LA Auto Show Preview: 2010 Lexus GX 460

Lexus has revealed the second-generation of its GX midsized luxury SUV, the GX 460, ahead of its official debut next week at the LA Auto Show. The same size as the model it replaces, the new GX 460 is still an old-fashioned, body-on-frame design that shares a platform with the redesigned Toyota 4Runner. Both are traditionally capable off-roaders. But it promises more refinement, through technology and conveniences. For example, a power-folding third-row seat folds flat into the floor, rather than up against the sides as the old one did. And that is just the beginning.

The name change also represents moving to a new 4.6-liter V8, which makes 301 hp, up from 263. The standard transmission is a new six-speed automatic–upgraded from last year’s five-speed. EPA fuel economy estimates are 15 mpg city and 20 highway, for a combined 17 mpg; the last GX returned 15 mpg combined.

A host of new high-tech features provide protective systems for everything from off-road driving to on-road crash performance.

Previously optional, the new Kinetic Dynamic Suspension System (KDSS) is now standard. It hydraulically controls the anti-roll bars for reduced body lean in corners, and disengages the bars for greater off-road articulation. The vehicle also has downhill assist control to automatically limit descent speeds on steep slippery grades off-road. The Crawl Control, trickled down from the Land Cruiser, is a feature that automatically controls the throttle to maintain a set speed on slow off-road ascents. Crawl Control engages automatically when low-range is selected and the crawl speed can be adjusted manually. Hill start assist keeps the vehicle from rolling back when starting on an uphill.

The GX 460 is available with Lexus’s full complement of electronic safety aids, including lane departure warning, a pre-collision system bundled with radar-guided cruise control that applies the brakes and pretensions the seat belts if it determines an accident is unavoidable. A Driver Attention Monitor alerts the driver when approaching an obstacle while failing to look where the vehicle is going. Lexus’s standard Safety Connect telematics system automatically calls 911 after an accident. A wide view monitor displays the area around the vehicle to help with parking maneuvers.

We last tested a GX in 2004. It was plush, refined and capable off-road, but lacked agility. The new GX seems like an incremental step but brings significant improvements in convenience, luxury amenities, and high-tech safety equipment. We’ll report how it all works together as soon as we buy and test our own GX.

Pricing starts at about $53,000 for the base model, and $57,500 for the Premium trim. It goes on sale late December.

—Eric Evarts 

Update: The maddening Audi key

We have complained about how difficult it is to release the ignition key in our Audi A4 and Q5 full track reports, as well as in the Cars blog. (See “Pet Peeve: Audi Q5 – The maddening key.”) The stubborn key can be quite infuriating because it usually happens when you’ve just arrived somewhere and you’re running late. Perhaps in Germany no one is ever late. We’ll admit, though, that it’s a bit easier to get the key out, even in haste, in our later-built A5 convertible that we’re now testing. All three models share basic components.

It didn’t take long for our recent blog to reach the attention of Audi’s headquarters in Ingolstadt, Germany. Audi’s response: “Cars produced as of November 2009 have a redesigned internal release mechanism,” says After Sales & Technical Service Director Marc Trahan.
 
Supposedly, the fix makes the release quicker. Evidently, this issue wasn’t a surprise for Audi. We haven’t tried the new mechanism for ourselves yet, however.
 
Cars with the quicker-release key should have 11/09 or later printed on their door jamb label.
 
—Gabe Shenhar and Mike Quincy

Survey: SUVs are top choice as consumers consider their next vehicle purchase

Over half of Consumer Reports online subscribers plan to buy or have recently purchased a new vehicle, and SUVs are the number-one pick for those still considering which vehicle type to buy, according to a recent survey. The popularity of SUVs signals a return to larger, versatile vehicles, despite the steep prices at the pump last year that led to a surge in small car sales. These findings are from a recent survey conducted by the Consumer Reports National Research Center that included more than 2,000 interviews of ConsumerReports.org subscribers.

Survey respondents who recently bought sport/utilities, or anticipated buying one, had several reasons for why they considered SUVs to have unique benefits and advantages over other vehicle types. Space, convenience, and perceived safety are three examples cited by at least a third of CRO subscribers.

