pow

pow- what's that from? I have a similar one, don't want to double-up.

BMW; it's a reference to their twin-scroll turbochargers.

Agreed. The 500L looks great. I also prefer the Wrangler Unlimited to the 2-door; the former reminds me of the G-Wagen and it looks less tipsy, less prone to rollover than the standard Wrangler.

TwinPower

It's nice, but as a V8-only car, I can't imagine it being any more than a niche model. Chances are it will sell for at least $40K, and the market for such an expensive car without much visual character or a prestigious badge is small.

In addition to the city and highway tests, the EPA test cycles also include a high speed test (e.g., multi-lane freeway simulation with a top speed of 80 mph), as well as A/C use and cold temperatures.

But, that's not used for generating the EPA Highway mpg numbers. And, when was the last time you saw EPA "High Speed" mpg on the window?

It is. That's why the 2008+ EPA numbers are lower.

In addition to the city and highway tests, the EPA test cycles also include a high speed test (e.g., multi-lane freeway simulation with a top speed of 80 mph), as well as A/C use and cold temperatures.

The truth is that your mileage will vary. The amount of fuel consumed is determined by the amount of work your car does. Everyone drives differently on different routes in different conditions. You can't expect one number to represent all city driving, and one number to represent all highway driving. IMO, the point of these tests is for comparative purposes... to see how cars do relative to others under the same circumstances. Of course, designing for the test might not be helpful if your "real world" driving patterns are different from the test.

As an example of the wide variability in fuel consumption, the trip computer in my Focus is telling me that I'm averaging 17 MPG so far on this tank. This is because I've been doing purely city driving in the peak hour, where I spend more time idling than moving. Yet if I reset the trip computer on a flat freeway going 55 mph, I've been able to sustain 45+ MPG over several miles. The car is rated 26/36 MPG.

For me, it's all about low-end grunt - mountains of torque at 1,500 RPM.

I care nothing for screaming at 5000 RPM to make power - it just annoys me.

I like an engine making good power while loafing at low RPM.

Sounds like you'd enjoy electric. Nothing like 443 lb-ft at 0 rpm.

Here's part of the problem... MPG:

Sonata 2.0T: 22/34

Fusion 2.0T: 22/33

Altima V6: 22/31

Accord V6: 21/34

Camry V6: 21/31

Malibu 2.0T: 21/30

Altima 2.5: 27/38

Accord 2.4: 27/36

Camry 2.5: 25/35

Fusion 1.6: 24/37

Sonata 2.4: 24/35

Malibu 2.5: 22/34

Accord Hybrid: 49/45

Fusion Hybrid: 47/47

Camry Hybrid: 43/39

Malibu Eco: 25/37

conspicuously absent in your comparison are the combined EPA numbers, which are actually the closest to what real world drivers get. True, the Malibu in some cases is like 2 mpg short in combined, but the major takeaway here is no one consistently gets EPA highway, so we should see comparos on the combined as well.

also curiously absent on your list are the legacy and passat, both of which get worse mpg than the malibu. both sell in sizeable numbers.

all of those cars with higher mpg do achieve their greater numbers primarily through less weight of structure and sound deadening removal.

Combined numbers are made up of city and highway numbers, 55% and 45% respectively. Malibu is lowest for both types of driving, so the order would remain.

I only included midsize sedans from high-volume automakers. I did forget Avenger/200, so I guess Malibu is second to lowest.

Here's part of the problem... MPG:

Sonata 2.0T: 22/34

Fusion 2.0T: 22/33

Altima V6: 22/31

Accord V6: 21/34

Camry V6: 21/31

Malibu 2.0T: 21/30

Altima 2.5: 27/38

Accord 2.4: 27/36

Camry 2.5: 25/35

Fusion 1.6: 24/37

Sonata 2.4: 24/35

Malibu 2.5: 22/34

Accord Hybrid: 49/45

Fusion Hybrid: 47/47

Camry Hybrid: 43/39

Malibu Eco: 25/37

good mpg on that audi diesel but if you are buying or leasing that expensive a car, you are not really getting diesel for the money you'd supposedly save on fuel. there is likely a good niche market for luxury diesels for those who just dig diesels.

It's not just fuel savings but less depreciation as well. The E and ML Bluetecs have a higher residual than the gas equivalents, so despite a higher MSRP, they have lower lease payments.

How much incentives has VW put on the hood of A8s in the past- on pace with mercedes' $13,000 s-class incentive?

