When we reviewed the VW Polo, we noted that it's a good and useful car let down by staid styling and a high price. VW is addressing… the former. According to Autobild [print version of July 31], the 2009 VW Polo will finally ditch the slab sides and become more stylish. Since the Polo already  has similar interior space as the MK3 Golf, this means the Polo might well become a lot more important for VW– to the detriment of the Golf, which suffers from what you could call generational bloat. For the Polo, VW plans to offer double-clutch automatic transmissions and a wide arrange of engines. Popular Mechanics reports that VW will also create a hovercraft hybrid version– just kidding. The mag reports (prays?) that VW may bring a clean-diesel, 70mpg Polo stateside. We say currency exchange rates mean VW can't make a dime on that deal unless they build the new Polo in Mexico, which they won't do because of the aforementioned cannibalism. 

Car makers like to take the credit, but auto suppliers have invented much of contemporary car technology. So when the boss of Germany's Bosch (the world's biggest auto supplier) talks about the future of automotive technology, people listen. Here's what Bernd Bohr had to say to Auto, Motor und Sport . "For the year 2015, we expect a total world market of 80 million new cars, of which only about 2.5 to 3 million will be hybrids and 800,000 will be purely electric. So gasoline and diesel engines will continue to predominate. Actually, we calculate that the world market share of diesel cars will rise by another 5 percent, to reach 28 percent." How come? "Despite disproportionate price increases for diesel fuel, in places such as France the share of diesels has increased from 70 to 80 percent, because of a new CO2 tax. Diesels are 30 percent more efficient, too. There is a political dimension: the EU's ambitious plans to reduce CO2 emissions are only reachable if Europe stays at least 50 percent diesel." But the U.S. has shown that diesel is a no go, no? "This is mainly because of high prices for low-sulfur diesel fuel which is caused by low refinery capacities. This bottleneck should be gone around 2010. We expect a diesel market share for the U.S. of 15 percent by 2015". Are you betting the company on these predictions? "We plan to reduce our dependence on auto technology from currently 61 percent to 50 percent."

Even though diesel fuel costs more than gasoline, even though diesel engines cost more than their gasoline equivalents, VW plans to sell TDI versions of the Jetta and Sportwagon stateside in 2009. To get the party started, VeeDub's announced that TDI buyers will be eligible for a $1.3k Federal Income Tax Credit. Yup, your tax money in their pocket, under the Advanced Lean Burn Technology Motor Vehicle credit program. The EPA has certified the TDI at 29 mpg city, 41 mpg highway. BUT VW cites test results from "leading third-party certifier, AMCI" (paid by VW of course) claiming the models get 38 mpg in the city and 44 on the highway. And while they work that one out, Toyota can't build enough their gas – electric Priora fast enough, even with a $500 price hike. [Source: VW]

Tata's Nano will officially become the world's cheapest car when it hits the Indian market this October. Sure, Tata blew its 1 Lakh ($2,500) price target, thanks to rising steel costs, but demand is still expected to exceed supply. Or so says Tata Chairman Ratan Tata [via Automotive News, sub]. Judging by the number of variants said to be in development, Tata's putting his money where his mouth is. A diesel version is on the way, and electric or compressed-air models could be next. And adding eco-friendly drivetrains can only help if the Nano actually attempts a launch in Europe in four years, as is rumored. After all, as an EV the Nano's weaknesses (made of cardboard, rolls in crosswinds) are actually strengths (light, cheap). And at the price point, it's more than competitive with the Zap Xebras of the world (pending a convincing road test). This may be why Automotive News Europe (sub) reports that Fiat is considering selling the Nano. "We have held talks about the Nano being marketed in markets where Fiat has already a strong presence," says Ratan Tata. "I am open to consider a partnership." Which means we'll all be able to buy the Tata Nano with a Fiat badge at a MINI store in, say, 2010?

