While General Motors has focused its green vehicle efforts on the Chevy Volt, Chrysler has shown no less than five electric and extended-range electric cars on the auto show circuit this year. Electric versions of the Jeep Wrangler and Patriot SUVs and the Chrysler Town & Country minivan have made the rounds, alongside a concept midsize sedan called the 200C and a sporty two-seat electric car known as the Dodge Circuit. The automaker has been telling the press for months that it planned to build one of the cars in 2010, but has stayed silent on which car would see production.
Now we have our answer. CNN Money reports, "Chrysler's first electric car, set to be introduced late next year around the same time as General Motors' Chevrolet Volt, will be a sports car with a zero-to-60 time of under five seconds and a top speed of 120 miles per hour." The Dodge Circuit will be released as a 2011 model.
If Chrysler survives, the Circuit may just be the first of many. CNN reports, "Following that...will come electric-powered cars, SUVs and crossovers, some based on Fiat vehicles, according to the ‘viability plan' Chrysler submitted to the Treasury Department."
PC Magazine adds, "No price range has been given yet. But that design," along with the performance figures Chrysler has quoted for the vehicle, "would put Chrysler's car in a virtual dead heat with the Tesla Roadster. Chrysler is even sourcing the chassis from Lotus, the same company that provided the platform design for Tesla's two-seat sports car."
In a way, however, the Circuit is the least ambitious choice Chrysler could have made. There is a limited demand for tiny, two-seat sports cars. Chrysler would likely build only a few thousand Circuits. The other possibilities would have all likely sold in much higher quantities.
If you're in the market for a new car, check out the U.S. News rankings of this year's best cars as well as this month's best car deals.
source: http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/daily-news/090417-Chrysler-s-First-Electric-Car-Will-Be-Sporty-Dodge-Circuit/
Car registrations drop in D.C.
by Tierney Plumb Staff Reporter
A sharp 5.8 percent decline in registered cars in D.C. since 2005 suggests that more city residents are choosing not to cruise around town -- even as population and household income have gone up.
Car registrations were up, however, in surrounding jurisdictions, which caused the rate to increase by 3.5 percent in the D.C. area since 2005, according to data compiled by the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board.
In local areas of Maryland there was a 3-percent jump in registrations and Virginia’s registrations were up 5.6 percent.
Beginning in 2005, a vehicle identification number decoder has been applied to vehicle registration data so that the planning board can look at the types of cars that drive around the region.
Before 2004, the percentage of passenger cars relative to sport utility vehicles had been dropping for each model year, resulting in an almost equal share of new vehicle purchases.
But that trend has since ended, and passenger cars now claim 60 percent of new purchases to 40 percent for SUVs.
The planning board’s figures suggest that the area’s fleet has gotten older since 2005, and the increase in car age is even greater for light trucks, SUVs, and heavy trucks than for passenger cars.
Mobile source emissions will increase as a result of fewer new cars being purchased, says the planning board.
The number of hybrids rolling around have increased more than threefold, but they only make up 1.5 percent of the entire region’s fleet. That’s not enough to offset the increased emissions of older vehicles.
D.C. offers incentives to new hybrid buyers, like a slashed registration fee for the first period of registration.
The data sources for the report include vehicle registration data as of July 1, 2008 from the D.C. Department of Motor Vehicles, Maryland Motor Vehicle Administration, and Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles.
A sharp 5.8 percent decline in registered cars in D.C. since 2005 suggests that more city residents are choosing not to cruise around town -- even as population and household income have gone up.
Car registrations were up, however, in surrounding jurisdictions, which caused the rate to increase by 3.5 percent in the D.C. area since 2005, according to data compiled by the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board.
In local areas of Maryland there was a 3-percent jump in registrations and Virginia’s registrations were up 5.6 percent.
Beginning in 2005, a vehicle identification number decoder has been applied to vehicle registration data so that the planning board can look at the types of cars that drive around the region.
