2007 Nissan Sentra SE-R

Pocket Rocket With a Gee Factor.

Type: Compact front-drive performance sedan.
MSRP: $20,525 - $22,880 (tested).
Engine: A 2.5-liter in-line 4-cylinder (200 horsepower, 180 pound-feet of torque); six-speed manual transmission.
Consumption: E.P.A. mileage estimate is 24 m.p.g. in town, 31 on the highway.
Alternatives: Honda Civic Si sedan ($21,685), Chevrolet Cobalt SS ($19,515), Hyundai Tiburon GT ($19,995), Mini Cooper S ($21,850).

Here is a car-marketing rule of thumb: the more letters and suffixes tacked onto a car name, the more gaudy accouterments — inside and out — the car will possess. So naturally you’d expect something called the 2007 Nissan Sentra SE-R Spec V to be pretty well endowed.

But the Spec V — let’s simply call it that — is surprisingly subdued in its excesses. Although it’s decked out with the requisite rear spoiler, bright red seat belts, and 17-inch aluminum alloy wheels, which have an awkward spoke pattern and look like stove-top gas burners, I felt relieved that things weren’t bigger, shinier and worse — with one exception.

A G meter sits front and center on the gray dashboard. It measures the G forces — how many times the force of gravity is pulling on your body. It also measures the extent to which Nissan has gone too far.

Not only is the Spec V a performance version of the Sentra, it is the performance version of the performance trim version — the SE-R — and sort of a pocket rocket squared.

The SE-R made its debut in 1991 as the Sentra’s top trim level. It came with a more powerful engine and was an instant underground hit with enthusiasts. For most of the decade, the SE-R was one of just a few performance-oriented compacts sequestered below the lackluster mainstream.

But then came the movie “The Fast and the Furious,” and automakers were suddenly made aware of a whole new market to exploit. In 2002, it was no longer enough to have just an SE-R. Nissan added a Spec V. In 2007, you needed a G meter.

I kept my eye on that G meter for the better part of five days of driving. Most of the time, the needle sat right on zero, but it wasn’t for the lack of trying. Oh, I tried. I pegged the car on on-ramps and off-ramps. I stopped short and started hard. The most I coaxed out of the Spec V was 0.1 g. Maybe it was broken. Maybe it is unnecessary.

Based on the sixth-generation Sentra, the Spec V is more powerful than the previous version. The 2.5-liter 4-cylinder engine returns 200 horsepower, which is 23 more than the SE-R and 60 more than the 2-liter 4 found in the regular Sentra. And the sound is beautiful, a smooth, graceful hum all the way up to the redline of 6,800 r.p.m.

The Spec V is available only with a close-ratio six-speed manual gearbox, which does the job without quirks or wobbles between gears. The electronic power steering feels direct, with a good amount of weight on surface streets, but on freeways the power assist seemed overdone.

You get the sense that all of the mechanical bits have been tweaked according to focus groups and research data to walk the delicate line between performance and comfort. The Spec V is definitely bigger and more spacious than ever. But it is also roughly 400 pounds heavier than the 2006 model. To stiffen the chassis, there is a larger front stabilizer bar and a V-brace behind the rear seats. A sport-tuned suspension and four-wheel disc brakes (including 12.6-inch rotors up front) also help the Spec V tuck in its weight. But all of that equipment fails to hide the bulk altogether.

The Spec V feels athletic but not chiseled. Road & Track clocked it at 6.6 seconds from a stop to 60 m.p.h., so its acceleration is better than ever. But the weight is the biggest factor in the overall feel of the car, which pales in comparison with the more enthusiastic pocket rockets of its ilk, like the Honda Civic Si and the Mini Cooper S.

And for a car with a name as long as the Nissan Sentra SE-R Spec V, it is more of an everyday driver than you’d expect. It’s still sporty and fun, but it is likely to disappoint extremists, especially those in search of higher Gs.
(C)NYT

Top 20 Most Dangerous Vehicles

Here are the 20 most dangerous vehicles according to 'real world safety' from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

Hoping to stay safe on the road? You might want to avoid certain cars.

For example, the Nissan 350Z has a death rate that's about double that of the average sports car.

But it's not for the reasons you might think. In this case, says Russ Rader, communications director for the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), an organization that represents the interests of the insurance industry, the 350Z is part of a group of vehicles that tends to be driven by younger, less-experienced or riskier drivers, and stands out for having high death rates, through no particular fault of the car.

"When they are in crashes," he adds, "they're particularly serious ones."

This illustrates a key point: Simply looking at the historical death rates for one particular model might not give much insight into the relative danger, or safety, of driving that vehicle. Furthermore, the most recent available federal data, interpreted by make and model by the IIHS, covers 2001 to 2004 model years in calendar years 2002 to 2005. Many models have had significant changes in safety equipment or complete redesigns since then.

The consensus among several safety experts we asked is that the best way to predict how dangerous or safe a new vehicle will be comes from looking at the way it's configured, particularly with respect to several important factors — side-impact protection, stability control and rollover risk — that together span a wide range in real-world safety.

That's what we did. Topping the list of the least safe: the Buick Rendezvous, the Ford Ranger/Mazda B-Series, the Nissan Frontier, the Ford Escape/Mercury Mariner and the Toyota Yaris.

High-Priority Protection
Among the various crash tests the IIHS performs on new vehicles, according to Rader, they see the widest range of results in those with side-impact and rear whiplash protection.

"What makes a vehicle unsafe today is a lack of side-impact protection," he says. "Whiplash is not a life-threatening injury, but head injuries [from a side impact] are commonly life-threatening."

Side-curtain airbags have been shown to greatly increase the chances of surviving a classic "T-bone" side-impact accident, such as when the other vehicle runs a stoplight, and depending on the design, they can also increase the chances of surviving a rollover. Side-curtain bags are mandated for all 2009 vehicles, and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) estimates that these alone will reduce fatal side-impact head injuries by 45 percent, saving up to 1,000 lives per year.

"Side airbags designed to protect your head are crucial, because a head injury is the most common fatal injury in a crash," says Rader. "It's the difference between life and death."

Structurally Sound
Along with side airbags, a vehicle also needs a well-built side structure to withstand a strong blow from vehicles of varying heights, says Rader.

Which leads to another major point: "Size and weight are very important aspects of safety," he says. "The laws of physics always apply in a crash. That means that people in smaller and lighter vehicles are always at a disadvantage in crashes with other vehicles."

In single-vehicle crashes, the weight advantage isn't as pronounced, but the statistics still point in favor of larger, if not heavier vehicles, he says.

However, John Linkov, managing editor of Consumer Reports, says that smaller and lighter vehicles aren't necessarily more dangerous. In many cases, they may offer handling and maneuverability advantages to help avoid accidents.

"A more nimble, better-handling vehicle," he says, "is likely going to be easier to control in an emergency and help the driver avoid the dangerous situation."

While generally heavier SUVs and pickups are at an advantage in multi-vehicle accidents, they've been shown to be at quite a disadvantage in single-vehicle accidents (such as when the driver falls asleep, or loses control swerving around a deer), which comprise 43 percent of fatal accidents.

In this type of accident, SUVs and pickups have more than double the chance of rolling over, according to NHTSA data. This risk relates closely to overall federal fatality data, showing that SUVs and pickups generally have a higher fatality rate than cars of a similar weight.