Would also be interesting to see the fleet sales of the A8 - likely over 50% worldwide.

An article you might find interesting: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-02/audi-defies-demand-drop-as-companies-give-workers-wheels-cars.html

The vast majority of luxury cars sold in Germany, Audi's second largest market, are company cars. Most private citizens can't afford a $100K car after VAT. In China, Audi's largest market, about a third of Audis go into government fleets.

Model S deliveries seem to be ramping up! I've been seeing at least two new ones everyday. The one I spotted today was Gray, and even with the standard 19" wheels, it looks great.

Also saw an Alfa Giulietta with a camo'ed Chrysler/Lancia front end and manufacturer plates.

BMW's N20 motor is really the only turbo four that works: high real world MPG, linear power delivery from idle to redline, zero lag, and pleasing engine note. At idle, it's a bit clattery, but that's the price of direct injection.

The whole point of the FR-S is how it feels on the road: the steering feel, the chassis setup, the gearbox, and yes, revving the hell out of that engine. A RAV4 engine would completely change the character of this pocket-sized sports car.

eAssist isn't horrible; it's just that most of its full-hybrid competitors are way more efficient and no more expensive.

Just an eample. I have made many trips Cleveland to Columbus and back, Cleveland to Indy and back. San Deigo to LA and back in one day. more than one. These are all out of the Tesla S range. Even my trips from LA to San Fran in two days could not be done with out adding at the least one full day to recharge to complete the run.

Many here on the east coast have made the run to the resorts off the coast of NC and SC these would no longer be one day runs. Many have also done the 1-2 day runs to FL and those are gone.

With air fair going up again these are common car trips. While even I have never drove east to west I and many have gone North and South on each coast.

I could not count the many trips from San Deigo to LA and back I have in one day and with the travel miles plus my driving in LA I could not do it. 400 miles are easy to rack up and then have to find a place to plug in for over 12 hours is not always in the cards even in LA.

The option of High miles and having a car that will not hold you up no matter what for 12 hours if you can find a charging station let alone one that is open.

We must consider many may have an interest in an electric cars but it must not alture their life in what they precieve as a negitive way. Time is money.

SD to LA is 121 miles according to Google Maps. With a 265 mile range, Model S will do a round trip.

As for LA to SF, that's 382 miles. But there are two solar-powered Supercharger locations along I-5 that will give you 150 miles of charge in half an hour, the time it takes to eat lunch. More Superchargers will be built across the country, so eventually you'll be able to drive from coast to coast for free.

http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger

It is not 121 in the real world if you drive from La Mesa to Santa Barbra and make side trip to other points like Pomona and the like. I have racked up more than 400 miles in one day just traveling between the metro areas and the surrounding areas. In Ohio the range would be lower with the colder months.

If you ake use of the superchargers or fastr charge on any electric car your battery life will be reduced much faster. These are only quick fixes and should only be used now and then.

I have done Indy in one day many times and it is 500 miles [go figure] to from my drive way to the speedway. on a long day like this the first problem is no charging stations here and the second in a day that I will be up 22 hours I have little time to sit for a half our on the way home.

Same here for going to Charlotte or Martinsville to the races. It is nothing for us to drive to Charlotte NC and then to Martinsville in one day from Ohio. Often we go back to Mt Airy to spend the night.

I know these are examples of race track trips but many others here do the same to Virgina Beach, Mertle Beach and many other vacation spots. East of the Mississippi many of these are day trips. That go well beyond the range of the car and most of us seldom stop to even eat for 30 min.

While things are not bad on these new EV cars they are still not there range wise or charging time wise with out hurting the battery. As for charging stations here in the east they are not poping up fast and they will be few in numbers for a good while. What do you do if the rare one you find has a line of more than one car?

In general peple today are in a instant world and nothing can be gotten of done fast enough. The gas car has set a standard and untill the other types of vehicles can match or beat them in all areas they will remain only a slow growth market. Growing but slow.

As of now the Volt has the only system I could live with in a vehilcle that is used for more than just driving to work.

The one thing we have yet to see is how the public reacts once the battery is gone. How will they deal with a car that is used up as the battery cost is not cheap and the car is worthless with out one. WIth that many miles what do you do? Do you spend the money on a worn out car or do you just trash the car when the battery is gone. This will effect cars like the leaf more since it was cheap. The Volt you could continue at the least driving it. The Teslas higher cost may make the new battery a better option. The Leaf in 10 years would just need to be raked up and burned.