Before 2004, the percentage of passenger cars relative to sport utility vehicles had been dropping for each model year, resulting in an almost equal share of new vehicle purchases.
But that trend has since ended, and passenger cars now claim 60 percent of new purchases to 40 percent for SUVs.
The planning board’s figures suggest that the area’s fleet has gotten older since 2005, and the increase in car age is even greater for light trucks, SUVs, and heavy trucks than for passenger cars.
Mobile source emissions will increase as a result of fewer new cars being purchased, says the planning board.
The number of hybrids rolling around have increased more than threefold, but they only make up 1.5 percent of the entire region’s fleet. That’s not enough to offset the increased emissions of older vehicles.
D.C. offers incentives to new hybrid buyers, like a slashed registration fee for the first period of registration.
The data sources for the report include vehicle registration data as of July 1, 2008 from the D.C. Department of Motor Vehicles, Maryland Motor Vehicle Administration, and Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles.
Hybrid Hummer Promises 100 Miles per Gallon
Posted by: superscientist
The Hummer is the poster child of excess consumption and inefficiency, but a Utah company is converting the much-maligned SUVs into a range-extended electric vehicle good for 100 mpg and a range of 40 miles.
Raser Technologies will unveil the Raser H3 on Monday in Detroit. It promises a 90 mph top speed, off-road capability and a lithium ion-battery you can recharge in as little as three hours. What's more, the company says the drivetrain can be installed in other trucks and it hopes to have 2,000 converted vehicles on the road by the end of next year.
That's a tall order, and there is no shortage of companies promising us wonder cars with miraculous fuel economy and impressive range. But Raser is taking a different approach. It isn't building a car from scratch like Aptera Motors or Lightning Hybrids. Instead, it's essentially cribbing from the Chevrolet Volt and Fisker Karma to convert existing vehicles with off-the-shelf parts.
"We've taken the worst environmental offender on the road and made it greener than a Prius," David West, the company's vice president of marketing, told Wired.com. "It truly is incredible to see and hear a Hummer that truly hums."
Because SUVs are popular but get lousy fuel economy, they're great candidates for electrification, said Jim Spellman, company vice president. Spellman came to Raser from General Motors, where he worked on the Chevrolet Tahoe hybrid.
"SUVs and trucks are the number one selling vehicle in America," he said. "Unlike the Prius, which is a mild hybrid vehicle, an eco-friendly SUV will get people's attention."
Spellman says there are practical reasons as well: Trucks are big enough to package the gasoline engine, electric motor and lithium-ion batteries without radically altering the bodywork or designing an all-new vehicle.
"Unlike the Volt and other hybrid cars we didn't have to build an entire car around the battery packs," Spellman said. "There was plenty of room in the back of the Hummer to install them, and they don't affect the ground clearance of the vehicle."
Raser Technologies has been building electric motors and developing geothermal electric plants since 2003, and Spellman says it started "cutting steel" on the H3 prototype 15 months ago.
The prototype we'll see in Detroit at the Society of Automotive Engineers World Congress on Monday features a series-hybrid drive train similar to the Voltec system in the Chevrolet Volt. Like the Volt, the H3 will be driven solely by electricity. The engine -- the 260-horsepower 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder used in the Pontiac Solstice -- will drive a 100-kilowatt generator to recharge the three lithium-ion battery packs. Fisker Automotive is using the same engine in its Karma range-extended EV.
All together the battery packs have a combined capacity of 40 kilowatt hours and total weight of 600 pounds. Raser claims a recharge time of between 3 and 10 hours, depending upon the voltage of the outlet the batteries are plugged into.
For the sake of comparison, the Volt uses a 16-kWh pack that weighs 375 pounds, while the Tesla Roadster has a 53-kWh pack weighing 992 pounds.
Tying it all together is something Raser calls the Hybrid Master Controller, which is a fancy name for the software that manages the engine, generator, motor and batteries. It was designed by FEV, a hybrid drive train engineering firm that is working on a range-extended EV based on the Dodge Caliber. General Motors provided some expertise along the way, said GM spokesman Kyle Johnson.
