Is the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration about to add some more safety measures to your next new car? According to The Detroit News, they might be. The Motown daily says that government officials are pondering whether or not they should require new vehicles to be fitted with lane-departure warning systems and automatic braking systems that trigger upon warning of an impending accident. Both systems are currently available only in very small percentage of new passenger cars – primarily luxury vehicles. According to the DetNews report, safety experts believe that the systems "show significant promise" in their ability to reduce traffic accident-related fatalities and injuries.

NHTSA will decide whether to require such systems in 2011 after further cost-benefit analysis, including looking at insurance company data and estimated manufacturing costs. It has already added new components to its New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) for 2011 vehicles, including a test that measures the effectiveness of lane-departure warning systems and a different frontal-crash program.

NHTSA hopes to announce its findings by the end of the year.

[Source: The Detroit News]

Some cars have red turn signal lamps, while others have an amber hue. Big deal, right? The National Highway Traffic Safety Association thinks it is, after finding that amber lights are 5.3% more effective at preventing crashes than the red blinkers. NHTSA came to that conclusion after comparing crash data of vehicles that switched from one color to another. Europe already mandates the amber turn signal, and NHTSA says that data from other agencies supports their findings. As it is, American cars sold in Europe already receive legal turn signal units – even if they aren't sold that way in America (see Chevrolet's C6 Corvette as an example).

NHTSA is now asking the public whether it should mandate amber turn signals for all vehicles sold in the States. Unfortunately for automakers, amber turn signals aren't exactly high fashion here in the U.S., as the vast majority of the signals are of the red blinking variety, likely because of cost considerations. While it's true that the auto industry is probably suffering from a case of far too many regulations, anything that can improve safety by up to 5.3% without costing an arm and a leg is probably worth considering. If NHTSA gives automakers a reasonable amount of time to implement the changes, automakers may be able to fit the change into the next design cycle.

[Source: Kicking Tires]

What would you think to be the leading contributor to fatalities in car crashes here in the States? Failure to use seat belts? Speeding? Drunk driving? Think again. According to a new study commissioned by Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation (PIRE), the leading cause of highway fatalities is deficient road conditions. In fact, the study asserts, with a roadway-related crash occurring every minute on American streets, inadequate roadway infrastructure is responsible for the majority of highway fatalities in the United States and over a third of injuries incurred in non-fatal crashes as well.

Given the state of many roadways, you might think that the situation – like America's road network – is beyond repair. However, the study, entitled "On a Crash Course: The Dangers and Health Costs of Deficient Roadways," assesses the financial cost alone of crashes caused by these substandard roadways – as a whopping $217 billion annually, including medical bills, loss of productivity and property damage. That's more than three-and-a-half times the $59 billion which local, state and federal governments in the United States invest in improving America's roadways. PIRE's solution? Improving road conditions, of course, including better signage and markings, widening shoulders and removing obstacles from roadsides. Follow the jump to read more on PIRE's findings and suggested solutions for what it deems is one of the largest killers in America.

[Source: Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation | Image: STR/AFP/Getty]

For a guy who allegedly wants a lot of the credit for creating Tesla Motors, Elon Musk certainly doesn't seem to like the job of being its CEO. As part of Daimler's investment deal with Tesla, Musk needed to commit to staying on as Tesla's CEO at least until the Model S launches in 2011. Musk told Reuters:

I didn't really have a choice. This was a requirement of Daimler that I remain CEO of Tesla through the Model S launch and then continue to be part of Tesla in a chairman role beyond that. It's flattering, but at the same time it's golden handcuffs.

Well, that sure makes it sound like fun, doesn't it? It's clear that Musk has always been interested in projects other than Tesla (e.g.: electric planes and SpaceX), but does he have to make running one of the hippest electric car companies around sound like a drag?

Another nugget from the article: One of the reasons the price on the Roadster was raised was to help qualify Tesla Motors for the DOE loan it later received. Musk said, "We did the minimum we needed to do to make the business work."



[Source: Reuters]

We'd wager that the last thing Toyota wants in the midst of the super-important launch of its new third-generation Prius is a negative stigma attached to the previous model. Unfortunately, that's exactly what the Japanese automaker may have on its hands as a number of owners of the 2005-2008 Toyota Prius with the HID headlight option are banding together on online forums, message boards and in possible class action lawsuits against the automaker in relation to failing headlamps.

According to Advertising Age, these HID headlight bulbs and their associated electronics can sometimes cost well over $1,000 to replace after they've gone faulty, and Toyota is unwilling to pick up the tab. At least one lawsuit has reportedly been filed last month by Girard Gibbs in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles on behalf of a Putnam County, N.Y., Prius owner. The suit contends that the problem is a "dangerous but undisclosed safety defect" and alleges that "Toyota is concealing the problems from owners" despite having been "long been aware of Prius' HID headlight problem." It's possible that the suit will get class-action status.

