-strength-regs-pushed-back-until-september/#commentsFiled under: ,



Do a search for "roof regulations" on Autoblog and the No. 1 result will be a post written back on August 19, 2005. That's how long it's been since the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration proposed the latest increase to the 35-year-old federal requirements that govern the strength of a vehicle's roof. The proposal was to increase the current standard of a roof being able to hold 1.5 times the vehicle's weight to 2.5 times.

Despite this being a very time sensitive issue, the proposal has been delayed yet again. The Detroit News reports the NHTSA says it will not be able to rule on the new standards by the prior set date of August 31st, but will instead write up a "revised preliminary proposal" by the end of September and finalize it by July of 2008.

[Source: The Detroit News]

Continue reading Roof strength regs delayed again

Roof strength regs delayed again originally appeared on Autoblog on Wed, 30 May 2007 16:04:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>delayNHTSArolloverroof strengthRoofStrengthWed, 30 May 2007 16:04:00 EST<![CDATA[Ford rollover settlement under re-review]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2007/05/15/ford-rollover-settlement-under-re-review/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/05/15/ford-rollover-settlement-under-re-review/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/05/15/ford-rollover-settlement-under-re-review/#commentsFiled under: , ,

In 2002, Benetta Buell-Wilson was driving her 1997 Ford Explorer in Southern California when she swerved to avoid debris on the freeway. The high center of gravity of the SUV and the quick steering input caused the Explorer to roll four-and-a-half times, eventually coming to rest on its roof. The impact caused the roof to collapse, crushing Mrs. Buell-Wilson's neck and paralyzing her from the waist down. The subsequent lawsuit, claiming that Ford manufacturered a faulty roof, awarded her $369 million dollars, of which $246 million was classified as punitive damages. In the proceeding cases, that figure was cut down twice by a California state appeals court to $82.6 million.

On Monday, the Supreme Court ordered the state appeals court to review the decision, using the court's decision to overturn $79.5 million in punitive damages awarded during the highly-publicized tobacco case that was heard earlier this year. The rational being that the jury can punish a defendant only for the harm done to the plaintiff and not to the other people affected.

Ford claims that the roof was designed to meet federal safety standards and that no wrongdoing had taken place. This is one of many cases that Ford has had to defend over the past several years.

[Source: Bloomberg]

Ford rollover settlement under re-review originally appeared on Autoblog on Tue, 15 May 2007 11:23:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>benetta buell-wilsonBenettaBuell-wilsonexplorerfordrolloverTue, 15 May 2007 11:23:00 EST<![CDATA[Michael Waltrip rolls SUV, is charged with leaving scene of accident]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2007/04/11/michael-waltrip-rolls-suv-is-charged-with-leaving-scene-of-acci/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/04/11/michael-waltrip-rolls-suv-is-charged-with-leaving-scene-of-acci/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/04/11/michael-waltrip-rolls-suv-is-charged-with-leaving-scene-of-acci/#commentsFiled under: , , ,

Embattled NASCAR star Michael Waltrip has some new problems on his plate. According to Yahoo Sports, he has been charged with reckless driving and failing to report an accident. The charges resulted from an incident over the weekend where Waltrip's Toyota Land Cruiser hit a telephone pole and rolled over about a mile from his house. He apparently fell asleep at the wheel, crashed and then walked home early Saturday morning.

Police discovered the wrecked SUV and then tracked down the two-time Daytona 500 winner at his home, where he was quoted as saying he was embarrassed but glad he was unhurt in the incident. Police reported finding blood at the scene, but Waltrip apparently suffered only minor cuts and abrasions. Accordint to the authorities, they saw the SUV on its side, traced the plates and realized it was Waltrip's vehicle.

Waltrip's first season as a car owner running Toyotas in NASCAR has been a difficult one, to say the least. Illegal fuel additives found in his engine during the Daytona 500 led to a record fine of $100,000 and 100 drivers points in the championship standings. He hasn't even managed to qualify for any of the other five races since the 500. Driver Dale Jarrett has only made the field on provisionals for 5 of those 6 races and is currently 37th in the points. Teammate David Reutimann failed to make two races and is 43rd in the standings. And now, Waltrip has this matter to contend with. It simply hasn't been his year so far.

Thanks for the tip, TGM3!

[Source: Yahoo! Sports]

Michael Waltrip rolls SUV, is charged with leaving scene of accident originally appeared on Autoblog on Wed, 11 Apr 2007 12:04:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>Michael WaltripMichaelWaltripNASCARrolloverToyota Land CruiserToyota NASCARToyotaLandCruiserToyotaNascarWed, 11 Apr 2007 12:04:00 EST<![CDATA[NHTSA to require anti-roll tech on all cars by 2012]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2007/04/06/nhtsa-to-require-anti-roll-tech-on-all-cars-by-2012/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/04/06/nhtsa-to-require-anti-roll-tech-on-all-cars-by-2012/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/04/06/nhtsa-to-require-anti-roll-tech-on-all-cars-by-2012/#commentsFiled under: ,

The NHTSA revealed the final rules on the mandatory installation of electronic stability control (ESC) to help prevent rollovers on all vehicles by the 2012 model year (September 2011). The legislation applies to all vehicles under 10,000 pounds, and was ushered in without dissent by automakers. Carmakers that produce less than 5,000 cars per year will be given more time to phase in the technology.