Corrective Measures
Electronic stability control systems, which smartly apply the brakes on one or more of the wheels as best to avoid loss of vehicle control in an extreme maneuver, have been offered for more than a decade in some luxury and high-performance vehicles, but the technology has been trickling down to most mainline brands over the past several model years.

NHTSA has called it the most significant development since the seat belt, and the federal government has mandated electronic stability control, but not until the 2012 model year. NHTSA estimates that the stability control mandate will prevent up to 9,600 fatalities and 238,000 injuries annually, at an average cost of $111 per vehicle in addition to the cost of antilock brakes, which most vehicles already offer as standard equipment or as an option.

"Electronic stability control is one of those rare safety features that's having a dramatic effect on saving lives," says Rader. "Stability control alone can reduce the risk of fatal single-vehicle crashes by 56 percent. And it can reduce fatal single-vehicle rollovers by 80 percent for SUVs, 77 percent for passenger cars."

Even though stability control was only offered in some of the more expensive SUVs a few years ago, Rader says that its impact is already easily seen in the Institute's yearly list of vehicles with the lowest death rates. Rader said that in the past, only a few of them were SUVs, but now they make up nearly half of the list.

Terrifying Trucks
Pickups are another surprisingly unsafe group of vehicles. Based on fatality-rate data, they're by far the most dangerous, says Michael Dulberger, president of the safety advocacy group Informed for Life.

"Pickups as a class have the highest rate of fatality and serious injury," he says, "and they have a very high rollover risk."

Rader agrees. "Pickups have a rollover problem," he says. "They have a high center of gravity and a high propensity to roll over." And making matters worse, "They're the laggards in electronic stability control," he says.

Last year, only one pickup model offered electronic stability control, according to Rader, while this year it's standard on 8 percent of models and optional on 20 percent. By comparison, 87 percent of SUVs now have standard stability control, according to the Institute.

Linkov agrees that some pickups pose the most danger to inexperienced drivers. "What we're seeing is that young people in places where pickups are a de facto choice are at an especially strong risk, with their propensity to roll over," he says.

Any vehicle can be especially unsafe if it's used in a way it's not designed for, such as if a high-clearance pickup is used primarily empty on curvy, hilly roads, according to Linkov.

"Combine that with a poorly trained driver," he says, "and it's dangerous."

The Methodology
As we've outlined, generalized fatality statistics point toward today's most dangerous new vehicles as those that are light, don't provide proper side-impact protection (airbags), have a higher propensity to roll over, don't handle particularly well and lack electronic stability control.

Informed for Life releases SCORE (Statistical Combination of Risk Elements) data each year, which combines all the available safety data from the federal government and the IIHS, along with the role of weight and the presence of stability control, into a single number for each particular model, making it easier to compare vehicles of varying sizes or body types.

The SCORE is calculated according to the role that each element plays in general fatal accidents. For instance, as about 26 percent of national accident fatalities occur in a side impact, 26 percent of the SCORE depends on the vehicle's rated side-impact protection.

The system, which has been implemented for about five years, more closely matches the fatality rate on a model-by-model basis than either IIHS or NHTSA ratings alone. And it's easy to decipher; it's on a scale that's proportional to risk, with the average passenger car ranked 100.

So, for instance, a SCORE of 150 means that the relative risk of driver fatality is 50 percent higher than for the average passenger car. In the group's 2007 list, the most dangerous vehicle, the Buick Rendezvous, at 161, has more than three times the relative risk of fatality than the Hyundai Entourage and Kia Sedona minivans, at 51.

To distill our list of the most dangerous vehicles, we looked at Informed for Life's bottom-of-the-heap results for 2007 model-year vehicles, including vehicles with a full range of crash-test results from NHTSA, the IIHS, or a combination of the two; and to also consider the role of accident avoidance (or lack thereof), we broke any ties with Consumer Reports' accident avoidance scores.

CR first measures the vehicle's maximum stable speed through emergency handling, essentially simulating a quick swerve around an obstacle and back into the right lane, then factors in driving position, visibility and seat comfort — all issues that the organization deems important in successfully avoiding an accident.

We're aware that this is a snapshot of the most dangerous cars among those that have been extensively tested, and that there may be more dangerous vehicles that either haven't yet been fully crash-tested or were only partially tested. Please consult www.safercar.gov or www.iihs.org if you're concerned about a particular model.

How Carmakers Reacted
Automakers were generally supportive of a methodology that looked for the safest — or in this case, the least safe — vehicles through a composite assessment of existing crash-test results, and considering side-impact protection and rollover likelihood, instead of looking at prior model-by-model fatality or injury data.

GM
Alan Adler, GM's safety spokesman, confirms that it's important to look at a wide range of information. "You've identified two technologies [side airbags and stability control] that are important, and we have rollout plans for both," says Adler.

More than 40 percent of GM's light trucks now have side-curtain airbags that allow head protection even in rollovers. Stability control is offered in 35 percent of GM vehicles for 2007, and the percentage rises to about 50 percent for 2008, according to Adler. Regarding SUVs and pickups, Adler says that "rollover is a big deal" to the company, which now does its own rollover safety testing.

To shoppers who might wonder why stability control isn't yet installed in more vehicles, GM's Adler says, "It isn't something you can slap on a vehicle," and explains that the automaker has been working to install it across the board ever since the agencies have revealed its importance. "It's a major engineering change to the vehicle."

Toyota
Toyota spokesman Bill Kwong questions the correlation between weight and safety; he says that Toyota has been incorporating more high-strength steel, which improves crash resistance yet saves weight, though again, at a higher cost to the automaker.

Kwong said that side-impact airbags are now available on all Toyota cars. They're optional on the Corolla, along with the Yaris and Matrix, two cars that ranked among the least-safe vehicles, according to our methodology, without the option.

"Those models are more price sensitive," especially the Yaris, which is why the side bags are optional, according to Kwong. He adds that dealerships are told to inform shoppers of the benefits of the Yaris's side airbag system.

Ford
Several Ford Motor vehicles were on our Most Dangerous list, but the company's safety spokesman, Daniel Jarvis, explains that these are all products near the end of their life cycle and not representative of the rest of Ford's model lineup.

Jarvis said the company places a strong emphasis on safety. Several of the vehicles that place highest in crash tests are from Ford, and the company has aggressive programs in place to install side airbags and stability control across its entire fleet.

"By the end of calendar year 2009, all retail vehicles will have stability control," says Jarvis; that would be nearly three years ahead of the federal mandate. Ford has also made an enhanced version, called Roll Stability Control, aimed to prevent the likelihood of rollover, standard on its larger Expedition and Explorer SUVs, and the company is adding the system to the smaller Escape sport-utility for the '08 model year.

Jarvis suggests there are a number of reasons why pickups have been among the last to get stability control, but one is that they come in such a wide range of powertrains and configurations, and each one of them needs to be engineered individually. "Complexity is one factor," he says.

Nissan
"Nissan has not had the opportunity to fully understand the methodology that went into this listing," says Jeannine Ginivan, a spokeswoman for Nissan. "That being said, Nissan takes its commitment to safety very seriously.

