The new EPA standards Obama has set for 2016

[Xetsuei]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090519/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_autos

Well, what do you think of it?

I can't quite see why it's needed, mainly because if we keep using petrol powered vehicles the gas will run out either way, but without this it will just run out faster. Same thing for greenhouse gas emissions. It will continue to be worse, but with this it will just be slower. And what I'd also like to know is if we could still drive things like muscle/sports/super cars - but of course at a price. I have to say I don't like the idea of nearly every car having under 200hp or 200 lb ft of torque. What about things that need to be towed? What about transit buses? Unless there is a way to make large engines needed to have that much power much more efficient, I don't see how it would work.

[Rob Oplawar]

Well, in order to propose something like this there have to be concessions made for those sorts of vehicles. The irony is that we know full well what the automakers do in the face of these sorts of restrictions: they reclass their van as a truck and call it an SUV. :rolleyes:

[leorimolo]

I've been actually thinking if 50 years from now I will be able to drive any antique sports car, it actually worries me if gasoline would be difficult to get.

[Rob Oplawar]

You can always synthesize a fuel that works in place of gasoline (the reason we don't do this now is because it's dirty and expensive)

[MetKiller Joe]

This is really going to suck for the person who could care less about getting good mileage and just wanting to get by on the montly paycheck.

[Xetsuei]

You've also got to factor in used cars. Tons more people buying a first car buy a used one because they're so damn cheap, and I don't see many used cars getting 35mpg+ (but of course by 2016 there will probably be more used cars getting better gas mileage).

[MetKiller Joe]

As prices for new cars go up, people that would have spent money on a new car will now spend it on a used car because they will find that getting a new car is too expensive. Demand for used cars will go up and their prices will go up.

[Xetsuei]

Still doesn't change the fact they will be cheaper than new cars.

[MetKiller Joe]

Still doesn't change the fact they will be cheaper than new cars.

They will always be relatively cheaper. Just now, fewer people will be able to buy them when they really need them.

[sdavis117]

This is really going to suck for the person who could care less about getting good mileage and just wanting to get by on the montly paycheck.

Usually having a car with better Mileage will help you get by on a monthly paycheck. Less gas = more money for you.

Plus, this will only increase the prices of new cars by about $1500 by 2016.

[Needles]

You can always synthesize a fuel that works in place of gasoline (the reason we don't do this now is because it's dirty and expensive)

You'll need a clean fuel eventually. We can use dirty fuels for a bit, but the damage to earth would go far after a while (you can't pollute it forever), and we'd be stuck with finding a clean synthetic.

[Xetsuei]

They will always be relatively cheaper. Just now, fewer people will be able to buy them when they really need them.

Relatively? Right now, they're MUCH cheaper. More people may be buying them, but the price is hardly rising.


Usually having a car with better Mileage will help you get by on a monthly paycheck. Less gas = more money for you.

Plus, this will only increase the prices of new cars by about $1500 by 2016.

People who are buying used cars aren't going to wait and save up for a more expensive new car with a little bit better mileage. Ask anyone short on money, or a first car buyer.

[MetKiller Joe]

People who are buying used cars aren't going to wait and save up for a more expensive new car with a little bit better mileage. Ask anyone short on money, or a first car buyer.

This was my point. As new cars become even more expensive there will be even more of those people.

[Bodzilla]

The plan is not to have people driving fuel efficient cars but it's to stop the car company's from producing gas guzzoling pieces of shit without researching other types of fuel sources or engines.
Think of the countless new fuel's and engines that where hushed by these faggots in order to keep their big profit margins.

Good move obama.

[n00b1n8R]

Seems like a move in the right direction to me.

[RecycleBin]

I bet they did this to piss GM off. jk

This idea looks very promising in the near future.

[Xetsuei]

The plan is not to have people driving fuel efficient cars but it's to stop the car company's from producing gas guzzoling pieces of shit without researching other types of fuel sources or engines.
Think of the countless new fuel's and engines that where hushed by these faggots in order to keep their big profit margins.

Good move obama.

People are more likely to buy fuel efficient cars than gas guzzlers if they have the money. It would make no sense for car companies to hold back on fuel efficient cars because they could make more money with them. I mean look at the Toyota Prius. How many of those do you see around town?