My local Land Rover dealer is the first car dealer in the country to buy carbon offsets for the first 50k miles of every new and used Landie they sell, in hopes of tempting green types into their Chelsea tractors. Now it seems that Land Rover has decided to offer more, erm, sustainable options for environmentally-minded ute lovers.  LR is showing a new range of diesel hybrid engines at the London Auto Show. Motor Authority reports that Land Rover's new electric rear axle drive (ERAD) consists of a rear-axle mounted 25w electric motor which can power all four wheels in parallel with a four-cylinder diesel engine. The powertrain also includes a Crankshaft Integrated Starter Generator (CISG) mounted in the dual-clutch transmission, which acts as a supplementary motor for adding torque to the driveline and also for starting the main diesel engine. Both the ERAD and CISG can be used for regenerative braking, and together account for a 20 percent reduction in carbon emissions. The ERAD/CISG system is still in early development, and is not expected to debut for several years. In the meantime, Land Rovers are expected to get stop-start technology as early as next year. Which hopefully means that Land Rover of Portland can end its gimmicky greenwashing campaign sooner rather than later.

Bioethanol is so last year. Biomass Magazine (yes, there really is such a publication) reports the latest research in biofuels is directed at producing "green hydrocarbon fuels.' While biodiesel is becoming relatively commonplace, it's based on oils derived from plants and animal fats. Green hydrocarbon fuels are second-generation biofuels made from the same biomass materials used for bioethanol, with several advantages. Since they're chemically identical to the petroleum-based fuels, they carry the same amount of energy. Unlike ethanol, no vehicular modifications are required, AND they can use the current fuel delivery infrastructure. The down side: the process to produce the fuels is much more complex than either petroleum or ethanol production, requiring the conversion of the biomass to bio-oil before the refining process can begin. Researchers are working to simplify the solution, but it'll still be a few years before there'll be a bountiful supply of biogas– at least the kind that isn't produced by a diet of burritos and beer.

We often get accused of diesel-bashing. But there's no getting around the fact that the decline of the diesel market penetration in Europe has begun. With diesel now costing the same as gasoline in Germany (we should be so lucky), the higher up-front costs of most diesel versions just doesn't pan out. Auto, Motor und Sport (print version only) has done an analysis of the minimum km per year required to amortize various diesel versions of popular cars. A few examples: 38k km (23k miles) for the BMW X-5; 30k km (18.3k miles) for the Opel Corsa, 25k km (15.3k miles for the MB E-class). In may, diesel's Eurozone market share dropped to 44 percent, from 47 percent in April. One study predicts that diesels will eventually lose fully half their market share. Another study shows that at least one-fourth of current German diesel drivers are seriously considering switching to a gas car with their next purchase. It looks like the party's over before the States could find the address. 

Why? Non-sales of GM's two-mode hybrid SUVs and pickup have thoroughly discredited the system as an expensive affectation. And although oil burners' adherents couldn't be more rabid if they were bitten by a foaming fox, there's little evidence to suggest that mainstream consumers want to pay the estimated $2k premium for a diesel powerpant AND a buck more per gallon at the pump. Still, what do I know? The Windsor Star says it's two-mode speed ahead for the former Daimler division. "J.D. Power reports that Chrysler intends to put its two-mode hybrid system in the Grand Caravan starting next year. Chrysler will start offering the same system in its Aspen and Dodge Durango SUVs next month, at prices starting about $5,000 less than the GM vehicles." Yes, well, that's $4k MORE than a gas version, BEFORE discounts. [NB: June sales reveal that the Durango's dead and the Aspen is deaderer.] As for the re-badged Caravan soon-to-be-unknown as the VW Routan, "Volkswagen could go in two directions… either by offering one of its own four-cylinder diesel engines, which would offer excellent fuel economy but be considered rather underpowered compared to gasoline-powered minivans, or by offering the three-litre Mercedes diesel that Chrysler is currently offering as an option in its Grand Cherokee." Decisions, decisions…