"All Nissan and Infiniti vehicles are engineered to meet or exceed government safety regulations as well as our own rigorous internal safety requirements — the Nissan Xterra and the Nissan Frontier are no exceptions. Nissan's electronic stability control feature, known as Vehicle Dynamic Control, is standard on the Xterra and currently an option on the Frontier. Rollover curtain airbags are also optional on both vehicles.

"As a company, we are committed to the safety of our vehicles and our drivers, and we urge everyone driving a Nissan or Infiniti vehicle to do so safely."

Suzuki
"At Suzuki, we place the utmost priority on manufacturing and selling safe vehicles, and both Forenza and Reno comply with all federal motor-vehicle safety standards," says David Boldt, communications manager. "Additionally, like all 2007 Suzuki passenger cars, the Forenza and Reno offer front-seat-mounted side airbags for both driver and passenger, as well as several layers of standard safety equipment.

"It's also important to note the active safety benefits provided by Forenza and Reno, with composed handling (four-wheel independent suspension), precise steering and four-wheel disc braking. Add excellent outward visibility for driver and passengers, and Suzuki's approach is to help the driver avoid an accident before it occurs."

Honda, Hyundai and Kia did not return calls for comment.

1. Buick Rendezvous
Four-Door SUV
SCORE: 161
Consumer Reports' accident avoidance: N/A

The minivan-based Rendezvous helped bring new customers to Buick dealerships, thanks to the Tiger Woods ad campaign behind it. But after the 2007 model year, the Rendezvous, with its abysmal three-star (out of five) NHTSA frontal impact rating, is history, to be replaced by the 2008 Buick Enclave, a crossover SUV with a full roster of standard safety equipment.

2. Ford Ranger/Mazda B-Series
Pickup, Regular Cab/Extended Cab: Four-Wheel Drive
SCORE: 153
Consumer Reports' accident avoidance: N/A

The Ranger still follows a simple, proven design that's good for pickup buyers who really want to keep it basic and affordable. Unfortunately, side airbags or curtain bags aren't available, even as an option; neither is stability control. What's more, the Ranger (and the nearly identical B-Series) gets a low three-star NHTSA rollover rating, (which corresponds to a 20% to 30% risk of rollover in a single-vehicle crash) with one of the highest rollover risk factors (0.3) of any vehicle.

3. Nissan Frontier
Extended-Cab Pickup
SCORE: 145
ConsumerReports' accident avoidance: Average

Stability control is optional on the Frontier, and recommended considering its three-star NHTSA rollover rating. The King Cab Frontier has surprisingly low three-star NHTSA frontal crash-test ratings (most other pickups do quite well in the frontal tests), though a four-door Crew Cab Frontier was given a better four-star frontal rating. The Frontier was also rated "Poor" (out of good, acceptable, marginal or poor) by the IIHS in rear impact. Both Frontiers tested didn't have side airbags or side curtain bags, which are also optional.

4. Ford Escape/Mercury Mariner
Four-Door SUVs
SCORE: 138
Consumer Reports' accident avoidance: N/A

Ford's small sport-utility vehicle, the Escape, and its cosmetically different sibling, the Mariner, were given an overall evaluation of "Poor" (the lowest possible rating) from the IIHS due to its lacking driver torso- and head-protection in the Institute's side-impact crash test (without the optional side airbag package). The federal government also gives the Mariner one of few three-star ratings, which corresponds to a relatively high risk of rollover. And stability control isn't available. Waiting for the '08 would be a smart move, as front side airbags, side curtain bags and stability control will all finally be standard.

5. Toyota Yaris
Four-Door
SCORE: 132
ConsumerReports' accident avoidance: Worse than average

Even though the Yaris has impressive fuel efficiency, a nicely designed interior, high expected reliability, and a number of other positive attributes, Consumer Reports' John Linkov says that the Yaris can't be recommended, "because its emergency handling is quite tail-happy and the driver could get out of control very quickly." And to make an especially dangerous combination, the Yaris four-door performs badly in both major side-crash tests, with three stars from NHTSA and a "Poor" rating from the IIHS.

6. Hyundai Accent
Four-Door
SCORE: 132
Consumer Reports' accident avoidance: Average

The Accent tested near the bottom among all cars, according to IIHS crash testing, with the organization giving it a "Poor" rating in both side-impact and rear-impact tests, plus an unimpressive "Acceptable" frontal rating. And this is with standard side airbags. When the federal government tested an Accent four-door sedan, it rated its side-impact performance with three stars--the lowest it gets in 2007.

7. Toyota Matrix/Pontiac Vibe
Four-Door
SCORE: 131
Consumer Reports' accident avoidance: Average

The Matrix and the closely related Vibe fair acceptably with four- and five-star results in the federal government's crash tests. But without the optional side airbags, the Matrix gets only three stars for front-seat passengers in the side-impact test. Stability control is optional on both models, which are due to be replaced by a new model after '08.

8. Kia Rio
Four-Door
SCORE: 127
Consumer Reports' accident avoidance: Better than average

The Rio is structurally similar to the Hyundai Accent. And like the Accent, it gets a low, three-star NHTSA side impact rating, plus appalling "Poor" ratings in both side- and rear-impact tests and the not-quite-passable "Acceptable" frontal rating from the IIHS. Surprisingly, those results are with the standard side airbags. Fortunately, the Rio has "better than average" accident avoidance qualities, according to Consumer Reports testing.

9. Chevrolet Aveo
Four-Door
SCORE: 126
Consumer Reports' accident avoidance: Average

The basic, lightweight Aveo, which is assembled in Korea by GM affiliate Daewoo, is the lowest-priced U.S.-market vehicle, starting at $9,995 for 2007. Side airbags are standard for front passengers, but not in back, and by the three-star side-impact result for rear-seat passengers and the "Marginal" side-impact result from the IIHS, occupants might not fare so well in a side-impact accident.

10. Suzuki Reno/Forenza
Five-Door/ Five-Door
SCORE: 125
Consumer Reports' accident avoidance: Average

The Reno and Forenza, a four-door hatchback and sedan, respectively, are also made by GM-Daewoo in Korea. Both come with standard front seat-mounted side airbags, but that doesn't seem to help them in IIHS side-impact tests, where they get "Poor" ratings in side impact, as well as rear impact. Side curtain airbags and stability control aren't available in either the Reno or Forenza.

11. Ford Focus
Two-Door Hatchback
SCORE: 124
Consumer Reports' accident avoidance: Average

The economical Focus received a "Poor" rating from the IIHS in its side impact test, and in federal tests it achieved only a three-star rating, with an accompanying warning regarding the high likelihood of head trauma. Compiling the risk, side-curtain airbags and stability control aren't available on the Focus, and seat-mounted side airbags are optional for front occupants.

12. Jeep Liberty
Four-Door SUV
SCORE: 118
Consumer Reports' accident avoidance: Average

The Jeep Liberty maneuvers much better in real-world driving than its height might suggest, and the "Average" CR accident avoidance score is reassuring. Yet it's also given just three stars in the federal rollover rating system. Additionally, in IIHS tests, the Liberty didn't fare so well, with a "Poor" rating in rear impact and a "Marginal" rating in front impact, together corresponding to a significantly higher chance of injuries if an accident occurs.

