LADA

Only on the Lada Niva: the "crank" for starting the engine was in series production until 1997

Although the electric starter was introduced as early as 1912, the Russian Lada Niva retained the option of manual engine starting as a backup system until 1997, long defying modern industry standards.

The first cars in history were devoid of many modern conveniences, including the electric starters that are now standard. It was in 1912 that Charles F. Kettering invented the electric system for the Cadillac, which is considered a turning point. Namely, until then, manually turning a lever (crank) was the only way to start the engine, which was a physically demanding and often dangerous process.

Despite the available technology, the manual starter did not immediately become a thing of the past. Although it ceased to be the primary method of starting a car from the 1930s, it remained on certain models for decades after most global manufacturers had abandoned it. The reason for its survival lay primarily in its role as a reliable backup system in extreme conditions.

The most striking example of such a technological anachronism is – perhaps not unexpectedly – ​​the Russian Lada Niva, a robust off-road vehicle known for its durability, but also for the questionable reliability of its electrical components. Precisely because of the specific conditions of use and the unreliability of batteries or electric starters in cold climates, Lada kept the manual start option in the Niva in production until – 1997. In the attached video you can see how a more modern Niva, with a 1.7 liter gasoline engine, could be started "by cranking".

It is widely known that Russian production was slower to adapt to modern trends. Accordingly, even when they removed the manual starter from the Niva engines, some examples produced in 1998 could still find a hole in the front bumper for inserting a lever.

The most unusual modification ever: adding a hand crank to the Lada Niva...The 1998 Lada Niva was the last car to have a factory-installed hand crank for the engine. No, it had a starter motor, but in case of electrical failure or a dead battery (both common in its use in Russia at the time), it was possible to start the engine manually.

What was more interesting, however, is that the 1998 model was a "new and improved" version of the Niva; introduced as VAS-21213 in 1995, it featured an injector engine instead of a carburetor. Still, it was possible to start it manually if necessary, and the option was available from the factory.

The initial plan was to have the Lada Niva 21213 as a temporary solution; it was supposed to be replaced by the new model "soon". But the 1998 Russian standard altered those plans somewhat, and also demanded drastic austerity from automakers; As a result, the manual crank disappeared in 1999.

However, many Russian Niva customers disliked this. Nivas were used extensively as everyday 4x4 vehicles in not-so-remote villages, where the last few kilometers of road, often unpaved or lacking snow removal, presented a challenge on the daily commute, and the possibility of being stranded in winter without the ability to call for help could be potentially lethal. You wouldn't even have to do something extremely stupid to get into trouble: melted snow could damage the wiring under the hood.

It's true that the number of people who actually needed this option wasn't that large, so initially, used Nivas already produced could suffice. But as time passed and existing Nivas went out of circulation, people discovered that although post-1998 Nivas didn't come with one from the factory, it was surprisingly easy to add one: you just had to install the pre-1998 manual crank adapter on the engine and sometimes drill holes in the bumper and/or body to access it.

The car was designed to accommodate the manual crank, after all, and aside from the bumpers/lack of adapter, not much changed. Some enthusiasts even managed to successfully install the manual crank on the Chevy Niva as well, which featured a different engine and wasn't designed to accommodate the manual crank in the first place; but in some cases, the radiator made this "upgrade" impossible.

Hand cranks haven't been the primary method of starting cars since the 1930s, so why did they persist? The crank served as a backup to the electric starter. For instance, the Russian Lada Niva, a rugged SUV, didn't have the best track record in terms of reliability, so the hand-crank option remained well into the '90s. (This wasn't the only unusual model to come out of that part of the world — Soviet Russia produced an off-road sedan way before AMC or Subaru.) YouTuber gogmorgoaway uploaded a video showing the process of hand-crank starting his 1996 Lada Niva(below).

Car enthusiast bearmtnmartin recalled on Classic Motorsports: "[There was a] 1997 Lada Niva which a forestry company I worked for bought. It came with a hand crank so we all had fun with it." But the car "was gone six months later as parts were unobtanium and it had already started falling apart."