"We're well aware of this project," Johnson said. "We helped them with some of the electronics integration and did some consulting."
Getting all the hardware to fit required modifying the Hummer's chassis. The transmission was moved back, the drive shafts altered and the exhaust re-routed. The Raser H3 also has a smaller fuel tank -- 11 gallons instead of 22 -- and it's been moved to make room for the batteries, which are mounted under the vehicle near the rear axle. Despite the mods, Raser says the vehicle doesn't lose any of its off-road utility.
West says production will begin "soon" and the company hopes to have 2,000 vehicles in the form of SUVs and trucks on the road by the end of 2010. He says Pacific Gas & Electric has requested two of them.
No word yet on how the project will be funded or what the vehicle will cost. Raser promises more details when the vehicle is unveiled Monday.
Photos: David West / Raser Technologies. Used with permission.
Above: The Raser H3 uses a turbocharged 2.0-liter gasoline engine to drive a 100-kilowatt generator, which recharges the lithium ion batteries as they approach depletion. It's the same engine Fisker Automotive is using in the Karma range-extended electric vehicle.
Above: Raser says it started with the Hummer H3 because it's big enough to package a gasoline engine, an electric motor, three battery packs and the control unit without extensive modifications.
The Volt will get roughly 40-50 mpg after the battery is discharged enough to cause the range extender to kick in.
This thing weighs, what, twice what a Volt will weigh? At least. And has lousy aerodynamics. It's going to get 100 mpg?
Only by making silly assumptions. Like, counting trips under 40 miles as free mileage. (It isn't, and there are appropriate ways to convert it to mpg-equivalence.) And figuring users will only use the vehicle in certain ways - like, 90% of all use will be on battery alone (which you've already counted as free).
That thing will never get more than 20 mpg on the range extender. If that much.
The EPA needs to get cracking and establish some mileage rules for plug-in hybrids, methinks. The fog is getting mighty thick.
It's got a gasoline engine so it can recharge on the go. and it's STILL only good for 40 miles? That's what you consider to be "range-extended"?
Sounds to me like a really good reason NOT to start with a pig of a SUV like the H3.
No matter what they do, it's still ugly as it ever was, still will drive like the military vehicle is based on, and is still a hazard to anyone in a 'reasonable' size vehicle. I'll still flip off every one I see no matter what kind of mpg is gets.
This is the same misguided idea as thinking a hummer with Bio Diesel is green. Sorry guys but CO2 is CO2 if it comes from gas or vegetable oil and therefore polutes the environment alike. What it does is just taking away the Bio Diesel from better usages.
And just to remind everyone that most of our electricity on the grid is provided by firing coal and so electricity from the grid is NOT green and will produce CO2, too.
Posted by: Anddreas Schaefer | Apr 17, 2009 3:31:31 PM
Well, it isn't very clear, agreed, what the "range" of 40 miles really means. But, the comparison numbers from the Volt and Tesla are illuminating. This thing has a combined battery pack capacity 2.5 times that of the Volt. If you make the simple assumption that this thing weighs twice as much as the Volt, you could expect it to go further on charge alone than the Volt. However, it clearly is vastly inferior in terms of drag, so you might reduce your expectation to roughly matching the Volt's 40 miles range.
This is probably the claim they are making with that "range" of 40 miles.
Agreed that the equivalent mpg numbers are becoming meaningless. A cents per mile figure would be better, with an agreed-upon set of factors such as price per gallon of gas, and price per kWh of leccy.
I completely agree. There is no way in hell this thing would get anywhere near 100MPG. The only explanation is that they are talking about an average MPG one would get while taking a trip of a fixed distance, say 100 miles or so. Then they divide the miles traveled by the gallons of gasoline used --- obviously disingenuous when the first 40 miles are all electric.
However, considering most people don't exceed 50-60 miles per day except on road trips, the vehicle probably would get the equivalent of 100 or more "MPG" on an average work day commute.
