We'd wager that the last thing Toyota wants in the midst of the super-important launch of its new third-generation Prius is a negative stigma attached to the previous model. Unfortunately, that's exactly what the Japanese automaker may have on its hands as a number of owners of the 2005-2008 Toyota Prius with the HID headlight option are banding together on online forums, message boards and in possible class action lawsuits against the automaker in relation to failing headlamps.

According to Advertising Age, these HID headlight bulbs and their associated electronics can sometimes cost well over $1,000 to replace after they've gone faulty, and Toyota is unwilling to pick up the tab. At least one lawsuit has reportedly been filed last month by Girard Gibbs in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles on behalf of a Putnam County, N.Y., Prius owner. The suit contends that the problem is a "dangerous but undisclosed safety defect" and alleges that "Toyota is concealing the problems from owners" despite having been "long been aware of Prius' HID headlight problem." It's possible that the suit will get class-action status.

The NHTSA has reportedly filed a preliminary investigation into the issue and contacted Toyota on May 13 regarding 338 complaints it has received so far from Prius owners about the HID headlamps. Spokesmen from Toyota have said the automaker is cooperating with the NHTSA investigation, which may or may not end up calling for an official recall.



[Source: Advertising Age]

Calling it "the most disappointing Honda Consumer Reports has tested in a long time," America's most influential product testing magazine has given extremely poor marks to the Japanese automaker's new Insight hybrid.

In a verdict that reminds us of a certain Jeremy Clarkson review (albeit more kindly worded), Consumer Reports blasted the gas-electric hatchback for its "ride quality, handling, interior noise, acceleration, rear-seat, access, and visibility," consigning the hapless Honda to a 21 out of 22 ranking among other small hatchbacks and wagons. Tallying a road test score of 54 points, it was trailed only by the widely panned Dodge Caliber, which managed just 49 points.

Despite the fact that it won't receive a much-coveted CR "Recommended" nod, the Insight still managed to post a "Good" overall road test score (largely on the strength of its 38 miles-per-gallon as-tested fuel economy). Regardless, it was comprehensively beaten by both the Volkswagen Jetta Wagon and the Hyundai Elantra Touring, which scored 80 and 79 points, respectively.

The Insight was the only vehicle in CR's test group to not to be Recommended, save Kia's Soul, which was excluded because the organization hasn't compiled any reliability data on the vehicle yet. Check out the press release after the jump and our new review of the car by clicking here.



[Source: Consumer Reports]

Driving a small car in the urban environs they're so well suited for can add up in big repair bills, says the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. Low speed incidents in parking lots and on tight city streets are everyday occurrences that seemingly shouldn't cost a lot to set right, but they apparently wind up costing consumers many thousands of dollars each year. The smallest cars on the market also have tiny price tags, making the price of repairs a much larger percentage of what the vehicle cost in the first place. The IIHS recently evaluated the bumpers of some of the tiniest vehicles on the market in low-speed incidents, and the results dovetail with the agency's equally low impressions of vehicle-to-vehicle impact performance of small-segment vehicles. A new damage assessment criteria was used to more closely mirror reality, and the cars underwent four tests: two corner impacts and two full width impacts on the bumpers.

Of the seven cars tested, only the Smart ForTwo earned an "acceptable" rating, with most of the pack scoring "poor." Worst was the Kia Rio's startling $9,380 total damage tally, by far the most expensive showing in the test. The Honda Fit and Mini Cooper may be more highly regarded in the small car segment, but both of those models also score poorly.

In diametric opposition to what anyone might actually enjoy driving, the Smart ForTwo and the Chevrolet Aveo came out best in terms of repair costs, bashing their way to $3,281 and $4,490 in total damage, respectively. It's clear from the IIHS' testing where bumpers often failed to engage or slid under the test barrier, that the way improve on the tests is to pay closer attention to bumper position in all circumstances when designing a car. If the bumper doesn't match up properly, bodywork ends up bearing the brunt of the impact, making even low-speed collisions expensive propositions. Hit the jump to see a video and a chart of the results along with the full release.

[Source: Insurance Institute for Highway Safety]

On a recent episode of The Chrysler Files, customers who purchased Chrysler vehicles that were later officially certified as lemons were being reimbursed by the company with checks... that bounced. The snafu stemmed from the fact that while said claims were made before Chrysler's bankruptcy, after the automaker's Chapter 11 filing, the judge had to clear the funds to be paid from Chrysler's account. Since the judge hadn't cleared the funds, the checks were worth precisely zero dollars.

Those owners will be happy to know that the judge has finally approved Fiat and Chyrsler honoring "all warranty and lemon law obligations" for cars purchased up to five years before April 30. With the ruling, those affected will also be eligible for additional costs and attorney's fees. Of course, that news still doesn't detail when you stranded motorists can expect a check to arrive -- or when they can cash the ones they already have -- but help is on the way.

[Source: Automotive News, sub req'd]

Consumer Reports has counted down the forty best deals on domestic new cars – those you can get from 10% to 25% below MSRP. Since CR doesn't have any Chrysler products that it feels it can recommend, there are no Pentastar products on the list, and General Motors products features but twice (the 2009 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 1LT 4X4 Crew Cab can be had for 15% below retail and the 2009 GMC Sierra 4WD Crew Cab SLT SWB for a 10% discount).

Topping the chart is the 2009 Nissan Titan SE 4X4 Crew Cab SWB, for which CR figures Nissan will slice off upwards of one fourth of the price. Otherwise, dominating the top of the list are Ford products in the 15% to 20% bracket, while the lower half is owned by "domestics" in the guise of Toyota and Honda with a smattering of Nissan and Subaru.

