The future of vehicle safety depends on talking cars. That is, cars that can communicate wirelessly, sharing data on their speed and positing, giving them the ability to alert drivers of potential dangers.

Through vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) technology, warnings could be triggered by a car slamming on their brakes in front of you, running a red light, or moving into your lane. Instead of dealing with the after effects of an accident, this technology would alert you to prevent a crash from occurring in the first place.

I recently had the opportunity to get behind the wheel of various connected vehicles at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) pilot test at a former naval air station in Alameda, California, and experience this promising new technology first hand.

I drove eight specially built vehicles with this new wireless technology which make them able to communicate with other vehicles at the test site. The vehicles I drove included a Acura TL, Cadillac DTS, Hyundai Sonata, Infiniti M37, Ford Taurus SHO, Mercedes-Benz C300, Toyota Venza, and Volkswagen GTI. Each vehicle was driven through a variety of traffic scenarios to see how the various alerts and warnings worked. They include:

Emergency electronic brake lights. This alerts a driver when a vehicle two or three cars ahead slams on their brakes unexpectedly, a help when you can’t see its brake lights. While driving behind two vehicles, I was notified immediately when the first car slammed on their brakes, enabling me to avoid a potential rear-end crash.

Forward-collision warning. This warning is sounded if there is an imminent forward crash. In one experiment, I drove up quickly to a slow-moving vehicle and had to brake immediately to avoid a rear-end collision. In the second scenario, I followed behind another car when it suddenly swerved out of the lane to expose a stopped vehicle in my path.

Blind-spot/Lane-change warning. When driving along on a highway stretch, the blind-spot warning light illuminated when a vehicle was traveling in my vehicle’s blind spot. Once I put on my directional signal to change lanes, a beep sounded to alert me it was unsafe. I also was instructed to drive past another car as I would on a highway and no alert sounded, showing that this technology doesn’t go off randomly unless there is an immediate danger. A vehicle-to-vehicle system is more accurate than current blind-spot monitoring systems that use cameras or radar and can even warn you of a car that’s accelerating into your blind zone, which conventional systems can’t do.

Left-turn assist. I was stopped at a traffic light trying to make a left turn, while another vehicle was waiting across the intersection to turn in the opposite direction. This application helped to determine if there was enough time to make the turn across oncoming traffic, a welcomed aid when my vision was obstructed by a stopped car across from me.

Intersection movement assist. This test was a bit more harrowing than the others. I had to travel toward a green light at 30 mph, while another vehicle was speeding towards their red light. Once the alert sounded, I needed to immediately react to avoid a dangerous T-bone accident. While I knew the risk was there, the warning would have helped a driver whose view was blocked or who was being inattentive.

Do-not-pass warning. While driving on a simulated rural two-lane road, this alert warned me that a vehicle was approaching and it was not safe to move into the left lane to pass a slower-moving vehicle.

Each vehicle I drove received the same information about the hazard. The difference is how the driver is alerted to the situation. Ford and Mercedes-Benz models used a series of lights on top of the dashboard. The yellow lights informed the driver of a potential hazard and the red lights warned that action (such as braking) needs to be taken. This was coupled with a tone as well.

Other manufacturers sampled used audible alerts and a graphic or message of the hazard description, or an illustration. General Motors and Toyota displayed the visual information above the center stack. Hyundai illustrated the warning in the center navigational display. Honda, Nissan and Volkswagen showed their visual warning in the instrument cluster, which is easier to miss.

Ford and GM were the only manufacturers that alerted the driver to which side of the vehicle that is in danger. This information is transmitted through a vibrating steering wheel, thereby avoiding alerting passengers. Other systems can vibrate the seat.

I found the Ford and Mercedes lights most useful, as their placement made it easy to see while looking out the windshield. No matter how the visual alert was displayed, the sound gets your attention to react immediately. Experiencing it behind the wheel, I was struck with how this useful this technology could be in every day driving situations, providing an additional safety net. Of course, this technology is still dependent on attentive drivers to take action, although a future step could have the vehicle braking autonomously.

For more on this new car safety technology, see our full report: “Stopping crashes
with smarter cars.”

