2012 5.0l V8 Level Lift Kit Nitto Tires Rear View Camera Heated+cooled Seats 4x4 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

EPA says fuel economy test for hybrids is accurate

The EPA says it stands behind its fuel economy test for hybrid vehicles following controversy about the testing process after Ford C-Max Hybrid customers and automotive journalists alike struggled to achieve 47 miles per gallon, the advertised mpg number, Automotive News reports. Ford responded to the issue almost two weeks ago by claiming that a 1970s-era EPA general label rule was responsible for the inaccurate mileage numbers, rerating the C-Max Hybrid's mpg numbers and offering customers rebates. Ford later said it didn't overstate the C-Max Hybrid's fuel economy and that it was surprised by the low numbers.
Ford technically didn't do anything wrong because it was following the general label rule, but agency regulator Christopher Grundler says the automaker was exploiting a loophole when it came up with the hybrid C-Max numbers, and that the testing process remains accurate. The general label rule allows vehicles that use the same engine and transmission and are in the same weight class to share fuel economy numbers, but it doesn't take into account other factors such as aerodynamic efficiency, which affects hybrids more drastically than non-hybrid vehicles. Ford originally used the Fusion Hybrid economy figures for the C-Max Hybrid and claimed the engineers didn't realize that its aerodynamic efficiency would affect fuel economy as much as it did.

2016: The year of the autonomous-car promise

About half of the news we covered this year related in some way to The Great Autonomous Future, or at least it seemed that way. If you listen to automakers, by 2020 everyone will be driving (riding?) around in self-driving cars. But what will they look like, how will we make the transition from driven to driverless, and how will laws and infrastructure adapt? We got very few answers to those questions, and instead were handed big promises, vague timelines, and a dose of misdirection by automakers. There has been a lot of talk, but we still don't know that much about these proposed vehicles, which are at least three years off. That's half a development cycle in this industry. We generally only start to get an idea of what a company will build about two years before it goes on sale. So instead of concrete information about autonomous cars, 2016 has brought us a lot of promises, many in the form of concept cars. They have popped up from just about every automaker accompanied by the CEO's pledge to deliver a Level 4 autonomous, all-electric model (usually a crossover) in a few years. It's very easy to say that a static design study sitting on a stage will be able to drive itself while projecting a movie on the windshield, but it's another thing entirely to make good on that promise. With a few exceptions, 2016 has been stuck in the promising stage. It's a strange thing, really; automakers are famous for responding with "we don't discuss future product" whenever we ask about models or variants known to be in the pipeline, yet when it comes to self-driving electric wondermobiles, companies have been falling all over themselves to let us know that theirs is coming soon, it'll be oh so great, and, hey, that makes them a mobility company now, not just an automaker. A lot of this is posturing and marketing, showing the public, shareholders, and the rest of the industry that "we're making one, too, we swear!" It has set off a domino effect – once a few companies make the guarantee, the rest feel forced to throw out a grandiose yet vague plan for an unknown future. And indeed there are usually scant details to go along with such announcements – an imprecise mileage estimate here, or a far-off, percentage-based goal there. Instead of useful discussion of future product, we get demonstrations of test mules, announcements of big R&D budgets and new test centers they'll fund, those futuristic concept cars, and, yeah, more promises.

Compact SUV Comparison: Specs, pics and reviews of every brand's crossover

Honda CR-V vs Toyota RAV4. Chevy Equinox vs Ford Escape. Mazda CX-5 vs Subaru Forester. Whichever combinations of compact crossover SUV you're considering, there's probably a comparison test or chart out there to read. Heck, you can even create a three-car comparison yourself here at Autoblog. However, if you want a bunch of that information all in one convenient place, well, here it is. Our mega comparison of specs, features and photos of compact SUV entries from every mainstream manufacturer that sells them. That includes the 2018 Chevrolet Equinox, 2018 Ford Escape, 2018 GMC Terrain, 2018 Honda CR-V, 2018 Hyundai Tucson, 2019 Jeep Cherokee (it's already on sale with notable changes from 2018), 2018 Jeep Compass, 2018 Kia Sportage, 2018 Mazda CX-5, 2018 Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross (none of Mitsu's SUVs are perfect fits for this segment, so we deemed the MEC the most competitive fit), 2018 Nissan Rogue, 2018 Subaru Forester, 2018 Toyota RAV4 and 2018 Volkswagen Tiguan. We can update this comparison as more information about 2019 models is released, most notably the Forester and RAV4. Now, there are certainly some models that are smaller (Nissan Rogue Sport) or larger (Kia Sorento) that could also be considered, but we figured it was wise to stick with those in this sweet spot of comparable size and price. We also included links to Autoblog reviews, buying guides and smaller comparisons. Engines and Transmissions With rare exception, this segment features four-cylinder power. Sometimes it's turbocharged, often its not, but standard engine outputs are generally in the same ballpark. Therefore, we'd recommend focusing on torque output, as it's what will make a difference around town or when passing, and weighing that versus fuel economy (the Chevy Equinox, GMC Terrain, Honda CR-V and Mazda CX-5 make particularly strong cases in this regard). Many drivers aren't too fond of continuously variable transmissions (CVT), either, so that's another thing to consider and note during a test drive. As you can see, several models are available with performance upgrades. Besides the Jeep Cherokee's available V6, all are more powerful turbocharged four-cylinder engines. The exception to this would be the Honda CR-V and Ford Escape, as their 1.5-liter turbo engines don't prioritize performance. Instead, they serve as overall upgrades to the base naturally aspirated engines standard on only their base trim levels (CR-V LX and Escape S).