All of the cars on the list have been tested by CR and have good overall safety scores, including rollover results. To come up with the final discount number, the magazine included customer rebates and dealer incentives. If you're looking for any one of these cars, the negotiating tactic you're probably looking for is "hard bargain." Check out the complete list of CR's Top 40 at the link below.

[Source: Consumer Reports]

Going through the process of having a troubled vehicle legally branded as a 'lemon' is difficult enough, but now, according to The Los Angeles Times, Chrysler's bankruptcy is making seeking recompense even harder for affected owners in California. According to the daily paper, settlement checks for Chrysler vehicles that have already been agreed upon as defective are apparently bouncing, costing already irked consumers additional time and money.

Apparently, the heart of the issue stems from the fact that financial claims made prior to the company's April 30 Chapter 11 filing can only be paid out if the bankruptcy judge approves the action. To date, Chrysler has apparently not requested the court's permission to make good on these lemon law payments, leaving little recourse for affected consumers.

Many affected owners have apparently spoken with attorneys, who apparently can't do much unless the lemon law payback accounts in question are unfrozen by the bankruptcy court. That means consumers could be out anywhere from a couple of thousand dollars to the entire cost of a new vehicle – one attorney, Alex Simanovsky, is quoted as saying that he has "a stack of six or seven checks in my drawer right now from Chrysler that have bounced" – settlement payments ranging from $2,000 on up to $40,000. Some consumers have already turned-in their defective vehicles to Chrysler, compounding the problem.

For its part, the LA Times says that Chrysler is telling customers with lemon law claims to get in line – by filing a claim with the courts, in effect joining the automakers other unsecured creditors seeking payment. In that scenario, however, defective car owners aren't expected to see much more than "pennies on the dollar."

Consumer groups have reportedly met with auto task force members to discuss the matter, but as of yet, there is no word on any remedy in the works. Thanks for the tip, MopePar!

[Source: The Los Angeles Times]

It's official. The Feds are pissed, too. On Thursday, a federal judge did what many of us have wanted to do for a long time now. He handed out restraining orders to two companies the Federal Trade Commission says have been calling you, me, all your friends, your 90-year-old blind grandmother, and anyone else without enough sense to ignore unidentified phone calls.

"Today the FTC has disconnected the people responsible for so many of these annoying robocalls," said FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz in a press release. "We expect to see a dramatic decrease in deceptive auto warranty calls, but we are still on high alert.

Voice Touch, Inc. and its partner Network Foundations LLC were ordered to immediately stop making phone calls that violate the Do Not Call Registry. The Feds also ordered the companies' assets frozen and appointed receivers over them to ensure all relevant documents are preserved for a May 29 hearing. Transcontinental Warranty, Inc., a client of Voice Touch, was also given a restraining order.

Does this mean those annoying calls will now stop? Most of them, probably. Does it mean your car's warranty really isn't about to expire? Judging by the number of new cars sold in the last two years, the end of your car's coverage is probably long gone or very near. Leave your number in the comments and someone will get with you soon to discuss your options. (We're kidding, obviously.)

[Source: The Associated Press]

The Chicago Tribune is shaking a rattle at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Its investigation has found 31 cases of infant seats exceeding injury limits or disconnecting from their bases during federal vehicle frontal impact crash tests. The NHTSA slams countless cars into barriers each year, like the 2008 Dodge Caravan in the gallery below. In addition to the sensor-laden crash dummies, some of the vehicles are also fitted with infant or child seats. According to the Tribune, the unreported child seat failures in those tests – crashes conducted only to test vehicle safety, not the safety of the child seats – has uncovered a serious flaw in infant/child seat testing.

In the United States today, infant seats are only tested on a sled. Before being sold, the seats must demonstrate the ability to survive a "simulated" head-on crash at 30 mph. On the other hand, the NHTSA crashes actual vehicles into a barrier at 35 mph (although it is only 5 mph faster, the impact is significantly greater). Sled tests are effective in some studies, but they fail to test the variables found among different vehicle interiors and the unique seat designs that change from manufacturer to manufacturer.

Responding to the Tribune report, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said in a written statement Friday that he ordered a "complete top to bottom review of child safety seat regulations." He will also make changes to make the crash-test results "more available" to consumers. Government crash test regulations have held automakers to the fire, and the result has been much safer vehicles for adults. Now it's time to bring infant/child seat manufacturers to the same flame and improve small occupant safety, as well.


[Source: Freep, image by NHTSA]

Dutch Mandel from AutoWeek, Terry Rhadigan from GM, John Neff from Autoblog and David Thomas from Kicking Tires (l-r)

It's not often that we report on ourselves, but our own illustrious editor-in-chief, John Neff (third from the left in the snazzy corduroy sport jacket his grandma got him last Christmas), participated in a symposium titled "Engaging the Blogosphere" at this year's Chicago Auto Show. It was a look at what the internet, and blogging in particular, means to the future of automotive journalism and marketing. Anchored by a brief analysis of the power of the internet on new car buyers, the event ended with a panel discussion that included representatives from "traditional media," an OEM, a car buying site and our own little professional blog. While the discussion produced some heated debate, it also helped put some outdated misperceptions of blogging to rest.

Follow the jump to read the whole story and learn what happened to shake up the room during the panel discussion. We've also embedded a video of the panel discussion so you can see for yourself what went down.

NOTE: We deliberately resisted the urge to add speech bubbles to the image above, so feel free to download a copy, add your own and post a link to it in the comments section of this post.