2000 Chevy Camaro on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Consumer Reports criticizes small turbo engines for misleading performance, fuel economy claims [w/video]

Consumer Reports has taken aim at at small-displacement, forced-induction engines, saying the powerplants don't manage to deliver on automaker fuel economy claims. Manufacturers have long held that smaller, turbocharged engines pack all power of their larger displacement cousins with significantly better fuel economy, but the research organization says that despite scoring high EPA economy numbers, the engines are no better than conventional drivetrains in both categories. Jake Fisher, director of automotive testing for Consumer Reports, says the forced induction options "are often slower and less fuel efficient than larger four and six-cylinder engines."
Specifically, CR calls out the new Ford Fusion equipped with the automaker's Ecoboost 1.6-liter four-cylinder engine. The institute's researchers found the engine, which is a $795 option over the base 2.5-liter four-cylinder, fails to match competitors in acceleration and served up 25 miles per gallon in testing, putting the sedan dead last among other midsize options.
The Chevrolet Cruze, Hyundai Sonata Turbo and Ford Escape 2.0T all got dinged for the same troubles, though Consumer Reports has found the turbo 2.0-liter four-cylinder in the BMW 328i does deliver on its promises. You can check out the full press release below. You can also read the full study on the Consumer Reports site, or scroll down for a short video recap.

Should heavy-duty pickup trucks have window stickers with fuel mileage estimates?

If you were to stroll into your nearest Chevrolet, Ford, GMC, Nissan, or Ram dealership, you'd find a bunch of pickup trucks. Most of those would have proper window stickers labeled with things like base prices, options prices, location of manufacture, and, crucially, fuel economy estimates. But you'd also run across a number of heavy-duty trucks with no such fuel mileage data from the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA doesn't require automakers to publish the valuable miles-per-gallon measurement for vehicles with gross weight ratings that exceed 8,500 pounds. That makes it difficult for consumers to compare behemoths powered by turbocharged diesel engines – between one another, and between smaller, gasoline-fueled trucks. Consumer Reports doesn't think it should be this way, and it's spearheading an effort (PDF link) to get the government to require manufacturers to publish fuel economy estimates. In its own testing, CR found that heavy-duty pickups powered by Ford's Power Stroke, GM's Duramax, and FCA's Cummins diesel engines (which doesn't include the Ram's EcoDiesel) get worse fuel mileage than their lighter-duty gas-powered siblings. We're not so sure HD-truck buyers are unaware of this fact – big diesels don't really come into their own until big loads are placed in their beds or attached to their trailer hitches. Under heavy workloads, the diesel trucks will almost certainly return greater efficiency than a similar gas-powered truck. What's more, HD trucks with lumbering diesels in general make the driver feel more confident while towing due to greater torque at low engine RPM than gas trucks. They also offer greater max-weight limits. Still, we agree EPA fuel mileage estimates should be offered for heavy-duty pickups. And we think the comparisons provided by Consumer Reports might be interesting to potential buyers. Click here to see the results of CR's tests, and let us know what you think using the poll below. Related Video: Featured Gallery 2017 Ford F-Series Super Duty: First Drive View 22 Photos News Source: Consumer Reports Government/Legal Green Read This Chevrolet Ford GMC Nissan RAM Fuel Efficiency Truck Commercial Vehicles Diesel Vehicles poll gmc sierra hd chevy silverado hd

Personal testimonies show real-world effect of plugging in with Chevy Volt

At this point, there are tens of thousands of individual stories about what it's like to live with a Chevrolet Volt. But it also remains informative to take a look at one of these in depth. For example, one Atlanta-area Volt owner says he's cut his cents-per-mile ownership costs by almost 40 percent compared to his previous car primarily because of his ability to drive almost all the time on electric power. Jeffrey Cohen told Clean Technica that he put about 14,000 miles on his Volt extended-range plug-in hybrid for the year that ended October 2013, and that more than 92 percent of those were on electrons. He estimates his "lifetime" miles per gallon rating at a whopping 384 mpg, a figure pushed upward by the fact that he installed a Level 2 charger at home while his employer added an external 110-volt charger at work. Cohen is spending 45 cents a mile for his car, compared to 73 cents in his Infiniti M35. As a result, he's spending 45 cents a mile for his car, compared to 73 cents a mile with his prior vehicle, an Infiniti M35. About two-thirds of those Volt costs are for the $349-a-month lease payments, while 15 percent is insurance, 11 percent is for the charger and seven percent for the gas and electricity that actually powers the car. Helping lower that last figure is an overnight electricity rate that's about 10 percent of Cohen's daytime rate. Chevy parent General Motors hopes such testimonies will re-trigger sales for the Volt in 2014. Last year, GM sold 23,094 Volts, down 1.6 percent from 2012. We expect our readers have similar stories they'd like to share in the Comments. Related Gallery 2011 Chevrolet Volt: Review View 22 Photos News Source: Clean TechnicaImage Credit: Lead image: AP Photo/Jae C. Hong Green Chevrolet GM Electric running costs