American Honda Motors has issued a recall for 45,747 of its 2008 and 2009 model year Odyssey minivans equipped with the power rear liftgate option. The gas-filled struts used to open and close the rear hatch are flawed and may fail to support the lifted door, said the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

According to NHTSA, the flawed struts leak pressurized gas which is needed to keep the large liftgate in the upright position. The defect can lead to unexpected closures of the rear gate, increasing the risk of injury to drivers and passengers who may be under the vehicle’s open hatch.

Honda, which has identified this recall as S22, will begin next month to notify its minivan owners affected by this safety recall. Mechanics at local dealerships will inspect and replace both liftgate gas struts in the affected Honda Odyssey vehicles free of charge.

For more information, consumers can contact Honda’s toll-free customer service line (800-999-1009) or visit the NHTSA website: www.SaferCar.gov.

Recall: 2008-2009 Honda Odyssey – Liftgate hinge and attachments; Campaign ID #: 12V062000 [NHTSA]

Gas prices continue to rise around the country in most areas compared to the week before. The national gasoline average is $.40 above the price this time last year. Diesel fuel is about $.39 above this time last year. Premium fuel is $3.87, up about seven cents from last week.

Source: Energy Information Administration, 2/20/12. Figures rounded to the nearest cent.

See our guide to fuel economy for advice on saving gasoline, including reports on how to get the best gas mileage and where to find the cheapest gas. Learn about future technologies in our guide to alternative fuels.

We’ve recently showed that most fuel-efficient cars can beat their EPA highway fuel economy estimates in Consumer Reports measured fuel economy testing. But if you want to hit 40 mpg on the highway, our tests show that you have more options than you might think.

Below is a list of recently tested vehicles that returned 40 mpg or better in our 65-mph highway fuel economy testing, but were officially rated for less.

If getting that magic 40 mpg on the highway is important to you, this list provides more options.

Again, it’s important to emphasize that maximizing fuel economy depends a lot on how and where you drive.

Several years ago we measured fuel economy with a 2005 Toyota Camry four-cylinder sedan in different situations. Driving at 65 mph delivered 35 mpg; speeding up to 75 mph cut that to 30 mpg, while slowing down to 55 mph returned 40 mpg. Hard acceleration and braking reduced the Camry’s mileage by 2 to 3 mpg.

The bottom line
EPA highway fuel economy numbers provide a place to start your comparison shopping, but they’re often over-hyped as advertising claims. The full fuel picture is more complicated than that. We suggest using a variety of sources, including Consumer Reports test data, to determine if you’ll actually get the fuel economy you desire.

Imagine being stopped at a busy intersection. It looks clear to safely make a left turn. You pull out, then CRASH. From seemingly nowhere, a speeding car rams into you. This situation happens everyday in cities across America, but there is emerging technology that could make this a rare occurrence.

So, let’s imagine the scenario again. This time you hear a beep and see a red light on the dash warning that a car is rapidly approaching and you won’t be able to safely turn. You remain at the stop sign, wait until the vehicle passes, and then proceed when it’s safe to do so, thereby avoiding a potential crash. Sounds like science fiction? It’s not, and this technology is closer to reality than you think.

Vehicle-to-vehicle communication is considered the next step in vehicle safety according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and has the potential to affect 80 percent of vehicle crashes on the road. Using wireless technology embedded in a vehicle, it sends safety messages to other cars on the road to provide information on speed, direction, and location to help avoid crashes.

A number of high-end cars already use radar and cameras in their pre-collision systems, but those can only alert drivers of hazards within close proximity. This new technology can reach 360 degrees around a vehicle and look beyond adjacent cars to “see” potential dangers obscured from the driver’s view. The good news is that this technology is relatively inexpensive to install, and with a deployment strategy and industry commitment, it can reach all vehicles on the road.

“In the past it’s always been the Cadillacs and the premium cars–the Mercedes–that get all the fancy gadgets and information about things happening on the road. Most people don’t drive high-end cars. The real opportunity is to get this down into the mass market where all your volume cars could have this safety technology. That’s where you get the real bang for the buck on addressing the crash problem,” says Don Grimm, senior researcher, General Motor’s Perception and Vehicle Control Systems Group.

