2015 Nissan Altima 2.5 Sl on 2040-cars

Auto blog

FCA-Renault merger faces tall odds delivering on cost-cutting promises

FRANKFURT/DETROIT — Fiat Chrysler Automobiles and Renault promise huge savings from a mega-merger, but such combinations face tall odds because of the industry's long product cycles and problems translating deal blueprints into real world success, industry veterans told Reuters. BMW's 1994 purchase of Rover, and Daimler's 1998 merger with Chrysler both made sense on paper. The companies promised to hike profits by combining vehicle platforms and engine families. Both combinations proved unworkable in reality, and were unwound. Renault and Nissan, which have been in an alliance since 1999 designed to share vehicle components, have only managed to use common vehicle platforms in 35% of Nissan's products despite an original target of 70%, according to Morgan Stanley. FCA and Renault have raised the stakes for themselves by ruling out plant closures. That increases the pressure to achieve more than $5 billion in promised annual savings from pooling procurement and research investments. The two companies have yet to fill in many of the blanks in the merger plan put forward by Fiat Chrysler. Renault's board is expected to act soon to accept the proposal, but that would lead only to a memorandum of understanding to pursue detailed operational and financial plans. A final deal and the legal combination of the two companies could take months to complete if all goes well. Pressure to cut automotive pollution is driving the latest round of consolidation. Automakers are looking at multibillion-dollar bills to develop electric and hybrid cars and cleaner internal combustion engines. Fiat Chrysler and Renault are betting they can design common electric vehicle systems, then sell more of them through their respective brands and dealer networks, cutting the cost per car. Developing all-new electric vehicles can bring more opportunities to share costs from the outset, industry experts said. "With the emergence of connected, autonomous, electric and shared vehicles, carmakers face immediate investments, so new opportunities for sharing costs have emerged," said Elmar Kades, managing director at Alix Partners. However, most electric vehicles lose money. This is a challenge for city car brands in Europe in particular. Both Renault and Fiat rely heavily on this segment for sales.

Why it's difficult to accurately test the efficiency of a plug-in car

When it comes to electric vehicles and plug-ins in general, the Environmental Protection Agency-certified range is a hugely important number. While actual range anxiety is largely psychological, the magic number does provide a point of comparison of buyers considering one EV over another. The driving distance is also often touted by automakers when marketing their models. Unfortunately, as Green Car Reports finds in a recent deep dive, the way the EPA calculates the figure is a convoluted mess, and discovering the reasons why is definitely worth the read. The issue isn't about bad science but instead comes down to vague wording. The EPA's accepted range test is sourced from an evaluation called J-1634 from the Society of Automotive Engineers, and it seems to provide balanced results for vehicles that automatically reach a single state of charge when plugged in. However for models with multiple charge settings, the situation gets complicated very quickly. Of course, these modes are often created in the software, meaning that a car's certified driving distance can change with just a few taps of the keyboard without the real world results owners might experience actually changing. By showing the test's effects on the certified range for the Tesla Model S, Nissan Leaf and Mercedes-Benz B-Class Electric Drive over the last few years, Green Car Reports makes a compelling argument that it's the evaluation that needs to change. Thankfully, it appears that the solution is a very simple one. Get the details here.

2013 Nissan Frontier gets substantial price drop, better fuel economy

With the competition dwindling (or dying) among compact trucks, Nissan is looking to make some minor changes to the 2013 Frontier to snag a few extra sales for its aging pickup. Pricing and fuel economy are probably two of the most important vehicle stats among new-car buyers, and the 2013 Nissan Frontier has made vast improvements in both areas over the 2012 model.
First things first: The MSRP of both the King Cab and Crew Cab models have dropped by $1,270 with new starting prices of $17,990 and $22,030 (*not including the $845 destination charge), respectively. The biggest price drop is seen on the SV Crew Cab 4x2, which dropped $1,450 to its new price of $23,990. The important thing here is that the 2013 Frontier King Cab is now priced just a few hundred dollars more than a regular cab version of the Toyota Tacoma. Nissan is also offering a new SV Value Truck Package that includes all the equipment of the previous SV Premium Utility Package (spray-on bedliner, Utili-Track in-bed cargo system with four adjustable cleats and Bluetooth) and adds in a rearview monitor and dual-zone air conditioning.
Another key change made for 2013 was to the Frontier's fuel economy. Except for the base-model truck (King Cab, inline-four, manual transmission, two-wheel drive), all other configurations have seen increases in city and/or highway fuel economy to the tune of one or two miles per gallon; the biggest improvement was to the V6 models with the automatic transmission, which saw an improvement of one mpg city and two mpg highway. Nissan accomplished this with better aerodynamics and updated internal engine components to reduce friction. Aero changes include a seal between the cab and bed, a tailgate spoiler and a new front chin spoiler. For more details on the 2013 Frontier - including a full pricing breakdown - scroll down for the official press release.