If you drive 400 miles per day on a routine basis, then the Model S isn't for you. For the 99.9% of the population who don't, then it's a fine car that will deal with all sorts of real world driving conditions and easily handle the occasional day trip thanks to its network of Superchargers.

Chances are, if you can afford a $60K luxury car, the time costs of spending 8 hours on the road in a day are too great. Six hours are about the limit for me, and even so, I'd need to stop for food. Anymore than that -- I'm flying.

It's still cheaper than all its competitors.

Grand Cherokee Limited 3.6: $37,595
Grand Cherokee Limited EcoDiesel: $42,095

difference = $4,500

Touareg V6 Sport: $43,945
Touareg TDI Sport: $47,445

difference = $3,500

Q7 TFSI Premium: $46,800
Q7 TDI Premium: $52,000

difference = $5,200

ML350: $47,270
ML350 BlueTEC: $51,270

difference = $4,000

Cayenne: $48,850
Cayenne Diesel: $55,750

difference = $6,900

X5 xDrive35i: $52,800 (w/ leather, convenience pkg, heated seats, power hatch, PDC)
X5 xDrive35d: $56,700 (standard equipment includes above options)

difference = $3,900

(None of the prices above include destination.)

Just an eample. I have made many trips Cleveland to Columbus and back, Cleveland to Indy and back. San Deigo to LA and back in one day. more than one. These are all out of the Tesla S range. Even my trips from LA to San Fran in two days could not be done with out adding at the least one full day to recharge to complete the run.

Many here on the east coast have made the run to the resorts off the coast of NC and SC these would no longer be one day runs. Many have also done the 1-2 day runs to FL and those are gone.

With air fair going up again these are common car trips. While even I have never drove east to west I and many have gone North and South on each coast.

I could not count the many trips from San Deigo to LA and back I have in one day and with the travel miles plus my driving in LA I could not do it. 400 miles are easy to rack up and then have to find a place to plug in for over 12 hours is not always in the cards even in LA.

The option of High miles and having a car that will not hold you up no matter what for 12 hours if you can find a charging station let alone one that is open.

We must consider many may have an interest in an electric cars but it must not alture their life in what they precieve as a negitive way. Time is money.

SD to LA is 121 miles according to Google Maps. With a 265 mile range, Model S will do a round trip.

As for LA to SF, that's 382 miles. But there are two solar-powered Supercharger locations along I-5 that will give you 150 miles of charge in half an hour, the time it takes to eat lunch. More Superchargers will be built across the country, so eventually you'll be able to drive from coast to coast for free.

http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger

Tesla Model S can go up to 300 miles on a charge though, and the top line one has 0-60 times like a CTS-V. That thing is fast. The ELR is not fast, and yes it can drive 400 miles or so with gas, but then it is just a gas burning car. If you are going to burn gas, just buy an ATS and save $20,000, and the ATS has better handling and acceleration.

I know GM needs to expand the models using Voltec/Delta II and that is why this car is here. But Cadillac has other needs and I'd rather seem them put the time and money into the cars they need and not low volume vanity projects.

I guess you have no clue of the 10 models they are already working on and will have out buy 2016. I see no issue with this car taking much away.

The S cost with all options are $105,000 and would not make it across country in less than a week. You might get to 60 fast but it may take you a lot longer to get to California.

Also from what I have read the fit and finish of the Tesla in Autoweek is very poor for the price paid.

Neither car is the answer but the ELR is more inline with working with the daily driving needs and single car needs of the real world driver.

Cadillac will not only offer the market the ELR but we will also have a nice choice of the ATS, New CTS and LTS. Next the new Escalade, SRX and small SUV to be anouncesd. There will be more than just these according to the reports.

People who need to travel across the U.S. usually fly. The Model S's range is plenty for any sane human being with a bladder.

Agreed on leasing..buying new only makes sense if you are going to keep a car for a decade, IMO. Do they have 6 month leases that would accomodate ocn, though?

Sell to CarMax. Voila.

I know you love EVs, blu, so I thought I'd be helpful and suggest the awesome Ford Focus Electric, which I'd totally get if I were in your shoes and wanted something fun and economical.

Basically a $39,995 car, sale price of $27,245, residual of $17,998 after 3 years, 15K mi/year. Including interest (0.3% with Ford Credit Lease), it's $280/month with $0 down payment and bank fee rolled in.

