It wasn’t long ago that compact cars served one purpose: getting from A to B an inexpensively as possible. They were made like crap, sucked to drive, and had next to zero features. They were pre-paid cell phones of the car world. The Chevy Cavalier is a perfect example of this; if you’ve ever had to drive one, you know what I’m talking about. The Cobalt wasn’t much better. It would be hard to find someone who bought one because they loved it (with the possible exception of the SS) – the answer is always “it was cheap and gets good fuel economy.” They were all this way, from every manufacturer – cheap little econo-boxes with nothing to them but the most basic of comforts. And they were awful. Then something happened. People started to want small cars. They started buying them by choice, instead of being cost-forced into them. And when something sells more, things get competitive. Ford recently released the kick-ass new Focus (never thought I’d say that,) Honda is releasing the ninth generation Civic for 2012 , and VW’s new Jetta is shockingly good. Historically, American brands lagged behind, but now they’re catching up. Last year, Chevy ditched the crapbox Cobalt and released the Cruze – a compact sedan that promised to be their first good car in this segment – something that could actually compete with the Civic and Corolla. I finally got my skeptical hands on one… Chevy sent me a 2012 Cruze Eco – their attempt to deliver a fuel-sipping small sedan into the efficiency-obsessed public without resorting to gimmicks like hybrid powertrains. I drove the car for a full week, including a 7-hour trip to the beach and back. Given Chevy’s previous attempts in this segment, I fully expected to come back with my eyes rolling, but instead found myself calling my Dad (who happens to be looking for a new car,) recommending he consider the 2012 Chevy Cruze Eco. Over those seven hours to Myrtle Beach and back, I managed to average 42.3 mpg – and that’s going 10-15 over the limit most of the way (I did get pulled over by a SC state trooper who I swear was Buford T Justice .) The fuel economy isn’t even the surprising part. What shocked me the most is that...

The little Kia moves up in the world. Like the U.S., where roughly 70 percent of new cars sold are black, white, or some shade of silver or gray, Korea’s automotive landscape is almost exclusively grayscale. This may have been why the locals gave us funny looks as we drove from downtown Seoul to the country’s east coast in a bright red 2012 Rio5 (U.S.-spec, of course). Or maybe it was the pace at which said red Kia was racing from one well-marked speed camera to the next. Keep Reading: 2012 Kia Rio5 SX – Short Take Road Test The rest is here: 2012 Kia Rio5 SX Tested: Looks Sporty, Could Feel Sportier Excerpt from:  2012 Kia Rio5 SX Tested: Looks Sporty, Could Feel Sportier

For years, members of California’s EV community have been whirring about in their golf carts, Th!nks, GEMs, and other electric runabouts (until 2003, that included a bunch of GM EV1s), and parking in a limited number of public spots equipped with charging stations at malls, airports, and the occasional Mickey D’s. But the promise of more plug-in vehicles from several automakers—tens of thousands in the near future, and possibly many more in the long term—has prompted a new wave of policy discussions. The current hot topic in the Golden State is the short, simply-worded California bill AB 475 , which is backed by General Motors and currently sits on Governor Brown’s desk awaiting action. It would allow not only EVs, but also E-REVs and plug-in hybrids, to use public charging stations in designated parking spots. More important, though, it would require the vehicles to actually be plugged in and using the spot for its intended purpose, and not simply because it’s close to storefronts, airport terminals, or the like. Unless an EV is actively being charged, it should be parked in the main lot with the rest of us, the law says. Violators would face a fine or towing. Someone’s Charging, Lord, Kumbaya What’s got the EV community in California particularly riled up is that there are currently more EV spots than actual charging stations to serve them, which has resulted in a practice called “plug sharing.” This occurs when the cords of one or more plug-in vehicles can reach a single charging station that’s already in use; the driver of the late-arriving vehicle unplugs the one that was there first—without the knowledge of that vehicle’s driver. The “plug thief” may or may not know if the first car was fully charged yet, and if they are especially low on electricity, likely won’t care. In a small, tight-knit community, plug sharing can work. But even the most gracious EV driver must concede that plug sharing relies solely on human decency. As a matter of statewide public policy, relying on good samaritan behavior is totally unworkable, especially if the outcome can immobilize another motorist. What happens when someone intending to “share” a charger for 10 minutes forgets to reconnect the car he or she unplugged? Or if that 10-minute...