That said, the electricity required to travel x amount of miles is far cheaper than the equivalent amount of gasoline, and even more so when the vehicle is charged at night during off-peak hours.
No, the vehicle goes 40 miles on electricity alone before needing to even start the generator.
He's absolutely right. The range needs to be at least . 3 times as far. What is this, a hummer for ants?!?
Yes! Finnally, someone is looking at the buying trend of the public! We want the SUV's -- not the dinky ecofriendly smart@$$ tin cans the enviro-weenies want on the road. Yes it could go into something a little more aerodynamic, but as a proof of concept that fits the market and can be scaled to get profit, its not a bad start. I (and a lot of people I know) have need for something big. With six kids and one with a wheelchair you need a serious vehicle for the road. Anything I can get outta this type of package is gonna be better than the 8mpg 350cid I get now. Its just too bad that I'll have to take out a second mortgage to get it.
When a car takes two "fuels" you can't quote one of them and ignore the other. They should give miles/kWh and miles/gallon.
And, kilowatts are not free. At an average cost of $0.11/kWh a Volt which takes 16 kWh for a full charge costs $1.76 to charge. That sounds good, but only get you 40 miles before the gas engine kicks in.
Looks like the internal cargo area won't be affected by the extra equipment, but can it really go off-roading or tow a huge boat as well as the normal IC version? Isn't that the argument for average people buying these things? I mean, no one buys a hummer because of ego or some self image problem right?
Hybrid, shmybrid. The future of propulsion is in perpetual motion. PayPal me $5 and I'll send you my brochure.
source: http://carjake.com/hybrid-hummer-promises-100-miles-per-gallon
The Hummer is the poster child of excess consumption and inefficiency, but a Utah company is converting the much-maligned SUVs into a range-extended electric vehicle good for 100 mpg and a range of 40 miles.
Raser Technologies will unveil the Raser H3 on Monday in Detroit. It promises a 90 mph top speed, off-road capability and a lithium ion-battery you can recharge in as little as three hours. What's more, the company says the drivetrain can be installed in other trucks and it hopes to have 2,000 converted vehicles on the road by the end of next year.
That's a tall order, and there is no shortage of companies promising us wonder cars with miraculous fuel economy and impressive range. But Raser is taking a different approach. It isn't building a car from scratch like Aptera Motors or Lightning Hybrids. Instead, it's essentially cribbing from the Chevrolet Volt and Fisker Karma to convert existing vehicles with off-the-shelf parts.
"We've taken the worst environmental offender on the road and made it greener than a Prius," David West, the company's vice president of marketing, told Wired.com. "It truly is incredible to see and hear a Hummer that truly hums."
Because SUVs are popular but get lousy fuel economy, they're great candidates for electrification, said Jim Spellman, company vice president. Spellman came to Raser from General Motors, where he worked on the Chevrolet Tahoe hybrid.
"SUVs and trucks are the number one selling vehicle in America," he said. "Unlike the Prius, which is a mild hybrid vehicle, an eco-friendly SUV will get people's attention."
Spellman says there are practical reasons as well: Trucks are big enough to package the gasoline engine, electric motor and lithium-ion batteries without radically altering the bodywork or designing an all-new vehicle.
"Unlike the Volt and other hybrid cars we didn't have to build an entire car around the battery packs," Spellman said. "There was plenty of room in the back of the Hummer to install them, and they don't affect the ground clearance of the vehicle."
Raser Technologies has been building electric motors and developing geothermal electric plants since 2003, and Spellman says it started "cutting steel" on the H3 prototype 15 months ago.
The prototype we'll see in Detroit at the Society of Automotive Engineers World Congress on Monday features a series-hybrid drive train similar to the Voltec system in the Chevrolet Volt. Like the Volt, the H3 will be driven solely by electricity. The engine -- the 260-horsepower 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder used in the Pontiac Solstice -- will drive a 100-kilowatt generator to recharge the three lithium-ion battery packs. Fisker Automotive is using the same engine in its Karma range-extended EV.