And unrelated to this I'd also like to say ethanol is a complete sham. It gets you less gas mileage, and produces more emissions.

[=sw=warlord]

I've been actually thinking if 50 years from now I will be able to drive any antique sports car, it actually worries me if gasoline would be difficult to get.
People will probably be using used chip fat oil more often.:(

[Disaster]

in b4 dane

[=sw=warlord]

in b4 dane
Danes banned so no need lol.

[Disaster]

aww

He gave me so many lols :(

[Bodzilla]

People are more likely to buy fuel efficient cars than gas guzzlers if they have the money. It would make no sense for car companies to hold back on fuel efficient cars because they could make more money with them. I mean look at the Toyota Prius. How many of those do you see around town?
what i'm talking about has been going on for more then just 5 years xet.

theres been thousands of engine changes, new engines fuels ect that have all been squished, bought out or covered up so these guys could keep selling the same shit and make more money.

It was competition they didnt want to have.

[TVTyrant]

what i'm talking about has been going on for more then just 5 years xet.

theres been thousands of engine changes, new engines fuels ect that have all been squished, bought out or covered up so these guys could keep selling the same shit and make more money.

It was competition they didnt want to have.
Well, thats part of the problem. There's more to it then that. I'm not too sure if alot of people would have been willing to buy new forms of engines if it weren't for the current crisis. Plus, by changing the fuel, you have to design engines that work under different temperatures, pressures, and designed to handle different kinds of friction. This means that workers have to learn to construct vehicles in a different way. It also mean that the legions of people who know how to fix cars and how they work on the inside lose their expertise.
So while I agree that there was alot of hush money floating around, I think tahts only really been in recent times, when there has been an incentive for developeing new fuel sources.

[Mr Buckshot]

Maybe this'll force those German manufacturers bring their smaller engines to North America.

e.g. Europe/Asia offers a Mercedes-Benz E-Class with a 1.8-liter four-cylinder that gets better mileage than the 2.4L Camry sold stateside, whereas the stateside Benz E-Class can be had with no smaller than a 3.5L V6 - also relatively inefficient. Bigger cars like the VW Phaeton or BMW 7 can be had with a 3.0L six cylinder - not that efficient, but definitely much better in mileage than the huge V8 that consumers stateside are forced to choose even at the base model. The VW Passat also can be had with a 1.4L inline-four in those continents, once again far more efficient than the 2.0L base model in North America.

imo those small engines available in Europe/Asia really need to make their way to this continent. Not all consumers shopping for German cars want to have some big sporty inefficient engine - I definitely would go for the small engines if I had a choice. I know I'd prefer a Benz with a 1.8 four-cylinder over the same model of Benz with a V6 or larger, and I'm sure many people would agree.

And also, maybe the Germans will hurry up with their hybrid models. The U.S. and Japanese manufacturers have had hybrids everywhere for nearly a decade now. German manufacturers have been painfully slow in getting into that market so far.



What about transit buses?


Most of the public buses here in Vancouver, BC are electric (they are connecting to overheard cables by these poles) and thus have zero emissions. However, buses that must travel across more than one zone at a time (e.g. from Vancouver to Richmond) are still diesel powered. Still though, most of my bus commutes are within one zone so I have the pleasure of riding in non-polluting vehicles. A Skytrain system linking most of the lower mainland is nearly completed (bloody slow construction time though >.<) which is also totally electric. Can't wait for that, much better than taking the bus.

[Varmint260]

It also mean that the legions of people who know how to fix cars and how they work on the inside lose their expertise.

Not necessarily. Many professional mechanics are expected to keep up-to-date on the latest machinery going into vehicles and equipment. In addition, although the engine is possibly the most important part of a vehicle (providing the power plant), it is hardly the only thing in a vehicle that needs servicing.

It's obvious, though, that this plan is a step forward. Sure, without it fossil fuels would just run out faster. Except that many things done in this world rely on fossil fuels (that will change, I know) so why not make those fuels last longer?

And yes, I do think more small engines being available here in North America would be a step forward. All a commuter car needs is an engine that can keep the car at the posted speed limit, with a little extra just in case.


Most of the public buses here in Vancouver, BC are electric (they are connecting to overheard cables by these poles) and thus have zero emissions.

