NHTSA launches investigation of Jeep Grand Cherokee fires

After reports that the Jeep Grand Cherokees may be three to four times as likely to catch fire in a rear-impact collision than other midsized SUVs, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has agreed to open an investigation.

Based on NHTSA data, the Center for Auto Safety (CAS) determined that the Grand Cherokee has a higher fatality rate than the Ford Pinto, which became infamous in the 1970s for bursting into flames in rear impacts.

The plastic gas tank in the Grand Cherokee is mounted behind the rear axle and hangs down below the rear bumper, making it vulnerable in accidents.

In 2005, Jeep redesigned the Grand Cherokee and moved the gas tank in front of the rear axle. This design reduced the likelihood of fires in these later Grand Cherokees, according to the CAS petition.

NHTSA investigations often lead to recalls, although they can take years.

Meanwhile, if you own a Grand Cherokee, the Center for Auto Safety says an optional skid-plate over the gas tank (available on Grand Cherokees with the off-road package) will provide some protection. 

 —Eric Evarts

Making car power windows safer

Each year children die needlessly in and around vehicles. The Cameron Gulbransen Kids Transportation Safety Act, signed into law in 2008, is aimed at helping to reduce the statistics and making vehicles safer for children. The Act requires the Department of Transportation to research a number of vehicle safety issues related to children, including power window safety. Recently, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced a proposed rulemaking on adding technology known as auto-reversing systems (ARS) that would help avoid power window injuries by stopping a window if an obstruction is detected. NHTSA proposed not to mandate ARS on all windows and is seeking comment. Consumers Union (the non-profit publisher of Consumer Reports) sent in comments in response to NHTSA strongly urging the government to require ARS technology on all light-passenger vehicle windows. (Read the comments from Consumers Union.)
 
The safety issue with power windows was addressed in part in 2006 when NHTSA decided to ban power window rocker and toggle switches from U.S.-manufactured vehicles. Car makers must now equip passenger vehicles with safer lever switches (which must be pulled up to close the window) by Oct. 1, 2010. A number of consumer organizations, including Consumers Union, Kids and Cars, and the Center for Automotive Safety petitioned NHTSA to enact this regulation, but at the time, the agency omitted including the auto reversing technology. NHTSA has determined that the issue will be largely addressed by requiring the safer switch types and that most fatalities are a result of someone (mostly children) inadvertently hitting the switch.
 
NHTSA’s research finds that 1,943 people are injured each year and six deaths occur from power windows closing on passengers. They estimate that the cost would be approximately $6 per window to add the feature. The technology is standard on most European vehicles, but it is on less than half the models from Chrysler, Ford, and General Motors.
 
Even though NHTSA is not recommending the new technology on all cars, they are proposing to require automatic reversal systems on windows that already have a one-touch or “express up” mechanism to close without continuous pulling up of the window switch by the operator. However, because most rear windows are not one-touch or “express up,” Consumers Union believes the requirement for ARS should extend beyond these types of power windows. We have observed vehicles for which the auto-reverse function does not work if the switch is being held continuously.
 
We hope that this life and injury-saving technology will be mandated in the future. In the meantime, adults need to be extra vigilant when using power windows to make sure rear passengers and children are not in harms way. And let this be a reminder not to leave children unattended in a vehicle, especially one that is running or has accessory power on.
 
For a list of 2009 vehicles that are equipped with ARS see safercar.gov. (Download pdf.)

Read: "Which power-window switches are safer?"

For more on child safety, see our kids and car safety guide.

—Liza Barth

Toyota recall and investigation is not over, yet

It turns out the investigation into Toyota/Lexus sudden acceleration, which prompted the largest recall in the company’s history to remove floor mats that could interfere with the accelerator pedal, isn’t over.
 
On Monday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) denied a petition to conduct an additional investigation into sudden acceleration, noting that the agency had previously investigated several similar complaints and that a new investigation was unlikely to draw any new conclusions.
 
Toyota quickly jumped on the news to proclaim that NHTSA had found no cause for the unwanted acceleration “other than the risk from an unsecured or incompatible driver’s floor mat.” (Original Toyota release.)
 
Yesterday, NHTSA rebutted that statement with a press release of its own, “correcting inaccurate and misleading information put out by Toyota,” and calling the floor mat recall “an interim measure, not a remedy.”
 
“This remedy does not correct the underlying defect in the vehicles involving the potential for entrapment of the accelerator by floor mats, which is related to accelerator and floor pan design,” the NHTSA statement says.

In the end, runaway acceleration can happen for lots of reasons. There is no substitute for knowing how to stop the car in an emergency, as we’ve detailed in a series of recent blog entries and tests. 

