2001 Chevrolet Corvette 2dr Cpe on 2040-cars

Auto blog

This map reveals the cleanest vehicles based on location

Naysayers love to point out how dirty the electricity grid mix is when it comes to charging electric vehicles. Curmudgeons are eager to jump into any conversation about EVs to enlighten the lucky listeners about how plug-in cars contribute to pollution, sometimes even throwing in a dash of climate-change denial for good measure. (Thanks, buddy. Pray, tell me more about the plight of oppressed SUV owners.) Unless someone buys an EV just because they think they're cool (which, yeah, they often are), they probably have at least a passable understanding of their environmental pros and cons. As many EV owners are already aware, location has a lot to do with any particular plug-in car's carbon footprint. Still, there's always more to know, and knowledge is not a bad thing, especially if one uses it to do the right thing. That's why this handy-dandy map from Carnegie Mellon University is so interesting. CMU researchers have compiled information about the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of various EVs based on where they're charged, as compared to gasoline-powered vehicles. The researchers looked at the Nissan Leaf, Chevrolet Volt, and Prius Plug-In Hybrid versus the gasoline-dependent Toyota Prius hybrid and the stop-start-equipped Mazda3 with i-ELOOP and compared grams of CO2 emitted per mile. CMU takes into account the grid mix, ambient temperature, and driving patterns. CMU takes into account the grid mix based on county, as well as ambient temperature and driving patterns in terms of miles traveled on the highway or in the city. For instance, if you drive a Nissan Leaf in urban areas of California, Texas, or Florida, your carbon footprint is lower than it would be if you were driving a standard Toyota Prius. However, if you charge your Leaf in the Midwest or the South, for the most part, you've got a larger carbon footprint than the Prius. If you live in the rural Midwest, you'd probably even be better off driving a Mazda3. Throughout the country, the Chevrolet Volt has a larger carbon footprint than the Toyota Prius, but a smaller one than the Mazda3 in a lot of urban counties in the US. The Prius and Prius Plug-In are relatively equal across the US. Having trouble keeping it straight? That's not surprising. The comparisons between plug-in and gasoline vehicles are much more nuanced than the loudest voices usually let on.

Bring back the Bronco! Trademarks we hope are actually (someday) future car names

Trademark filings are the tea leaves of the auto industry. Read them carefully – and interpret them correctly – and you might be previewing an automaker's future product plans. Yes, they're routinely filed to maintain the rights to an iconic name. And sometimes they're only for toys and clothing. But not always. Sometimes, the truth is right in front of us. The trademark is required because a company actually wants to use the name on a new car. With that in mind, here's a list of intriguing trademark filings we want to see go from paperwork to production reality. Trademark: Bronco Company: Ford Previous Use: The Bronco was a long-running SUV that lived from 1966-1996. It's one of America's original SUVs and was responsible for the increased popularity of the segment. Still, it's best known as O.J. Simpson's would-be getaway car. We think: The Bronco was an icon. Everyone seems to want a Wrangler-fighter – Ford used to have a good one. Enough time has passed that the O.J. police chase isn't the immediate image conjured by the Bronco anymore. Even if we're doing a wish list in no particular order, the Bronco still finds its way to the top. For now (unfortunately), it's just federal paperwork. Rumors on this one can get especially heated. The official word from a Ford spokesman is: "Companies renew trademark filings to maintain ownership and control of the mark, even if it is not currently used. Ford values the iconic Bronco name and history." Trademarks: Aviator, AV8R Company: Ford Previous Use: The Aviator was one of the shortest-run Lincolns ever, lasting for the 2003-2005 model years. It never found the sales success of the Ford Explorer, with which it shared a platform. We Think: The Aviator name no longer fits with Lincoln's naming nomenclature. Too bad, it's better than any other name Lincoln currently uses, save for its former big brother, the Navigator. Perhaps we're barking up the wrong tree, though. Ford has made several customized, aviation themed-Mustangs in the past, including one called the Mustang AV8R in 2008, which had cues from the US Air Force's F-22 Raptor fighter jet. It sold for $500,000 at auction, and the glass roof – which is reminiscent of a fighter jet cockpit – helped Ford popularize the feature. Trademark: EcoBeast Company: Ford Previous Use: None by major carmakers.

GM under fire from safety advocates over braking problem caused by recall fix

Safety experts are lambasting General Motors over what they say is the automaker’s slow notification of owners of certain 2019 sedans and trucks that a recall fix could cause power braking to fail and increase the risk of a crash, the Detroit Free Press reports.  GMÂ’s original recall in December targeted about 550,000 Cadillac CT6 sedans and Chevrolet Silverado 1500 and GMC Sierra 1500 pickups, all from the 2019 model year, over potentially defective electronic stability control and antilock brakes. In that case, GM said the errors would not show up as a diagnostic warning on the instrument cluster. But after GM had done recall work on 162,000 vehicles, about 1,700 owner have complained that their power brakes didnÂ’t work after they had the recall done and then used the OnStar app to start their vehicle. GM then issued a supplemental fix for customers whoÂ’d already had their vehicles serviced. In this case, a diagnostic warning should illuminate saying either “Service Brake Assist” or “Service ECS,” which GM says is a signal that a customer should not drive the vehicle and instead call their dealer, which will tow the vehicle and have it repaired. Safety advocates say the automaker hasnÂ’t gone far enough to protect customers. “The fact that you could potentially start a vehicle and not have brakes is a pretty risky proposition,” Sean Kane, president of the Safety Research and Strategies, which works on auto issues for plaintiffs and governmental organizations, told the Freep. “The fact that they wouldnÂ’t notify owners (sooner) is pretty stunning.” GM told the Freep it was required to notify the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and file paperwork before it notified customers about the original recall, which was made Dec. 12. It then had to investigate and resolve the problem created by its original recall fix before alerting customers. GMÂ’s call center and dealers are contacting the remaining 900 customers who havenÂ’t yet had the update made to the original recall repair. GM also hired a vendor to send recall letters to the 550,000 customers affected by the original recall notifying them about the update. There are no known injuries or deaths related to the problem. Read the Freep story here.