Autonews

 

AUTONEWS

AI 'blind spot' could allow attackers to hijack self-driving vehicles

A newly discovered vulnerability could allow cybercriminals to silently hijack the artificial intelligence (AI) systems in self-driving cars, raising concerns about the security of autonomous systems increasingly used on public roads. Georgia Tech cybersecurity researchers discovered the vulnerability, dubbed VillainNet, and found it can remain dormant in a self-driving vehicle's AI system until triggered by specific conditions. Once triggered, VillainNet is almost certain to succeed, giving attackers control of the targeted vehicle.

How the VillainNet attack works...The research finds that attackers could program almost any action within a self-driving vehicle's AI super network to trigger VillainNet. In one possible scenario, it could be triggered when a self-driving taxi's AI responds to rainfall and changing road conditions. Once in control, hackers could hold the passengers hostage and threaten to crash the taxi.

The researchers discovered this new backdoor attack threat in the AI super networks that power autonomous driving systems.

"Super networks are designed to be the Swiss Army knife of AI, swapping out tools, or in this case sub networks, as needed for the task at hand," said David Oygenblik, Ph.D. student at Georgia Tech and the lead researcher on the project.

"However, we found that an adversary can exploit this by attacking just one of those tiny tools. The attack remains completely dormant until that specific subnetwork is used, effectively hiding across billions of other benign configurations."

An application of SuperNets and how VNet enables targeted attacks on SuperNets depending on real-world deployment conditions. Credit: Proceedings of the 2025 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (2025)

Why this backdoor is so dangerous...This backdoor attack is nearly guaranteed to work, according to Oygenblik. This blind spot is nearly undetectable with current tools and can impact any autonomous vehicle that runs on AI. It can also be hidden at any stage of development and include billions of scenarios.

"With VillainNet, the attacker forces defenders to find a single needle in a haystack that can be as large as 10 quintillion straws," said Oygenblik.

"Our work is a call to action for the security community. As AI systems become more complex and adaptive, we must develop new defenses capable of addressing these novel, hyper-targeted threats."

Experiments, impact, and research details...The hypothetical fix to the problem was to add security measures to the super networks. These networks contain billions of specialized subnetworks that can be activated on the fly, but Oygenblik wanted to see what would happen if he attacked a single subnetwork tool.

In experiments, the VillainNet attack proved highly effective. It achieved a 99% success rate when activated while remaining invisible throughout the AI system.

The research also shows that detecting a VillainNet backdoor would require 66x more computing power and time to verify the AI system is safe. This challenge dramatically expands the search space for attack detection and is not feasible, according to the researchers.

The project was presented at the ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS) in October 2025. The paper, "VillainNet: Targeted Poisoning Attacks Against SuperNets Along the Accuracy-Latency Pareto Frontier," was co-authored by Oygenblik, master's students Abhinav Vemulapalli and Animesh Agrawal, Ph.D. student Debopam Sanyal, Associate Professor Alexey Tumanov, and Associate Professor Brendan Saltaformaggio.

Provided by Georgia Institute of Technology 

AUTONEWS

Škoda Fabia 130 & Mini Cooper S

The choice between the Škoda Fabia 130 and the Mini Cooper S depends on whether you prioritize practicality and comfort or performance and style. In specialized comparisons from February 2026, the Mini Cooper S is generally considered the "winner" for those seeking a sporty car, while the Fabia 130 stands out as a more rational and spacious option.

Performance and style comparison...The Mini Cooper S is classified as a legitimate "hot hatch," focused on agility, while the Škoda Fabia 130 is seen as a "warm hatch"—a faster version of the standard car, but less extreme.

Mini Cooper S(below):

-Power: It has around 204 hp, significantly surpassing its rival.

-Driving: Stiffer chassis, more communicative steering, and a more exciting engine sound.

-Style: Iconic design and premium interior with a focus on customization and visual technology.

Škoda Fabia 130(below): 

-Power: Equipped with a 1.5 TSI engine optimized for 177 hp (130 kW).

-Driving: Suspension 15mm lower and firmer than the standard version, but still focused on everyday comfort.

