AD #1931 – Auto Braking Systems Vary Greatly, California Wants Stricter GHG Regs, 1st Autonomous Taxi Launches

August 25th, 2016 at 11:49am

Runtime: 8:58

To watch this episode on YouTube click here.

- AAA Tests Auto Braking Systems
- California Approves Law to Cut GHGs
- Boosting Octane Boosts Efficiency
- Start-Up Launches 1st Autonomous Taxi
- The Drive Home: Part Two

Visit our sponsors to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: Bridgestone , Dow Automotive Systems and Lear Corporation

»Subscribe to Podcast | iTunes | RSS | Listen on Phone Stitcher | YouTube

Thanks to our partner for embedding Autoline Daily on its website: WardsAuto.com

16 Comments to “AD #1931 – Auto Braking Systems Vary Greatly, California Wants Stricter GHG Regs, 1st Autonomous Taxi Launches”

  1. MJB Says:

    “Drive Home” question: Will they at least clean the cars up this time?

    It’s admirable that these vehicles are still able to make such a trek, and quite a testament to their build quality. But for heaven’s sake, somebody break wide with a wet sponge and some suds. Hit them up with a fresh coat of wax too, while you’re at it!

  2. Lex Says:

    I am always looking to have my voice heard by OEMs when it comes to their vehicles. I really like the redesign of the Ford Escape. Now the Escape has the same front end as it’s big brother the Ford Edge. Both vehicles are very handsome. Unfortunately the interior of the Escape has not been updated. The Escape feels cluttered and the gages stick out of the dash at you. Ford need to copy the interior of the Edge and fit it into the Escape. Also please remove those fender vents from the rear portions of the front fender. They look very old school. Consumers like me like a streamline looking vehicle without excess trim and badging to get int he way when you are washing and detailing your pride and joy. I hope Mark Fields is reading and listening!

  3. Lex Says:

    My Uncle just purchased a 2017 Kia Sportage AWD. He is a numbers guy and view his vehicle as an appliance. When Kia was ranked number one in reliability that sold him on the brand. I was very surprised that he purchased the new Sportage. It has some very nice lines and features while looking a little like a “Baby Porsche Cayenne” to me.

    If GM is going to bring back the “Cavalier” nameplate in global markets for an all new car. Why that name? The Cavalier was a cheap junky car which nobody really loved!
    Let’s give this new car a fresh start with a new name or a name with some good history.

  4. MJB Says:

    #2. While I understand your issue with the Escape interior, I don’t think doing a cut-&-paste of the Edge interior is the solution. You’ve gotta give the designers something to do.

    Not to mention, when interiors get copied from higher end models to lower ones, it can work against whatever exclusivity, panache, or uniqueness was originally meant for the higher end vehicle.

    Heck, I see that now with my two young boys. If the older one has something unique, then the younger one gets the exact same thing, it instantly looses its value with the older one, and he no longer wants his.

  5. Barry Rector Says:

    John,
    Haven’t you had guests on your programs talking about how cars that run only on ethanol (E85) fuel have lower emissions, higher MPG and greater performance over the flex fuel engines? Could this not be a reasonable alternative to pursue?

  6. Drew Says:

    Sorry guys. I like the interior of the Escape, particularly the instrument cluster. Ford changed the floor console so cell phones have their own cubby instead of using one of the cup holders. But, I hate the exterior changes. The exterior changes aren’t disasterous, but they are backward steps.

  7. Kit Gerhart Says:

    I hope they quickly, and effectively get the road salt off of those old cars at the end of that “drive home,” or they will soon be rusty hulks.

  8. Kit Gerhart Says:

    3 I don’t think Chevy plans to revive the Cavalier name in the U.S. The name probably doesn’t have the negative vibe in other parts of the world, that it has here.

    As far as I’m concerned, the Cavalier doesn’t deserve the bad reputation is has. The second generation was a very good car, for the price. My friend’s Sunfire, the same thing as a Cavalier, has 250K miles with no major problems. Not many cars, even much more expensive ones do as well.

    Yeah, the first generation J cars, especially the first four or five years, were not very good.

  9. Kit Gerhart Says:

    5 If you take full advantage of E-85, with higher compression, etc., you get good power and mpg. If cars were sold that way, there would need to be a way to prevent people from putting low ethanol fuel in them, and a higher percentage of stations would need to sell E-85.

