GM set off something of an insanity bomb a few weeks back by claiming their Volt moonshot would get 230 mpg based on draft EPA testing standards. Nissan countered via Twitter, claiming that its forthcoming Leaf EV would get 367 mpg using the same test, and the age of EV efficiency madness was initiated. Needless to say, neither the Volt nor the Leaf can be directly tested to give an apples-to-apples comparison to internal combustion-powered vehicles, and this opening salvo seemed bent on removing plausibility from the EV efficiency equation. But sanity in EV efficiency has an unlikely new champion in luxo-EREV maker Fisker.
Mick Jagger once sang that “you can’t always get what you want,” and, to a degree, he was right. As a petrol head and committed environmentalist, I’ve found I’ve had to make compromises. After going crazy in my friend’s Porsche Boxster, I develop a painful pang of guilt of all the resources I wasted in the name of fun. No, really. Likewise, after driving greenly in my Toyota Yaris on a long drive (achieving 50 mpg for anyone who’s interested), I feel like I’ve watched a Russell Brand stand up show (i.e., I feel like my soul is damaged due to the absence of fun). But now it seems like Mr. Jagger’s words are out of date. Apparently, you CAN get what you want . . . .
Ford will be offering four-cylinder Ecoboost engines in a vast array of its forthcoming models, reports Motor Trend. The 2.0 EcoBoost will likely see base-model duty in vehicles ranging from the Edge and Mustang to the unibody 2011 Explorer, while replacing the V6 option in the Fusion and Escape. And though the EcoBoost two-liter looks good on paper (275 hp, 280 lb·ft), its projected ubiquity raises an interesting question: how important are engines in product differentiation? If GM’s blurring of the platform-sharing/brand-engineering lines hurts its brands, does the same hold true for Ford’s engine-sharing? Though modern engine control units theoretically allow Ford to customize engine characteristics (torque curve, power, efficiency) for each application, we’re not hearing anything about any such plans in the EcoBoost PR material. Could Ford’s engine uniformity hurt its appeal?
Nothing like a well-run long-distance fuel economy comparison to cut through the hype and exaggerations. Edmunds took the 2010 Prius, 2010 Insight, 2009 Jetta TDI, 2010 Fusion Hybrid, and a 2009 Mini Cooper on a carefully-controlled outing from L.A. to Las Vegas and back, including back roads with steep grades through Death Valley one way; 200 miles of tedious city driving in Sin City; and I-15 back to L.A. The results shouldn’t be very controversial, since they’re reasonably close to EPA numbers. But TDI fanatics swear the EPA tests undercount diesels. Not according to this test. Here’s the skinny:
“We’ve gotten thousands of thousands of questions regarding issues that Congress never dreamed of,” admit NHTSA spokesfolk to the NY Times. Say it ain’t so! The latest clunker stumper is the issue of gray market imports, which do not have official EPA ratings. When the Gray Lady’s Christine Negroni asked NHTSA if her gray market 1985 Mercedes 230E would qualify for a CARS rebate, the answer was likely accompanied by a heavy sigh. “It’s a question of determining if there’s a comparable model being sold in the U.S. that can determine fuel economy,” explains NHTSA’s Rae Tyson. “Our lawyers are going to have to make a decision.” Meanwhile questions like this have flooded the CARS hotline with some 45,000 calls. Not that calling the hotline would help with the gray market question. “If the question has stumped me, it’s going to stump the hot line too,” says Tyson. “It’s going to require an interpretation that we’re not equipped to make right now.”
Think your clunker gets 18 mpg combined? Plan on cashing in on the CARS clunker rebate program? You might want to double check those EPA numbers over at fueleconomy.gov. As part of the buildup to the Cash For Clunker program, the EPA undertook “quality assurance and quality control effort regarding fuel economy calculations on more than 30,000 vehicle model types spanning the past 25 years.” But according to CNN Money, this pre-stimulus housecleaning turned up bad data for about 100 vehicles and ended up changing their clunker rebate eligibility. Although “roughly” the same number of cars became newly eligible as became newly ineligible, this news came as a nasty surprise to owners of the 1993 Camry V6 wagon, 1995 Saab 900S, 1988 Toyota 4Runner and the 1987 Mercury Grand Marquis. And since the EPA’s statistical quality control didn’t take place until the official launch of the program, some shoppers had their deals planned out before realizing that their trade-ins were too efficient to qualify. Meanwhile, dealers have their own complaints about the program.
One anonymous dealer writes:
I wish you would let us opt out of the cash for clunkers deal. Three dealers on the conference call stated that they were not fucking with this bullshit. You wouldn’t believe the bullshit involved in this. I don’t see this costing us any significant sales. We will waste more time fucking with this than it will ever be worth. The rebates are in place to subsidize the deal. Collecting our money will be a full time job.