Love the trolley buses. It's quite true that it's much easier to run electric-only on transit buses that run a specific route. The only thing is that the buses don't quite have zero emissions. One day, when all the electricity these buses used is generated though zero-emission power plants, then yes, they will be emission-free. Lookin' forward to that.

[Xetsuei]

what i'm talking about has been going on for more then just 5 years xet.

theres been thousands of engine changes, new engines fuels ect that have all been squished, bought out or covered up so these guys could keep selling the same shit and make more money.

It was competition they didnt want to have.

Show us some of these examples please.


Bigger cars like the VW Phaeton or BMW 7 can be had with a 3.0L six cylinder - not that efficient, but definitely much better in mileage than the huge V8 that consumers stateside are forced to choose even at the base model. The VW Passat also can be had with a 1.4L inline-four in those continents, once again far more efficient than the 2.0L base model in North America.

Oh how dare they, they give a big expensive car an engine that's needed in it, they should just make them slow. People who are buying a Phaeton or a 7 series BMW aren't going to care about gas mileage, and they most certainly won't want a car that expensive to be slow. I'll look up on some of the figures of people who have actually bought those cars with the V6 engine. And I'd also like to know why you think V8 engines are the devil. They are powerful, provide tons of torque, great noise, and some aren't gas guzzlers (gasp!). Let's look at the Corvette Z06's power plant, the LS7. 505hp, 470 lb ft of torque, 28mpg highway. It's the only super car that doesn't have the gas guzzler tax.

[Mr Buckshot]

Show us some of these examples please.

watch the movie "Who killed the Electric Car?"



Oh how dare they, they give a big expensive car an engine that's needed in it, they should just make them slow. People who are buying a Phaeton or a 7 series BMW aren't going to care about gas mileage, and they most certainly won't want a car that expensive to be slow.

Not totally true, after all why are such small engines offered on these big cars in Europe and Asia? Also a lot of Asian countries impose a hefty road tax based on engine displacement (typically spikes when exceeding 3000 cc). Like in Thailand, there are a sizable number of Mercedes on the road but they have pretty small engines (e.g. 1.8L in a Benz E Class) because the owners don't want to be struck with so much annual road tax. Seen it for myself. I don't know about European countries though, but obviously there's enough demand for the manufacturers to offer say a BMW 7 with a 3.0 liter engine.




And I'd also like to know why you think V8 engines are the devil.

fyi my family car has a V8, but if a V6 was offered we probably would've gone with that. I don't think they're the devil, it's just that I think consumers in North America should have more options than a V8 in certain cars. V8s are awesome in true sports cars, but I never find them particularly necessary in a family sedan.

So yeah, I still think those small engines available in Europe and Asia should come over here.

[Xetsuei]

Electric motor =/= mechanical engine that runs on a liquid based fuel.

And of course engines that small would be offered there because of the road tax. Of course car manufacturers will do almost anything to get their car sold. Common sense. But still, look at the sales numbers. Not that many. And also, the Phaeton isn't offered with an engine smaller than 3200cc. And of course I will have to put one more thing, the BMW 7 series with the 6 cylinder engine has only been available (in Europe) since the beginning of 2009.

[Mr Buckshot]

Still if you think back to the point of that article (laws forcing automakers to improve mileage) it would probably make sense for those small engines to come stateside. Ok so maybe someone buying a BMW 7 in America might not care about the mileage, but it's likely that someone buying a VW Passat or a BMW 3 might care as those are the cheaper models. Bringing in the more efficient engines definitely would improve sales of the lower end models.



the BMW 7 series with the 6 cylinder engine has only been available (in Europe) since the beginning of 2009.


I have a friend in the U.K. who owns a 2005 bmw 730...that's a 2996 cc engine there. It wasn't gray-imported from Asia, it was bought in the U.K. in that configuration. Costs about ten thousand pounds less than the V8-powered 750 of the time.

[Xetsuei]

Still if you think back to the point of that article (laws forcing automakers to improve mileage) it would probably make sense for those small engines to come stateside. Ok so maybe someone buying a BMW 7 in America might not care about the mileage, but it's likely that someone buying a VW Passat or a BMW 3 might care as those are the cheaper models. Bringing in the more efficient engines definitely would improve sales of the lower end models.