-Features: It is the only one of the two with paddle shifters for manual gear changes, something absent in the new Mini.

Summary of the choice (below):

-Choose the Mini Cooper S if you want the fastest, most fun-to-drive car with the highest visual status.

-Choose the Škoda Fabia 130 if you need a car that is practical for the family, comfortable on long trips, but still offers an extra dose of power when needed.

AUTONEWS

Car manufacturers support appeal to Brussels for fairer competition

The association of manufacturers for the automotive industry (AFIA) supported the appeal addressed to the European Commission to strengthen fair competition and preserve European innovation and value chains.

In a statement, the association, as a member of the board of CLEPA – European Association of Automotive Suppliers, announced that it is joining the open letter sent to the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, “which defends the urgent need to create measures that help strengthen fair competition and preserve the capacity for innovation and European value chains”.

According to CLEPA, which sent the letter in December 2025, car suppliers, who are “responsible for 75% of the total value of a vehicle”, are “a strategic pillar of European industrial prosperity”.

However, it warns that they face “unprecedented frictions, in a global context marked by distorting subsidies, price dumping, state-supported overcapacity and unilateral tariffs that leave European producers at a structural disadvantage and facing unfair competition.”

The letter also says that, in 2025, “imports of automotive components from China reached 8.2 billion euros” and that the trade balance went from a surplus five years ago of almost 7 billion euros to a deficit of 700 million euros.

Citing a recent study by Roland Berger, it also warns of the risk of job losses in Europe by 2030 if timely measures are not taken.

“Importing the cheapest technology today empties our capacity for innovation tomorrow. If we allow our value chains to deteriorate, we will lose factories, but also our strategic autonomy. We risk exchanging European technological sovereignty for permanent dependence on lower-cost, less regulated regions,” warns CLEPA.

AFIA also emphasizes that Europe must remain open to international trade and cooperation, but recalls that "trade is only sustainable when it is based on equivalent rules for all and on effectively fair competition."

Quoted in the same statement, the president of AFIA and member of the CLEPA board, José Couto, highlights that "the transition to low-emission mobility and digitalization requires investment, scale and predictability."

"If Europe wants to lead the transformation, it must guarantee fair competition conditions and frameworks that keep value, innovation and employment anchored in the European space. Supporting the CLEPA proposal is choosing industrial sovereignty, strengthening the resilience of value chains and protecting Europe's technological capacity," he adds.

The association also reaffirms its willingness to collaborate with European decision-makers and partners in building "a credible and ambitious framework that aligns competitiveness, innovation and climate transition, ensuring that the transformation of mobility creates value and quality jobs in Europe."

In Brazil, the Chinese CKD and SKD electrified production system reigns supreme without any resistance from the government...The apparent tranquility demonstrated by the president of Anfavea, Igor Calvet, during the press conference announcing the January automotive industry balance sheet on Friday, the 6th, is likely to turn into a new concern. No request for the renewal of import quotas for CKD and SKD electrified kits was addressed to the government before the deadline, January 31st, when the US$463 million agreed upon in August expired. However, according to reporting by Autocar, executives from companies originating in China are preparing new visits to government representatives to try to extend the benefit in some way.

There are two fronts: the first is the establishment of new quotas, perhaps smaller, for a longer period. The argument is that CKD and SKD kits are important in the transition from imports to local production, as there is a timeframe for the machines to be fully operational in the new factories. The import tax rate today is 10% to 30%, depending on the technology. Since February 1st, it applies to all imported kits, as quotas have been eliminated.

The next Gecex meeting is scheduled for February 12th, and although some executives linked to Anfavea fear it will not be on the agenda. The plan is for it to be reconsidered by the MDIC committee after Carnival, in an extraordinary meeting, according to sources who spoke to the press.

A mechanism for new entrants...In parallel, Chinese companies are working on creating a transition system for new entrants, linked to Mover, the Green Mobility and Innovation Program. Those who commit to producing in Brazil will receive an import quota for CKD and SKD kits for a short period while they structure their production unit.

This is nothing new: it was established in the past with the Inovar Auto program, which granted import tax or IPI (Industrialized Products Tax) discounts to companies that committed to local production.