Leading reasons to purchase an SUV

63 percent said they need extra cargo space
59 percent said they like to sit up high and see over other cars
51 percent said they need all-wheel drive to handle bad weather
41 percent said the SUV's versatility is worth the lower gas mileage
37 percent said they feel safer in a SUV
31 percent said they don't like the image of minivans
27 percent said they need room to carry more than five people

SUVs can range in size and price, and all of the reasons listed above show why they appeal to various types of drivers. (See our in-depth SUV buying advice and Ratings.) 

It should be noted, however, that because of their taller height, SUVs as a class are not as nimble as passenger cars and have a greater rollover risk in emergency handling maneuvers. Also, their added weight compromises fuel economy. For these reasons, and more, a station wagon or minivan are worthwhile alternatives.

Station wagons--like a Subaru Outback--and even some hatchbacks combine the cargo-carrying flexibility of a small or midsized SUV with the comfort, fuel economy, handling, and performance that can rival a sedan. Even a small hatchback such as the Honda Fit can provide a lot of cargo room for its size. Also, all-wheel drive is not limited to SUVs. An increasing number of cars are offering AWD.

Read our wagon buying advice and ratings, available to online subscribers.

—Maggie Shader with the Consumer Reports National Research Center

Recall: 2007-2008 Jeep Wrangler

Chrysler is recalling over 161,000 Jeep Wranglers equipped with automatic transmissions manufactured between June 2006 and July 2007. The vehicles were not equipped with a transmission fluid temperature warning system, and a fire could result if the fluid boils over and comes in contact with the engine or exhaust component.

Dealers will inspect the 2007-2008 models and enable a “hot oil” warning light on the dashboard and an audible chime indicating when transmission fluid temperature is elevated.

Typically, for the transmission fluid to reach a high temperature in an SUV, the vehicle would need to be used for a heavy-duty purpose, such as serious off-roading or pulling a heavy load. Both scenarios are easy to imagine with a Wrangler, as it excels in its off-road ability. Owners should also be aware of the tow capacity for their Wrangler, which is between 2,000 and 3,500 lbs. depending on the trim line. Those owners who do push their Wranglers hard might also consider an aftermarket transmission cooler.

For more information, owners can contact Chrysler at 1-800-835-1403.

See our Jeep Wrangler review.

—Liza Barth

New rollover protection criteria lead to fewer IIHS Top Safety Picks for 2010

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has released a much shorter list of Top Safety Picks for 2010 than in previous years, just 27 models, compared with 94 models in 2009. The Institute has tightened the criteria it uses to name Top Safety Picks for 2010 with the addition of rollover protection, leaving out many vehicles that previously made the list. 

To receive a Top Safety Pick designation for 2010, cars have to receive a Good rating in the IIHS’s new roof crush tests, as well as meet all the earlier criteria: Good scores in front and side crash tests, a Good head restraint design for rear impacts, and the inclusion of Electronic Stability Control. In its crash tests, the IIHS rates cars on a scale of Good, Acceptable, Marginal, and Poor.

The added requirement of a Good rating in the roof strength test eliminated several top-selling models that were on last year’s list, including the Ford Fusion and the Honda Accord. “Honda and Ford would have to make only minor changes to achieve good ratings for roof strength, as the Accord and Fusion just missed the mark,” says IIHS president Adrian Lund.

The Toyota Camry also missed the mark because its head restraints were rated Marginal. Toyota had no cars on the list of Top Safety Picks this year. Other past winners with no vehicles on the list this year included BMW, Mazda, Mitsubishi, and Saab. The Institute praised Subaru as the only automaker to win the award in every category it entered, with five vehicles earning the Top Safety Pick designation. Chrysler, Volkswagen, and Volvo each earned four. No convertibles were included on this year’s list. Two new small cars, the Nissan Cube and the Kia Soul, join the list.

The Volvo XC60, which was introduced this year, had an early safety problem in the side impact test, and only models built after Nov. 1, 2009 qualify for the award. However, IIHS points out that consumers with XC60s built before than can see their Volvo dealer for an update.