I agree here. But what I also think is they focus too much on gas engines. Diesel engines people. A twin turbo 2.7L V6 diesel engine (used in Jaguar XF) can get 50mpg. What I don't quite understand is why no one cares about diesel, and why so few diesel cars are in the US. I mean sure the fuel costs more, but better gas mileage and less emissions. A Volkswagen Golf diesel can get 75mpg, Subaru Legacy diesel 50mpg. And another great thing is you don't really sacrifice power. A gasoline engine getting 50mpg has to be like 80hp, but a diesel can be over 200hp.


I have a friend in the U.K. who owns a 2005 bmw 730...that's a 2996 cc engine there. It wasn't gray-imported from Asia, it was bought in the U.K. in that configuration. Costs about ten thousand pounds less than the V8-powered 750 of the time.

Whoops, only bother to look at the shortened information and now I see all the 3.0L petrol and diesel choices. But I would have to ask why on earth would you buy a car that large and expensive with such a small engine? You're spending all that money already, it's not like you want the car to be slow. And I am skeptical about it costing ten thousand pounds less. I won't believe that unless you give some proof.

I'd also like to say Europe/everyone else needs to learn a lesson from American in fuel efficiency. We got a 7.0L V8 engine to get 28mpg highway. That's pretty fucking insane imo.

[Mr Buckshot]

I agree here. But what I also think is they focus too much on gas engines. Diesel engines people. A twin turbo 2.7L V7 diesel engine (used in Jaguar XF) can get 50mpg. What I don't quite understand is why no one cares about diesel, and why so few diesel cars are in the US. I mean sure the fuel costs more, but better gas mileage and less emissions. A Volkswagen Golf diesel can get 75mpg, Subaru Legacy diesel 50mpg. And another great thing is you don't really sacrifice power. A gasoline engine getting 50mpg has to be like 80hp, but a diesel can be over 200hp.

Totally agreed. One of my neighbors owns a Mercedes E320 diesel and it's even more efficient than my mom's Toyota Highlander Hybrid. The BMW 335d was recently launched stateside btw and it's also highly efficient without sacrificing performance. My teacher even bought a VW Jetta diesel recently and is always boasting about its efficiency, heh.

Europe and (parts of) Asia are diesel haven, you can find all those European models with very efficient diesel engines.

trouble is, a lot of people here suffer from the delusion that diesels are slow, smelly, and loud, which is no longer the case. Just a matter of time before every consumer can be convinced. I have been in some new Bluetec diesel models and they feel/sound no different from a gas model.

[Bodzilla]

Show us some of these examples please.
i aint gunna crawl around the net to show you individual examples because you've had your head under a rock.

what about the air powered car? or the steam? the hydrogen was invented a long time ago as well.

but of course petrol supremacy~

i'm done, find it yourself.

[PenGuin1362]

trouble is, a lot of people here suffer from the delusion that diesels are slow, smelly, and loud, which is no longer the case. Just a matter of time before every consumer can be convinced. I have been in some new Bluetec diesel models and they feel/sound no different from a gas model.

Most people know diesels are efficient, however it creates more pollution then regular gasoline, not to mention diesel is far more expensive then typical gasoline. A diesel is not energy, environmentally, nor economically friendly.

[=sw=warlord]

I'd also like to say Europe/everyone else needs to learn a lesson from American in fuel efficiency. We got a 7.0L V8 engine to get 28mpg highway. That's pretty fucking insane imo.
The arrogance in that comment almost made me go blind...
And you lot wonder why us europeans have the concept of americans only going for fuel guzzlers...
You say you like cars with alot of noise?
Would you preffer a electric car but with a massive speaker underside synthesizing the sound but same torque or would you preffer a petrolium car?
In all seriousness i am rather interested if the only reason you lot go for fuel guzzlers is the noise emmited [which is another kind of pollution...].
-rep all you like but im sure there will be others here who feel the same, limited may know what im talking about seeing as he's over here and knows what the general conception of america is over here.

[mech]

I agree here. But what I also think is they focus too much on gas engines. Diesel engines people. A twin turbo 2.7L V6 diesel engine (used in Jaguar XF) can get 50mpg. What I don't quite understand is why no one cares about diesel, and why so few diesel cars are in the US. I mean sure the fuel costs more, but better gas mileage and less emissions. A Volkswagen Golf diesel can get 75mpg, Subaru Legacy diesel 50mpg. And another great thing is you don't really sacrifice power. A gasoline engine getting 50mpg has to be like 80hp, but a diesel can be over 200hp.

