2020 Tesla Model 3 Standard Range Plus 4dr Sedan on 2040-cars

Auto blog

In-demand BMW i8 deliveries start in June, and it's more efficient than we thought

Memo to Elon Musk: objects in the rear-view mirror may be closer than they appear. In this case, it's a couple of plug-in BMWs. And they represent the closest thing to a true competitor for Musk and the Tesla Motors electric vehicles. The German automaker re-confirmed that demand for its upcoming i8 plug-in hybrid will exceed the initial supply batch, though BMW didn't release any specific numbers, Reuters says. BMW will start production next month with deliveries commencing in June for the 362-horsepower i8. The news is consistent with a November estimate from BMW that indicated that the first year of i8s were essentially spoken for in advance. We learned in late January that the number of i3 battery-electric vehicles imported to the US won't meet demand during that vehicle's first year of sales either. Here's the thing: all these people were interested in the i8 when BMW said the car got the equivalent of 94 miles per gallon. Turns out, those calculations were a bit off. Reuters also notes that the new numbers show the i8 gets 112 MPGe. That's on the lenient European cycle, but if anyone was holding out for an i8 with triple-figure fuel economy, your time (to get on the waiting list) has come.Motley Fool proposed late last month that BMW is positioned to be Tesla's only real competition when it comes to high-performance plug-in vehicles. The reasoning was that the BMW plug-ins, like the Teslas, are being built from scratch and don't just have EV powertrains dropped into existing vehicle platforms. Whether or not the competition is truly a two-team race is something we're not sure is completely decided yet, but we know it'll be fun to watch unfold either way. Want proof? Check out Autoblog's enjoyable First Drive of the i8 here.

Why we can't have better headlights here in the U.S.

It wouldn't be a European auto show if we weren't teased with at least one mainstream vehicle we can't have here. At the Geneva Motor Show last week, the small but vocal contingent of shooting-brake buffs lamented that the Mazda6 wagon won't be coming to our shores, although they can take comfort in the fact that the vehicle won't get the torquey 250-horsepower 2.5-liter turbocharged gasoline engine we'll get here. Mercedes-Benz also announced a new headlight technology in Geneva that likely won't be available here anytime soon. It's just the latest in a long line of innovative and potentially lifesaving front-lighting solutions that the federal government doesn't allow in this country due to outdated standards — and a current lack of leadership at the U.S. Department of Transportation. Mercedes-Benz's new Digital Light system that debuted in Geneva uses a computer chip to activate more than a million micro-reflectors to better illuminate the road ahead. The Digital Light headlamps works with the vehicle's cameras, sensors and navigation mapping to adjust lighting for the given location and situation and to detect other road users. The Digital Light technology also serves as an extended head-up display of sorts by projecting symbols on the pavement ahead to alert drivers to, say, slippery conditions or pedestrians in the road. And it can even project lines on the road in a construction zone or through tight curves to show the driver the correct path. Digital Light will be available on Mercedes-Maybach vehicles later this year, although like any technology it's bound to trickle down to less expensive vehicles. That is, if we ever get it here in the U.S. Audi, a leader in automotive lighting, has repeatedly run into snags trying to bring state-of-the-art car headlights to the U.S. The German luxury automaker's recently introduced matrix laser headlight system, which performs many of the same trick as Mercedes-Benz's Digital Light, also isn't legal on U.S. roads. And five years after the introduction of its matrix-beam LED lighting, which illuminates more of the road without blinding oncoming motorists with brights by simultaneously operating high and low beams, Audi still can't bring that technology to the U.S. either.

Tesla says Chris Christie's move is 'affront to the very concept of a free market'

Tesla has a special history with the state of New Jersey, having delivered the 500th Roadster there in 2009. Fast forward to 2014, though, and the electric vehicle company is having a decidedly less-positive experience in the Garden State. In short, Tesla's ongoing dealer fight has turned sour, and thing are potentially going from bad to worse today. Tesla says it has been working "constructively" with the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission (NJMVC) and Governor Chris Christie's administration "to defend against the New Jersey Coalition of Automotive Retailers' (NJ CAR) attacks on Tesla's business model and the rights of New Jersey consumers." In other words, the right for Tesla to open its own stores and not use the traditional dealer model. The legislative process on the fate of Proposal PRN 2013-138 (PDF) has been continuing and Tesla says it thought everyone was acting in good faith, but now it's not so sure. In a new official blog post, Tesla says: Unfortunately, Monday we received news that Governor Christie's administration has gone back on its word to delay a proposed anti-Tesla regulation so that the matter could be handled through a fair process in the Legislature. The Administration has decided to go outside the legislative process by expediting a rule proposal that would completely change the law in New Jersey. This new rule, if adopted, would curtail Tesla's sales operations and jeopardize our existing retail licenses in the state. ... This is an affront to the very concept of a free market. A meeting on the proposal is scheduled to take place this afternoon, and Tesla is not happy about it. In Ohio last year, Tesla asked for immediate help to stop a similar bill, which ended up working. For a while. Last year, New Jersey started considering an EV-only tax that would cost EV drivers about $100 a year, but that appears to have been scrapped.