When can we see this feature in our cars?
NHTSA has been testing in-car consumer acceptance. With the help of the University of Michigan, the agency will look at every day real-world scenarios starting this summer. After compiling all the data, NHTSA will determine if there is enough research and data to mandate the technology in all new cars. Consumer Reports believes the potential safety benefits of this technology make it worth pursuing, but motorists still need to drive responsibly and pay attention to the road.

See our full report “Stopping crashes with smarter cars” for more on the benefits and possible road blocks with new vehicle safety technology.

Nissan North America is recalling a small number of 2012 Nissan Altima and Nissan Versa sedans for issues with their side curtain air bags, according to the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The Nissan vehicles were made with air bag initiators that contain an incorrect mixture of propellants that may not inflate the safety devices during a collision.

Similar issues have been identified by the NHTSA and other manufacturers.

Earlier this month, the NHTSA announced a recall of 2011 Toyota RAV4 SUVs for side curtain air bag problems. Honda also recalled 2012 Crosstour and Civic vehicles while Subaru recalled 2012 Legacy and Outback vehicles for similar air bag issues.

For this current NHTSA recall, Nissan is expected to notify affected owners of recalled Altima and Versa sedans on Feb. 27. Owners will be instructed to bring in their recalled vehicles to a local Nissan dealership where mechanics will inspect and replace the flawed side curtain air bag initiators free of charge.

For more information regarding this Nissan recall, consumers can check the NHTSA website: www.SaferCar.gov.

Recall: 2012 Nissan Altima / 2012 Nissan Versa – Side curtain air bags      Campaign ID#: 12V055000 [NHTSA]

Last week, we looked at whether cars rated at 40 mpg EPA highway could actually deliver on that estimate in the real world. It turns out that most can based on our tests, but the Hyundai Elantra fell a bit short. Are there other cars that are also challenged to live up to their window sticker?

Here are other recently tested cars and truck that just match (or miss) their EPA highway fuel economy numbers in Consumer Reports highway tests.

This list features a variety of automakers and models. However, about a third are Hyundai and Kia vehicles (the Forte, Optima, Santa Fe, Sorento, and Tucson). Several large GM pickups and SUVs appear here, too. Hitting the EPA highway estimates in these vehicles will be more difficult than in the typical vehicle.

To sum up, you probably can easily beat the EPA highway numbers in your Volkswagen TDI or Toyota Prius. If you drive a big GM truck or SUV, a Hyundai or Kia, then you may struggle to achieve the window sticker figure. Even beyond that, there are exceptions: The Hyundai Sonata with its base 2.4-liter beat its EPA estimate by 4 mpg in our tests.

For buyers interested in fuel economy, there’s more to the story. Tune in tomorrow for more.

For more on fuel economy, see our special section.
See our video on how we test for fuel economy.

If you are an automaker launching a new, fuel-efficient car, claiming 40 mpg (EPA highway fuel economy) is like the new black. Basically everyone’s doing it. But, will consumers actually achieve that magic number in the real world? To find out, we compared the highway fuel economy in Consumer Reports’ tests to the EPA numbers for cars claiming over 40 mpg on the highway.

A few words on our tests: Consumer Reports measures the fuel economy of every car we purchase and test. We don’t test preproduction models. To get our numbers, we physically measure fuel economy with a precision fuel meter that we put into each car’s fuel line; we’re not going by the amount of gas pumped into the car at a gas pump or the onboard computer.

Our highway fuel economy numbers are measured using two different drivers, driving on a stretch of highway at 65 mph, going in both directions to mitigate wind and roadway slope effects. Wind speed must be below a nominal amount and results are temperature corrected. Since we test in all seasons, the air conditioning is shut off for consistency.

These test results are accurate, real-world figures and they are both repeatable and comparable.

Below are the numbers for all of the gasoline- and diesel-powered cars we’ve tested that claim over 40 mpg highway in the EPA test cycle.

Most cars that claim 40 mpg on the highway can indeed deliver that or beat it, assuming the driving conditions are right. Some cars, like most of the Volkswagen diesels that we have tested, as well as the hybrid Toyota Prius and Lexus CT 200h, can beat the magic number by large margin.

