Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments.
Spy Shots: Production Audi TT Clubsport Quattro
Chevy Camaro getting early unveil at Indy in September
James Garner recovering from mild stroke
VIDEO: God's ringtone is a V10-powered Audi R8
IIHS releases official results on the smart fortwo
Autoline on Autoblog with John McElroy
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Ford Shelby GT500 Mustang
Future Classic: 1984 Chrysler Minivans
First Drive: 2009 Volkswagen Jetta Sportwagen
_thumbnail.jpg "Lamborghini Reventon unboxed in Las Vegas")
Reader Comments for
Subscribe to this threadThe different sides of diesel: Dodge Ram 2500 Cummins vs. Smart Fortwo CDI
(Page 1 of 1)
The Idiot @ Apr 30th 2007 11:19AM
Rather unintelligent conclusion, clear manipulation of the numbers. If Ram's engine was scaled down proportionally, it would have been a 1.67 liter, and I'm quite sure the mileage would've been worse than Smart.
Also, Autoblog reporter has difficulty with reading comprehension - the article talks about increasing the size proportionally to the vehicle weight, not engine size. Although it sounds the same to the reporter, it isn't.