Is Congress motivated by the people or by reelection? Or, even an oil-ending transport plan? The European Commission today is actively seeking to develop a plan to move away from oil towards alternative fuels in the EU, most recently launching a public consultation on the matter. Should the US, via a non-partisan forum, also be investigating a straightforward, honest and transparent plan towards US energy independence? According to some, such as the Council on Foreign Relations, concepts like energy independence are a waste of energy  — no pun intended. Essentially, according to the Council, there is simply no way to end US dependence upon foreign oil in the next few decades, and thinking beyond that is just too far into the future. Hence, the Council suggests that all foreign oil-reducing opportunities need to be utilized, including natural gas, new drilling, fuel efficiency and batteries. Unfortunately, the Council concludes, those promoting energy independence typically only advocate one technology or pathway, such as new drilling, natural gas or plug-in vehicles. By only focusing on one; however, the Council argues that foreign oil dependence is only guaranteed to be greater than it needs to be, longer than it needs to be. Others, such as John Stossel, have in the past argued that ideas like energy independence don’t make sense because they are anti-free trade, which means that Americans are stuck with alternatives that leave the US at an economic disadvantage compared to our competitors in the world, especially our emerging competition from Brazil, Russia, India and China. Instead, Stossel argues that free markets achieve the best solutions. While I understand, and even somewhat concur with Stossel’s point, it’s kind of funny talking about free markets in the energy space when cartels like OPEC and nationalized oil companies, or NOCs, owned by countries like Russia and China are the major players in the energy game. Nevertheless, I do believe that governments, like the US, need to focus on breeding competition when it comes to energy and efficiency, rather than trying to picking winning technologies in some attempt to predict the future. Likewise, I concur with the Council on Foreign Relations that energy independence is too far beyond...

Is Congress motivated by the people or by reelection? Or, even an oil-ending transport plan? The European Commission today is actively seeking to develop a plan to move away from oil towards alternative fuels in the EU, most recently launching a public consultation on the matter. Should the US, via a non-partisan forum, also be investigating a straightforward, honest and transparent plan towards US energy independence? According to some, such as the Council on Foreign Relations, concepts like energy independence are a waste of energy  — no pun intended. Essentially, according to the Council, there is simply no way to end US dependence upon foreign oil in the next few decades, and thinking beyond that is just too far into the future. Hence, the Council suggests that all foreign oil-reducing opportunities need to be utilized, including natural gas, new drilling, fuel efficiency and batteries. Unfortunately, the Council concludes, those promoting energy independence typically only advocate one technology or pathway, such as new drilling, natural gas or plug-in vehicles. By only focusing on one; however, the Council argues that foreign oil dependence is only guaranteed to be greater than it needs to be, longer than it needs to be. Others, such as John Stossel, have in the past argued that ideas like energy independence don’t make sense because they are anti-free trade, which means that Americans are stuck with alternatives that leave the US at an economic disadvantage compared to our competitors in the world, especially our emerging competition from Brazil, Russia, India and China. Instead, Stossel argues that free markets achieve the best solutions. While I understand, and even somewhat concur with Stossel’s point, it’s kind of funny talking about free markets in the energy space when cartels like OPEC and nationalized oil companies, or NOCs, owned by countries like Russia and China are the major players in the energy game. Nevertheless, I do believe that governments, like the US, need to focus on breeding competition when it comes to energy and efficiency, rather than trying to picking winning technologies in some attempt to predict the future. Likewise, I concur with the Council on Foreign Relations that energy independence is too far beyond...

