Rare True Barn Find Rolling Chassie Soft Top Frame No Motor Wrong Transmission on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

2019 Jaguar I-Pace gets official 234-mile range rating

The 2019 Jaguar I-Pace is officially rated to travel as far as 234 miles on a single charge of its battery pack. That's down slightly from the 240 miles initially promised when the slinky electric crossover was first unveiled here in the States. And, while it's roughly equal to the base version of the Tesla Model X, that's not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison. Quoting maximum electric range without considering the capacity of a car's battery pack is the same as quoting the maximum driving range of a gasoline-fueled vehicle without considering how many gallons of gas the tank holds. The I-Pace's battery pack is rated at 90kWh. The Model X's smallest pack is 75kWh. So the Tesla can go about the same total distance as the Jaguar using significantly less energy. It's not just Tesla that boasts greater efficiency figures than the Jaguar. Chevy manages to eke 238 miles out of the Bolt EV's 60kWh battery pack, and Hyundai gets 258 miles from the Kona Electric's 64kWh pack. These vehicles certainly don't all play in the same market segments, and there are a lot of variables to consider. For instance, the Jaguar's 4.5-second 0-60 rating is quicker than the Model X's 4.9-second rating, and its advertised power output of 394 horsepower and 512 pound-feet of torque is higher than Tesla's for the 75D (though Tesla's actual power numbers aren't really advertised in traditional hp and lb-ft figures). But even if cars like the Model X, Chevy Bolt, and Hyundai Kona EV aren't directly comparable across the board, their range and battery capacity figures do help us understand the relative efficiency of each specific vehicle. The efficiency of electric vehicles rated by the EPA is expressed as a MPGe (miles per gallon equivalent) figure. The 2019 Jaguar I-Pace's figures of 80 city, 72 highway, and 76 combined MPGe don't compare favorably with the Tesla Model X's 91 MPGe city, 95 MPGe highway and 93 MPGe combined ratings. It'll be interesting to see how much EV buyers care about the Jaguar's comparatively poor MPGe ratings, but they will definitely have an impact in the real world. In practical terms, what all of this means is that the Jaguar I-Pace is going to use more electricity per mile than the Tesla Model X. And that means it's going to cost more to drive the same distance in the Jag when compared to the Tesla, or just about any other modern long-range EV that's currently on the market. Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party.

Junkyard Gem: 1973 Jaguar XJ6

It requires a certain high level of commitment to keep an old Jaguar on the road, and so plenty of first-generation Jaguar XJs end up as projects that never get finished, sitting in yards or garages for decades before winding up in the nearest U-Wrench yard. As I clomp through car graveyards around the country in search of interesting machinery, I see so many 1980s XJs that I don't bother to photograph many of them … but a genuine Series I early Jag is a different story. Here's a '73 XJ6 whose final parking space (prior to facing the cold steel jaws of The Crusher) sits right next to that of a same-year Mercedes-Benz 450SLC in an East Bay yard. How the mighty have fallen! The C107 was too picked-over to be worth photographing, but you can admire the photos of this much nicer '72 I found in Denver a few years back. Unlike the last Series 1 XJ6 that I've photographed (in the very same yard, albeit 13 years ago), this car has not had its original straight-six engine replaced by a small-block Chevrolet V8 (because Jaguar parts were expensive and Chevy parts were cheap during the 1970s, that swap happened frequently). The US-market XJ6 got 150 horsepower from this smooth-running DOHC six, 40 fewer horses than the (far more expensive) 450SLC that year. The interior looks ravaged by the decades, but you can still discern the opulence that once reigned in this wood-and-leather-lined space. The dash boasts a full complement of authentic Smiths gauges, with a tasteful Kienzle clock right in the middle. Here's why we can assume that fewer than two of those instruments functioned at any given time during the life of this car: wiring by The Prince of Darkness! Working on electrical faults in these cars built up your patience while undermining your faith in symptom-to-problem relationships. The six-digit odometer ensures that we'll never know if we're looking at a 56,819-mile car or a 356,819-mile car. I'd guess 156,819 if I had to, based on pedal wear. These cars were very popular in the Bay Area, which has been full of European-car aficionados since the first Renault AXs sputtered off the docks of the San Francisco waterfront. Back in the 1970s and 1980s, you'd never see an old XJ without one of these pre-EU "GB" stickers on the back. The faded condition of this one suggests decades of sitting in the sun, probably while the car sat dead in the driveway due to electrical problems.