All together the battery packs have a combined capacity of 40 kilowatt hours and total weight of 600 pounds. Raser claims a recharge time of between 3 and 10 hours, depending upon the voltage of the outlet the batteries are plugged into.
For the sake of comparison, the Volt uses a 16-kWh pack that weighs 375 pounds, while the Tesla Roadster has a 53-kWh pack weighing 992 pounds.
Tying it all together is something Raser calls the Hybrid Master Controller, which is a fancy name for the software that manages the engine, generator, motor and batteries. It was designed by FEV, a hybrid drive train engineering firm that is working on a range-extended EV based on the Dodge Caliber. General Motors provided some expertise along the way, said GM spokesman Kyle Johnson.
"We're well aware of this project," Johnson said. "We helped them with some of the electronics integration and did some consulting."
Getting all the hardware to fit required modifying the Hummer's chassis. The transmission was moved back, the drive shafts altered and the exhaust re-routed. The Raser H3 also has a smaller fuel tank -- 11 gallons instead of 22 -- and it's been moved to make room for the batteries, which are mounted under the vehicle near the rear axle. Despite the mods, Raser says the vehicle doesn't lose any of its off-road utility.
West says production will begin "soon" and the company hopes to have 2,000 vehicles in the form of SUVs and trucks on the road by the end of 2010. He says Pacific Gas & Electric has requested two of them.
No word yet on how the project will be funded or what the vehicle will cost. Raser promises more details when the vehicle is unveiled Monday.
Photos: David West / Raser Technologies. Used with permission.
Above: The Raser H3 uses a turbocharged 2.0-liter gasoline engine to drive a 100-kilowatt generator, which recharges the lithium ion batteries as they approach depletion. It's the same engine Fisker Automotive is using in the Karma range-extended electric vehicle.
Above: Raser says it started with the Hummer H3 because it's big enough to package a gasoline engine, an electric motor, three battery packs and the control unit without extensive modifications.
The Volt will get roughly 40-50 mpg after the battery is discharged enough to cause the range extender to kick in.
This thing weighs, what, twice what a Volt will weigh? At least. And has lousy aerodynamics. It's going to get 100 mpg?
Only by making silly assumptions. Like, counting trips under 40 miles as free mileage. (It isn't, and there are appropriate ways to convert it to mpg-equivalence.) And figuring users will only use the vehicle in certain ways - like, 90% of all use will be on battery alone (which you've already counted as free).
That thing will never get more than 20 mpg on the range extender. If that much.
The EPA needs to get cracking and establish some mileage rules for plug-in hybrids, methinks. The fog is getting mighty thick.
It's got a gasoline engine so it can recharge on the go. and it's STILL only good for 40 miles? That's what you consider to be "range-extended"?
Sounds to me like a really good reason NOT to start with a pig of a SUV like the H3.
No matter what they do, it's still ugly as it ever was, still will drive like the military vehicle is based on, and is still a hazard to anyone in a 'reasonable' size vehicle. I'll still flip off every one I see no matter what kind of mpg is gets.
This is the same misguided idea as thinking a hummer with Bio Diesel is green. Sorry guys but CO2 is CO2 if it comes from gas or vegetable oil and therefore polutes the environment alike. What it does is just taking away the Bio Diesel from better usages.
And just to remind everyone that most of our electricity on the grid is provided by firing coal and so electricity from the grid is NOT green and will produce CO2, too.
Posted by: Anddreas Schaefer | Apr 17, 2009 3:31:31 PM
Well, it isn't very clear, agreed, what the "range" of 40 miles really means. But, the comparison numbers from the Volt and Tesla are illuminating. This thing has a combined battery pack capacity 2.5 times that of the Volt. If you make the simple assumption that this thing weighs twice as much as the Volt, you could expect it to go further on charge alone than the Volt. However, it clearly is vastly inferior in terms of drag, so you might reduce your expectation to roughly matching the Volt's 40 miles range.
