Autoblog

U.S. university boffins have hypothesized that you'll get a better idea of how much you spend on gas if you start thinking in gallons per mile. With U.S. gas prices headed for the upper atmosphere, people are paying more attention to fuel efficiency numbers. Europeans already express their fuel usage in liters/100 km, which makes sense seeing that they've been paying $5 a gallon for much longer than we have.

The key is that going from 10- to 20-MPG yields higher savings -- which means less money spent on fuel -- than going from 25- to 50-MPG. The former swap yields $25 dollars in savings over 100 miles, the latter yields just $10 in savings. However, if you know that one car uses 5.5 gallons per 100 miles, and another uses 3.5 gallons per 100 miles... then you immediately know which one will cost you less at the pump.

Of course, this all depends on what kind of car you're starting with in the first place. Researcher Richard Larrick said, "We were trying to decide whether to get rid of a minivan and go for a station wagon versus getting rid of a sedan and going for a really high-mileage hybrid car. We realized in the end we were better off trading in the minivan and only gaining 10 miles per gallon then we would be trying to swap out the sedan for a highly efficient car." Thanks for the tip, Stephen!

[Source: Reuters]

Oil company advertising is apparently much more effective than we had originally thought. As gasoline prices creep up towards $4.00 per gallon (already there in Southern California), consumers are still more likely to purchase fuel based on brand over price.

According to NPD Group analyst David Portalatin, consumers cite "product performance" as their justification for buying one particular brand over another. It's all due to very effective branding and marketing, cites Portalatin. (We'd have to agree, as we've yet to meet anyone who can discern a difference between a tank of Chevron or Costco fuel from the driver's seat.) Now that the massive oil mergers are behind them, the petroleum giants are focusing on selling "quality" to differentiate themselves from the discount fuel stations. As consumers continue to blindly drive towards big brand gasoline, their efforts are apparently working -- regardless of cost. Let's just hope Starbucks doesn't catch wind of this trend and try a new source of revenue...

[Source Advertising Age, Photo by David McNew, Getty Images]

Whether you call it "premium," "super unleaded," or even "high test," it all means the same thing -- the most expensive gasoline at the pump. In a somewhat counterproductive trend, the skyrocketing cost of fuel is forcing automobile manufacturers to use smaller and more powerful engines, often with forced-induction. Unfortunately, these engines require higher octane... the distinguishing feature of premium fuel.

Kelley Blue Book has been following the trend and according to their analysis, there were 166 vehicle models that required premium fuel in 2002. This year, that number is up to 282. While some automakers only require premium for their highest performing models, companies like BMW call for premium fuel across their model range.

While there is no advantage to running premium fuel in an engine that doesn't call for it, you should run the higher octane fuel in a powerplant designed for it (if in doubt, check the owner's manual, or the inside of the fuel filler door). While nearly every late-model high-performance engine on the road can handle a slightly lower octane rating without damage, don't skimp when filling up as your fuel economy and horsepower will suffer (yes, it will likely negate any savings at the pump).

[Source: USA Today]

Jon Markman at MSN Money doesn't hold back when he says "Corn-based ethanol production is sure to go down as one of the greatest mistakes ever in U.S. energy policy." It's even more provoking when he writes "replacing fossil fuels with corn-based ethanol would double greenhouse gas emissions over the next three decades. The studies show that switchgrass, an alternative to ethanol that's more weed than plant, would boost emissions by 50%."

The problem isn't with the cars, the problem is with what it takes to grow the biofuel in the first place. Clearing the land, harvesting, and refining the crops, plus the loss of forest and wild lands and habitats, amounts to creating a carbon footprint worse than fossil fuels. According to the Science article which, admittedly, posits an extreme scenario, it would take 423 years to even out the carbon debt if Indonesia's peat lands were converted to palm oil fields.

The research is starting to give some people pause, such as the folks at the European Union who declared they wanted ten-percent of the block's transport fuel to come from plants. And Joe Fargione of the U.S. Nature Conservancy asks, "Is it worth it? ...[S]urprisingly the answer is 'no'. These natural areas store a lot of carbon, so converting them to crops results in tons of carbon emitted into the atmosphere."

Thanks for the tip, Zo!

[Source: MSN Money]

Consumers prefer cup holders and heated seats over fuel efficiency, according to CNW Marketing Research. That's right, we all talk about how we want our vehicles to be environmentally friendly and easy on gas, but when it comes down to it, what we really want are things to hold our coffee and keep our derrières warm. On the plus side, General Motors is saying fuel economy is becoming more of a priority to shoppers – it points out that four years ago it wasn't even in the top ten (studies by GM list fuel economy behind styling and value). So, what is it going to take to wake up consumers and make fuel efficiency a priority? Most experts feel that a significant hike in the cost of gas will be the kick that sets us straight. Just don't take away the cup holders.

[Source: Forbes via AutoblogGreen]

Click above for a high-resolution gallery of the 2008 Porsche Cayenne.