The NHTSA has reportedly filed a preliminary investigation into the issue and contacted Toyota on May 13 regarding 338 complaints it has received so far from Prius owners about the HID headlamps. Spokesmen from Toyota have said the automaker is cooperating with the NHTSA investigation, which may or may not end up calling for an official recall.



[Source: Advertising Age]

A new study by RL Polk & Co. shows that the kind of car you drive is tied to the state you live in, and whether that state is traditionally Republican or Democrat-leaning. The study shows that 36 of the 50 United States tie closely to political lines. Red states (Republican) typically buy domestic, while blue states (Democrat) typically skew import.

In states where Democrats won three of the past four elections, imports consist of as much as 60% of the market, while Republican strongholds favor domestics by up to 74%. The paradigm changes slightly in traditionally Democrat states that also produce a lot of cars and trucks. States like Wisconsin and Michigan still prefer domestic products. The three states that have been split over the past four elections also prefer domestic vehicles.

The exact reason for the phenomenon isn't clear, but a quick view of the political map shows that traditional Democrat strongholds are on the east and west coast, where imports are preferred. The center of the country traditionally favors Republicans, especially in the South. That's pickup truck country, and Ford, GM and Chrysler dominate the segment.

[Source: Washington Times | Image: Infovis.net]

The long-fought battle surrounding Michelin PAX runflat tires on certain 2005-2007 Honda Odyssey and 2006-2007 Acura RL models has finally come to a close. A Maryland judge has awarded $83,000 to those taking part in the class-action lawsuit, netting each plaintiff $5,000, $2,500, or $2,000 for tire replacements.

The suit claimed Honda and Michelin weren't upfront about the cost or durability of the tires, and that they last half as long as standard radials. As part of the settlement, Michelin is offering a three-year, 36,000-mile warranty on the tires to the 94,000 owners of the affected models. Also offered is a $300 rebate on a new Odyssey or Acura RL, or $110 for the purchase of a Honda-approved PAX spare tire kits. Hat tip to FaLex.

[Source: Greenville Online]

The final days of MG were disastrous and disastrously expensive. The British government finally has an accounting of what happened, but it only adds to both sides of the disaster: the report took four years and £16 million ($26 million U.S.) for CPA firm BDO Stoy Howard to compile.

For now, various government figures are upset about the delay and the cost. BDO is reported to have spent more than £130,000 ($214,000 U.S.) on hotels and expenses, leading to charges of the firm "living like kings" while MG's workers were living on government support. The report hasn't been released yet, so no one knows what it says. When it is made public, if the MG story continues as it has, what's actually in the report will probably be just as hard to swallow as the lead-up to it.

[Source: Sunday Mercury]

When President Obama signed the Cash-for-Clunkers bill into law back on June 24, the Transportation Department was given 30 days to set the official rules and regulations for the program that will put the plan into motion. According to the official CARS (Car Allowance Rebate System) site, NHTSA intends to get the deed done a day early by July 23. Although the paper the President signed stipulated that consumers may be eligible for the program starting on Wednesday, July 1, the Transportation Department is warning dealers not the jump the gun:

Interested dealers and consumers may want to wait until all of the detailed issues that must be addressed in the implementing regulations are resolved. If a dealer chooses to structure a transaction before the final rule is issued, they will bear the risks associated with later demonstrating that the transaction meets all of the specifications of the final rule.

Dealerships who violate the official rules and regulations may be subject to fines of up to $15,000. Still have questions? Click here to see the complete list of FAQs straight from the NHTSA.

[Source: CARS | Image: kudzuplanet under C.C. 2.0]

The saga of California's greenhouse gas waiver has come to an end with the EPA deciding that the state can indeed enforce its own GHG emissions standards for new motor vehicles. This means that, at least between now (with current model year vehicles) and when the 2012 MY vehicles arrive, California and the 13 states (and D.C.) that have adopted its rules will use the stricter emission standards to regulate vehicles. In the EPA's statement on the decision, it says it used "the law and science as its guide," in order to "tackle air pollution and protect human health." EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson says:


Here's a short history of the waiver story: CARB asked for the waiver in December of 2005. The EPA announced in December of 2007 that it would deny the waiver (after then Vice President Dick Cheney met with automakers). The day after Barack Obama was inaugurated, CARB asked the EPA to reconsider the denial, a request that the new President supported. When strong national CAFE standards were announced in May, the EPA's waiver lost a bit of its punch, but it still wanted the waiver to bridge the gap between now and when the CAFE rules go into effect with 2012 vehicles. Today, the EPA said "okay." Come to think of it, this saga probably isn't as final as this decision might imply. Check out the official press release after the jump.

[Source: EPA | Image: David McNew/Getty]