No matter what brand automobile you drive, be sure to read "How to stop a runaway car: Don’t pump the brakes" and "Putting a car in Neutral might save your life." And the report "Owners of Toyota cars in rebellion over series of accidents caused by sudden acceleration" at ABCNews.com.

 —Eric Evarts

Related:
Gas-pedal inspection shows most do not pivot
More than floor mats: NHTSA report gives more details on Lexus crash
Putting a car in Neutral might save your life
Putting stuck floor mat survival strategies to the test
Floor mat survey reveals problem with all-weather mats
Toyota and Lexus floor mat recall is official
Toyota advises 3.8 million Lexus and Toyota owners to remove floor mats
Misaligned floor mat may have caused calamity

More than floor mats: NHTSA report gives more details on Lexus crash

It may not be just floor mats that lead to sudden unintended acceleration in Toyota and Lexus models, which were factors in killed California Highway Patrolman Mark Saylor and his family this summer.
 
More information has come to light regarding Toyota Motor Company’s 3.8-million vehicle recall for sudden unintended acceleration. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has released a report about its inspection of the vehicle that suggests factors beyond the floor mats as potential culprits or complicating factors (NHTSA report pdf).

Highlights include:

According to the NHTSA report, the mats in the Lexus ES 350 that Saylor was driving were made for a Lexus RX 400h SUV, not the ES 350 sedan.

The gas pedal was fused to the mat in the fire that ensued after the crash. The gas pedal used a single hinge on the upper end, and it did not have a center pivot that might have made it easier to get the pedal out from under a floor mat. (To be fair, most accelerator pedals lack a center pivot – of 44 cars we surveyed in our parking lot, only the Kia Optima had a center hinge pivot.)
 
The Lexus that Saylor was driving had a keyless ignition, which uses a start/stop button to start and stop the engine. There is no traditional key to turn if you need to shut the engine off in an emergency. In the case of the ES 350, the button needs to be held for three seconds before it will turn off the engine if the car is in gear. Toyota says it considered this a safety feature to prevent the engine from turning off if the button were pressed accidentally. However, the report points out that Saylor was traveling at an estimated 100 mph—that’s the equivalent of traveling one and a half football field in three seconds.
 
The ES had a data recorder but its information has not yet been reviewed.  

Brian Lyons, Toyota’s manager of safety and quality communications, says the company is looking at features to mitigate problems with stuck accelerators following the accident. “Our focus is on avoidance of the problem, rather than measures to mitigate it” in case the throttle becomes stuck, he says.
 
Bottom line:
As the investigation continues, we expect further insights to emerge from both federal departments and Toyota, especially once the event data recorder has been examined. In the meantime, Consumer Reports will continue to explore related issues, as we have done previously with our blog posts on floor mats and unintended acceleration survival strategies.

For now, our advice remains that moving the gear selector to neutral is the best option.
 
—Eric Evarts

Updated 11/3/09

Letter to Washington: Consumer Financial Protection Agency needs to govern all car financing

Following the meltdown in financial services last year, the Obama Administration wants to launch a Consumer Financial Protection Agency as a watchdog over consumer financial products. As progress is made in Washington, D.C. on a bill to create this agency, one contentious area on Capitol Hill revolves around whether car dealerships, where many car loans originate, should be subject to the new rules and regulations of the agency on lending. (Learn more about the Consumer Financial Protection Agency.)
 
A high level of complaints about auto dealerships, typically related to predatory lending practices at dealerships, is driving the need for oversight. Such issues are ranked number one among consumer complaints lodged with state and local consumer protection agencies, according to an annual consumer complaint survey by the Consumer Federation of America and other consumer groups.
 
About 94 percent of new car sales involve financing, according to the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA). According to a report by CNW Marketing Research, an automotive marketing firm, 85 percent of those Americans who have a car loan have negative equity in their vehicles. Other studies have pegged this negative equity at an average of $4,400.
 
Now several consumer groups, including Consumers Union, which publishes Consumer Reports, have signed on to a letter to Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), asking him to ensure that the bill includes dealer financing.
 
Car dealers predictably oppose the measure (PDF). They argue that loan transactions are already regulated by the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Reserve Board and all 50 states. And they point out that auto financing was not among the factors that lead to last year’s credit collapse.
 
NADA spokesman Bailey Wood told the Detroit News that "payment packing, misrepresenting fees, falsifying loan applications, forgery, etc., are already illegal,” implying that they don’t need further regulation.
 