With their increased propensity to roll over, 90% of SUVs already feature ESC, but only 40% of 2007 model cars do. Given the disproportionate fatality rate for rollovers - only 2% of auto accidents result in rollovers, but rollovers account for 40% of fatalities - having all cars equipped with ESC is estimated to reduce rollovers up to 84%, save up to 10,300 lives, and prevent up to 238,000 serious injuries per year. When it comes to single vehicle crashes, SUV rollovers could drop by 59%, with passenger cars dropping 34%.

The threshold test will be conducted at 50 mph, using a steering robot to swerve the vehicle in a predetermined pattern while the vehicle is moving at 50 mph. According to the NHTSA, the test is severe enough to cause most vehicles to spin out without ESC. Mandated equipment includes an indicator light to warn drivers about problems with the ESC.

Since ESC employs computer-controlled selective braking, all cars must also be equipped with ABS, which is a direction automakers were headed in anyway. The cost to automakers will be in the area of $985 million, but the cost-per-vehicle will only be $111, a small premium for a life saved. The cost of property damage is also expected to drop by up to $450 million per year.

One glaring weak spot is the roof. While the NHTSA has been reviewing roof strength since the '90s, proposals have been opposed by safety advocates as too weak and manufacturers as too strong.

Exceptions to always-on ESC could off-road vehicles, use on track days, driving in deep snow, and mismatched tire sizes (e.g., using a spacesaver spare). Ford and GM have indicated they expect to beat the mandatory deadline by a year.

[Source: Detroit News]

NHTSA to require anti-roll tech on all cars by 2012 originally appeared on Autoblog on Fri, 06 Apr 2007 19:49:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>absesclegislationnhtsarolloverFri, 06 Apr 2007 19:49:00 EST<![CDATA[Safety group sues NHTSA in Explorer debacle]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2007/04/02/safety-group-sues-nhtsa-in-explorer-debacle/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/04/02/safety-group-sues-nhtsa-in-explorer-debacle/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/04/02/safety-group-sues-nhtsa-in-explorer-debacle/#commentsFiled under: , , , ,

There's still fallout landing from the Firestone-tire-crashing-Explorer episode. Maryland-based Quality Control Systems Corporation has sued NHTSA in an attempt to gain access to any reports Ford made to the agency regarding injuries and deaths from tire-related incidents. This latest action, under the Freedom Of Information Act, has been brought on by NHTSA's refusal to share any data it's collected about Explorer crashes.

NHTSA has been waffling about the level of detail it will release. A federal judge had ordered the agency to revamp a proposed rule allowing a high level of secrecy. The order was appealed by the Rubber Manufacturers Association, we're assuming in the interest of self preservation, and NHTSA is sitting on its hands until that appeal is resolved. If something was amiss with the tires, recommended inflation pressure, or just plain bad driving, the public deserves transparency. NHTSA contends that deciding what level of information to release on a case-by-case basis would be overwhelming - as well as possibly revealing sensitive corporate information. A blanket policy favoring informing the public, rather than protecting companies that make faulty products would be a step in the right direction. Instead, we're going to still be in the dark while time is wasted clogging up the legal system and paying lawyers to duke it out. Now, that's what we call progress.

[Source: Detriot Free Press]

Safety group sues NHTSA in Explorer debacle originally appeared on Autoblog on Mon, 02 Apr 2007 06:54:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>explorerfordinformationlawsuitlegalnhtsarolloversecrecysecretsueMon, 02 Apr 2007 06:54:00 EST<![CDATA[VIDEO: Corvair to Nader: Kiss my unsafe quarter panel!]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2007/02/23/video-corvair-to-nader-kiss-my-unsafe-quarter-panel/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/02/23/video-corvair-to-nader-kiss-my-unsafe-quarter-panel/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/02/23/video-corvair-to-nader-kiss-my-unsafe-quarter-panel/#commentsFiled under: , , ,



YouTube serves up another cool video. Corvairs are hella cool, and they were tarred and feathered out of existence by zealots. They were no worse than other cars on the road at the time, but they were picked up as all that was wrong with motoring safety by Ralph Nader. Cars in in the late '50s when the Corvair was developed were all less safe than what we have now. 50 years of scientific study and applied engineering will do that for you. This video offers up some great scenes of a Corvair being herded around Lime Rock's track, as well as some off-road adventures. This is marketing propaganda, so of course the little chuffer comes off as unburstable. It also shows the infancy of the rigorous vetting processes cars must go through now. The handling test is especially hilarious, as the edit is made just as the tail of the rear-engined Corvair starts to come around. Showing a spin is not the best way to demonstrate platform stability. We get to see Corvairs rolled over, driven off slopes that are larger than would be wise, and fording streams. Hyperbolic advertising aside, it's pretty cool to see an early 'Vair abused in such a gratifying manner. Unsafe? pfft! Then as now, it's mainly the loose nut behind the wheel that causes problems.

