2001 Mitsubishi Montero Sport Xls Sport Utility 4-door 3.0l, 4 Wd on 2040-cars

Auto blog

California adapts ZEV mandate with PHEVs for smaller automakers

California is the nation's largest market for zero-emissions vehicles with over 100,000 of them estimated to be on the roads there. The state's goal is to keep that number growing every year. To that end, the California Air Resources Board is now tweaking its rules in a way that might not boost ZEVs but could mean more plug-in hybrids for the Golden State. Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Subaru, and Volvo asked for an exemption to the state's zero-emissions vehicle mandate last year due to their relatively small development budgets compared to larger automakers. CARB denied their request but did craft a compromise, according to Automotive News. Rather than being required to offer a ZEV in the state, companies with an annual global revenue of less than $40 billion, like those in this group, may instead sell plug-in hybrids to earn ZEV credits. The companies aren't completely off the hook, though. If these plug-in hybrids don't earn enough credits, the corporations must buy them on the market to make up the difference. Automakers with popular electric models like Nissan and Tesla have made a big business through this trading system by selling their surplus to rivals. Tesla alone pocketed $51 million in the first quarter from this part of its business, according to Automotive News. The changes to the regulations also aren't set in stone, yet. CARB is meeting in 2016 and could adjust things further at that time. Related Video: News Source: Automotive News - sub. req. via Hybrid CarsImage Credit: Justin Sullivan / Getty Images Government/Legal Green Jaguar Land Rover Mazda Mitsubishi Subaru Volvo Emissions Electric Hybrid California zev credits zero emissions vehicle

Automakers want to stop the EPA's fuel economy rules change, and why that's a shortsighted move

With a Trump Administration looming, the EPA moved quickly after the election to propose finalizing future fuel economy rules last week. The auto industry doesn't like that (surprise), and has started making moves to stop the EPA. Ford CEO Mark Fields said he wanted to lobby Trump to lower the standards, and now the Auto Alliance, a manufacturer group, is saying it will join the fight against cleaner cars. The Alliance represents 12 automakers: BMW, Fiat Chrysler, Ford, GM, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mitsubishi, Porsche, Toyota, VW, and Volvo. Gloria Bergquist, a spokesperson for the Alliance, told Automotive News that the "EPA's sudden and controversial move to propose auto regulations eight months early - even after Congress warned agencies about taking such steps while political appointees were packing their bags - calls out for congressional action to pause this rulemaking until a thoughtful policy review can occur." The EPA was going to consider public comments through April 2017, but then said it would move the deadline to the end of December. That means that it can finalize the rules before President Obama leaves office. The director of public affairs for the Consumer Federation of America, Jack Gillis, said on a conference call with reporters last week when the EPA originally announced its decision that it is unlikely that President Trump will be able to roll back these changes. Gillis also said on the same call that any attempt by the automakers to prevent these changes would be history repeating itself. "These are the same companies that fought airbags, and now promoting the fact that every car has multiple airbags," he said. "These are the same companies that fought the crash-test program, and now are promoting the crash-test ratings published by the government. So, it's clear that they're misperceiving the needs of the American consumer." There are more reasons the Allliance's pushback is flawed. Carol Lee Rawn, the transportation program director for Ceres, said on that call that the automotive industry is a global one, and many automakers are moving to global platforms to help them meet strict fuel economy rules around the world.

Brand new cars are being sold with defective Takata airbags

If you just bought a 2016 Audi TT, 2017 Audi R8, 2016–17 Mitsubishi i-MiEV, or 2016 Volkswagen CC, we have some unsettling news for you. A report provided to a US Senate committee that oversees the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and reported on by Automotive News claims these vehicles were sold with defective Takata airbags. And it gets worse. Toyota and FCA are called out in the report for continuing to build vehicles that will need to be recalled down the line for the same issue. That's not all. The report also states that of the airbags that have been replaced already in the Takata recall campaign, 2.1 million will need to eventually be replaced again. They don't have the drying agent that prevents the degradation of the ammonium nitrate, which can lead to explosions that can destroy the airbag housing and propel metal fragments at occupants. So these airbags are out there already. We're not done yet. There's also a stockpile of about 580,000 airbags waiting to be installed in cars coming in to have their defective airbags replaced. These 580k airbags also don't have the drying agent. They'll need to be replaced down the road, too. A new vehicle with a defective Takata airbag should be safe to drive, but that margin of safety decreases with time. If all this has you spinning around in a frustrated, agitated mess, there's a silver lining that is better than it sounds. So take a breath, run your fingers through your hair, and read on. Our best evidence right now demonstrates that defective Takata airbags – those without the drying agent that prevents humidity from degrading the ammonium nitrate propellant – aren't dangerous yet. It takes a long period of time combined with high humidity for them to reach the point where they can rupture their housing and cause serious injury. It's a matter of years, not days. So a new vehicle with a defective Takata airbag should be safe to drive, but that margin of safety decreases with time – and six years seems to be about as early as the degradation happens in the worst possible scenario. All this is small comfort for the millions of people who just realized their brand-new car has a time bomb installed in the wheel or dashboard, or the owners who waited patiently to have their airbags replaced only to discover that the new airbag is probably defective in the same way (although newer and safer!) as the old one.