1997 Chevrolet Camaro Base Coupe 2-door 3.8l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

What car should James Robertson buy to drive his famous 21-mile commute?

The Internet has been abuzz this week with the story of Detroit resident James Robertson, the 56-year-old factory worker who has walked some 21 miles to work for the last 10 years. The Detroit Free Press brought Robertson's story to the fore, helping an online fundraising campaign to generate more than $275,000 (as of this writing). The original goal was just $5,000, or about enough to replace the used Honda that died on Robertson back in 2005, and left him walking. So, newly flush with funds, what's the perfect car for Robertson to buy? Let's look at the specifics of his situation, and try to pick out the best options. Here's what we know: Robertson's commute is (famously) 21 miles; he lives in downtown Detroit (for now) and seems pretty humble, so something very flashy is probably out; former Honda aside, his ties to the city (and statements about being a Ford fan) seem to indicate a Detroit Three company product is best; he's a single guy with a girlfriend; he's got to deal with Michigan weather, and the sometimes fickle snow removal processes in The D. Here are some choices: Ford F-150 Robertson is on record as being a Taurus fan, and after a decade of walking I've no doubt that the big sedan would offer a cozy respite. Still, as a car guy and a student of the industry, I'd have a hard time recommending a sedan so clearly in need of replacement. Especially when The Blue Oval has such great stuff within the rest of its roster. The 2015 F-150 seems almost perfect for Robertson. Opting for either of the new EcoBoost V6 engines should help keep fuel bills in reasonable check, while healthy ride height and four-wheel drive will get him to work on time even during the snowiest of snow days. Better still, with a fat options sheet and car-like ride quality, Robertson can have just about every amenity he might want, in a package that won't disrespect his blue-collar roots. Chevrolet Colorado You guys saw this one coming, right? The smaller footprint of the midsize Chevy pickup, relative to some of the other options here, should be an advantage for urban parking and driving. And again, 4x4 is an option for the nasty weather, the running costs should stay pretty low and there aren't many tech/luxury features that can't be had in-cabin. I'd go ahead and splash out on the Crew Cab bodystyle, too, just in case Robertson feels like starting a carpool.

These are the 'Greenest' and 'Meanest' cars in 2015

As has become tradition, the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) has come up with a ranking of what it refers to as the "greenest" cars of 2015, and, by way of contrast, a list of the so-called "meanest" cars, so those who value eco-friendliness over all else can choose which vehicles they should or should not consider buying. As you may expect, electric cars make up the majority of the greenest cars on the list, but, perhaps surprisingly to many, the Tesla Model S didn't make the cut. It's worth noting, too, that where the electricity an owner uses to charge their electric vehicle has a big impact on its overall environmental impact. "A car that is charged using electricity generated from natural gas or renewables is going to have significantly less impact on the environment than one charged on a coal-heavy grid," says ACEEE lead vehicle analyst Shruti Vaidyanathan. The ACEEE's list for 2015 looks very different than it did in 2014. It's an interesting collection, though – and we're sure this goes without saying, really – we'd recommend doing a bit more research into each vehicle and how it might fit into your daily life before making any purchase decisions. Click here to see the ACEEE's list of the Greenest and Meanest vehicles sold in the United States in 2015. Green Bugatti Chevrolet Fiat GM GMC Mercedes-Benz Nissan RAM smart Toyota greenest greenest cars

Our favorite mid-engine Corvette theories and rumors

The mid-engine Corvette! We just saw blurry photos through the foliage, and are hearts are all aflutter because it means that this car is real. And it's the most " never before" Corvette since 1984. Which leads us to all kinds of wacky theories and speculation. Everybody knows something or heard from a guy. None of those guys (or gals) from GM are talking to Autoblog, to be clear. But that won't stop us from stirring the pot. Let's go over a few point-by-point. The pushrod engine will be replaced by an overhead-cam V8 Car and Driver has repeatedly reported that an overhead-cam engine will come after the mid-engine Corvette's debut with an old-school pushrod. We've heard the same thing firsthand, albeit from a source with no connection to the development of the Corvette or powertrain. "At some point two valves can't pass future emissions regulations," said the guy we know. While the pushrod engine is compact, the design makes it difficult - if not impossible - for sophisticated variable valve timing (and lift) systems that control combustion with more precision. Hasty conclusion: The pushrod engine has a finite life in front of it. This one's a lock, it's a just a matter of when. Bowling Green's new paint shop is really the mid-engine assembly line Credit to Reddit for this one. Like we said, everybody knows a guy. But let's look deeper. The new paint facility costs $439 million dollars and adds 450,000 square feet, almost half the size of the existing plant. Plus GM announced another $290 million in upgrades at Bowling Green Assembly. That sure sounds like a lot of money, but you can actually spend that much on a paint booth. Porsche spent 500 million Euros (about $561 million dollars) to add the Macan assembly to its Leipzig, Germany plant in 2014. Chrysler shelled out $850 million for a paint shop in Sterling Heights, Michigan. GM spent $600 million for a new paint shop at the Fairfax (Kansas City) plant. Honda, on the other hand, is working on a thrifty $210 million project in Marysville, Ohio that includes a 300,000 square foot expansion, and the low-volume Acura NSX facility only cost $70 million. Hasty conclusion: The square footage and cost could easily mean a new assembly line instead of (or in addition to) a paint line. And if the NSX plant was really that cheap, GM could have hidden a similar sum in its existing announcements.