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

Honda Element gets dog-friendly, though doesn’t learn needed tricks

Honda has expanded its accessory offerings for the Element SUV to include new equipment aimed to improve the safety and comfort of the four-legged passengers. The new “Dog Friendly” system can be integrated at the factory into the 2010 Element EX cargo area and will provide a place in daily driving for the pet to be properly restrained and out of reach from the driver. It will also help to restrain the dog behind the rear seats, so that the pet and occupants of the vehicle will have a reduced chance of injury in the event of a crash. The concept behind this canine commuter was previewed at the New York auto show.

The Dog Friendly components include a soft-sided cargo area kennel made from strong seat belt material netting, a cushioned pet bed in the cargo area, a 12-volt DC fan, second-row seat covers with a dog pattern, all-season rubber floor mats and a spill resistant water bowl. An extendable ramp will also store beneath the bed, so it can be accessed when the tailgate is open.

The 2010 Element EX version has an MSRP of $22,635 for the 2WD model. The dog equipment will retail at $995 and be available to buyers on Nov. 16th. The 2010 Element in all trims will be available at dealerships in mid-October.

Though it’s always been versatile and reliable, the Element is a bit long in the tooth. The “Dog Friendly” system may be well-liked by some, perhaps many people, but we would also have welcomed a couple of new tricks, such as a powertrain upgrade like that bestowed on the 2010 Honda CR-V—14 more horsepower and 1 more EPA-rated mpg. As it is, the Element suffers from significant road noise, lousy visibility, a stiff ride, and tricky emergency handling.

While Dog Friendly adds some appeal, at a significant price, it really doesn’t teach this old dog any new tricks to make it more competitive, or earn it a Consumer Reports Recommendation.

—Liza Barth 

For more pet-related reports see:
Vacation travel for dogs
Best dogs for retirees
Tax break for pet care?

GM ready to unload Hummer

General Motors is now one step closer to selling off the Hummer brand to Chinese company Tengzhong. Today GM announced that they are in a definitive agreement that will allow Tengzhong to acquire the Hummer brand and trademarks as well as rights to manufacture Hummer vehicles. Tengzhong will own 80 percent stake in the company and a private entrepreneur will hold the remaining 20 percent.

Part of the agreement requires Hummer to contract manufacturing and other services to GM for a period of time. The H3 and H3T will continue to be built in the Shreveport, Louisiana plant and the H2 at the Mishawaka Indiana plant until June 2011 with a possible one year extension. This is good news to the 3,000 plant workers who will continue to be employed.

Once the deal is final, Hummer is expected to offer an alternative power train in each model, E85 capability in the 2010 H3 and H3T, and the potential for a diesel engine in the H3 for markets outside of the U.S.

While the financial details were not officially announced, Bloomberg is reporting the sale is worth about $150 million, which is quite a bit less than the $500 million General Motors said it was seeking during bankruptcy proceedings. It looks like the collapse in negotiations for Saturn last week spurred GM to consider a lower price to keep this deal from falling through as well.

—Liza Barth 

1993-2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee - Safety group calls for recall due to potential fire hazard

Jeep Grand Cherokees built between 1993 and 2004 are three to four times as likely to catch fire in a rear-impact collision than other midsized SUVs, according to a petition (download pdf) filed by the Center for Auto Safety. The document asks the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to recall the as many as 2.3 million of these Grand Cherokees still on the road.
 
“The fuel system in the 1993-04 Grand Cherokee is defectively designed in that it contains a plastic fuel tank subject to rupture, degrades in performance over time, a fuel filler neck that tears off in a range of crashes, a hostile environment with sharp objects such as suspension bolts that can puncture the tank, extends below the bumper and is unshielded,” writes CAS Executive Director Clarence Ditlow in the petition. (Ditlow also serves on the board for Consumers Union.)
 
Examining NHTSA data, the Center determined that the named Grand Cherokees were involved in 172 fatal fires, resulting in 254 deaths between 1992 and 2004. According to the petition, that is a higher fatality rate than for the Ford Pinto, which was subject to a similar recall in 1978.
 
An optional steel skid-plate, available for off-road applications, would protect the fuel tank, Ditlow says in the petition.
 
In 2005, Jeep redesigned the Grand Cherokee, and moved the gas tank in front of the rear axle. Only one of these later Grand Cherokees has been involved in a fatal crash involving a fire. In that case, the vehicle rolled over, and the occupants were thrown from the car, so the fire was not a factor in their deaths.
 
The petition filing indirectly raises an interesting question of whether the U.S. government now faces a conflict of interest as a vehicle regulator and an owner with a 10 percent stake in Chrysler, plus the majority stakeholder in General Motors. (Read: "Buzzword: Government Motors.")

So far NHTSA has not responded to the petition.

Update: Chrysler has posted a response on its corporate blog, excerpt below:

Statistically, rear impacts that result in serious injury are rare occurrences. Chrysler Group is confident that a proper study which considered all factors in all collisions including rear collisions with fire would show that the 1993-2004 Jeep Grand Cherokees perform as well as or better than other vehicles in their class.

