Bose Sound Paddle Shifters Suede & Leather Seating Heated Seats Push Start on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

Asian automakers still reluctant to use more aluminum

There's a logical progression of technology in the auto industry. We've seen it with things like carbon-ceramic brakes, which use to be the sole domain of six-figure sports cars, where they often cost as much as an entry level Toyota Corolla. Now, you can get them on a BMW M3 (they're still pricey, at $8,150). Who knows, maybe in the next four a five years, they'll be available on something like a muscle car or hot hatchback. Aluminum has had a similar progression, although it's further along, moving from the realm of Audi and Jaguar luxury sedans to Ford's most important product, the F-150. With the stuff set to arrive in such a big way on the market, we should logically expect an all-aluminum Toyota Camry or Honda Accord soon, right? Um, wrong. Reuters has a great report on what's keeping Asian manufacturers away from aluminum, and it demonstrates yet another stark philosophical difference between automakers in the east and those in the west. Of course, there's a pricing argument at play. But it's more than just the cost of aluminum sheet (shown above) versus steel. Manufacturing an aluminum car requires extensive retooling of existing factories, not to mention new relationships with suppliers and other logistical and financial nightmares. Factor that in with what Reuters calls Asian automaker's preference towards "evolutionary upgrades," and the case for an all-aluminum Accord is a difficult one. Instead, manufacturers in the east are focusing on developing even stronger steel as a means of trimming fat, although analysts question how long that practice can continue. Jeff Wang, the automotive sales director for aluminum supplier Novelis, predicts that we'll see a bump in aluminum usage from Japanese and Korean brands in the next two to three years, and that it will be driven by an influx of aluminum-based vehicles from western automakers into China. Only time will tell if he's proven right. News Source: ReutersImage Credit: Sean Gallup / Getty Images Plants/Manufacturing Honda Hyundai Mazda Nissan Toyota Technology aluminum

Nissan: We lose money on each Leaf replacement battery

Nissan has been playing its cards pretty close to its chest when it comes to the production costs for Leaf battery packs. The company recently put a price on replacement batteries for customers at $5,500 plus the requirement to return the old battery. If the decommissioned battery is worth $1,000 to Nissan, as they have stated, that means the battery costs about $6,500 to make, right? Maybe even less if Nissan wants to turn a profit, as automakers are wont to do? Wrong.
Green Car Reports spoke to Nissan about these battery costs, and found that the automaker actually loses money on selling the replacement battery for the Leaf at the current price. Jeff Kuhlman, Nissan's vice president of global communications said, "Nissan makes zero margin on the replacement program. In fact, we subvent every exchange." All you English majors will know that "subvent" is a fancy way to say "subsidize." Kuhlman added, though, "We have yet to sell one battery as part of the program."
The fact that Nissan offers its replacement batteries for less than it costs to manufacture them is telling of a company both cares about what its customer needs and is dedicated to the success of its product. In this case, both of those things encourage people to give up fossil fuels and adopt electric mobility, which is heartening. As more people switch to battery-powered driving, though, battery technology should become better and cheaper, and the scale of production should cause manufacturing costs to decrease. Eventually, Nissan could easily see itself breaking even selling the Leaf battery replacements.