Students returning to universities in the United States this week are going to be joined by thousands of new first-year students. But also among the incoming frosh: Ford vehicles. Today, Ford Motor Co. announced that it is partnering with Zipcar to provide college students the opportunity to share Ford vehicles, rather than drive personal cars, during the school year. Under the agreement, up to 1,000 vehicles—mainly 2012 Ford Focus small cars and 2012 Ford Escape compact SUVs—will become part of the Zipcar for Universities program over the next two years. Ford will also offer the first 100,000 students $10 off the $35 annual membership fee for the Zipcar short-term college car rental program, now available in 250 school campuses nationwide. What’s more, the car company will also subsidize the first one million hours of Ford vehicle sharing, knocking the rental fees down to about $7 to $8 per hour. The agreement greatly expands Zipcar’s nationwide fleet of more than 8,000 vehicles of 30 different models, from Toyota Priuses to Mini Coopers. But the move is seen as a pretty savvy—and cost-effective—move by Ford to woo young drivers to consider the American company’s vehicles for their future first-car purchases. (According to Forbes’ reckoning, the two-year agreement will cost Ford a paltry $2 million. By comparison, the company spends an estimated $2.5 billion in advertisements per year.) Interestingly, the Ford Focus and Fusion cars are the only two models from an American car company to make our list of best cars for teen drivers . This could be seen as a “win” all around, aiding Ford and Zipcar with their business goals, making affordable transportation available to more college students, and also giving more consumers a chance to test drive a car outside of a direct sales environment. Ford, Zipcar Bring Future of Transportation to Newest Generation of Drivers at U.S. Universities [Ford press release] Zipcar’s University program [Zipcar] Ford’s Zipcar Deal Is A Clever Marketing Move [Forbes] Via Zipcar, Ford Seeks Young Fans [NY Times] Hey kids, rent a Zipcar Ford Focus cheap: It’s more fun than sexting [USA Today] See the original post here: Ford and Zipcar join forces for college...

Students returning to universities in the United States this week are going to be joined by thousands of new first-year students. But also among the incoming frosh: Ford vehicles. Today, Ford Motor Co. announced that it is partnering with Zipcar to provide college students the opportunity to share Ford vehicles, rather than drive personal cars, during the school year. Under the agreement, up to 1,000 vehicles—mainly 2012 Ford Focus small cars and 2012 Ford Escape compact SUVs—will become part of the Zipcar for Universities program over the next two years. Ford will also offer the first 100,000 students $10 off the $35 annual membership fee for the Zipcar short-term college car rental program, now available in 250 school campuses nationwide. What’s more, the car company will also subsidize the first one million hours of Ford vehicle sharing, knocking the rental fees down to about $7 to $8 per hour. The agreement greatly expands Zipcar’s nationwide fleet of more than 8,000 vehicles of 30 different models, from Toyota Priuses to Mini Coopers. But the move is seen as a pretty savvy—and cost-effective—move by Ford to woo young drivers to consider the American company’s vehicles for their future first-car purchases. (According to Forbes’ reckoning, the two-year agreement will cost Ford a paltry $2 million. By comparison, the company spends an estimated $2.5 billion in advertisements per year.) Interestingly, the Ford Focus and Fusion cars are the only two models from an American car company to make our list of best cars for teen drivers . This could be seen as a “win” all around, aiding Ford and Zipcar with their business goals, making affordable transportation available to more college students, and also giving more consumers a chance to test drive a car outside of a direct sales environment. Ford, Zipcar Bring Future of Transportation to Newest Generation of Drivers at U.S. Universities [Ford press release] Zipcar’s University program [Zipcar] Ford’s Zipcar Deal Is A Clever Marketing Move [Forbes] Via Zipcar, Ford Seeks Young Fans [NY Times] Hey kids, rent a Zipcar Ford Focus cheap: It’s more fun than sexting [USA Today] Continued here: Ford and Zipcar join forces for college car-sharing...