The letter signed by Consumers Union and others cites several dealer practices that the Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) needs to regulate to protect consumers, including:

• Selling retail installment contracts to lenders.
• Engaging in bait-and-switch financing, also known as "yo-yo" financing.
• Engaging in "loan packing" -- misrepresenting the costs to finance over-priced add-ons.
• Forging loan documents and/or signatures.
• Failing to pay off outstanding liens on traded-in vehicles, as promised, a.k.a. "car kiting."
• Charging excessive, hidden dealer "markups" of interest rates.
• Price gouging by Buy-Here-Pay-Here lots, where dealers carry their own finance paper.
• Engaging in other predatory lending practices.

 
There is also a fairness issue – the bill will cover banks, credit unions, and finance companies when they make car loans. It should also cover dealer loans.

Consumer Reports has long stated that paying cash for a car is the most cost-effective way to buy. For those who finance, it is important to shop for the best interest rate and secure a loan prior to visiting a car dealership to ensure it is the consumer who is driving the deal. That advice has never been more relevant. (Read: "Watch for these sales pitches.")

The House Financial Services Committee, which Rep. Frank chairs, is due to begin marking up the bill today.

Watch the Consumers Union video on the Consumer Financial Protection Agency.

Learn more about new car buying.

—Eric Evarts

Making laws to reduce dangerous driver distractions

So, you’d think it would be a simple thing for states to pass laws prohibiting texting. It’s pretty obvious that texting and driving aren’t compatible activities. The data shows a 2,200% increase in crash risk. And multiple polls show that drivers favor regulations against texting while driving.
 
But it’s not that simple. Vehicle and consumer product safety is mandated by federal agencies, as are laws regarding mass transit and commercial driving between states; indeed Secretary LaHood announced new regulations regarding train, bus, and truck operators at the conclusion of the Driver Distraction Summit in Washington, D.C. In contrast, driving laws regarding individuals are controlled at the state level. A federal law, like the ALERT Drivers Act legislation supported by Senators Chuck Schumer, Bob Menendez, Kay Hagan, and Mary Landrieu, can push states to pass laws through sanctions such as withholding federal highway funds if states do not pass bans on driving while texting.
 
Two state legislators who were panelists here, Senator Bruce Starr from Oregon and Representative Steve Farley from Arizona, stated that there are disadvantages to federal laws using the “stick” approach of withholding highway funds  rather the “carrot” approach in offering incentives to push the passage of state laws. A top-down federal approach raises the hackles of some state legislators, who feel they were the ones elected to represent their constituents, not some senator from another state.
 
There is also a concern that texting laws would be very difficult to enforce. This notion was dispelled by Major David Salmon, the director of the traffic services division of the New York State Police. New York was the first state to legislate a hand-held cell phone ban. Last year, 8 percent of the tickets issued in New York were for for cell phone use while driving. As Major Salmon put it, state troopers can be very resourceful at figuring out how to enforce laws, so doing so would unlikely pose a problem.
 
One important point: it was stressed by numerous presenters that for any law to have a bite to it, it needs to be a “primary” law. That means that a law enforcement officer can pull you over for the primary task of being on a phone or texting, rather than being charged as a secondary offense to some other traffic violation.
 
Many different parties, from vehicle manufacturers to insurance companies to the electronics industry, back state laws against distracted driving. But there is one very important component missing. If you want laws to help protect you against distracted driving, contact your state legislators. Most polls show wide support for legislation, but it was made clear at the Driver Distraction Summit that direct contact from constituents can make a big difference in getting laws passed. 

—Tom Mutchler

For more information on distracted driving see our related reports:
Choosing words wisely in the distracted driving discussion
Distracted Driving Summit: The hands-free debate
Defining the problem: Casting a wide net over driver distraction
Automakers agree to ban
Anti-texting video to scare drivers straight
Using wireless communication devices while driving
Cell phone use and driving laws
Dangers of cell phones while driving
Should cell phone use by drivers be illegal?
Texting while driving
Talking in the slow lane

American highways are safer last year

The National Transportation Safety Board reports that 9 percent fewer people died on American highways last year than in 2007, continuing the trend toward safer cars and safer roads across the country.

Total fatalities fell to 34,017 from 37,435, even as Americans cut back on driving in the recession. Total vehicle miles fell from 3.03 billion miles traveled to 2.93 billion miles. While the miles driven were reduced, the fatality rate fell at an even greater rate to 1.27 per 100 million miles driven from 1.36 in 2007. The lower overall highway fatality rate means individual trips have gotten safer as well.

All is not rosy in on the roads, however. For the 11th straight year, motorcycle fatalities have increased. Last year 5,290 riders died in crashes, compared to 5,174 last year. In 1997, the number was just 2,116. The increase is attributed to a greater number of middle-aged motorcycle buyers as well as the repeal of mandatory motorcycle helmet laws in many states. Not counting this increase in motorcycle fatalities, the death rate for car passengers dropped even further than reported.