Christopher Knittel of UC Davis made this graph of trends in the Honda Accord’s weight, horsepower, torque and fuel economy since its introduction. His entire report Automobiles on Steroids: Product Attribute Trade-Offs and Technological Progress in the Automobile Sector is available for download in PDF format from UC Davis. The data kind of speaks for itself though, doesn’t it?
Fresh off its widely-copied “Assurance Program,” Hyundai is reaching into its bag of tricks for a new gimmick. And found inspiration in Chrysler’s 2008 gas-price guarantee promotion. Automotive News [sub] reports that Hyundai will offer customers who buy or lease a new Hyundai between July 1 and August 31 the opportunity to lock in a $1.49 per gallon price for gasoline for one year or 12,000 miles. According to research publicized by Hyundai North American President John Krafic, “40 percent of potential new car buyers were staying on the sidelines due to uncertainty over gas prices.” But Chrysler’s promotion didn’t save the farm a year ago when gas price anxiety was at an all-time high. After all, at three dollars a gallon, the estimated savings on a base, four-pot Sonata aren’t likely to top $725. Has Hyundai’s success at selling cars based on America’s insecurities peaked?
Automotive News [sub] reports that finals rules for America’s own scrappage scheme will be released on or around July 23rd. The notice comes with a warning to dealers that they are legally responsible for any trade-ins they structure prior to that date. Violators of the program’s rules could face a $15K fine per illegal transaction. And just to add to the mounting concerns about the effectiveness of scrappage schemes, consider the top-10 beneficiaries of the UK’s scheme, via Autoexpress. Hyundai/Kia is the big winner there, although of the vehicles on that list only the Yaris and Fit are sold in the US. Will US automakers benefit from this attempted subsidy considering their weakness in the budget compact segment? Don’t count on it . . .
It’s BMW’s most efficient 3 series yet, which means it’s a brand-killer stateside Not to worry though, the new M5 will have 600hp. We’ll get that. Anyway, the two liter BMW oil burner gets 62.8mpg (52 miles per US gallon, non-EPA testing) and emits fewer than 120 grams of carbon per kilometer. Too bad it still starts at about $38K (in the UK). And takes 10.9 seconds to reach 62 mph. And since we’re in the realm of Euro-diesel fantasy, wouldn’t you just as soon cough up $40-42K for a 123d five-door? It may only get 50 mpg (41 US, etc), but it’s the first diesel to produce 100 hp per liter, and “a gem of an engine,” according to Autocar. Back in the stark reality of the American market though, that new M5 is going to have a twin-turbo V10. And in case that’s not enough, it will also boast a boost button based on the F1 KERS system. Good times.
Ford may “just say ‘no’” to TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) money that puts them under the control of the PTFOA (Presidential Task Force on Automobiles), but the other wise acronym-aversive automaker doesn’t mind bellying up to the DoE’s (Department of Energy) bailout buffet. Bloomberg‘s mysterious “people familiar with the plans” say Ford, Nissan and Tesla will all dine upon loans from the “original” bailout package: the $25 billion feast created by the 2007 energy bill. The loans were intended to “help automakers boost fleetwide fuel economy.” In February, the DoE said they’d received 75 applications, totaling $38 billion. According to Bloomies, Ford, Nissan and Tesla are the first to get the handouts loans.
The Detroit News covers the report by the University of Michigan’s Transportation Research Institute (because TRI texts are behind a password lock). Authors Walter McManus and Ron Kleinbaum write,
Story after story frames the issue of a struggling industry that will not survive tough fuel economy standards. However, there is substantial evidence that the domestic auto industry has ignored customers’ demands for fuel economy, and has consistently undervalued the impact of fuel economy on their profit potential.
Plus,
Our view is that GM is still not prepared to change enough, fast enough to achieve the transformation it needs to make.
After the GSA and Nancy Pelosi’s office turned down TTAC’s request for a breakdown of the vehicles purchased under the Recovery Act’s Energy-Efficient Federal Motor Vehicle Fleet Procurement program, we went all FOIA. The U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) has now released the info to us (as it should, transparency for the program is promised here). We’ve published the list after the jump, formatting the data by model, number purchased, country of assembly and fuel economy. Exactly 11,319 of the 17,205 vehicles purchased were assembled in the USA. [NB: I’ve provided fuel economy numbers for base versions with automatic transmissions, as per typical fleet practice.]
In addition to offering hybrid options across its lineup, Mercedes-Benz will mount a three-cylinder engine in certain vehicles by 2012, reports Motor Authority. Mercedes R&D Boss Thomas Weber does mention that there’s a slight hitch to the plans, namely that “Mercedes is currently looking for a partner to help develop the new three-cylinder engine.” In what appears to be a case of car-before-horse(power), Weber confirms that this undeveloped engine will appear in future iterations of the C-Class, B-Class, A-Class and Smart ForTwo. The American market is not expected to receive three-banger benzes, although a 1.4-liter Kompressor engine is being considered for the C-Class.
Recent Comments