This is probably the claim they are making with that "range" of 40 miles.
Agreed that the equivalent mpg numbers are becoming meaningless. A cents per mile figure would be better, with an agreed-upon set of factors such as price per gallon of gas, and price per kWh of leccy.
I completely agree. There is no way in hell this thing would get anywhere near 100MPG. The only explanation is that they are talking about an average MPG one would get while taking a trip of a fixed distance, say 100 miles or so. Then they divide the miles traveled by the gallons of gasoline used --- obviously disingenuous when the first 40 miles are all electric.
However, considering most people don't exceed 50-60 miles per day except on road trips, the vehicle probably would get the equivalent of 100 or more "MPG" on an average work day commute.
That said, the electricity required to travel x amount of miles is far cheaper than the equivalent amount of gasoline, and even more so when the vehicle is charged at night during off-peak hours.
No, the vehicle goes 40 miles on electricity alone before needing to even start the generator.
He's absolutely right. The range needs to be at least . 3 times as far. What is this, a hummer for ants?!?
Yes! Finnally, someone is looking at the buying trend of the public! We want the SUV's -- not the dinky ecofriendly smart@$$ tin cans the enviro-weenies want on the road. Yes it could go into something a little more aerodynamic, but as a proof of concept that fits the market and can be scaled to get profit, its not a bad start. I (and a lot of people I know) have need for something big. With six kids and one with a wheelchair you need a serious vehicle for the road. Anything I can get outta this type of package is gonna be better than the 8mpg 350cid I get now. Its just too bad that I'll have to take out a second mortgage to get it.
When a car takes two "fuels" you can't quote one of them and ignore the other. They should give miles/kWh and miles/gallon.
And, kilowatts are not free. At an average cost of $0.11/kWh a Volt which takes 16 kWh for a full charge costs $1.76 to charge. That sounds good, but only get you 40 miles before the gas engine kicks in.
Looks like the internal cargo area won't be affected by the extra equipment, but can it really go off-roading or tow a huge boat as well as the normal IC version? Isn't that the argument for average people buying these things? I mean, no one buys a hummer because of ego or some self image problem right?
Hybrid, shmybrid. The future of propulsion is in perpetual motion. PayPal me $5 and I'll send you my brochure.
source: http://carjake.com/hybrid-hummer-promises-100-miles-per-gallon
Top 5: Car colours for 2009
By Jodi Lai, National Post
Judging a book by its cover and judging a car by its colour are no different. Different colours say different things about the drivers who pick them and can sometimes make or break the appeal and longevity of a car.
Could you imagine a Ferarri that isn't red? We see yellow and black ones occasionally, but they get snubbed by hardcore Ferarri fanatics.
Do you remember the hideous vomit-coloured BMW M3? BMW's colour choice was the laughing stock of the entire automotive community when it was released. Silver is a classic Porsche colour and British cars almost always have to be dark green. Also, if you drive a white or blue Impala or Town Car, people will think you're a police officer.
According to DuPont Automotive's Colour Popularity Report, white is still the top choice, holding 20% of the North American market, while silver and black are tied at 17%. Blue is making a strong comeback, according to the report, coming in at 13%. Grey stands at 12% while red is at 11%, beiges and brown at 5%, green at 3%, yellow and gold at 2% and other colours filling in less than 1%.
Cars with metallic paint are worth more than cars with flat colours and usually demand a premium in dealer showrooms. Metallic cars are said to sell faster as used cars, and could be worth more than a flat-coloured counterpart.
Loud colours such as reds, yellows and oranges are generally more popular on sports cars and compacts, while larger vehicles such as SUVs and trucks, tend to me more neutral.
1. White is probably so popular because it doesn't show dirt and seems more unique than silver. It's also said to be unpretentious, with more buyers of luxury cars opting for unassuming pearly finishes instead of loud colours. Also, light colours act as reflectors, so white cars won't be as hot after sitting in a sunny parking lot all day.