Diesel fuels don't pass emission standards in the U.S. for everyday vehicles due to them having more emissions than their regular gasoline counterparts.



i aint gunna crawl around the net to show you individual examples because you've had your head under a rock.

what about the air powered car? or the steam? the hydrogen was invented a long time ago as well.

but of course petrol supremacy~

i'm done, find it yourself.

Air powered vehicles are not practical, and never will be.

Steam /Hydrogen vehicles need to break down the molecules in said solution with an additional machine that is run on fuel which ends up wasting more fuel than you're getting out of it.

Pure electric cars are at a stand still right now for multiple reasons, but what's being RnD at the moment are Gasoline electric vehicles. Everyones looking out for the Chevy Volt which is going to be the first gasoline electric vehicle mass produced.

[Xetsuei]

i aint gunna crawl around the net to show you individual examples because you've had your head under a rock.

what about the 1)air powered car? 2)or the steam? 3)the hydrogen was invented a long time ago as well.

but of course petrol supremacy~

i'm done, find it yourself.

1)Was stupid, only went like 15 miles.
2)Also stupid, operating temperatures and other shit~
3)Already being made by Honda.

And of course you won't bother to find it, why even mention it in the first place.



Most people know diesels are efficient, however it creates more pollution then regular gasoline, not to mention diesel is far more expensive then typical gasoline. A diesel is not energy, environmentally, nor economically friendly.

Diesel does not cost far more than typical gasoline. In my state, it costs less than premium. And it seems the only reason you think diesel isn't environmentally friendly as you look at huge trucks blowing smoke into the air. Well most small diesel cars have things called particulate filters, which pretty much solve the problem. Don't ask me why they aren't put on trucks, I don't know why they aren't.


The arrogance in that comment almost made me go blind...
And you lot wonder why us europeans have the concept of americans only going for fuel guzzlers...
You say you like cars with alot of noise?
Would you preffer a electric car but with a massive speaker underside synthesizing the sound but same torque or would you preffer a petrolium car?
In all seriousness i am rather interested if the only reason you lot go for fuel guzzlers is the noise emmited [which is another kind of pollution...].
-rep all you like but im sure there will be others here who feel the same, limited may know what im talking about seeing as he's over here and knows what the general conception of america is over here.

Electric cars are stupid alone, and a speaker on the bottom would be even worse. But Jeremy Clarkson even said (referring to the Tesla Roadster) "Wish it had a CD of V8 noises". And yes, I would prefer a gasoline engine to an electric engine with similar power/torque.

And why is the comment arrogant? It's completely true. No one else in the world has made such a powerful engine get such great gas mileage. They haven't even come with in 10mpg of it.

And I've got to say you follow the wrong stereotypes if you think all Americans just love fuel guzzlers and V8 engines and loud noises. I'd have to say that's pretty damn ignorant. And also if you think of noise pollution bad, then that's pretty sad. I mean if it's a ricer with a huge muffler on his Honda Civic then sure, that doesn't sound the best. But I can't honestly see it being a problem unless everyone has straight pipes on their car.


Diesel fuels don't pass emission standards in the U.S. for everyday vehicles due to them having more emissions than their regular gasoline counterparts.

Mind showing us these?

[Rosco]

Steam /Hydrogen vehicles need to break down the molecules in said solution with an additional machine that is run on fuel which ends up wasting more fuel than you're getting out of it.

Hydrogen vehicles do look like the best way ahead if we need an emergency fuel for vehicles, but it could easily be dangerous because of the compression and such, but it looks pretty secure. (From top gear episodes, getting the fuel in is pretty safe)

[Mr Buckshot]

Diesel fuels don't pass emission standards in the U.S. for everyday vehicles due to them having more emissions than their regular gasoline counterparts.

not anymore, Mercedes-Benz's Bluetec Cleandiesel system is probably cleaner that a lot of gasoline engines. They engineered it to convert many of the pollutants into urea or something. BMW also launched a 50-state-compliant diesel car that uses some advanced tech of its own to clean up its act.