The Cayenne, Porsche's ultimate sport-ute, is the subject of a new recall to fix a fuel line problem. While the V8 models (including the new GTS) are unaffected, about 5,900 V6 models need to visit the Porsche doctor (a.k.a. any dealer) for repair. The recall centers on a fuel line that may be abraded by engine cladding through normal driving. Initially, a knocking sound is heard that can eventually lead to marking on the fuel line. Dealers will simply reroute the fuel line to solve the problem. No fuss, no muss.

A total of 5,573 Cayennes sold in the United States and 392 sold in Canada are covered by the recall and all are 2008 models.

[Source: Autoweek]

While two Camaro mules were caught at LAX earlier in the week, another was recently captured on the other side of the world. Still sporting the camouflage look that Bob Lutz vowed to banish, the car was spotted on an open trailer somewhere in Australia. The photographer managed to capture an important detail that many fans have been mulling over since the launch of the Camaro concept. That essential feature is the appearance of the fuel door. The concept perched the door on top of the driver's side rear fender. Apparently that will not be true of the production vehicle. The spy shot indicates that the Camaro will intake fuel through the passenger side rear fender. However, since folks in Australia drive on the right side of the vehicle that makes it the driver's side in their world. We hear their toilets swirl in the other direction, too. Due to cost saving measures, we don't expect the fuel door location to change for U.S. production. Also of note are the rear taillights, which we can see in these images are red on the inside and amber on the outside. Minor details, for sure, that will no doubt be eagerly devoured by Camaro faithful waiting for this car's return.

The taillights also appear to be colored specifically for the Australian market. Australian Design Rule 6 calls for all amber direction indicators. That explains the change from all red taillights. It is a detail that will probably be spared from the U.S. market. However, if any stateside owners clamor to be different they might be able to score some ADM amber lenses off eBay.

[Source: Camaro5.com via Jalopnik]

Detroit's sharp intake of breath over the very real possibility of increased federal fuel economy standards apparently doesn't include Chrysler's voice. CEO Robert Nardelli has told The Car Connection that rather than waste lots of time and energy opposing the likely increase to a 35 mpg fleet average, Chrysler will put its head down and get it done. Attaining the goal will not be without pain, however. Cuts will be made, and the books are still in the red.

There is hope, though, if Chrysler and parent Cerberus Capital can stick it out. A new contract with the UAW eases some of the automaker's financial burden, allowing that money to be plowed into development of more fuel efficient vehicles. There's a new two-mode hybrid system, co-developed with Daimler, GM, and BMW, which should help lift the fleet average without Chrysler abandoning their bread and butter moneymakers. With a lineup heavy in less-frugal vehicles like SUVs, trucks, and minivans, Chrysler's acknowledged the holes in their product mix and will set about plugging product into the voids. First up is the new Journey, the company's first crossover vehicle. The CUV segment is red-hot right now, so having a model to sell is a plus. Having a good model that will continue to sell well is an even bigger plus. At this point, Chrysler's facing an uphill climb.

[Source: TCC]

Kimi Raikkonen and the boys at Ferrari can breathe a sigh of relief, as their championship has been formally confirmed by the FIA. The title was appealed by the incredibly sore losers at McLaren, who insisted that because of a temperature irregularity in the fuel in BMW's and Williams' cars at the season closer in Brazil, those four cars should have been disqualified, thereby catapulting McLaren's Lewis Hamilton to the championship. (Yeah, they were serious.)

Hamilton, it should be noted, stated that he didn't want to win the championship that way. And nobody else wanted him too, either. Even F1 supremo Bernie Ecclestone threatened to quit the sport if the FIA took the title away from Raikkonen and awarded it to Hamilton over the technicality.

The ruling was issued by a specially-convened panel of the FIA's International Court of Appeal, presided over by a Czech motorsport judge and three others from the United States, Greece and Portugal. The court, which heard testimonies from BMW, Williams and McLaren, convened in London instead of the FIA's headquarters in Paris due to traffic issues in the French capital.

Our take: Rules are rules, but if the FIA had stripped Raikkonen of his title, it would have been bad for him, bad for Hamilton, bad for F1 and bad for motorsports. We'll be waiting for Ron Dennis to find a way to blame us for this, too.

Full statement from the FIA after the jump.

Click the pics above for a gallery of high-res images of the Hyundai i-Blue Concept.

Hyundai, like practically every other automaker in Frankfurt, is showing off its green-wares. The i-Blue is the poster-child for the automaker's environmentally focused future, with a 100 kW motor powered by a fuel cell. Developed by Hyundai's Design and Technical Center in Chiba, Japan, the i-Blue's platform shares the concept's name, and will likely underpin future D-segment crossovers with a 2+2 seating arrangement.

The styling is certainly futuristic, with expansive front fenders, a dramatic fascia, heavily sculpted sides and a rear spoiler that culminates in a sharp point and houses a reversing camera. Inside, it's all flowing shapes, all the time, with plenty of space for its occupants and technology that only Data could wrap his head around.

All the details are available in Hyundai's press release after the jump, and we've assembled a gallery of live and press pics for your viewing pleasure.