13. Dodge Dakota
Four-Door Pickup
SCORE: 117
Consumer Reports'accident avoidance: Average

First, the good: The mid-size Dakota is one of the least-tipsy pickups, with a four-star rollover rating, plus an "Average" accident avoidance rating. Now, the bad: It's rated "Acceptable" in front- and rear-impact tests, and there's no available stability control. Side airbags and side-curtain bags are optional.

14. Chevrolet Cobalt/Pontiac G5
Two-Door
SCORE: 117
Consumer Reports' accident avoidance: Much better than average (Cobalt SS)

The Chevy Cobalt and its almost identical twin, the Pontiac G5, are a little more dangerous than average due to their side-impact performance. The IIHS gave the Cobalt a "Poor" evaluation in its side-impact tests, and when NHTSA tested the Cobalt, they noted a safety concern over the higher-than-average likelihood of serious head trauma. Front-side airbags and side-curtain airbags are optional, but stability control is not available.

15. Nissan Xterra
Four-Door SUV
SCORE: 115
Consumer Reports' accident avoidance: Average

The tall, boxy Xterra sport-utility vehicle flaunts its rugged looks toward active young men, and fortunately comes with stability control to help remedy its three-star NHTSA rollover rating and especially high rollover risk. Frontal impact results are passable but unspectacular, at four stars. Side and side-curtain airbags are optional.

16. Saturn ION
Four-Door
SCORE: 115
Consumer Reports' accident avoidance: Better than average

The ION shares its underpinnings with the Chevrolet Cobalt and Pontiac G5, but has some more substantial differences. For instance, the rollover index is slightly better. The ION gets a "Poor" rating from the IIHS in side-impact testing, along with a three-star NHTSA side-impact rating for front occupants. Head-protective side-curtain airbags are optional; stability control is not.

17. Chrysler PT Cruiser
Van
SCORE: 114
Consumer Reports' accident avoidance: Average

The very retro-stylish yet roomy PT Cruiser has been around for quite a few years essentially unchanged, with no major update during that time. NHTSA side-impact performance for front occupants is a modest four stars. Front-seat side airbags aren't standard on all Cruisers, but they're available at extra cost. Stability control isn't available at all.

18. Honda S2000
Convertible
SCORE: 114
Consumer Reports' accident avoidance: Much better than average

The high-performance S2000 convertible has stellar handling and accident avoidance, and gets a surprisingly good five-star rating in NHTSA's side-impact test, plus a top five-star mark for rollover risk. But side airbags aren't at all available on the little, low-riding roadster.

19. Toyota Scion tC
Two-Door
SCORE: 113
Consumer Reports' accident avoidance: Better than average

Like most small, sporty coupes, the tC boasts good handling--as evidenced by CR's "better than average" rating for accident avoidance and a relatively low risk of rollover. But side-impact airbags aren't standard and if not equipped with the optional side airbags and curtain bags, the tC can be a little risky. It received a just-acceptable, four-star side-impact rating,

20. Mazda3
Four-Door/Five-Door Hatchback
SCORE: 113
Consumer Reports' accident avoidance: Much better than average

The Mazda3 has been the darling of automotive critics. The styling is unique and still stands out several years after introduction, the powertrain is peppy, and it's one of the best-handling small cars. Now for the bad part: Both the sedan and hatchback versions of the 3 fared very poorly in side-impact crash tests, garnering a lowly three-star rating from NHTSA and the lowest "Poor" rating from the IIHS. Side airbags aren't standard, either.
(C)Forbes

2007 Hyundai Azera Test Drive

If you can do without a few frills, Hyundai's Azera rides with some heady competition in the near-luxury segment, but at a much lower price.
MSRP: $24,235 - $27,335

Hyundai’s Azera is a midsize, entry-level luxury sedan that replaced the XG350 when it debuted for 2006. It is, in so many ways, light years ahead of that model, which itself seemed to be at least a generation or more behind its Japanese rivals in terms of performance, styling and accommodations. The question, however, is whether the Azera, no matter the improvements over the car it replaces, qualifies as a true competitor to luxury vehicles like the Lexus ES 350, or whether it’s merely Hyundai’s slightly dressier version of cars like the Honda Accord, Toyota Camry or, for that matter, Hyundai’s own Sonata. We’ll take the middle ground and call it a reasonable, and in some ways superior, alternative to models like the Buick LaCrosse or Toyota Avalon.

The Hyundai Azera costs a couple of thousand dollars less than an Avalon, and a lot less than a Lexus ES 350. It’s well equipped with only a handful of options available, but offers nothing in the way of the “gee-whiz” electronics that tend to define the latest luxury vehicles. This helps keep the cost down, but it tends to limit its appeal among gadget freaks that seek status in extolling the virtues of features like adaptive headlamps, “smart key” systems and laser-guided cruise control to their country-club acquaintances.

The car carries over from its inaugural 2006 model year with only minor changes that include new backlit electroluminescent instrumentation of the sort that Lexus has employed since the original LS 400. An engine immobilizer security feature is now included to help shave a few dollars off the car’s insurance premiums for comprehensive coverage, and the side mirrors incorporate turn-signal indicators, a feature that is both practical but also a bit of a conceit, in that luxury cars like Mercedes-Benzes typically have such indicators in their side mirrors.

As with all other Hyundais, the Azera is covered by a warranty that puts most, if not all, of the luxury makes to shame. This includes a five-year/60,000-mile bumper-to-bumper protection that pretty much takes care of everything, save for maintenance and normal wear-and-tear; 10-year/100,000-mile powertrain coverage for major components; and five-year/unlimited mileage roadside assistance, which is essentially a free auto-club subscription for towing and other perks.

As General Motors has discovered, selling cars with a generous warranty is a great way to attract buyers who might otherwise eschew a particular brand for fear of reliability issues. While we have not heard any widespread complaints about the longevity of recent Hyundai models, and their initial build quality is eclipsing that of older brands, according to J.D. Power and Associates’ Initial Quality Study, we’d look at the warranty as a no-cost service contract, which would otherwise cost several thousand dollars if sold by a dealer’s finance and insurance department.

Exterior
Overall, the Hyundai Azera is a handsomely styled, though not particularly flashy, automobile. With the logos covered up, few casual onlookers would likely identify it as a Hyundai, and some might even mistake it for a Lexus or Infiniti. It lacks the overt visual personality of, say, a Jaguar S-Type or Mercedes-Benz CLS-Class, but it’s in no way unattractive.

A wide front grille is flanked by horizontal halogen projector-beam headlamps, and the front fenders flow cleanly to the rear of the vehicle without much in the way of clutter or adornment. Its roofline stays high until curving sharply downward just before the rearward edge of the back door. A higher and more horizontal roofline may not look as sleek as many competing sedans that follow the trend toward swoopy looks, but it does keep taller occupants from bumping their heads when getting in and out of the backseat. A prominent “Azera” logo in chrome between the taillamps is perhaps a bit too brash for what is otherwise a subtlety styled car.

The Limited version of the Hyundai Azera tends to look a bit dressier than the SE, given its larger and fancier 17-inch, 10-spoke aluminum alloy wheels, which are not available as a factory option on the base car.