Video after the jump

Continue reading VIDEO: Corvair to Nader: Kiss my unsafe quarter panel!

VIDEO: Corvair to Nader: Kiss my unsafe quarter panel! originally appeared on Autoblog on Fri, 23 Feb 2007 15:58:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>60'sadvertisingchevroletcorvairgmlime rockLimeRocknaderrollovertestingvideoFri, 23 Feb 2007 15:58:00 EST<![CDATA[NHTSA pursuing tougher crash standards]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2007/01/09/nhtsa-persuing-tougher-crash-standards/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/01/09/nhtsa-persuing-tougher-crash-standards/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/01/09/nhtsa-persuing-tougher-crash-standards/#commentsFiled under: ,

Getting a five-star crash test rating will get a whole lot tougher with a new proposal from the Bush Administration that would put into effect a requirement for side-impact testing.

Grade inflation is one of the reasons behind the change, and with 87% of all vehicles earning a four- or five-star rating, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) admits that its rating system lacks influence in the car-buying decision (and we all know how much a government agency hates not having sufficient influence).

In addition to a side-impact test that might replicate a broadslide slide into a pole or tree, NHTSA is considering adding weight to the barriers to simulate impacts with heavier vehicles, increasing the speed used in crash tests, and modifying crash-test dummies to better represent smaller female occupants.

[Source: Detroit News]

NHTSA pursuing tougher crash standards originally appeared on Autoblog on Tue, 09 Jan 2007 14:57:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>crash testingfive starfour starfrontalnhtsaroll overrolloversafetyside impactsTue, 09 Jan 2007 14:57:00 EST<![CDATA[Ford bolstering roofs of some models in wake of lawsuits]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2006/12/06/ford-bolstering-roofs-of-some-models-in-wake-of-lawsuits/http://www.autoblog.com/2006/12/06/ford-bolstering-roofs-of-some-models-in-wake-of-lawsuits/http://www.autoblog.com/2006/12/06/ford-bolstering-roofs-of-some-models-in-wake-of-lawsuits/#commentsFiled under: , , , , ,

When a vehicle rolls over, one of the critical components in assuring the safety of its occupants is the roof structure and its ability to protect, not injure its occupants. On the heels of nearly $250-million dollars in judgments relating to injuries caused in rollover accidents, Ford Motor Company has considerably stepped up its efforts to assure the roof strength of its vehicles.

A new standard proposed by NHTSA in August, 2005 raises the minimum force withstood by a roof structure from a multiple of 1.5 to 2.5 times the vehicle's weight while maintaining sufficient head room for a buckled-in average size adult male to avoid being struck by a crushed roof. Unfortunately, a final ruling could take as long as a year and would give the manufacturers until at least 2011 to comply.

In a letter to the NHTSA, Ford's director of automotive safety office, James P. Vondale, disclosed that some versions of 11 models would have roofs 20 percent stronger than required. For instance, the Expedition and Navigator, as well as some F-250 and E-series models would exceed the standard, matching the Volvo XC90, which has one of the strongest roofs on the market.

Follow the jump for more info and a list of the 11 models from Ford that will receive stronger roofs in the near future.

[Source: The Detroit News]

Continue reading Ford bolstering roofs of some models in wake of lawsuits

Ford bolstering roofs of some models in wake of lawsuits originally appeared on Autoblog on Wed, 06 Dec 2006 19:06:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>ExpeditionF-250Ford Motor CoFordMotorColawsuitsNavigatorNHTSArolloverWed, 06 Dec 2006 19:06:00 EST<![CDATA[GM plans to equip all models with rollover air bags]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2006/12/05/gm-plans-to-equip-all-models-with-rollover-air-bags/http://www.autoblog.com/2006/12/05/gm-plans-to-equip-all-models-with-rollover-air-bags/http://www.autoblog.com/2006/12/05/gm-plans-to-equip-all-models-with-rollover-air-bags/#commentsFiled under: , , ,



Although rollovers only make up three percent of crashes in the US, they account for over a quarter of all traffic fatalities. General Motors is in the process of investing over $10 million to study the effects of rollover crashes and while doing so, has made a pledge to outfit all their vehicles with rollover-enabled airbags by 2012.

Currently, a little under half of the vehicles sold by GM are equipped with such detection and deployment systems, and although the number of rollover crashes is small in comparison when viewed amidst the majority of crashes, the General thinks that more research is necessary.

[Source: Detroit News]

GM plans to equip all models with rollover air bags originally appeared on Autoblog on Tue, 05 Dec 2006 06:49:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>airbagsfatalitiesgeneral motorsGeneralMotorsrolloversuvTue, 05 Dec 2006 06:49:00 EST