Ever go to get a haircut, ask for just a trim, and the cutter truly just barely cuts your hair? That's what happened on the 3-Series refresh. The front fascia is slightly revised. But for the most part, we're looking at the same ol' 3-Series we know and mostly love. Or strongly like. The biggest changes for the American version are: (1) a 335i wagon will now be available; (2) BMW is rolling out their dual clutch automatic transmission from the M3 as an option on the 335i coupe and convertible models only (guess on a $2500 price premium over the stick) and (3) the 335d, as in turbodiesel, is coming to America. From that oil burning engine you can pay 5.19 for diesel fuel, but also enjoy 425 lb ft of torque starting at only 1750 rpm and 265 horses. For now, the 335d will be only available configured as a RWD sedan for us North Americans, but the engine is set to land in the AWD BMW X5 as well. To be 50-state compliant, the engine uses the AdBlue urea injection system co-developed with Mercedes and VW. Expect the updated cars to be '09 models shipping early fall.

Big Pixamo Gallery  

Those of you wishing for a sensible, small, utilitarian diesel engined pickup truck are about to get your wish. The Wall Street Journal reports Mahindra & Mhaindra's plan to release its Appalachian model mid-size pickup is on schedule for 2009. Previous reports  tell us that the truck will feature a 2.2-liter, four-cylinder diesel rated at 150hp and 300 ft. lbs. Preliminary specifications tell of a six-speed automatic transmission, electronic stability control and a 7.5 ft. long bed. Mahindra's importer Global Vehicles (GV) has a… er… colorful history. Some years ago, GV tried to import a mini-Hummer style vehicle from Aro S.A. of Romania. The effort went down in flames; the Romanians could never jump the safety and emissions regulatory hurdles. Mahindra, on the other hand, is a far more capable company than Aro and is already a force in the U.S. farm tractor market.  More fantastic is Mahindra's claim that it will release a diesel-electric hybrid version in (you know it, you love it) 2010. Competition in the shrinking U.S. light truck market shows no signs of letting up. Now if it could just begin…

AutoExpress reports that Ford has prepped a not-so-mean but oh-so-green Fiesta ECOnetic for the British Motor Show. While not officially confirmed for production, odds are it will eventually hit (love tap?) the streets of The Land of Hope and Glory. The ECOnetic Fiesta will have a 1.6-liter turbodiesel powerplant with all of 89hp, as well as loads of aerodynamic mods. Equally important, the UK-market Fiesta will have low enough CO2 emissions to evade London's congestion charge. ECOnetic trim recently debuted on a European Ford Focus, with a claimed 55mpg. As Edward Neidermeyer reported, in real-life testing, the Focus ECOnetic that number dropped to some 37 mpg. If we saw a proportionate drop for the ECOnetic Fiesta, that would mean about 44 real world miles per gallon. That's still very impressive. The new model Fiesta isn't on sale yet, although it is coming to the US with gasoline engines about 12 – 18 months from now. [All numbers are US miles per gallon]

You'd figure that Mercedes would promote their new California-compliant BlueTec diesel-powered vehicles based on their fuel efficiency. Times two, considering that opting for the oil-burning engine requires a $1k premium. And the fact that diesel is roughly 25 percent more expensive than gas. We knew there was an "issue" when WardsAuto's strapline revealed that "The ability of the diesel cross/utility vehicles to achieve a cruising range of up to 600 miles is a significant selling point, the auto maker says." To which we say uh-oh. Still, you'd think that Ward's would crunch the numbers. Nope. "Cleaning the exhaust doesn’t bite into fuel economy because the diesel generates 20%-33% better mileage than a comparable gasoline engine. The 6-cyl. Bluetec provides 4-cyl. fuel economy and V-8 power and torque, the auto maker claims." In the interests of veracity and transparency, Frank did the math for you below. Oh, and the BlueTec's NOx-scrubbing urea supply lasts just 10k miles. If the tank gets too low, you get 20 starts to refill. After that, the car won’t start. Where do I sign?