2010 IIHS Top Safety Picks

Large cars
Buick LaCrosse
Ford Taurus
Lincoln MKS
Volvo S80

Midsize cars
Audi A3
Chevrolet Malibu built after Oct. 2009
Chrysler Sebring 4-door with optional ESC
Dodge Avenger with optional ESC
Mercedes-Benz C-Class
Subaru Legacy
Subaru Outback
Volkswagen Jetta sedan
Volkswagen Passat sedan
Volvo C30

Small cars
Honda Civic 4-door with optional ESC, except Si
Kia Soul
Nissan Cube
Subaru Impreza, except WRX
Volkswagen Golf 4-door

Midsize SUVs
Dodge Journey
Subaru Tribeca
Volvo XC60
Volvo XC90

Small SUVs
Honda Element
Jeep Patriot with optional side air bags
Subaru Forester
Volkswagen Tiguan

Although fewer models earn the award this year, it is still possible to find models in all categories with good overall safety scores. However, in some categories, few if any models meet both IIHS’s requirements for a Top Safety Pick and Consumer Reports standards for recommendation. To be recommended by Consumer Reports, a vehicle must perform well in our testing, have at least average reliability, and perform adequately in safety tests by both the government and the IIHS, if tested.

The small SUV category illustrates how fewer models now standout as the safest and best models. Last year 10 small SUVs earned Top Safety Pick designations. This year only four did: the Honda Element, Jeep Patriot, Subaru Forester, and Volkswagen Tiguan. Many other small SUVs received sub-par ratings in the IIHS’s new roof-strength test. Of those, only the Forester and the Tiguan meet the criteria to be recommended by Consumer Reports.

Overall, vehicle safety has made significant improvements through the years, as automakers have added stronger front and side structures, head-protecting air bags, and electronic stability control on many more models. (For proof, see “IIHS crash tests 2009 Chevrolet Malibu vs 1959 Bel Air.”) Increasingly stringent safety tests have been a driving force in motivating the auto industry to make progressive improvements, and this revised methodology to selecting Top Safety Picks will likely lead to even safer vehicles. 

There are many considerations when choosing a new vehicle, and this change to how the IIHS spotlights what it considers to be the safest models should help car buyers who prioritize safety.

—Eric Evarts 

For more information on the government tests, see our related reports:
Crash test 101
Rollover 101
Roof-crush standards

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

2011 Ford Explorer: Inflatable, seat-belt air bags to protect rear-seat passengers

Ford announced today that it will offer inflatable seat belts in the back seat of its 2011 Ford Explorer. The new safety feature will provide additional protection for kids and elderly passengers—common second-row occupants that are especially vulnerable to injury.
 
The belts will reel in and out like regular belts, but they will have air bags built into the webbing that will inflate upon impact. The inflatable belts will spread the load of the impact across about five times more body area, Ford says. Since rear seated passengers don’t have frontal impact air bags to help protect them in a crash, the seatbelts are their main source of crash protection during an impact. With regular safety belts, the force of the impact is spread only across the area of the body that is in contact with the belts. This can lead to neck and chest injuries in severe crashes, especially for young or small passengers who don’t fit in the belts as well as average-sized adults. (This is why children under eight years old should always ride in a child seat, to ensure the belts lay cross the strongest bony structures in their bodies.)
 
Ford claims the new belts will reduce those injuries and have been designed to still be used to safely install a child safety seat. The company says the technology protects even if passengers are sleeping with their heads resting on the belt.
 
The bag-equipped belts will start out as an option on the new 2011 Explorer, Ford says, then availability will expand to other models. Similar technology is available in some light aircraft.
 
The air bags sit inside the fabric of the seat belts and inflate in 40 milliseconds using a cool, low-pressure gas from a cylinder housed under the rear seats of the vehicle. This inflation rate is much slower than traditional air bags to reduce the potential for injury from the air bags themselves.

In surveys the company has conducted, it says 90 percent of respondents have deemed them as comfortable to wear as regular safety belts or more comfortable, because they are slightly wider and softer than standard belts. Ford hopes this will encourage more rear seat passengers to wear the belts. Currently, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) estimates that 60 percent of rear seat passengers wear their safety belts, compared with 83 percent of front-seat occupants.

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

—Eric Evarts

Video: Diesel comparison - BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen

For buyers looking for a fuel efficient car, diesels provide an alternative to hybrids. Popular in Europe for years, more diesels are making their way to the U.S. market.

Modern diesels escape many of the liabilities of earlier designs. They are quieter, burn cleaner, and have much improved acceleration. Fuel economy is considerably improved over gasoline-powered versions.