However, the government suffered two defaults: first from Asia Motors, during the FHC (Fernando Henrique Cardoso) administration, and then from JAC Motors, represented by the SHC Group, owned by Sérgio Habib, which even announced a factory in Camaçari, Bahia, that never materialized. They never fulfilled their promises. They imported units with tax discounts and left the debt in the hands of the Federal Revenue Service.

This history may hinder the advancement of this system within the government, although it is viewed favorably, even by established automakers here, who could use the benefit in electrified vehicle projects.

Resistance within the government...Industrialization through CKD and SKD kits is not well received within the MDIC (Ministry of Development, Industry and Foreign Trade), according to the report. The prevailing view among high-ranking officials is that the more industrialization, the better, and that creating quotas for kits that only require assembly in factories goes in the opposite direction.

According to NewCAR, which heard from a well-connected source within the ministry, Camex's position is against the creation of new quotas, but pressure may come from above, from other ministries and the Presidency of the Republic. There is also resistance from the Finance Ministry due to the tax revenue loss that these imports would generate.

Anfavea's position will remain the same. President Calvet stated during a press conference on Friday, the 6th, that he is unaware of any request to the government, but will oppose any that is made, tomorrow or in two or three months: “We defend industrialization. We want to generate jobs throughout the chain, something that will not be done with the importation of CKD or SKD kits.”

by Autonews

 

BMW

The future BMW 3 Series Coupe 2027

The next generation of the BMW 3 Series is already generating serious discussion, and while most of the focus has been on the sedan, it is hard not to imagine what a sleek coupe version could look like. If BMW follows its usual formula, the coupe will carry over much of the sedan’s bold new identity while adding a lower, more athletic stance that enthusiasts have always appreciated.

Up front, the design language will likely stay consistent with the Neue Klasse direction. Expect wide, horizontally stretched kidney grilles that visually merge with slim headlights. The daytime running lights should feature the now familiar twin diagonal light signatures on each side, giving the car a sharp and instantly recognizable face. It is a modern look, but still unmistakably BMW.

Around back, the styling is expected to follow the same narrow and precise theme. Thin taillights with horizontal light elements that flare slightly toward the outer edges would give the coupe a planted and technical appearance. One notable change could be the relocation of the license plate recess from the trunk lid to the rear bumper. That is not typical for traditional 3 Series or 4 Series coupes, but BMW has already started making similar changes on newer sport utility vehicles like the X5. It suggests a subtle shift in design philosophy.

Under the skin, the coupe should mirror the sedan mechanically. The new 3 Series will ride on an updated version of the Cluster Architecture platform, allowing BMW to offer a wide range of gasoline and diesel engines. At the top of the regular lineup, the M450 model is expected to deliver around 420 horsepower from a 3.0 liter turbocharged engine, effectively replacing the outgoing 382 horsepower M340i. That is a meaningful jump in performance and signals BMW’s intent to keep the driving experience sharp and competitive.

The sedan is expected to debut later this year, with the coupe traditionally following after. For drivers who still appreciate the balance of precision engineering and emotional design, this upcoming 3 Series coupe could be one of the most exciting releases in the segment.

by Autonews

AUTONEWS

Self-driving cars are poorly prepared for high-risk road situations—here's how AI can improve them

Self-driving cars have made impressive progress. They can follow lanes, keep their distance, and navigate familiar routes with ease. However, despite years of development, they still struggle with one critical problem: the rare and dangerous situations that cause the most serious accidents.

These "edge cases" include sharp bends on wet roads, sudden changes in slope, or situations where a vehicle approaches its physical limits of grip and stability. In real-world deployments, which often involve some level of shared control between driver and automation, such moments can arise from human misjudgment or from automated systems failing to anticipate rapidly changing conditions.

They happen infrequently, but when they occur, the consequences can be severe. A car might handle a thousand gentle curves perfectly, but fail on the one sharp bend taken a little too fast.

Current autonomous systems are not trained well enough to handle these moments reliably. From a data perspective, these events form what scientists call a "long tail": they are statistically rare, but disproportionately important.