2. Silver also doesn't show dirt and shares many benefits with white-coloured cars. In pouring rain and bad weather conditions, some complain that silver camouflages too easily and is difficult to see.
3. Black has a stealthy look to it, but shows scratches, dirt and dust like a lighthouse in a foggy evening. Black is seen as a sophisticated colour, as a black car generally requires more maintenance to keep it looking fresh. Black also shows off a car's lines more than a silver car.
4. Blue is going to go through a revival this year, according to DuPont. Dark blues are luxurious while lighter blue hues can be fun and playful in compact cars.
5. Grey is often chosen by people who want to get away from the commonality of silver, but crave all the benefits it offers. Grey could be called anything from "gun metal" to "seal grey" with those looking for something more badass opting for the harsher sounding gun metal.
(Photo: So many colours, so little time. Credit: Joe Raedle / Getty Images)
Judging a book by its cover and judging a car by its colour are no different. Different colours say different things about the drivers who pick them and can sometimes make or break the appeal and longevity of a car.
Could you imagine a Ferarri that isn't red? We see yellow and black ones occasionally, but they get snubbed by hardcore Ferarri fanatics.
Do you remember the hideous vomit-coloured BMW M3? BMW's colour choice was the laughing stock of the entire automotive community when it was released. Silver is a classic Porsche colour and British cars almost always have to be dark green. Also, if you drive a white or blue Impala or Town Car, people will think you're a police officer.
According to DuPont Automotive's Colour Popularity Report, white is still the top choice, holding 20% of the North American market, while silver and black are tied at 17%. Blue is making a strong comeback, according to the report, coming in at 13%. Grey stands at 12% while red is at 11%, beiges and brown at 5%, green at 3%, yellow and gold at 2% and other colours filling in less than 1%.
Cars with metallic paint are worth more than cars with flat colours and usually demand a premium in dealer showrooms. Metallic cars are said to sell faster as used cars, and could be worth more than a flat-coloured counterpart.
Loud colours such as reds, yellows and oranges are generally more popular on sports cars and compacts, while larger vehicles such as SUVs and trucks, tend to me more neutral.
1. White is probably so popular because it doesn't show dirt and seems more unique than silver. It's also said to be unpretentious, with more buyers of luxury cars opting for unassuming pearly finishes instead of loud colours. Also, light colours act as reflectors, so white cars won't be as hot after sitting in a sunny parking lot all day.
2. Silver also doesn't show dirt and shares many benefits with white-coloured cars. In pouring rain and bad weather conditions, some complain that silver camouflages too easily and is difficult to see.
3. Black has a stealthy look to it, but shows scratches, dirt and dust like a lighthouse in a foggy evening. Black is seen as a sophisticated colour, as a black car generally requires more maintenance to keep it looking fresh. Black also shows off a car's lines more than a silver car.
4. Blue is going to go through a revival this year, according to DuPont. Dark blues are luxurious while lighter blue hues can be fun and playful in compact cars.
5. Grey is often chosen by people who want to get away from the commonality of silver, but crave all the benefits it offers. Grey could be called anything from "gun metal" to "seal grey" with those looking for something more badass opting for the harsher sounding gun metal.
(Photo: So many colours, so little time. Credit: Joe Raedle / Getty Images)
2010 Nissan Cube: First impression
by Liane Yvkoff
There's something different about the Nissan Cube, and it's not because it's square or has asymmetrical windows. I'm in the driver's seat, and I can't seem to adjust the rear-view mirror to fit the entire rear windshield. Is the mirror smaller than usual? Is the offset window throwing me off? Or am I just not used to driving a car with good rear visibility?
Large asymmetrical windows that wrap around the Cube are the vehicle's signature design feature.
Large asymmetrical windows is one of the Cube's differentiators in the crowded crossover SUV segment. Although they've been doing it for 10 years in Japan, Nissan is a relative latecomer to the box-on-wheels trend in the U.S. with the Scion xB and the Kia Soul already in the mix. To stand out in the square car market, the company seems to have made "quirkiness" their signature on the Cube. A byproduct of this design is that you finally have a car with a rear window big enough that short people can see out of.