Now here comes to fun part. Electricity is cheap in PA, what, 7 cents a kWh? Focus Electric uses 15 kWh per 48 miles, or $1.05 for your round trip commute. 23 working days a month, so $24/month on electricity.

How much are you paying for depreciation in the Patriot? For gasoline alone, at 23 MPG and $3.50/gal, that's $7.30/day or $168/month.

And it's fun. Weeeeee:

I hear the new Fusions lease pretty well, by the way.

Hypothetical situation: you travel a good distance 5 days a week by car to and from your job. You are in the market for a new vehicle.

Do you buy an inexpensive, economical vehicle since higher mileage at trade-in tends to affect resale value, and you know you'll take a hit, so why not get into a "throw-away" vehicle with a modicum of comfort and fun for the weekends?

Or do you go with something bigger, nicer and more expensive BECAUSE you spend so much time in your vehicle, and that time should be spent in something with bells and whistles to make the slog more enjoyable and the weekends even more so?

Seeking opinions.

At the rate you go through cars, ocnblu, I'd lease new. I know folks who think it's a bad idea, but if you know what you're doing, and you choose the right car, it could be very rational. There's really no point to buying new if you sell your car within 3 years:

1. A lease is basically paying for depreciation and interest over the lease period.

2. You take on a much smaller debt liability.

3. If the residual is higher than market rate after 3 years, you win: you paid less in depreciation than purchasing.

4. Even with leases, you have equity in your car. So if the residual was too conservative, you can have CarMax buy out your lease and you pocket the difference.

Also, if you get huge discounts, the effective depreciation for some cars is less over the first 2 years than later into its life. My folks leased an E350 BlueTec:

$60,000 MSRP

$49,800 selling price

$44,400 residual (2 years, 10k mi/yr)

= $5,400 depreciation + $1,560 interest = $6,960 over 2 years

= $290/month + 9% tax = $315/month

This was a $0 down payment lease, just first month payment, bank fee ($795), registration, and maximum security deposits due at signing. The point is that with all these discounts applied over a relatively short period, there's actually very little in the way of depreciation compared to a longer term lease. And this means buying used isn't always cheaper, because effective depreciation may be greater 2+ years into the car's life.

Really the best part of a lease is flexibility and assurance. I purchased my Focus for $21K OTD, which is now worth $14K at trade-in after 13 months. That's $538/month in depreciation; if I were to lease for 24 months, it would be closer to $200/month. Not wanting to take that hit, I'm stuck with the car for years, well past its warranty period for it to make any financial sense.

Why take out a huge loan to finance a car, sell it, and pay off the loan when you could just pay for the depreciation and interest directly? The former sounds like a huge risk to me. Plus, in most states, you only pay taxes for your lease payment, as opposed to the entire car.

said she could accept a Cadillac for her personal transportation.

So Cadillac has become "acceptable" transportation and not aspirational.

About the XLR being an underpowered, overpriced Corvette, one could argue that the ELR is an overpriced and underpowered ATS coupe. The ELR may have a better looking grille than the ATS, but the ATS isn't stuck with FWD proportions and overhangs.

You gotta wonder if Ford can make a plug-in Fusion for about $10k more than an SEL trim car, why not just make a plug-in ATS for $55k.

ATS starts at $30K and looks more homely than ELR. A plug-in version of that car will flop. At that price, buyers are looking for vanity, and ELR delivers.

I actually like the proportions of ELR; it's almost like a MR car.

It should at least outsell the $76K XLR, which, at its peak, had 3,700 annual sales.

The problem here is that truck owners are already a closed-minded bunch. Brand loyalty is huge and it'll be hard to dissuade them from sticking with a tried-and-true diesel or gas V8 drivetrain, as evidenced by the low adoption of GM's hybrid system. Factor in reliability concerns that truck owners will undoubtedly have about plug-in's and it pretty much equals a 'no sale.'

If GM put a Volt-Tec drivetrain into a truck, I'd doubt it'd have gotten the traction the Volt has.

Methinks Maximum Lutz is trying to minimize the Volt for his own gain.

Agreed. I don't know why the Big 3 won't offer a ~3 liter diesel for full-sized trucks and SUVs.

I've driven a GL350 BlueTEC, and it seems to have all the motor one would ever need: 3.0L V6, 240-hp, 455 lb-ft. The curb weight is 5,800 lb, it does 0-60 in 7.5 seconds, and it gets 19/26 MPG.