[First mpg = EPA combined mileage; second mpg = BT mpg rounded to the nearest whole number]

G-class – GL450 4matic (4.6L V8), 15mpg > 18 – 20mpg; GL550 4matic (5.5L V8), 14mpg > 17 – 19mpg M-Class – ML350 4matic (3.5L V6), 17mpg > 20 – 23mpg; ML550 4matic (5.5L V8), 15mpg > 18 – 20mpg R-Class – R350 4matic (3.5L V6), 16mpg > 19 – 21mpg

Consumer Reports have a brand-spankety new survey out, and it says that Americans can tell that gas is expensive. Oh yeah, and that they might do something about it. Survey says that four-dollar gas™ has 79 percent of us car-shopping Yanks wanting a "car with better fuel economy," and 74 percent driving less to keep costs down. Even though the respondent-identified $4.32 per gallon "tipping point when drivers would further drastically curtail driving" is only upon those of us on the left coast, a full 80 percent of prospective buyers are considering a "diesel, flex-fuel, or hybrid vehicle." Too bad those numbers aren't broken down between those three very different options. So America has taken notice of pricey gas, but the real question is who do Americans blame? And the answers are as unimaginative as you might expect, with the federal government (77 percent), oil companies (75 percent), foreign oil producers (70 percent), and Middle East conflict (68 percent), taking the rap for pain at the pump. When asked what the feds should do to fix the mess, 90 percent say "increase support for alternative energy development", 84 percent say "negotiate lower prices with oil-exporting nations", 83 percent say "encourage conservation through tax incentives for alternative transportation", while 81 percent want to "allow more drilling in the U.S. and offshore." Interestingly, "Putin-style nationalization of oil firms" and "wholesale invasion of the middle east" weren't polled, suggesting there might not be convenient solutions to scapegoats number two, three and four. 

Forty or fifty years ago, every manufacturer built concept cars with alternative– and sometimes pretty outlandish– power plants (small nuclear reactor, anyone?). The gas turbine was a popular choice. GM, Ford and Chrysler were all deeply involved in gas turbine research, stretching back to the late '40s and early '50s. In 1963, Chrysler built a fleet of 50 distinctively-styled turbine-powered cars and gave them to consumers to generate real-world feedback. Turbine engines were the wave of the future– a technologically-advanced powerplant that could run on anything combustible that would flow through a pipe, from kerosene to perfume. Chrysler's test program racked-up over 1.1m miles. They continued turbine engine research until the mid 70s, when they actually planned to put a turbine into production. Then, suddenly, nothing. Chrysler's financial problems led to government loan guarantees that included stipulations that they abandon plans to produce turbines (too risky). GM and Ford had long-since been distracted by other shiny objects like rotary engines and winning LeMans. So turbine engine research halted. With all the emphasis now on alternative fuels, perhaps it's time to revive an engine that can run on hydrogen, biofuels, petroleum distillates or even coal dust. Combined with modern engine-control technology, it could be worth a second look. Or not.

A widely touted goal of the environmental movement: increasing American's percentage of renewable energy use to 25 percent by 2025. According to a report by the RAND corporation, meeting the so-called "25 by 25" goal without significant consumer cost will require "major technological developments." Green Car Congress reports that 9.5 percent of electricity and 1.6 percent of motor vehicle fuel currently comes from renewable energy sources. The RAND report identifies biomass and wind energy as the two greatest opportunities for meeting the 25 by 25 goal. But it also points out that both require significant improvement to make a low-cost impact on renewable energy usage. For motor vehicles in particular, biomass-based (non-foodstock) "second-gen" biofuels must become significantly cheaper and more prevalent. Reducing renewable fuel goals to 10 or 15 percent by 2025 would also disproportionately reduce consumer expenses. Then again, the higher the cost to consumers, the more competitive renewable fuels become. The preceeding was brought to you by the Energy Future Coalition of UAW Boss Ron Gettelfinger's "Marshall Plan" fame. Over to you, taxpayers.