Men Free Blog

Anybody who watches Autoline on Detroit or reads our Autoline on Autoblog posts will know that John McElroy is a certifiably nice guy. Bob Lutz is known more as a brash talker who isn’t afraid to make his views known, regardless of what others may think. Both of them, though, are very closely attuned to the auto industry. The head product-honcho at GM and our very own Mr. Nice Guy share the opinion that the Feds should suspend their ever-increasing crash-testing standards for a few years. If a car is safe enough for our European relatives, it should be safe enough for us, right? In reality, this is not the case, as the U.S. standards differ enough from those across the pond that a car sometimes needs to be designed specifically to pass one or the other. For this reason, the Chevy Beat won’t be sold on U.S. soil.

To complete the deal, McElroy also suggests doing the same for environmental standards. As with crash tests, though both the U.S. and the European regulations are strict, they don’t quite match. Therefore, many cars — especially those equipped with diesel engines — can’t be sold in the States despite being available in Europe. Lutz doesn’t specifically touch on this point, but we’d hazard a guess that he’d go along with it as well.

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]

Read

Transport Canada has been planning on implementing a change which would lower Canadian bumper safety standards from the current 8 km/h standard to 4 km/h. This halving of the standard would bring the Canadian testing in line with the regulations of both Europe and the U.S. Apparently, Transport Canada believes that vehicles would be cheaper to import while maintaining automobile safety. In fact, Canadian officials believe that the new standard could actually improve pedestrian safety. Or not, according to the IIHS, which has sent a letter to Transport Canada urging them to reconsider making the change. The IIHS response is pretty scathing, Using words and phrases like “unsubstantiated, incorrect assumptions, ill-informed and misleading,” but the response could seemingly be summed up this way: Yo hosers, what were you thinking, eh? Thanks for the tip, Karen!

[Source: Auto North]

Sure, there’s always the airbag-equipped motorcycle, but for those who prefer to power their own two wheel transporters, you’re pretty much on your own. The Dutch Cycling Federation has just cranked out a study showing that some 60 lives could be saved each year (though we’re not sure if that’s worldwide or region-specific) if airbags were installed on the hoods of vehicles. These external safety devices could also slash serious cycling injuries by 1,500 a year, and while you’re likely passing this off as completely infeasible, Sweden’s own Autoliv has already developed a bag that “inflates from the bottom of the windscreen.” Of course, these timid cyclists could just wait until 2010 and strap on a wearable airbag of their own, but where’s the fun in that?

[Via Autoblog]

Read

Sure, there’s always the airbag-equipped motorcycle, but for those who prefer to power their own two wheel transporters, you’re pretty much on your own. The Dutch Cycling Federation has just cranked out a study showing that some 60 lives could be saved each year (though we’re not sure if that’s worldwide or region-specific) if airbags were installed on the hoods of vehicles. These external safety devices could also slash serious cycling injuries by 1,500 a year, and while you’re likely passing this off as completely infeasible, Sweden’s own Autoliv has already developed a bag that “inflates from the bottom of the windscreen.” Of course, these timid cyclists could just wait until 2010 and strap on a wearable airbag of their own, but where’s the fun in that?

[Via Autoblog]

Read

Let’s face it — pedestrians are already running amok in major city crosswalks; it’s not like we really need to help them hold up the line of traffic any longer while their light is red, is it? All pent up aggression aside, Hanyoung Lee’s brilliant Virtual Wall concept could certainly assist the non-hardened tourists cross from one side to another without fear of being flattened. Essentially, the light-formed barrier would keep cars and Earthlings separated while individuals are cleared to walk, and while we aren’t sure if bumping into said obstacle would cause tire deflation, engine stall or any other totally tough consequences, we can’t imagine it being too effective (or fun, in a devilish way) otherwise.

Read

Infiniti has a knack for keeping technophiles grinning, and just as it did with the G35’s in-dash entertainment system, it’s bringing geeks even more automotive improvements to keep our minds off of those skyrocketing gas prices. Reportedly, both the 2009 FX35 and FX50 will be available with all-around cameras (you know, like those found on the EX35), Intelligent Cruise Control and Distance Control Assist. The automaker seems particularly proud of that last one, as it claims to be the first in the industry to offer up the tech. Put simply, DCA will assist drivers in releasing the throttle and applying the brakes as needed in stop-and-go / congested traffic, and (obviously) the system stays activated even after the brakes are tapped. Check out the read link for a few more sneak peeks at the forthcoming features.

Read

In the last 24 hours, we’ve been accosted with more high-tech, in-car wizardry than we’ve ever asked for. And while you’ll have to wait until next week to read our review of the new Infiniti FX, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has weighed in on the top five new safety technologies that may, or may not, have an effect on crash rates.

The IIHS studied the effectiveness of blind-spot detection systems, adaptive headlamps, lane-departure warning systems, forward-collision warning systems with automatic braking and emergency brake assist, and found that despite the hype, some of them may not be as useful as automakers make them out to be.

Of the 2.3 million frontal crashes that take place annually, 7,200 result in a fatality. The proliferation of systems that can detect an imminent frontal collision, sound a warning and if the drive doesn’t react, preload all the safety systems and begin applying the brakes may prove useful. The same goes for lane departure warning systems, which notify the driver with a tone if they begin veering out of their lane. Others, like blind-spot detection systems won’t have as much affect on road fatalities since they don’t account for a substantial amount of fatal crashes, but they’ll certainly make people more aware of their surroundings.

The IIHS also noted that adaptive headlamps, which turn in conjunction with the wheel to illuminate around a curve, might cause drivers to increase their speed, making a crash more probable. While we don’t buy that last one, it highlights the point that’s often left out of these studies: driver error is the number one cause of collisions. Fix that and all this added technology is superfluous.

[Source: IIHS via Detroit News]