Collecting more real world data does not fully solve the problem, because deliberately seeking out dangerous conditions is costly, slow, and risky. Many of these scenarios are simply too dangerous to practice in real life. We cannot deliberately put vehicles into near-crashes on public roads just to see whether the software can cope. If an AI system rarely sees extreme situations during training, it has little chance to respond well when they occur in real life.

In the current fleet of self-driving cars, a human in a control center is often at hand to intervene if something goes wrong. But to achieve fully driverless cars, researchers need to find ways of effectively training AI systems to handle high-risk situations.

Our research team at Dublin City University, working with colleagues at the University of Birmingham, has been tackling this gap.

We have developed a virtual "proving ground" that uses generative AI to safely create rare, high-risk driving scenarios, allowing vehicles to learn from them without putting anyone in danger. Instead of waiting for rare events to happen naturally, we can teach an AI model to create realistic but challenging driving scenarios on demand, including ones that push vehicles close to their physical limits.

Practicing safely...The generative AI that is used in our system is designed to learn from real driving data and then produces new, realistic scenarios. Crucially, it does not just reproduce typical roads and speeds.

It focuses deliberately on the most demanding situations including sharp curves, steep slopes and high speeds, combined in ways that challenge both human drivers and automated systems. This allows us to expand the range of situations a vehicle can experience during training, without ever leaving the simulator.

In effect, the car can "practice" dangerous situations safely, repeatedly and systematically. However, the goal of our work is not to replace the human driver entirely. Instead, we focus on human–machine shared driving: a partnership in which the car and the driver support each other.

Humans are very good at intuition, anticipation and adapting to unfamiliar situations. Machines excel at fast reactions and precise control. Shared driving aims to combine these strengths. In our system, control is continuously adjusted depending on risk.

When the road is straight and safe, the driver remains firmly in charge, but when the system detects a high-risk situation, such as a sharp bend that the driver may be approaching too quickly, it smoothly increases the level of automated assistance to help stabilize the vehicle. Importantly, this is not a sudden takeover. The transition is gradual and adaptive, designed to feel natural rather than intrusive.

To evaluate the system, we went beyond pure simulation. We used a driver-in-the-loop platform, where real people sit in a high-fidelity driving simulator and interact with the AI in real time. The results were encouraging. Less experienced drivers benefited most: when they struggled on complex or winding roads, the system provided timely support, reducing the risk of losing control.

At the same time, the system avoided unnecessary intervention during safe driving, helping drivers feel more engaged rather than overridden. Overall, this adaptive approach led to safer, smoother driving compared with fixed or overly conservative control strategies. It also allows both the human driver and the AI to improve at their handling of extreme road situations.

Autonomous vehicles are often judged by how well they handle routine driving, but public trust will ultimately depend on how they behave when things go wrong. By using generative AI to train vehicles on rare but critical scenarios, we can expose weaknesses early, improve decision making, and build systems that are better prepared for the real world.

Just as importantly, by keeping humans in the loop, we can design automation that supports drivers rather than replacing them outright. Fully driverless cars may still be some way off, but smarter training systems like this can help bridge the gap by making both human-driven and automated vehicles safer on today's roads.

Provided by The Conversation

AUTONEWS

Strong winds and gusts pose a danger to trucks, trailers, and vans

Portugal is well aware of the potential for heavy rain to cause damage. Recent storms have also highlighted the destructive risk of strong winds, which are more dangerous for certain vehicles.

In Portugal, it is (sadly) common to have to deal with the damage caused by excessive rainfall, as well as the floods and flash floods associated with this phenomenon, but the strong winds that hit us in the wake of the most violent storms are practically a novelty. And, when these winds reach speeds close to 200 km/h, the damage they can cause impresses anyone. If we have already seen what can happen to trees and the most fragile roofs, it is advisable to take precautions regarding the damage that these air masses, which move at speeds that not all cars can reach, can cause to vehicles, especially those with large surfaces that sometimes act like sails.