Why the difference? EPA fuel economy numbers are measured using preproduction vehicles, measured in corporate development facilities. (The EPA conducts compliance check tests of approximately 10-15 percent of tested vehicles.) The EPA highway number includes a combination of varying speeds for an average of 48 mph, including a high-speed cycle that reaches 80 mph. The results are then calculated with a multiplier. In other words, they provide a level basis for comparing one vehicle to another, but that number can be hard to relate to the real world.

We’ve also found that some variables can affect the fuel economy of a specific vehicle in the real world but have less effect for a more generic vehicle in laboratory tests. Vehicle weight can be affected by optional equipment, like adding a sunroof, and rolling resistance can be affected by choosing optional tires.

It’s important to note that achieving any fuel economy number depends strongly on how you drive. Getting off the highway and dealing with intersections will reduce economy, an important factor given that very few drivers can drive solely on the highway. Driving faster, especially at highway speeds, can significantly reduce fuel economy; likewise driving slower improves it. Using air conditioning has an effect, as does carrying passengers or mounting a roof rack.

For more on fuel economy, see our special section.

More teen drivers ages 16 and 17 were killed in the first half of 2011 than in the first half of 2010, according to preliminary data by the Governors Highway Safety Association. If that trend continues for the second half of 2011, then it would reverse 10 years of significant declines in teen driver deaths.

Data pulled from all 50 states and the District of Columbia found that deaths of 16-year-old drivers increased 16 percent from 80 to 93 deaths. Plus, the rates are up 7 percent from 110 to 118 deaths for 17-year-old drivers, for a combined increase of 11 percent up from 190 to 211. Twenty-three states saw an increase, 19 decreased, and eight, plus D.C. were unchanged. See the details on the chart below.

Previous declines in teen deaths have been attributed to stronger graduated licensing programs and a weak economy, which led to fewer miles being driven. This uptick in fatalities could be due to the positive effects of GDL laws and other legislative upgrades leveling off between 1996 and 2010, in addition to an improved economy.

GDL programs began in 1996 and have grown quickly. Although they vary by state on their levels of restrictions, the common intent is to allow young drivers to gain experience before being granted unlimited driving freedom. Various state upgrades occurred through early 2011 with 82 law changes, including passenger restrictions in 23 states, nighttime restrictions in 15 states, and an extended learner’s phase in 16 states. Twenty-seven states have also added parental supervision for a minimum number of hours.

New laws governing cell phone use have also gone into effect, banning their use by new drivers in 30 states, plus D.C. Likewise, texting has been banned for all drivers in 35 states, plus D.C.

Studies attribute GDL initiatives to the reduction in teen deaths over the past few years. However, there is still more that can be done to strengthen GDL programs and other teen driving initiatives to reduce the death toll further. For more details on the GDL programs in your state check out the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s website.

For more on teen driving, see our special section.

Model year 2013 cars will carry new redesigned fuel economy and environment labels and Fueleconomy.gov has added the stickers to its mobile site so you can access the label data from your phone and personalize your car search based on your needs.

As we previously reported, the new stickers still list city, highway, and combined fuel economy and annual fuel costs, as well as air-quality ratings. But now the labels also include comparative information.

You can access information about a new car at Fueleconomy.gov/m in two ways, by scanning the QR Code found on a given car’s window sticker, or by going right to the mobile site and searching for the vehicle in the “Find a Car” feature.

The “New Window Sticker” section explains the information on the EPA/DOT label, plus has samples of the new labels for plug-in hybrids, and electric vehicles as well. Different vehicle types have different stickers.

The mobile version of the stickers let you personalize the fuel economy, fuel cost, and environmental estimates based on the number of miles you drive each year, and the percentage of miles you drive in stop-and-go vs. highway traffic, as well as how much you pay for fuel, where you live, and how you want your fuel economy reported (miles per gallon or gallons per 100 miles).

The mobile version of the new stickers also lets you view the reported on-the-road fuel economy other drivers are getting with the same vehicle.

Fueleconomy.gov Mobile Site Puts New Fuel Economy Information at Your Fingertips [The Auto Chanel]