As is the case with most upscale models, the Azera’s exterior colors tend to be on the sedate side, with silver, beige, green, light blue and gray being the dominant hues. The silver model we drove nonetheless had an attractive and well-executed paint finish.

Interior
If the Hyundai Azera’s outward appearance suggests it’s from one of the upscale Asian brands, the sedan’s interior literally shouts the inference. Its attractive design is straight out of the Lexus sketchbook, and it’s well finished with quality materials used throughout the roomy cabin.

The seats — our test vehicle’s were finished in leather — are supportive and offer sufficient comfort, even over longer treks. Eight-way power adjustments are standard for the driver; the front passenger gets four-way adjustments. It may take some time to find one’s “sweet spot,” as is often the case with multiple-choice cushions, but posterior nirvana is generally obtainable for even those of larger build.

Unfortunately, memory settings for the seats are only offered as part of the $2,550 Limited Ultimate Package on the top model. Heated front seats are standard on the Limited and are optional with the base car in the $1,800 SE Premium Package.

The rear seat offers sufficient room for two six-footers, with a third, albeit shorter, occupant able to fit between them as the need arises. Entry and exit to and from the rear seat is generally good. The rear seat folds flat in 60/40-split sections to maximize cargo-carrying abilities. The fold-down rear seat backs are mainly useful for toting longer objects, as opposed to big, bulky ones like televisions or desks; you’ll want a hatchback or SUV for those items.

A leather-wrapped tilting and telescoping steering wheel with integrated audio-system controls is standard; adjustable brake and accelerator pedals, a boon to motorists shorter or taller than the norm, are only available on the Limited model as part of the Ultimate Package.

The Hyundai Azera’s dashboard is attractive and controls are well laid out. It can be finished in beige, black or gray; choose either of the latter two treatments to avoid distracting reflections on the inside of the windshield on sunny days. While a GPS navigation system remains unavailable, one of the unintended bonuses is that the center stack of audio, climate-control and other switchgear is uncomplicated and intuitive to operate, without the necessity for a touch screen or confusing integrated multimedia controls you’ll find on many other upscale models. (Besides, you can always purchase an inexpensive portable navigation device for journeys into unfamiliar areas.) All buttons and switches are well identified and large enough to operate while wearing gloves.

The Azera SE comes adequately equipped with an AM/FM/CD stereo that can play MP3 files on discs, automatic air-conditioning and the usual power accessories. The Limited adds wood trim and a power rear sunshade. Front, front side and head-curtain airbags are included across the line, as are “active” head restraints designed to mitigate whiplash injuries in rear-end collisions.

A power sunroof and a CD changer are available on both versions, while a power tilt/telescoping steering wheel, rain-sensing wipers, power folding outside mirrors and the adjustable pedals with memory setting are only offered through the Limited Ultimate Package.

Performance
The Azera’s all-aluminum 3.8-liter V6 engine operates smoothly and quietly, and it employs the latest technology like variable valve timing to generate a more-than-adequate 263 hp. The engine provides more muscle than many midsize sedans in the same price range and is only slightly less powerful and a bit courser in operation than the Lexus ES 350’s 275-hp V6.

A five-speed automatic is the only available transmission, and it performs admirably. It affords manual gear selection for added control while careening through twisty curves or for dropping a gear as you hit a highway on-ramp.

At an estimated 17 mpg city/26 mpg highway, the Azera is neither an economy car nor a gas guzzler. Depending on how you drive, you can expect those figures to be off by a few miles per gallon in real-world use, but not prohibitively so.

While the Azera is certainly no sport sedan, it behaves admirably in most respects, with ample comfort and relatively neutral front-drive handling characteristics. Front-drive vehicles have most of their weight over the front wheels, and so they don’t generally feel as nimble as many rear-wheel-drive cars.

We found the Hyundai Azera to be pleasant in our urban and highway jaunts alike. Its suspension is tuned on the soft side, but the car doesn’t wallow over bumps and pavement imperfections. The car’s speed-sensitive power steering applies more assistance at lower velocities to make parking and garage maneuvers easier, but it tightens up on the highway when a more-solid feel and higher steering effort are advantageous. The car’s turning radius is reasonably tight, so it requires little effort to parallel park, though unlike other models in its class, neither rear proximity warnings nor a backup camera are available to make the chore that much easier.

The larger 17-inch wheels and all-season tires on the Limited (the SE comes with 16-inch rims and rubber) help improve the car’s ride and handling a bit, but not dramatically so. Four-wheel disc antilock brakes with electronic brake-force distribution are standard and help bring the car to a stop with reasonable authority and control. The Hyundai Azera does not have a brake assist function found on many luxury cars; this feature brings an added margin of safety in panic-stop situations by applying maximum braking force when a panic stop is detected.

Stability and traction control systems are included to help mitigate wheel slippage and prevent a loss of control in extreme handling situations and/or slippery surfaces. Both systems work well, though (as in most vehicles) you’ll want to switch the traction control off when attempting low-speed maneuvers, especially parking, in measurable snow when a certain amount of wheel slippage is otherwise unavoidable.

All in all, we think that the Hyundai Azera is a solid value and one worth considering for those who don’t care about brand clout or having the latest high-tech gizmos. Its amenities, quality and performance are at least equal to those of competing models in its price range and even stand up well to more-expensive models. Just bear in mind that if you like sporty driving dynamics, this probably isn’t the car for you.
(C)Forbes

Hot-Selling Cars in 2007

The arrival of several new convertibles, such as this Volkswagen Eos, is boosting convertible sales, which are likely to reach a record this year. Convertibles, small cars and hybrids are in while big pickup trucks and Hummers aren't as popular as they used to be.

As sales of large trucks and brutish, truck-based SUVs decline this year, more car shoppers than ever before are taking home new, fuel-thrifty, gasoline-electric hybrids like the Toyota Prius and Honda Civic Hybrid.
In fact, the Prius and Civic Hybrid are on track to set U.S. sales records in calendar 2007.

The Prius alone could break the 200,000 sales barrier by Dec. 31, which would be a first for a hybrid in the U.S. That means more new Priuses are sold than Ford Mustangs or Honda Odyssey minivans.

See which vehicles are the Bestsellers So Far in 2007

Small Cars Are "Big"
Also big on shoppers' lists today: small cars—especially the newer ones such as subcompacts—with small price tags, accommodating interiors and, of course, good gas mileage.

Toyota's smallest and lowest-priced car, the Yaris, is on pace to double its sales in 2007 over 2006. This could mean sales of the little Yaris could approach a respectable 100,000 this year, which is on par with the better-known, long-running Volkswagen Jetta.

What's the appeal? Introduced in calendar 2006 and with a starting price of less than $12,000, the five-seat Yaris has promised Toyota quality and is rated at 34 miles a gallon in city driving and 40 mpg on the highway as a 2007 model.

Sales also are on track to double this year for Honda's smallest car, the Fit, which starts at less than $14,000 and features government fuel mileage ratings as high as 33/38 mpg for 2007.

"Small is big right now," said Dick Colliver, executive vice president at American Honda Motor Co. "Smaller vehicles have become more attractive."

The Best-Selling SUV?
In another dramatic shift among car buyers, this year's top-selling SUV doesn't come with a gas-guzzling V8 or even a V6, and it's not from Detroit. It's the Honda CR-V with a 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine developing half the horsepower—166—that a V8 might.