Compared to the other box-shaped cars, the Cube has the "edgiest" design. The strong styling is expected to appeal to a decidedly young audience. Marketed as a sort of "apartment on wheels" since much of their demographic is still living with their parents, it's tempting to make the comparison. Although it's shorter and narrower than its direct competitors, the Cube offers a voluminous interior and a decent range of accessories that encourage personalization.
Interior mood lighting is optional, and you can even spring for a shag rug to sit atop the dash. But a home away from home it is not.
The Cube is equipped with versatile 60/40 fold-flat and three-position sliding rear seats, but the vehicle's relatively short length makes it an improbable place to crash for more than a quick nap, unlike other cars, such as the Honda Element which can fit a double mattress. That said, the Cube offers a lot of headroom - more than the Scion xB and the Soul in the front and as much as the Soul in the rear -- giving the car a roomy, open feeling.
Or maybe it's the large wrap around windows on the right side.
The Cube offers sliding 60/40 fold-flat rear seats and storage in the left C-pillar.
But the Cube could stand a bit more purposeful function. There's only one 12-volt charger, and it's in the front. I hate having to decide which of my perpetually low-battery level devices to charge on a trip. The dash-topping shag rug may serve as a conversation piece, as one Nissan spokesperson explained it, but there probably would be even more to talk about if the rug were able to grip the personal electronics that don't really have a home, like cell phones, iPods, and those keyless keys that are still required for push-button ignition.
They may not have executed so well on the apartment-on-wheels concept, but unexpected compartments and accessories definitely inspire the idea of car-as-storage-unit. The Cube sports a built-in pillar storage (read: stash box) and Nissan is selling a lock-box for the well of the truck to store items out of sight.
The dash-topping shag rug is one way drivers can personalize the Cube. But don't expect to get any use out of it.
Bungee cords affixed to the doors can be used to hold small items such as maps, and knobs protrude from the center stack and doors on which to hang things (up to 1.5 kilograms). Finally there's a good place to hang a garbage bag.
Electronics, Nissan marketers say, are important to their targeted buyers. The upgraded stereo system on the SL interfaces with iPods and iPhones. However, I would have preferred actual iPod integration that's easier to use. Nissan explains that their setup is more modular; that it's easier to accommodate the next big thing, which may or may not be iPod-centric. But in the mean time, I couldn't figure out how to select different playlists. In Nissan's defense, I didn't have the manual. The Cube offers an optional navigation system that I didn't get to try. I'm hoping the iPod interfaces better with a screen.
Rolling on the streets, the car didn't turn as many heads as I expected, but I got a few quizzical looks at stop lights with drivers peering down from their SUVs into the smaller ute. Parked and from a distance, I sometimes confused first generation xBs for the Cube.
Door-mounted bungees can help organize loose items in the Cube.
Nissan marketers admit the success of the cube will not be achieved through performance. Zipping around streets? Yes. Racing down them? No. The handling isn't as responsive as other Nissan vehicles, but it's not designed for that. And with a 1.8L 4-cylinder, 122-hp engine, neither is the Cube designed for speed. But it's enough power tooling around the city, and is paired with either a 6-speed manual transmission or Xtronic CVT (Continuously Variable Transmission). On the upside, the short wheelbase and tight turning radius makes it easy to turn around mid-street (not typically legal) to snag an open parking spot.
At $13,990 for the base model, it's almost a couple thousand less than the xB ($15,750), but more expensive than the Soul ($13,300). The competitive price-point also puts it in competition with the other starter cars on the market, such as the Honda Fit ($14,750) or the Toyota Yaris ($12,205). Given the affordable entry price, good mileage (Nissan expects 30 mpg on the highway), forward styling, and spaciousness, the Cube is a great first-time buyer car, but without the starter car feel.
source: http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-10221096-48.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)