The 1993-2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee meets or exceeds all applicable federal safety standards and, as noted, has an excellent safety record. There are many millions of 1993-2004 Jeep Grand Cherokees on the road whose owners and families continue to enjoy tens of millions of miles and hours of safe vehicle operation each year.

Also read the New York Times report "Asserting risk of Jeep fires, safety group urges recall."

—Eric Evarts

Sneak peek: 2011 Kia Sorento

With the next-generation redesign, the 2011 Kia Sorento makes the transition to a car-based platform. The size increases in the process, making it longer and roomier than the previous version with seating up to seven passengers. This will allow it to better compete against other crossover designs such as the Ford Escape, Honda CR-V, and Toyota RAV4. The Sorento’s length grows to 184.4 inches, up from 181 inches and the width expands over an inch to 74.2. Cargo capacity also increases nearly five cubic feet.

The Sorento will have two engine choices—a 2.4-liter four-cylinder producing 172 hp and a 3.5-liter V6 producing 273 hp. Both engines are matched to a six-speed automatic transmission and are available in either front- or all-wheel drive.

Standard features include a AM/FM/Sirius/CD/MP3 audio system with a USB input and Bluetooth connectivity. Also available is a push-button start, voice-activated navigation, and back-up camera. Pricing information has not yet been revealed.

The new unibody design may help address the stiff ride and clumsy handling problems we found in our tests of the current Sorento, which scores too low to be recommended.

The Sorento is the first Kia produced at the newly built West Point, Georgia, plant, and it will hit showrooms in January 2010.

For more on the Kia Sorento and other new vehicles coming soon, see our New Car Preview section.

—Liza Barth

Revealed: 2010 Toyota 4Runner

Once known for their rugged truck underpinnings and off-road prowess, many SUVs have been softened in recent years as the ever-popular segment devolves into raised station wagons and away from truck-based models. That is not the case with the redesigned 2010 Toyota 4Runner, a vehicle that not only embraces its adventurous heritage, but seeks to further it. The fifth-generation model will be offered in three trims, the top-of-the-line Limited, SR5, and a Trail grade for maximum off-road capability.

Taller, wider, and longer than the previous 4Runner, the new model also increases the underhood power. All 4x4 models use a new 4.0-liter V6 engine that generates 270 hp--34 hp more than the previous V6 version. EPA estimates are 17 mpg city and 22 mpg highway for the 4x4 models, with 19 mpg combined. Maximum towing capacity is 5,000 lbs.

The 4x2 models are equipped with either the V6 or a 2.7-liter four-cylinder engine. EPA estimates are 18 city and 23 highway mpg for the SR5.

The 4Runner now offers several advanced features to assist off-road driving, such as active traction control, crawl control for help in steep declines, and dynamic suspension that disconnects stabilizer bars to help the wheels manage difficult trails. A Multi-Terrain Select system enables the driver to choose a preset surface condition, informing the 4Runner how to best manage wheel slip, akin to offerings available in some Jeep and Land Rover products.

Standard safety features include stability control, antilock brakes, and brake assist. Hill assist is standard on all 4x4 models and the 4x2 V6. All 4Runners have active headrests for driver and passenger and eight standard air bags. A back-up camera is standard on Limited and Trail lines, and it is optional on the SR5.

Also available is a subscription-based telematics system that provides collision notification, a stolen vehicle locator, an SOS button, and roadside assistance.

We consider the 2009 Toyota 4Runner to be one of the better SUVs suited for serious off-roading. It is both civilized and trail ready. We look forward to testing the new model on the road, our test track, and on our infamous rock hill. (See how we conduct our off-road tests.)  

For more on the Toyota 4Runner and other new vehicles coming soon, see our New Car Preview section.

 —Liza Barth

Updated: More powerful 2010 Honda CR-V

Honda has announced some power and feature upgrades to the best-selling Honda CR-V for the 2010 model year. Most notable is a 14-hp increase to 180-hp. Along with more power, the 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine also boasts an increase in EPA-estimated fuel economy by one mpg in both city and highway driving, which becomes an estimated 21/27/23 for city/highway/overall for the EX AWD model. In our tests of the previous version, we measured 15/29/21. We also found the CR-V only had adequate acceleration, but the new increase in horsepower could help.

Besides the changes under the hood, the front grille gets a facelift with a single horizontal cross bar instead of the double trim accent from the previous design. The front fascia now has more paint color instead of the black lower valence and the hood now is flush into the grille, instead of wrapping down and around.

Other detail changes include a new interior door handle design with a rubberized grip and the front seat center arm rests increases in width by one inch. Ten-spoke alloy wheels, standard on the EX and EX-L, replace the seven-spoke design. Bluetooth connectivity will now be available on models equipped with the navigation package and automatic on/off headlights will be standard on the EX-L line.

Retail prices will range from $21,545 for the base 2WD LX to $29,745 for the top of the line EX-L AWD with navigation system. A $710 destination charge will be added. The 2010 CR-V will hit dealerships in the coming weeks.

The CR-V is one of the top-scoring small SUVs Consumer Reports has tested. For more on our Ratings, reliability, fuel economy, safety and more, see our Honda CR-V model overview.

—Liza Barth