
u/plun9

Volvo’s Heartbeat-Sensing Anti-Carjacking Technology Was Y2K Safety at Its Weirdest
hagerty.comMercedes-Benz’s CEO Thinks New Cars May Have Room for Even More Screens Inside
roadandtrack.comYann LeCun’s Bet That Intelligence Starts in the World
aryeian.blogFerrari Says It “Didn’t Expect” the Level of Hate the $640,000 Luce EV Got
jalopnik.comWorld Clock with Twilight/Night Overlayed on Map
nixon-development.comMitsubishi Has Once Again Reused the Eclipse Name on an SUV, This Time on a Rebadged Nissan Leaf
caranddriver.comCanada keeps planting seeds. Silicon Valley keeps harvesting them
vancouversun.comThe $8.6B Startup Trying to Beat Waymo Without Maps | WSJ
youtube.com2026 vs. 1996 Chevrolet Blazer IIHS crash test
The demonstration pitted a 1996 Chevrolet Blazer against the 2026 model in a special, head-to-head version of the Institute’s moderate overlap front crash test.
The Institute’s last test of this nature featured a 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air and a 2009 Chevrolet Malibu. It exploded the myth that older vehicles were built like tanks and therefore safer for their occupants.
The latest head-to-head crash test presented just as stark a contrast. The driver of the new Blazer would likely have walked away with bumps and bruises. The driver of the 1996 model would have suffered serious, potentially fatal injuries.
The occupant compartment of the 2026 model remained intact. All but one of the injury measurements taken from the driver dummy showed minimal injury risk. The risk of injury to the driver’s right foot or lower leg was a little elevated but still in the acceptable range.
In contrast, the impact crushed the occupant compartment of the 1996 model, pushing the dashboard and steering column into the dummy’s lap. The fully inflated airbag hit the dummy in the chin, snapping its head back and toward the window.