Praise the lawd! Praise the lawd! Praise the lawd! Here comes Gordon Murray to the rescue! Hopefully … I was filled with terror and repugnance as much as every other gearhead out there when the current head guy of Lotus (the car company, not the race team(s)), Dany Bahar said (in effect), ‘Screw all this lightweight sportscar crap – we’re heading up market and adding more luxury stuff!” I know, I know. This, from the head of a car company founded by Anthony Colin Bruce Chapman. The guy that said, “To go fast, add lightness,” and, in the process of putting that divine wisdom into practice ended up kicking some serious sports car ass over the past five decades. I know, it insulted me too. Well, hopefully Lotus won’t be doing anything too stupid in the future, that is if they pay attention to one of their newest hires, Gordon Murray. Murray, of course, is best known in automotive circles for such trivialities as various Brabham Formula One cars, the McLaren F1 supercar and, most recently, the T.25/T.27 city car project that makes a Smart Car look like a delivery truck. Sure, he’s only joining forces with Lotus in an “advisory capacity”, but you have to say it’s a step in the right direction. Murray will sit on Lotus’ Advisory Council, a board that already includes such names as known car nuts as Bob Lutz, Tom Purves (former BMW North America chief), former BMW designer Burkhard Göschel and Volkswagen engineer Frank Tuch. It don’t sound like a list of idiots to me. Lotus and Murray said that his new (advisory) gig with the boys from Hethel shouldn’t get in the way of Murray’s independent design outfit. There’s also some Karmic justice at work here too. When he first started out as an engineer in F1, Murray hoped, above all, to join the legendary Lotus team before being snapped up by Bernie Eccelstone to work at Brabham instead. “Gordon has never been afraid to trail blaze, take risks and do things differently, these are attribute that we are very familiar with and very proud of at Lotus. With his incredible and unique motorsport and design experience he will complement the existing council line up perfectly. We’re very much looking forward to working with...

Reports of a mysterious pattern in the Gobi Desert in China showed up on the interwebs on August 17th. Shortly after, the Chinese media, including magazines, newspapers and state TV stations, reported on the strange phenomenon, some of them even mentioning UFOs. The photos were first posted by a photographer at weibo.com . A week later, BMW reveals that the UFO-like patterns were simply part of a viral marketing campaign that was created for the introduction of the new 2012 BMW 1 Series. The patterns were simply crop circles, symmetrical with 1-2 inches deep marks. Sina, a major news portal, revealed BMW’s hidden hand behind the viral commercial on Aug. 25, shortly after BMW published an ad video. BMW explains its mischief by saying that the spirit of the vehicle–and its prospective drivers–is “UN1QUE,” and that this fits in with the fake crop circle news because UFO stands for “UN1QUE For One.” The outcome of Sina’s story on the viral ad was reflected in over 300,000 reactions on the news portal. As with any viral marketing campaigns, people’s reactions were split. Some of them were even furious with having been bricked creating another river of comments on the popular news site. [Source: TheEpochTimes ] See the rest here: BMW’s ‘Crop Circle’ Marketing Campaign Confuses Chinese Media

The fellows at Burningimage , a photography studio in Brisbane, Australia, are bringing us some incredible photos of a new BMW 1M in Alpine White color. By using unique lightning techniques, the photographer manages to capture the 1M in all its glory and from different angles, with the beautiful Brisbane in the background. As mentioned before, BMW offers the 1M in three colors, Alpine White, Valencia Orange and Sapphire Black. Based on our own research among US BMW dealerships, the top two color choices for 1M owners are Alpine White and Valencia Orange. The new “baby-M” went on sale this May and with a price tag of $47,010, turned the 1M into one of the most desired BMW on the market. Unofficial sources mentioned to us that the U.S. market could see somewhere near 800 units. Enjoy the photo gallery! Continued here:  Photoshoot: BMW 1M Alpine White in Brisbane

Earlier this month, BMW revealed a new 2012 BMW 1 Series ‘Performance Studie’ to a select group of individuals at a dealership event in Frankfurt, Germany. The special 1 Series model features a new line of performance parts and will go on display next month at the Frankfurt Auto Show. The model will be introduced under the Performance Studie badge. To improve the somewhat controversial look of the new F20 1 Series, BMW is bringing a series of cosmectic changes developed under the M-badge. The front showcases an aggressive M-Sport spoiler with larger than usual air intakes.  The sportiness of this model is also enhanced by the blacked out kidney grille. As with the previous BMW 1 Series tii model, black racing stripes are covering the car from front-to-back. Down the side, the Performance Studie features black-shadowed wheels with polished spoke surfaces. The two-tone theme is carried over to the chunky rear bumper bar with black details. It remains unknown at the moment if a power upgrade will be included in the Performance Studie package, but we will find out more in less than two weeks at the biggest European auto show of the year. View post:  BMW 1 Series Performance Studie

If you’re packing the coolers, the picnic blankets, and the rooftop carrier—and heading out on the road over the Labor Day holiday weekend, be glad that you’re not paying even more at the pump. Hurricane Irene—in addition to wreaking havoc on much of the Northeast—affected some refineries this past weekend, but it didn’t cause… See original here:  Gas Prices Up Slightly Over Labor Day Weekend: Irene To Blame?