Highway safety improvements are coming as more cars are designed to pass the most stringent crash tests, and more models are equipped with electronic stability control and curtain air bags. Find out more about choosing a safe car and driving safely in our car safety section.

—Eric Evarts

Distracted driver summit

Today starts a two-day summit in Washington, D.C., to address the dangers of driving while texting and other distractions behind the wheel. The event coordinated by the Department of Transportation will bring together government officials, educators, researchers, technology experts, and law enforcement officers to address the issues and risks and determine what type of action is needed to help combat this growing safety problem.

Driving while texting has become an increasingly important topic as recent data found that texting is significantly more risky than using a cell phone while driving. So far, 18 states plus the District of Columbia have banned text messaging while driving. In addition, new drivers are banned from texting in nine states (Delaware, Indiana, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Texas, and West Virginia) and school bus drivers are banned from text messaging in the state of Texas. The Cars blog will be monitoring the summit and will bring you the latest information as it becomes available.

For more information on distracted driving see our related reports:

Automakers agree to ban
Anti-texting video to scare drivers straight
Using wireless communication devices while driving
Cell phone use and driving laws
Dangers of cell phones while driving
Should cell phone use by drivers be illegal?
Texting while driving
Talking in the slow lane

—Liza Barth

Buzzword: Fee-bate

A combination of the words fee and rebate, a fee-bate is a market incentive based on exempting some buyers from a fee imposed on others as a “sin tax” for buying certain products. In some cases, the fee is actually paid to buyers who make particular buying choices, such as purchasing an energy-efficient product.

That’s essentially the idea behind the Efficient Vehicle Leadership Act, a bill introduced in the Senate today by Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME). The bill would levy an additional tax on automakers for cars they produce that get lower than the required average fuel economy required for their class. The bill would eventually replace other existing taxes and incentives such as the Hybrid Tax Credit and the Gas Guzzler Tax.

Rebates and fees would be based on how much better or worse fuel economy a particular model gets compared with the average required for its class.

For example, small conventional cars with good fuel economy such as the Ford Focus or Honda Civic would receive a $1,000 rebate, while the Ford Escape hybrid would receive $2,500. The Toyota Prius, which gets the best fuel economy of any production car currently sold in the United States, would get a $4,000 rebate. On the other hand, the Hummer H2 would be subject to a fee of $2,500.

The rebates would begin in 2011 and the fees would be phased in starting in 2013, under the bill.

—Eric Evarts

Obama unveils 35 mpg requirement at GM factory

During a visit to a General Motors factory in Ohio today, President Obama formally unveiled new fuel economy regulations governing cars produced through 2016.
 
The new rules include the first federal limits on carbon dioxide for cars. Limiting carbon dioxide directly limits how much fuel a car can burn. The standards will set different fuel economy targets for different sizes of vehicles and will set individual mpg targets for each automaker based on the mix of vehicles of different sizes that it produces.
 
Overall, the targets will require that passenger vehicles average 35.5 mpg by 2016, broken down to 39 mpg for cars and 30 mpg for pickups, minivans, and SUVs. By 2012 new cars and trucks have to average 29.2 mpg. This will require a 40 percent improvement over current cars.
 
Automakers had a part in drafting the standards, which constitute a compromise between older federal standards and those proposed by California, which 14 other states signed onto. General Motors issued a statement saying in part: “Greater consistency and certainty among a variety of regulations will help a new GM execute its current product plan centered on new technologies and more highly fuel efficient and quality cars and trucks.”
 
Automakers including GM, Ford, Chrysler, have said they cannot meet the new regulations without selling electric cars, and are rushing forward with plans for electric cars and plug-in hybrids.
 
Some analysts, however, are still suspicious of the automakers’ involvement in the rulemaking. Dan Becker, Director of the Safe Climate Campaign at the Center for Auto Safety, says, “The devil is in the details. Detroit’s lobbyists have done their best to riddle this decision with credits and other loopholes. We urge the Administration to close these loopholes or implement an automatic backstop to ensure that the president’s promise of 35.5 mpg average vehicles in 2016 will be kept.”
 
In a recent survey by the Consumer Reports National Research Center, more than 80 percent of Americans said fuel economy was the most important factor in choosing a new car. And used car buyers ranked it second behind price. (Read: "Survey: Car buyers look to buy American, sound off on concerns.")
 
At Consumer Reports, we place a high value on fuel economy and conduct our own independent, real-world fuel economy tests. Check out our fuel economy hub here.
 
We’ll keep you up to date on how the latest crop of fuel-efficient—and, when available, even electric cars—perform. 

—Eric Evarts

Learn about driving green in the Consumer Reports special fuel economy section.