With a moderate size, commendable 2007 government fuel economy rating of 23 miles a gallon in city driving and 30 mpg on the highway and a starting retail price around $22,000, the CR-V appeals to both mileage- and budget-conscious buyers.

The second most popular SUV in 2007 is another smaller-sized model without a V8, the Ford Escape. In fact, a hybrid version of the Escape qualifies as the top SUV in gas mileage. The Ford Escape Hybrid has a 2007 rating of 41/32 mpg. The higher city mileage stems from the fact that city driving allows for more usage of the onboard, supplemental electric motor.

Maybe the appearance of these smaller, fuel-thrifty SUVs as top sellers begs the question: Should Americans really call SUVs "big, bad gas guzzlers" anymore?

A Bevy of Convertibles
Americans can't seem to resist open-air cars, and with at least five new convertibles introduced over the past couple years, convertible sales are likely to hit a new high in 2007.

Pontiac's Solstice, with two seats and a starting price of less than $22,000, leads Volkswagen's Eos hardtop convertible, starting at just over $28,000, among the newest models in 2007 sales. Saturn's first-ever convertible, the Sky roadster, is coming on strongly, too. It's a sibling vehicle of the Solstice and starts around $25,000.

But don't count out the indefatigable Miata. Mazda's long-running and popular MX-5 Miata continued to outsell each of these newcomers in early 2007.

The Miata is lower-priced than the others, with a starting retail price under $21,000. It's also the only one of the bunch in the Guinness Book of World Records as the world's top-selling roadster.

Noteworthy Disparities
Not everything is predictable in car buyer trends, gleaned from U.S. sales reports released by automakers for the first six months of 2007.

Cadillac's big, blingy Escalade SUV has not only maintained its sales. It has increased them over calendar 2006's levels.

The Escalade, star of umpteen hip hop music videos, is a luxury ride with a starting price around $55,000. There is, as many Escalade fans attest, nothing else quite like it, especially when it's customized to the hilt with big wheels, alcantara upholstery and multiple video screens inside.

Mercedes-Benz is doing well, too, this year with its biggest SUV in America. The full-size Mercedes GL-Class—an Escalade competitor that's also priced over $50,000—posted sales gains in 2007. In fact, sales of the GL doubled in early 2007 over the same period in 2006.

More full-size Chevrolet Suburban SUVs were sold in early 2007 than in the same period last year. The Suburban has a reputation as a stalwart vehicle for hauling the family and towing trailers, boats and the like.

Ford's full-size F-Series pickup truck continues as America's top-selling vehicle, though sales have been declining for three straight years. Still, for every new Honda Civic sold in 2007, there are likely to be two Ford F-Series pickups sold.

Some Lowlights
Buick continues to sink. The venerable brand that used to be aspirational has only one vehicle—its newly introduced, 2008 Enclave SUV—that's boosting U.S. sales.

All other Buick vehicles—from the Lucerne sedan to Rainier SUV—are selling more slowly than they did last year. In fact, South Korean automaker Hyundai already has sold more vehicles in the U.S. —more than 236,000—than Buick is likely to sell here for the full year.

Environmentalists will hail this news: U.S. sales of all Hummers this year are down. The Hummer brand, known as the poster brand for gas guzzlers, is struggling with its obvious image problem plus newfound consumer interest in fuel economy. Company officials are keeping chipper, though, and hope sales stay even, overall, for the year.

Maybe the "retro" look is finally starting to wear thin for U.S. car buyers. Every one of the major retro-styled cars that debuted in recent years—the Volkswagen New Beetle, Chrysler PT Cruiser, Chevrolet HHR and Ford Mustang—posted notable sales declines in the first half of 2007.
(C)Ann Job, MSN

Low-Cost Chinese Cars Making Restrained Entry to European Market

After a rocky start, Peter Bijvelds has hopes for the Landwind autos he imports, saying Chinese cars offer European buyers the value they seek.

They have names like the Brilliance BS6, the Landwind Fashion or the improbable Hover Wingle, and though these sedans, vans and sport utility vehicles are hardly as familiar to Europeans as, say, a Volkswagen Golf, they are beginning to show up on European roads.

“I’ve got air-conditioning, ABS brakes and air bags,” said Carlo Scalvini, describing his Hover, a big and boxy sport utility vehicle built by the Great Wall Motor Company, with headquarters in Baoding in eastern China. “And the price is competitive: you pay 10,000 euros less in the end,” more than $13,000.

The enthusiasm of people like Mr. Scalvini could influence the global auto industry and China’s place in it. China’s quiet inroads into Europe are the first test of rich markets by Chinese automakers as they build dealer networks and deliver small shipments of cars to test the reaction of drivers and auto industry experts.

Many of the dealers who have signed on with the Chinese previously worked with the Japanese and the South Koreans, and so have experience in coaxing Europeans to purchase cars with unfamiliar names and unusual looks, but sweet prices.

If business is starting fitfully, they foresee healthy profits down the road, aided by the weak dollar. European car dealers pay in dollars for the Chinese cars, yet are paid in strong euros when they resell them, pocketing nifty profits from exchange rates.

“The game the Japanese mastered in 15 years, and the Koreans in 10,” said Nigel Griffiths, director of European light vehicle forecasting at Global Insight, “they will do in 18 months to 5 years.”

Paradoxically, the Chinese have been helped in Europe by their alliances with Western automakers in China. Some of the Chinese cars being imported into European countries use electrical components from Bosch, the big German parts supplier, or have been designed by Italian firms like Giugiaro. Now, the Europeans are seeing their ideas and components flow back into their own markets.

That the European market is essentially open is also helping the Chinese. Because so many European cars are now being built elsewhere, a quota on imports is politically almost impossible.

There have been setbacks, like abysmal results on a crash test done on a Chinese car two years ago. Some specialists are skeptical that the Chinese can become major competitors in Europe and the United States. After all, car buying remains an emotional business. “There is a general lack of brand awareness, and distribution is a hurdle,” said Michael K. McKenzie, a China expert at PricewaterhouseCoopers’ automotive institute in Detroit.

But the Japanese and South Koreans overcame similar hurdles. Moreover, the Chinese are moving in several stages. “They are coming through the back door: first Russia, then working their way west,” Mr. Griffiths of Global Insight said. He estimates that China will sell 54,000 cars in Russia this year, out of a total market of two million, compared with 31,000 last year.

The Chinese are arriving even as European carmakers struggle with flat prices and diminishing profit, and the Chinese presence is expected to ratchet up the pressure. That will force some European companies that stayed in the mass market for small cars, like Fiat, either to move up to larger, more expensive models, or to perish, Mr. McKenzie predicted. “They will undercut these companies, and the market will be more contested,” he said.

It began when a Dutch Nissan dealer, Peter Bijvelds, visited China with a friend in 2004 to inspect the Landwind factory in Nanchang, a gritty city south of the Yangtze River in Jiangxi Province. The trip ended with Mr. Bijvelds’ introducing a big and boxy Chinese-made S.U.V., the Landwind New Vision, a twin of G.M.’s Opel Frontera, at the 2005 Frankfurt auto show. It did not handle like a European car and its engine had little excess power, but for Europeans tired of station wagons or wanting to tow a trailer, this car cost 25 percent less than a Kia or a Hyundai model. It had air-conditioning, air bags and aluminum wheels. In the first two weeks, Mr. Bijvelds said, he sold 500 of them.