    A friend has a drag car, with a carburetor, that uses E-85, and he likes using that fuel. He needs to get fuel directly from a place that mixes it, though, to make sure he gets the right gas/ethanol mix. Pump E-85 can vary quite a bit in mix ratio.

  10. W L Simpson Says:

    Proper driver training would eliminate the need for automation, which will be a messy situation in the foreseeable future. “You can’t fix stupid”–w/a diode.

  11. Rick W Says:

    Regarding the AHH show and engine manufacturer’s requesting the use and availability of only higher octane fuels, thus eliminating the sale of lower octane fuels, I believe would be a huge benefit to the CO2 emissions issue and better fuel economy.

    Unfortunately, they also state the use of higher blended (more than 10%) Ethanol fuels would also be beneficial in their designs of ICE engines.

    My first comment on that is;
    Go back to the table and increase the the national gas tax on fuel for the obvious reasons.

    Second,
    I agree with the mandatory use of higher octane fuels nationwide, especially while gas prices are low.

    Third;
    I DON’T want to see higher blends of ethanol as a possible mandate from the Gov’t.
    I have already experienced significant and expensive problems with the use of 10% blended Ethanol here in the Northeast.
    The Gov’t is ignoring the FACT that Ethanol wreaks havoc on our gasoline powered motorcycles, ATV’s, Boat’s, Lawnmowers, generators and ALL other small gas powered equipment with carburetors.

    The mandated use of 10% Ethanol has already cost me thousands of dollars in the repair and replacement of fuel systems in these types of equipment that I own, involving carb replacements and fuel tank problems, etc. due to the Ethanol absorbing water and creating the growth of very thick organism’s in the whole fuel systems.
    Also, a very large problem is the Manufacturers of this type of equipment, even today, WILL NOT honor any warranty if any % of Ethanol is used in the fuel being sold to us. So we’re F****D.

    Even 10% is too much and the EPA is mandated by Congress to increase the amount to at least 15% in the very near future.
    This even worse for all of us with carburated engines and especially with older equipment that we are trying to maintain and use.

    Just my 2 cents, but I have been writing my Congress people and Senators but the reponses are that it is already a mandate and there is nothing they can do.

    Utter Bullshit…………………..

  12. Rick W Says:

    Correction to my above post.

    I meant Autoline This Week not AAH.

  13. Kit Gerhart Says:

    @Rick, #11
    Could you tell us what equipment has been damaged by E-10? I have experienced no problems with my 1977 John Deere lawn tractor with the original un-modified carburetor, and the original fuel pump. I needed to replace the original shellacked cork carb floats in an old BMW motorcycle, but other than that, it has had no problem.

    Also, the thing with E-10 “going bad” seems highly exagerated. I park two cars, two motorcycles, and the mentioned lawn tractor for 7 months each winter, with E-10 in the tanks. No problem.

  14. Kit Gerhart Says:

    There is no way that the sale of lower octane fuel should be eliminated, unless the cost of producing higher octane fuel is the same. There is no advantage to using higher octane in engines not designed for it. Even with my two “premium recommended but not required” cars, there is no apparent difference in normal driving.

  15. XA351GT Says:

    Kit @ # 13 , I can tell you from personal experience that ethanol blended fuels almost burned my Falcon down. I pulled the car out of the garage and went back to close the gates on our fence. Walking back to the car my wife says were leaking something. I thought she saw condensation dripping from the exhaust . She said no it’s up by the back tire. I reached under there and gas was pouring through my braided stainless fuel hose from the tank to the front of the car. It was leaking right onto the tail pipes. I shut the car off rolled it back to the garage and hosed everything off. I removed the hose and it was like swiss cheese. The thing was only about 10 years old at the time. If I had jut drove it without her seeing the leak we surely would have burned to the ground. I have no love for that crap. It kills gas mileage which seems to be counter to getting good emissions as you are using more fuel. I’d like to see if anyone has done a study which shows how much emissions are really saved versus pure gas. Alcohol burns 3 times faster than gas . So maybe 10% isn’t enough to change it mush , but it would be interesting to know what the numbers are.

  16. Kit Gerhart Says:

    It’s good your car didn’t burn down. That would not be cool.

    Apparently your, probably aftermarket gas line was not compatable with ethanol mix. You need to be careful with aftermarket “specialty” products.

    Yes, you get 3% worse gas mileage with E-10 than with E-0. If the difference is greater than that, there is something wrong with the fuel system/engine control.