We are all familiar with how easily a flash flood can sweep away dozens of cars, but most drivers are less likely to be aware of the risk that certain types of vehicles face when the wind reaches unusual speeds. And it is not even necessary for the wind to equal or exceed 200 km/h, because even at more moderate speeds, it is easy to turn or unbalance and cause larger vehicles to overturn, sometimes throwing them against others traveling in the opposite direction.

While strong winds overturning vehicles are still (thankfully) a rarity in our country, there are other regions of the globe where this type of accident is quite common, and to prove it, we have used some images published this month on the social network X, in which a semi-trailer truck traveling on a national road is seen being overturned when it was traveling near Dumas, Texas. In a region where the US National Weather Service predicted winds between 56 and 72 km/h, with gusts of up to 113 km/h — well below the 200 km/h maximum felt in Portugal, more specifically in the central region — the consequences of the wind force hitting the side of the semi-trailer are visible, causing it to tilt to one side and resulting in the accident, without the tractor driver being able to prevent it. It is worth remembering that a 40-foot semi-trailer pulls a trailer that is 12.2 meters long and 2.6 meters high, which gives it a lateral surface area of ​​31.6 m2, a value equivalent to the mainsail of a generously sized sailboat reefed for strong winds.

According to local press, the authorities' criticism was mainly directed at drivers who, at the wheel of empty vehicles—meaning vehicles with little weight but a lot of area exposed to the wind—insisted on traveling through areas where excessively strong winds were expected. This implies extra caution for those driving trucks and semi-trailer tractors, whether empty or carrying very bulky but light loads. But while trucks are in the hands of professional drivers and companies specializing in logistics, there are other vehicles in the hands of private individuals and drivers, such as vans, caravans, and motorhomes, where the surface area exposed to the wind is proportionally larger than the weight they carry most of the time.

Still in Texas, a second accident occurred in recent days when a vehicle, not a truck but a pickup truck towing a smaller trailer, also veered off course due to the force of the wind, with the result being equally evident in a post published on X. Along with these two examples recorded on video, the local sheriff's office reported several other accidents in the region, resulting from the wind that particularly battered vehicles whose volume exceeded the weight of the vehicle combination.

Strong winds and sudden gusts create severe, often underestimated, hazards for commercial vehicles, specifically trucks, trailers, and vans. Due to their large surface area, known as "sail area," these high-profile vehicles are prone to swaying, drifting between lanes, or rolling over. Empty or light trailers are particularly susceptible to wind-induced accidents because they lack the weight to stabilize against lateral, or side, forces.

Key risks to vehicles(below):

Rollovers: Strong crosswinds can catch the side of a trailer and flip the vehicle entirely. Gusts of 60+ mph are considered severe, but lower speeds can still cause issues.

Jackknifing: Winds can push the trailer faster than the cab, causing it to swing out and create a 90-degree angle with the tractor.

Lane drift: Sustained winds and gusts can force vehicles out of their lanes, pushing them into adjacent lanes or off the road.

Danger to others: A swaying, tipping, or runaway trailer poses a major threat to surrounding vehicles, often resulting in multi-vehicle pileups. 

Vulnerable conditions & areas(below):

Empty trailers: Without heavy cargo to anchor them, trailers are highly unstable in high winds.

Open aeas & bridges: Open plains, mountain passes, bridges, and overpasses are high-risk areas for sudden, intense gusts.

Passing large vehicles: Passing or being passed by another large vehicle creates wind tunnels that can cause sudden, intense pressure changes, pushing or pulling the trailer.

Wind Speed thresholds: While dangerous, 30–40 mph winds require caution, 40–60 mph increases the risk of, and 60+ mph poses severe danger.

Safety tips for drivers(below):

Slow down immediately: Lower speeds reduce the force of the wind on the vehicle and improve control.

Keep two hands on the wheel: Maintain a firm, two-handed grip to handle sudden steering shifts.

Stop and park: If conditions become unmanageable, find a safe, sheltered location to pull over and wait for the wind to subside, ideally parking facing into the wind.

Check weather and route: Review wind forecasts and avoid exposed bridges or open roads when high-wind warnings are in effect.

Ensure proper cargo loading: Verify that all doors are secured and cargo is evenly distributed.

by Autonews