Then, at about the time of the Frankfurt show, the German automobile club, known as ADAC, put the New Vision to a crash test. The driver’s survival chances were about nil, the club’s testers said.

Mr. Bijvelds’ Chinese partners were dismayed. The New Vision was put aside while Landwind ironed out the kinks. A successor model, the Landwind Expedition, has a comely design by an Italian design studio, a German-built engine and all European safety features.

Mr. Bijvelds suggested that the automobile club might have been prompted by German automakers to undermine his project. A club spokesman, Maximilian Maurer, denied that. “I am sure that in time the Chinese will succeed here,” he said, “and the ADAC doesn’t want to keep them away. We simply want to inform consumers about the quality of these cars.”

Mr. Bijvelds, 28, receiving a visitor at the headquarters of his Landwind Motor Corporation near Antwerp, Belgium, said, “We get so many products from China with Western brands, why not cars?” Europeans, he says, are after value, citing Renault’s recent bonanza with the Logan, a car built in Romania that has a six-month waiting time for delivery in Belgium. “They want a lot of car for a little money,” he said.

The German crash test, a colleague told him recently, may have been a blessing in disguise. “Now everybody knows you,” the friend said, “For good or bad, they know you.”‘

In Germany, Hans-Ulrich Sachs, a former Volkswagen executive who is chairman of HSO Motors Europe, is signing on dealers to sell the Brilliance BS6, a comfortable sedan with a vague resemblance to a midsize BMW. Indeed, Brilliance assembles BMW’s 3 and 5 series cars for the domestic Chinese market.

By the end of this year, Mr. Sachs, 54, wants 150 showrooms in Germany, and by next year, 1,100 throughout Europe. This year, he hopes to sell 6,000 to 7,000 cars. The first 500 arrived in mid-March.

Why would a German buy a Chinese car? he asked rhetorically. “Value for the money.”

For Europe’s carmakers, alliances with Chinese companies could become two-edged affairs, providing models that one day may well compete against their own cars. Volkswagen, for instance, has joint ventures with Shanghai Automotive and First Auto Works. Yet Kai Grüber, spokesman for the Volkswagen Group China, played down the potential for competition, saying that VW focused for now on the domestic Chinese market. “Future exports into the Southeast Asian area are conceivable in markets where we can expand our offering with new models,” he said.

At Eurasia Motor here in Palazzolo, about 35 miles northeast of Milan, where Mr. Scalvini bought his S.U.V., a shipment of 360 arrived in November, and have all been sold through a network of 95 Italian dealers. “We’re now expecting 800 more — in lots of 200 each — of the same model,” said Federico Daffi, Eurasia’s chief financial officer. Eurasia pays Great Wall $14,000 for the S.U.V.’s, and sells them for as little as 19,600 euros (about $27,000), still one-fourth below the South Korean competition. Eurasia then uses the lower price to market to middle-class families who until now could not afford an S.U.V.

Mr. Scalvini, 44, would buy more Hovers now, if they were available. He is the owner of Consorzio Vela, a company that employs about 800 people and maintains a large fleet of vehicles supplying services like delivery and catering to other Italian companies. The Hover’s Mitsubishi-built engine is fuel efficient and will offer the option of shifting from gasoline to liquid propane gas in future models.

“I’m convinced it will be a winner,” he said.
(C)NYT

Crash test is pain in the neck for car makers

Some car companies - even those that have "Top Safety Pick Awards" from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety - say its rear impact protection test doesn't reflect reality, and that its methods force auto makers into a one-size-fits-all solution.

The institute's rear impact test, which was developed in conjunction with auto safety groups around the world, is supposed to show how well a car protects you from whiplash in case of a rear collision.

While whiplash may not seem like much, it's a big deal if you suffer from it - the pain is severe and can last for weeks or months. And it's a really big deal if you're running an insurance company. Whiplash claims cost them $8.5 billion every year, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

Two years ago, the institute begin giving out "Top Safety Pick" awards for car, SUV and van models that get its top rating of "Good" for front side and rear impact protection. Winning car companies even get an actual trophy.

But getting a top grade for front and side impact protection, where poor performance means an increased likelihood of death, isn't enough to win the prize. Autos have to protect against whiplash too.

Cars that have earned the institute's "Top Safety Pick" award include the 2008 Ford Taurus, the Volvo C70 convertible and Hyundai Entourage minivan.

But some cars that get top "Good" ratings for both front and side impact crash ratings, including the BMW 3-series and the Toyota Camry and Avalon, still get "Poor" ratings for rear impact protection.

The Insurance Institute's rear impact safety test has two parts. The first simply measures the seat to determine the relationship between the seat back and head restraint, which is commonly known as a headrest.

Only seats with a headrest that's located and shaped to prevent the head from moving back in a crash even get to go on to the actual "impact" test. If not, the seat automatically gets a "Poor" or "Marginal" rating.

Seats that get an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating - the institute's two best ratings - are then mounted on a moving platform, and a crash test dummy is seatbelted in pace. A puff of compressed air sends the sled forward in a sudden movement to mimic the impact of a car traveling at 20 miles per hour.

Automakers object to these tests for two reasons. The first is that the Institute crash-tests seats once using a single average-sized crash test dummy. Car companies say they test their seats using dummies of various sizes.

"General Motors designs its head restraints to meet a variety of driver sizes rather than focusing on a single set of metrics," GM said in a statement regarding recent rear impact tests on SUVs, trucks and vans. "Head restraints are part of the integrated approach to occupant protection in all GM vehicles."

The Institute counters that, in real life, people rarely adjust their head restraints, usually leaving them in the lowest position no matter how tall they are. In an impact test, however, the institute does move the headrest to the proper height for the dummy. At worst, said Institute president Adrian Lund, it still replicates a situation that's probably safer for occupants than real life.

Some car companies object to the fact that the "impact" test is conducted using a sled rather than a real car being hit by another real car.

"Impact absorbing structures on Toyota vehicles play a major role in helping to effectively absorb impact energy in the event of a front, side or rear collision," said Toyota in a statement. "When performing the rear crash dynamic test, the IIHS procedure does not take the whole vehicle into account."

Crashing real cars is expensive, though, and the Institute wrecks many real cars for front and side impact crash tests. In the rear impact protection test, said Lund, the jet of air that briefly rockets the sled forward is precisely programmed, from the rate of acceleration to the way the sled stops, to emulate the movement of a vehicle's passenger compartment during a 20 mile-per-hour rear hit.

In the end, the Institute insists, its rear impact test is just as good as crashing real cars, which shows in reduced whiplash claims for occupants with "Good" seats.

"Of all the safety devices in our vehicle," said Russ Rader, a spokesman for the Insurance Institute, "you are more likely to need a good head restraint than an airbag"
(C)CNN

Safiest cars

These cars earned the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's Top Safety Pick award.

That means they earned the best possible ratings front, side and rear impact protection and they are available with electronic stability control.

Acura MDX
The MDX is a midsized SUV with a third row of seats in the back, but it feels stable and handles surprisingly well for a vehicle of its size.








