Autoblog

When the C-Class predecessor launched, it was known as the 190 and carried a four-cylinder powerplant underhood. Mercedes is now considering a return to four-pots in the U.S. market as the price of fuel continues to soar. MBZ is reportedly already testing a 1.4-liter carrying a supercharger, which is strange when you consider there's already a 1.8-liter blown four-cylinder on sale in Europe. The C180 Kompressor seems like it'd be the easy way to get fours back into the U.S. lineup, but Mercedes must have some other ideas driving the decision to develop the smaller 1.4.

Even stranger, while the talk is all about forced induction, the end result will supposedly be underwhelming in the power department, so Mercedes is planning on ramping up the glitter without delivering the gold. Perceived performance is the euphemism for a car that comes with a loud exhaust and twitchy throttle, and that's what Mercedes engineers think it will take to make the car palatable to U.S. buyers. Gee, leave the sound insulation out so that 25 mph feels like 100 and we're sold! Seriously, is this a late April Fool's joke? "Perceived performance?" A car that's not in denial about being thrifty might be more successful than a poseur.

[Source: Inside Line]

Readers of London's Sunday Times kept telling the auto reporters that the official mileage numbers for the Prius were overstated by about 15 imperial mpg. Intrigued, the Times decided to test things out by running a Prius against a BMW 520d with regenerative braking from London to Geneva, a 460-mile trip. Then they added 100 miles of urban running to give the Prius a chance to recover ground on its proper turf.

The verdict: the conventional diesel with Efficient Dynamics beat the full hybrid by 2.2 imperial mpg, or 1.8 US mpg. This means that an executive sedan with all the mod-cons and 500 extra pounds beat the mollusk-shaped sip-tastic wunderkind known as the Prius. And the diesel's CO₂ emissions are just 32 g/km higher than the hybrid poster-child, to boot.

Admittedly, we find the test a bit unfair -- the Prius is not meant show its muscle at "75-mph into a headwind," and adding 100 miles of urban driving doesn't make up for 460 miles of autoroute. Reverse those driving conditions and then let's see who won. Still, for all of us diesel fans out there, it's a feather we won't mind putting in the cap. Thanks for the tip, George!

[Source: Sunday Times via Technoride]

Back in December, we told you about the new method the government would be using to calculate fuel mileage. For the first time in twenty years, they decided to make changes to better reflect real-world driving conditions and driver behaviors. The changes went into effect starting with 2008 model year cars, and are evident in the newly styled window stickers on those vehicles (shown above). We correctly surmised that most estimates would go down by some degree using this new formula. In our comments, many of you immediately noticed that this would unfairly bump some vehicles into the gas guzzler tax bracket. Apparently, you had reason to be concerned.

Revealed after some sleuthing by the boys at Dubspeed Driven, the EPA is still using the 1991 tax schedule and gas guzzler calculation method. That essentially means that the exact same car that skirted the gas guzzler surcharge last year, could be a scofflaw in 2008. Cars like a Nissan 350Z, for instance. It's combined 23.15 last year kept it out of the gas guzzler bracket, but under the new formula, it's a $1,300 offender at 21.15 mpg.

There's no mention anywhere on the EPA website about the new testing procedures or the fact that 2008 vehicles will likely be reporting lower mpg compared to 2007 Monroneys. Scared at the possible backlash when their vehicles appear to be getting poorer mileage, major carmakers have banded together to create a website to help educate consumers about the apparent drop in fuel economy, but nothing seems to be in place at the EPA to account for the change. Trucks, some sport utilities and minivans are all still exempt from gas guzzler tax, however.

[Source: Dubspeed Driven]

A columnist for The Economist confirms what many of us thought was obvious. New is not necessarily better and it's good to keep your nose clean.

Moving from London to Texas (what a shock that must have been), the writer needed a car, and wanted one of the (what was then) shiny new Priuses. But not even a bright green nature could persuade the frugal side to part with $30k.

A little research turned up a previously-titled Honda Civic LX 5-speed for just under $11k. At first, the little Honda got 34 MPG, impressive, but not the 60 MPG claimed by the Prius. But after some basic maintenance (new air filter and an oil change) the Civic's highway numbers jumped to 40 MPG. Sweet. The writer's aunt boosted her hybrid Civic's numbers from 46 mpg to 50 mpg just by properly inflating her tires and setting the cruise control.

So by forgoing the latest and greatest, the author saved almost $20k. By spending $25 on an oil change and $10 on an air filter, the Honda burns fewer gallons of gas. No, the columnist hasn't discovered some ancient automotive secret, but the writer does show how small, inexpensive choices can positively affect the wallets and environments of Prius and H2 drivers alike.

[Source: The Economist]

U.S. Representative Ed Markey, D-Mass., is introducing a bill today that will require automakers to raise their fuel economy standards by 4% a year starting in late 2009 for cars and late 2011 for trucks. The key word here is "require," as President Bush proposed a similar plan that was more of a really strong suggestion with a few loopholes than an actual law with penalties for not being followed.

On the brightside, Markey's plan is reportedly less severe than previous ones he's proposed, though it is estimated that raising fuel economy standards 4% a year will cost the auto industry a grand total of $114 billion between 2010 and 2017. U.S. automakers would likely shoulder about $85 billion of that expense. Markey's plan would even require that fuel economy standards continue to rise 4% a year in 2018 and beyond, that is, if it's technologically feasible. Talk about a big if.

The ultimate goal of Markey's plan would get fuel economy standards for automaker fleets to 35 mpg by 2018. In truth, that's a decade of time to add an additional 10 mpg to the current standard. It doesn't sound impossible, especially if vehicles like the GM Volt reach production and prove that hyper mileage cars can be sold alongside relative gas guzzlers to even out the MPG balance sheets. Unfortunately, that doesn't really account for gas guzzlers outselling high-mileage vehicles many times over.

[Source: The Detroit News]

High gasoline prices have to be good for someone, and in news that will shock few, those fortunate men and women appear to work for Big Oil. Chevron, America's second largest oil company announced Friday that its first-quarter profits hit four billion dollars, a dramatic 49 percent increase over last year. With a profit of $1.80/share, that beat the Street by two cents.

Between ExxonMobil, Chevron and ConocoPhillips, America's top three oil companies raked in more than 15 billion dollars in profits this quarter.

[Source: San Jose Mercury News]

While some people are trading in their SUVs or even large cars for smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles, others are abandoning four wheels for two. Heritage Harley Davidson owner Toby O’Brien has noted an increase in the number of people coming into his store and purchasing motorcycles after selling off their SUVs. “With a bike you're getting up to 40 miles a gallon so you're saving significantly so a lot of people are taking advantage of that,” says O’Brien.

But he readily admits that new sales means novice riders. Organizations such as the Pennsylvania Motorcycle Safety Program and others offer free training courses for newbies.

Would you be willing to switch from four to two-wheels to save gas?

[Source: The Pittsburgh Channel]