2004 Nissan Frontier Xe Crew Cab Pickup 4-door 3.3l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

You'll soon be able to buy an EV in China for just $8,000 after incentives

Renault is eventually looking to sell an electric vehicle in China that will cost as little as $8,000 after government incentives kick in. According to Reuters, Renault-Nissan chief Carlos Ghosn offered the prediction at the New York Times Energy for Tomorrow conference in Paris this week. Granted, China government incentives are approaching $20,000 per vehicle, as China looks to address its cities' notorious pollution problem, so there's some wiggle room with that price. And of course, the devil is in the details, and Ghosn didn't provide any. Still, such a low-priced EV would likely challenge the dominance of China-based EV makers BYD and Kandi. And the effort would likely be lucrative, given that it has been predicted that China will become the world's largest EV market by the end of the decade. In fact, the publication EV Sales said earlier this year that as many as 300,000 EVs will be sold in China in 2016 (by comparison, Americans bought about 100,000 EVs and plug-in hybrids combined through the first 10 months of the year). BYD is expected to sell 75,000 Tang SUV units this year. With such growth expectations in mind, automakers are focusing on China for potential EV development. Earlier this year, Volkswagen Group said it signed a memorandum of understanding with China's Jianghuai Automobile (JAC) for plug-in vehicle production. Mercedes-Benz parent Daimler also stated its goal to broaden plug-in vehicle sales in China. Renault appears to be trying to make an early mark in China. Dongfeng Renault Automobile Co., the Chinese joint venture between Renault and Donfeng, is looking to start testing a self-driving electric vehicle this month. Dongfeng Renault will use a 1.5-mile stretch of road in Beijing's Caidian district for testing purposes. Related Video:

Mitsubishi cheated on Japanese fuel economy test since 1991

Mitsubishi now says that its cheating on Japanese fuel economy tests stretches as far back as 1991. The automaker has hired an independent panel of investigators to get to the bottom of what happened, and the company will give them three months to prepare a report about the deception. Mitsubishi's cheat involves how the company calculated driving resistance to determine fuel economy. In 1991, Japan's Road Transport Vehicle Act established a coasting test to establish the driving resistance, but Mitsubishi's engineers used their own "high-speed coasting test," according to its statement. In 2007, the company decided to only use the country's mandated evaluation, but the employees kept utilizing the high-speed test in the field. In the most recent scandal, workers selected low values for driving resistance from the results, which made the fuel economy look better. Mitsubishi's presented these details in a report to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport, and Tourism. "We are currently investigating the reasoning behind each of the decisions," the company said in a statement. It also hired three former prosecutors to figure out why this happened for so long. At this time, Mitsubishi only confirms the incorrect figures for some of the company's minicars, but this investigation could discover more transgressions. This fiasco started when Nissan discovered fuel economy discrepancies in some of its Mitsubishi-made tiny kei-class cars in Japan. Mitsubishi came clean and admitted the problem affected about 625,000 vehicles in the country. Japanese media have alleged more vehicles have incorrect mileage, including the Outlander. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in the US has also requested data from the Japanese automaker to confirm similar deceptions didn't happen for vehicles here. Related Video: Regarding the Report to MLIT Concerning Improper Conduct in Fuel Consumption Testing of Vehicles Manufactured by Mitsubishi Motors Corporation Tokyo, April 26, 2016 The following is a summary of the report submitted by Mitsubishi Motors Corporation (MMC) to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT) today, pursuant to instructions received from MLIT on April 20 to investigate improper conduct in fuel consumption testing of vehicles manufactured by MMC. Report Summary 1.

Junkyard Gem: 1996 Nissan Quest XE with 338,549 miles

When I hit the junkyard, I always look for vehicles with impressive final figures showing on their odometers. I find so many Hondas and Toyotas with better than 300,000 miles that I don't consider them especially noteworthy (the exception being super-low-spec cheap models, such as a Tercel or Civic VX), and it goes without saying that the bar is quite high for Mercedes-Benzes as well. It has been surprisingly difficult to find discarded Nissans that made it past the 300k mark; today's Junkyard Gem is just the fourth I've documented. The highest-mile junked Nissan I'd found prior to today's minivan is a 1994 Maxima with 364,238 miles, followed by a 1987 Maxima with 341,176 miles and a 1986 200SX with 309,222 miles. Keep in mind that Nissan didn't go to six-digit odometers on most of its US-market cars until the early 1980s, and then went to tough-to-read-in-the-junkyard electronic odometers in the early 2000s; this means the pool of potential high-mile Nissans is limited to about the 1983-2000 range of model years. Ford has just as much right to claim credit to this van's impressive mile total as does Nissan, since the Quest was a collaboration between Ford and Nissan that also produced the Mercury Villager; this van was built by Ford at the Ohio Assembly plant. The Quest/Villager platform was derived from the Maxima's, and the engine is pure Nissan: a 3.0-liter VG30 V6 rated at 151 horsepower. The only transmission available in the first-generation (1993-1999) Quest/Villager was a four-speed automatic. This one appears to have been sold new at Landrum Nissan in Pueblo. The rear glass has been painted flat black, possibly to keep prying eyes from seeing valuable cargo. The rear seats are long gone, so this van probably hauled cargo for much of its long life. The front interior seems to be in good shape. Why is this van here? There's body damage on the left rear and right front, suggesting a crash that may have bent the suspension past the worth-fixing threshold. Perhaps the crinkled metal just made this van too unsightly, or maybe some powertrain problem was the culprit. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. It's time to expect more from a minivan. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. It's all fun and games until the toddler takes the wheel.