If you were looking for big changes in price or content for Nissan’s flagship sedan, prepare to be disappointed. For the 2012 Nissan Maxima, pricing begins at $31,750 (excluding destination charge) for the Maxima 3.5 S and tops out at $34,450 (also less destination charge) for the Maxima 3.5 SV. If you’re keeping score, those are the exact… Go here to read the rest:  2012 Nissan Maxima Priced The Same As Last Year

Car sharing just as important as plug-in vehicles? Should batteries just be a piece of the solution? While the Frankfurt Auto Show will be a forum for many new hybrid and plug-in vehicles, a new consumer survey suggests that most German consumers aren’t nearly as bullish as the German government regarding such vehicles. Consequently, Gartner suggests that Germany should reconsider its largely singular focus on plug-ins and also include alternatives, such as new engine technologies, car sharing, public transportation, etc. According to Gartner’s latest survey only “16 percent of Germans would consider buying a battery car, compared with 52 percent who want gasoline power, 43 percent hybrids, 37 percent diesel and 25 percent natural gas motors,” according to the DetroitNews. Also, the keyword is ‘consider’. As US studies have proven, real world sales are far different than ‘consider’ percentages. For example, numerous studies have for a few years now also suggested that a majority of Americans would ‘consider’ buying a hybrid. Yet, less than 3 percent actually purchase hybrid cars . Consequently, Gartner analyst and survey author Thilo Koslowski expects plug-ins to achieve just 3 percent of global marketshare by 2020 because of plug-in costs, range limitations, etc. Fortunately, sometime after 2020, Koslowski has higher hopes for plug-ins. Sometime in the ’20’s Koslowski expects a battery breakthrough that could significantly increase plug-in sales by significantly reducing battery costs. Even then, however, Koslowski doesn’t expect plug-ins to dominate the automotive landscape. In fact, Koslowski even suggests that automakers might even be wasting time and resources trying to develop plug-in cars that offer the same range and costs of conventional vehicles when other paths might be cheaper, but just as beneficial. “Governments (like in Germany) are putting all their money on electric vehicles, when there might be other ways,” Koslowski said. “Instead of just subsidizing battery cars, why not split it off and spend it on public transportation, car sharing, give them a free bicycle, why be so limited in terms of what might work?” Most interesting, in my opinion,...

Car sharing just as important as plug-in vehicles? Should batteries just be a piece of the solution? While the Frankfurt Auto Show will be a forum for many new hybrid and plug-in vehicles, a new consumer survey suggests that most German consumers aren’t nearly as bullish as the German government regarding such vehicles. Consequently, Gartner suggests that Germany should reconsider its largely singular focus on plug-ins and also include alternatives, such as new engine technologies, car sharing, public transportation, etc. According to Gartner’s latest survey only “16 percent of Germans would consider buying a battery car, compared with 52 percent who want gasoline power, 43 percent hybrids, 37 percent diesel and 25 percent natural gas motors,” according to the DetroitNews. Also, the keyword is ‘consider’. As US studies have proven, real world sales are far different than ‘consider’ percentages. For example, numerous studies have for a few years now also suggested that a majority of Americans would ‘consider’ buying a hybrid. Yet, less than 3 percent actually purchase hybrid cars . Consequently, Gartner analyst and survey author Thilo Koslowski expects plug-ins to achieve just 3 percent of global marketshare by 2020 because of plug-in costs, range limitations, etc. Fortunately, sometime after 2020, Koslowski has higher hopes for plug-ins. Sometime in the ’20’s Koslowski expects a battery breakthrough that could significantly increase plug-in sales by significantly reducing battery costs. Even then, however, Koslowski doesn’t expect plug-ins to dominate the automotive landscape. In fact, Koslowski even suggests that automakers might even be wasting time and resources trying to develop plug-in cars that offer the same range and costs of conventional vehicles when other paths might be cheaper, but just as beneficial. “Governments (like in Germany) are putting all their money on electric vehicles, when there might be other ways,” Koslowski said. “Instead of just subsidizing battery cars, why not split it off and spend it on public transportation, car sharing, give them a free bicycle, why be so limited in terms of what might work?” Most interesting, in my opinion,...