2003 Nissan Pathfinder Se 4wd Power,cruise,6cd,bose Sound System on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Question of the Day: What (non-Skyline) JDM car to import?

I have been looking into the idea of bringing a four-wheel-drive kei van over from Japan, something like a Honda Street or perhaps even a Mitsubishi Minicab Bravo Route 66, and so I have been researching the various bureaucratic hoops I must jump through in order to bring such a car into my state (Colorado). When I finally tracked down the state official who knew the answers, his very first words were "OK, so what year Skyline do you want to register here?" Yes, Nissan's not-sold-over-here factory-hot-rod of the 1980s and 1990s is what gets shipped over most often, but there are other worthy JDM vehicles. Say, for example, a stunning 1990 Mitsuoka Le Seyde (above), which was far classier than the Excalibur and based on the sporty S13 Nissan Silvia, aka 240SX. Of course, the king of JDM cars is the mighty Toyota Century, and you can get nice legal-to-import examples for reasonable prices. No, you can't get the V12 Century legally – yet; the V12-powered cars don't hit the 25-year-old mark until 2022. So, what's your choice for a 1991 or earlier Japanese-market car to import, assuming that the Skyline is off the table? Related Video: Auto News Honda Nissan Toyota Car Buying nissan skyline questions

A realistic approach to fixing Mitsubishi

There are going to be a lot of words written about what Nissan needs to do with Mitsubishi in the coming months and years in the interest of turning the brand around. After Nissan's purchase of a controlling stake in the diamond star brand, there's been more interest in Mitsubishi thanks to the potential of platform sharing and plenty of cash from Nissan-Renault to get the juices flowing again. But, while some have been doing their best to advocate for the return of the 3000GT, Evolution, and even the Starion - Many of these posts forget the reality of the market we live in today. As much as we like to look back fondly at the sports coupes of the '90s, a byproduct of the insane cash flows all the Japanese manufacturers had at the time, the reality of today puts a much greater emphasis on what is most-boring; Crossover SUVs, alongside mid-size and compact sedans. We do need to ask a fundamental question, how much Mitsubishi is enough to be able to continue to call the cars Mitsubishis? Aside from slight product revisions and reconfigurations, Mitsubishi (at least in North America) has been largely dependent on the same GS platform and 4B1 engines that date back to their long-time partnership with Chrysler (and Hyundai) in the mid '00s. Admittedly, the chassis and engines have served the company well, underpinning a wide variety of vehicles sold around the world, and seeing quite a few revisions to at least attempt to keep products competitive. But, the GS chassis is old, heavy, and severely out of date - and when matched to the underpowered 4B1 series engines - make for largely uncompetitive offerings in the market. While something like the Outlander Sport is indeed interesting compared to a Honda CR-V, it is by no means the smart choice in the segment. So, going forward, unless Mitsubishi has had a skunkworks of sorts developing their chassis and engine replacements over the past few years, what exactly are they planning to do for their bread-and-butter models? I think the straightforward answer is without a doubt the Nissan North America parts bin. With so many of their models selling well, and for the most part, are reasonably well-reviewed, it would be quite simple to adapt the chassis and powertrain to Mitsubishi's liking to create a high-volume alternative to what is currently available now.

Carmakers ask Trump to revisit fuel efficiency rules

Car companies operating in the US are required to meet stringent fuel efficiency standards (a fleet average of 54.5MPG) through 2025, but they're hoping to loosen things now that President Trump is in town. Leaders from Fiat Chrysler, Ford, GM, Honda, Hyundai, Nissan, Toyota and VW have sent a letter to Trump asking him to rethink the Obama administration's choice to lock in efficiency guidelines for the next several years. The car makers want to revisit the midterm review for the 2025 commitment in hopes of loosening the demands. They claim that the tougher requirements raise costs, don't match public buying habits and will supposedly put "as many a million" jobs up in the air. The Trump administration hasn't specifically responded to the letter, although Environmental Protection Agency nominee Scott Pruitt had said he would return to the Obama-era decision. The automakers' argument doesn't entirely hold up. While the EPA did estimate that the US would fall short of efficiency goals due to a shift toward SUVs and trucks, the job claims are questionable. Why would making more fuel efficient vehicles necessarily cost jobs instead of pushing companies to do better? As it is, even a successful attempt to loosen guidelines may only have a limited effect. All of the brands mentioned here are pushing for greater mainstream adoption of electric vehicles within the next few years -- they may meet the Obama administration's expectations just by shifting more drivers away from gas power. This article by Jon Fingas originally appeared on Engadget, your guide to this connected life. Related Video: News Source: ReutersImage Credit: Daniel Acker/Bloomberg via Getty Images Government/Legal Green Chrysler Fiat GM Honda Hyundai Nissan Toyota Volkswagen Fuel Efficiency CAFE standards Trump