http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/07/06/gre...est/index.html

Any violent reactions?

 

No GMs on the meanest- rightly so.

Civic GX as the greenest- rightly so.

 

Wait doesnt Pontaic have a commercial about the G5 being more fuel efficient than I think Civic?? Or was it Corolla?? I forget??

And what about Ranger with the best fuel economy for any truck in its class?

 

The range is 1-100 and the highest score was a 57?!?! Sounds like their rating system is all screwed up anyways.

 

It's CNN, who gives a ****?

 

I complained to CNN yesterday about this article. I said it was just more cheerleading for Honda and Toyota, and that the mainstream media needs to stop bashing the domestics and rooting for the Japanese, because they're not the good guys.

 

Is it just me or are all those cars hidious, looks like a bunch of suppositories (espcially the Toyotas).

 

The descriptions in that article make it sound like the greenest and meanest are determined by fuel economy, but it appears to be entirely focused around emissions.

Why is a ranking of cars by emissions spending so much time talking about fuel economy, which is a separate attribute? Some of those 'meanest' cars, especially the diesels, actually get damn good mileage... they just don't do it while keeping the air like flowers...

 

It is all about stock prices. Ford and GM have been pulling down the market while Honda and Toyota stock has been pulling it up. Big corporate owned media likes to punish companies who's stocks are not making the market as a whole look good. They do it in every sector, not just auto. Look at Google and Apple, big media loves them.

 

They're not entirely separate attributes. The more fuel you burn, the more CO2 you emit; that's a pretty firm relationship (assuming C02 is a dangerous emission that needs to be tracked). And all else being equal, the more fuel you burn the more of the actually bad emissions you'll emit.

 

All else cannot be equal in the real world. Insight, with its old lean burn program, had nearly the same NOx emissions as the Z06. Carmakers with tiny engines can exploit this, because emissions are regulated on grams/mile, not grams/displacement. As well they should.

ACEEE did the study, not CNN.

Your opinion on looks is filed with the others from GTO owners.

 

Unfortunately, promoting Honda and Toyota in the way this article does are not going to help GM or Ford on the stock market.

 

That is how it goes. Once GM is more profitable and the stock starts shooting up you will see the press drool over them. Financial news has a heard mentality to it.

 

I understand they're not entirely separate, but all things are really far from being equal... especially when looking at diesel emissions per mileage vs gas emissions per mileage.

 

CO2 is tied directly to fuel economy, but actual "pollutant" emissions (CO, NOx, unburned HCs) are not.

CO2 is NOT a regulated pollutant when it comes to cars meeting emissions standards.

Of course, the global warming yahoos are trying to change that... and these days it does seem like many articles are, intentionally or not, considering CO2 to be a pollutant.