Acura RDX
The Acura RDX shares some of its basic engineering with the Honda CR-V, which was also awarded a Top Safety Pick award by the Insurance Institute. As with all Honda SUVs, electronic stability control, which helps prevent vehicles from going out of control or flipping over in emergency maneuvers, comes as standard equipment on the RDX.





Audi A4
The A4 was close to making the cut last year, but it was hampered by a merely "Acceptable" performance in whiplash protection. With improvements to the Audi's seats, the A4 and larger A6 earned the Insurance Institute's Top Safety Pick award.






Audi A6
The A6 was close to making the cut last year, but it was hampered by a merely "Acceptable" performance in whiplash protection. With improvements to the Audi's seats, the A6 and smaller A4 earned the Insurance Institute's Top Safety Pick award.






Ford Edge
The Edge, a car-based crossover, is targeted at young, urban couples or small families looking for something more versatile than a car but more stylish than the typical SUV.








Ford Taurus
The Ford Five Hundred had been a Top Safety Pick before the Insurance Institute added a requirement that vehicles must be available with electronic stability control to get the awards.
Slightly redesigned for 2008 and renamed the Taurus, this car is now available with stability control so it has been returned to the list.

Ford Taurus X
The Taurus X, formerly known as the Freestyle, is an SUV-like wagon that shares most of its engineering wth the Ford Taurus sedan. The Taurus X has three rows of seats.








Honda CR-V
The CR-V shares some of its basic engineering with the Honda Civic. That car was dropped from the Insurance Institute's Top Picks list, however, because of a new requirement that all vehicles on the list must offer electronic stability control.






Honda Pilot
The mid-sized Honda Pilot has been one of the most popular crossover SUVs around since its introduction in 2002. Like all Honda SUVs, it comes standard with electronic stability control.







Hyundai Entourage
The Entourage is Hyundai's new minivan. The Kia Sedona is essentially the same vehicle with relatively minor differences. The Sedona has a smooth and quiet ride, comfortable interior and solid build quality, according to Edmunds.com.







Hyundai Santa Fe
The Santa Fe was completely redesigned for the 2007model year. Like all Hyunda vehicles it has electronic stability control as standard equipment.








Kia Sedona
The Sedona is Kia's new minivan. The Hyundai Entourage is essentially the same vehicle with relatively minor differences. The Sedona has a smooth and quiet ride, comfortable interior and solid build quality, according to Edmunds.com.







Lincoln MKX
The MKX is Lincoln's luxury version of the Ford Edge. In addition to a different look, the MKX's ride and handling are slightly different from the Edge's as well.

Saab 9-3
The 9-3 offers excellent handling and performance for a front-wheel drive car. Evidently, it offers class-leading safety, as well.

Saab 9-3 convertible
The 9-3 was one of two convertibles, both made by Swedish car companies owned by one of the major Detroit automakers, to earn a Best Pick. Saab is part of General Motors.
To earn a "Top Safety Pick" designation, a vehicle must get top scores in all impact tests and it must be available with electronic stability control.

The 9-3 has automatic rollbars that deploy in the event of a rollover.

Mercedes-Benz M-class
With its car-like engineering, the M-class is, technically speaking, a crossover vehicle. It handles well and, according to the Insurance Institute's tests, offers excellent protection in the event of a wreck.







Mercury Sable
The Mercury Montego had been a Top Safety Pick before the Insurance Institute added a requirement that vehicles must be available with electronic stability control to get the awards.
Slightly redesigned for 2008 and renamed the Sable, this car is now available with stability control so it has been returned to the list

Subaru B9 Tribeca
Its peculiar design may not suit your tastes, but the Tribeca does perform very well in crash tests. Electronic stability control comes as standard equipment.

Subaru Forester
To make the Top Picks list for 2007, the Insurance Institute required vehicles to have electronic stability control available as, at least, an option. The Subaru Forester and Legacy are the only vehicles on the list that do not have it as standard equipment. For the Forester, stability control is available only on the Sports 2.5 XT version.





Subaru Legacy
The Legacy is Subaru's midsized answer to the Toyota Camry and Honda Accord. Aside from its strong performance in the Insurance Institute's very demanding crash tests, the Legacy also offers all-wheel-drive. That's something you won't find in any Camry.






Volvo XC90
Volvo's reputation has been built on safety, so Volvo's absence from last year's Insurance Institute Top Safety Pick list was surprising to many consumers. The fact is, however, that many companies now make very safe cars, not just Volvo. Ford's Swedish luxury brand makes the cut this year with its XC90 SUV.





Volvo C70
The C70 is a hard-top convertible made by Ford-owned Volvo of Sweden.
A hard convertible top, like the one on the C70, cannot support weight and does not offer any safety benefit as compared to a cloth top. The C70 has automatic rollbars that deploy in the event of rollover.
(C)CNN

In Rear-End Crash Test, Most Trucks & SUVs Fail to Stop Neck Injury

Most trucks & SUVs do poorly in whiplash test. 54 current models - or two-thirds of all the vehicles in the test - fail to adequately protect occupants in rear-end collisions.

Two-thirds of pickups, vans and sport-utility vehicles don't provide acceptable protection against whiplash in rear-end collisions, according to tests by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS).

Some 54 models were rated "marginal" or "poor" by the Institute in tests that involved measurements of seats and head restraints and, in some cases, simulated rear-end collisions.

Vehicle seats and head restraints are first measured to determine if the headrest, because of its shape and angle, is likely to provide adequate protection.

Seats that are deemed likely to provide good protection are then tested in a simulated crash. The seat is attached to a moving platform that is struck from behind at 20 miles per hour. The Institute then measures impact forces on a crash test dummy riding in the seat.

Twenty-one current models - or 24 percent of those tested - earned the best possible rating of "Good." Twelve models earned an "Acceptable" rating, the second-best rating.

"In stop-and-go commuter traffic, you're more likely to get in a rear-end collision than any other crash type," says IIHS's David Zuby. "It's not a major feat of engineering to design seats and head restraints that afford good protection in these common crashes."

The agency stresses that to reduce neck injuries, the vehicle's head restraint should be high enough to be at the back of the head.

Rear-end collisions are frequent, and neck injuries account for 2 million insurance claims each year, costing at least $8.5 billion.

For SUVs, the best performers were models by Subaru, Volvo, Acura, Ford, Honda and Hyundai.

Some manufacturers objected to the fact that the seats are not tested while mounted in the vehicle.

"We are confident our whiplash injury lessening system and vehicle design will provide a reasonable level of safety for our customers in the real world," Toyota said in a statement.

While Toyota's Tundra pickup earned the top "Good" rating for whiplash protection in the IIHS tests the Toyota Sienna minivan and Toyota Highlander, when equipped with a tilting headrest and adjustable lumbar support, and 4Runner SUVs earned "Poor" ratings. The Toyota Rav4 and FJ Cruiser SUVs and Tacoma pickup all earned a rating of "Marginal."

Overall, SUVs have the most vehicles with "Good" protection - 29 percent - while vans followed with 27 percent and only 6 percent of pickups earned a "Good" rating.

"The reason may be that automakers have updated or introduced many new SUVs since 2006, but minivans and pickups are being updated more slowly," said Zuby.
(C)CNN