But buying a diesel usually means paying more up front. Finding a diesel pump isn't quite as easy as locating gasoline, and diesel fuel prices recently have fluctuated widely. Except for Volkswagen, diesel vehicle availability is also limited to high-price luxury brands.

In this video, we take a look at four diesels—Mercedes-Benz GL320 Bluetec, BMW 335d, BMW X5, and the Volkswagen Jetta TDI—and their pros and cons.

—Tom Mutchler

2009 Annual Auto Reliability Survey: A high price doesn’t mean it’s reliable

Paying more for a new car doesn’t guarantee that it will be reliable. Inexpensive small cars and midsized family sedans are the most reliable vehicles according to our 2009 Annual Auto Survey, which is based on our subscribers’ experiences with 1.4 million vehicles.

Twenty of out of 37 small cars and 21 out of 41 family cars have above-average predicted reliability. Minivans are at the bottom of the list, but there are not as many minivan options. See how the other vehicle categories fare below.

Car type	% of models rated average or better
Family cars	91%
Small cars	84%
Small SUVs	83%
Upscale cars	78%
Compact pickups	74%
Midsized SUVs	74%
Full-sized pickups	68%
Luxury cars	67%
Sporty cars	62%
Upscale/luxury SUVs	55%
Large SUVs	50%
Minivans	43%

When it comes to buying a new car, you do not need to spend top dollar. It pays to do your research and find the model that meet Consumer Reports’ stringent requirements to be recommended, as well as your budget.

For more details on our 2009 Annual Auto Survey including the full list of most and least reliable new cars by vehicle type, see our reliability report. Also, check out our guide to car reliability for more details on new and used car reliability as well as owner satisfaction.

—Liza Barth 

Pet Peeve: Audi Q5 – The maddening key

As you know, we all drive the test cars not only on the track, but in our day-to-day lives as well. We drive the cars to the grocery store, the doctor’s office, and to fulfill our share of car pooling to kids’ soccer practices. This adds to the all-important “what’s it like to live with” section of our final write up.
 
Last night I drove the Audi Q5. In our tests, we praised its quiet, well-finished cabin; comfortable ride; strong V6 engine; and very un-SUV like handling. But, for me, the absolute deal-breaker and argument against buying one (at least this one) is the infuriating ignition key.
 
You see, Audi, similar to many high-end manufacturers, uses a blocky, all-in-one ignition key. But in no way does it resemble a traditional key, such as a house key. Instead, these new style keys are a bit larger than a Hot Wheels car, and not nearly as much fun. The ignition mechanism works by the key being inserted into a slot and then pressed to start the car. However, many who have driven our Q5 found it annoying, compared to the typical transponder keep-it-in-your-pocket key common to this class.
 
But my frustration with it boiled over last night when I drove my boys to their Cub Scouts pack meeting. When I pulled into the school lot and put the Q5 in Park, I couldn’t remove the key to shut down the car. Which left me no choice but to then push it in again, restarting the car and try again. I had to restart the car four times before it magically released from the dashboard. We walked into the meeting late. I was not amused. The same thing happened on the way home. And on the way into work this morning.
 
This was similar to our experience with the last Audi A4 we tested, which had a similar set-up. When we brought the issue up at a meeting with Audi, we were told a change is in place for 2010 models. I’ll believe it what I can pull the key out the first time.
 
For years, Audi’s slogan has been “advancement through technology.” I’m sorry, but this system is not a step forward. What is the point of taking something relatively simple (like shutting off the car) and making it complicated? How did the designers and engineers convince upper management that adding extra steps to a simple task was good idea? We criticized recent Audis in our evaluations for unnecessarily complicated controls. For example, selecting a seat heater or fan speed setting requires pushing a button and then dialing in the setting you want. Other cars do this with a single button press.
 
When I think of how much better cars are than they ever were, I think of stability control; antilock brakes; curtain air bags; and engines and components that run reliably for 100,000-plus miles. Growing up in the 1970s, I never thought I’d see the day when a 400-hp Chevrolet Corvette would get 31 mpg on the highway. Stuff like this gives me hope that the wonderful world of cars keeps evolving in ways I couldn’t dream of.

But this Audi ignition key is so infuriating that I don’t want to drive it. And in my view, it is a regression of common-sense engineering.

Read our full Audi Q5 road test (available to online subscribers).

—Mike Quincy