Steam powered cars are stupid imo.

as for hydrogen fuel cells, I personally think passenger cars aren't the best place to start - it should be transit buses whose rotues don't permit them to run on electric trolleys. Right now it would be a massive undertaking to build as many hydrogen stations as we have gas stations. But it wouldn't be so massive to build bus stations that have hydrogen.

[TVTyrant]

not anymore, Mercedes-Benz's Bluetec Cleandiesel system is probably cleaner that a lot of gasoline engines. They engineered it to convert many of the pollutants into urea or something. BMW also launched a 50-state-compliant diesel car that uses some advanced tech of its own to clean up its act.

Steam powered cars are stupid imo.

as for hydrogen fuel cells, I personally think passenger cars aren't the best place to start - it should be transit buses whose rotues don't permit them to run on electric trolleys. Right now it would be a massive undertaking to build as many hydrogen stations as we have gas stations. But it wouldn't be so massive to build bus stations that have hydrogen.
Probably the best post so far.

Hydrogen has a severe limitation in the fact that it costs as much energy to produce the hydrogen as it would to just have gasoline cars. So in order to make it work, we need to find an area where they produce all of their energy by either hydro electric dams or some geothermic energy. Good spots would be Oregon, Iceland, right next to Hoover Dam, etc,

No, diesel does not cost less than gas. Diesel is a BI-PRODUCT OF GASOLINE PRODUCTION. This means you have to produce gasoline in order to have diesel, and since the point of this plan is to get rid of gasoline, it doesn't work.
Bio-Diesel is another story, however, and I think we should start using it alot. As far as I know, you have to do very little conversion of engine materials in order to run it, and its got even better fuel efficiency that diesel. While it has lower emissions, the fact that it has any at all (unlike hydrogen which has none) is still putting it on the rocks.

Ethynol/Petrol/Alcohol based fuels are a terrible terrible idea. You have to revamp everything, teach people how to work on the engines, use different kinds of parts etc. Plus, the emissions are just as bad as with gasoline or diesel. The only good thing about it is that countries like Brazil can build it effectively using sugar cane and you can become self-dependent off of it. Most of the other fuels you cannot. Oh wait, yeah you can.

[Xetsuei]

No, diesel does not cost less than gas. Diesel is a BI-PRODUCT OF GASOLINE PRODUCTION. This means you have to produce gasoline in order to have diesel, and since the point of this plan is to get rid of gasoline, it doesn't work.

The point I was trying to make is they're a lot more fuel efficient than regular gas engines. And no, here in Oregon premium gas costs more than regular diesel.

[Mr Buckshot]

Diesel may cost more than normal non-premium gas, but if the mileage improvements are big enough, then you actually save money. And yes premium can cost more than diesel.

[TVTyrant]

The point I was trying to make is they're a lot more fuel efficient than regular gas engines. And no, here in Oregon premium gas costs more than regular diesel.
I live in Oregon TOO. Thats what I'm saying. Also, most people dont buy premium gas, or at least as far as I know. In the Portland area where I live, Diesel does cost more than premium at most gas stations anyways.

Plus, that still doesn't change the fact that you have to produce gas in order to make diesel.

[Xetsuei]

I live in Oregon TOO. Thats what I'm saying. Also, most people dont buy premium gas, or at least as far as I know. In the Portland area where I live, Diesel does cost more than premium at most gas stations anyways.

Plus, that still doesn't change the fact that you have to produce gas in order to make diesel.

You can still save more money if you buy the diesel. Let's say the Volkswagen Golf diesel. If diesel costs even $1 more than regular gas, you will still save money in comparison to something like a Toyota Prius. And I don't know where you live in Portland, but there too I see diesel as less than premium. And no, people don't buy premium because they don't have to. Common sense.

No, you don't produce gas (as in from the pump) in order to make diesel, you produce PETROLEUM in order to do it. There's a big difference.

[TVTyrant]

And I don't know where you live in Portland
On a far more friendly note, I live in the burbs, out in Hillsboro. How about you?

[Xetsuei]

Salem.

[TVTyrant]

You ever go and urinate on the capital building?

[TeeKup]

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/upload/10478/images/1HondaInsightConcept.jpg

*is getting this vehicle*

[TVTyrant]

:O Shiny

[kid908]

awesomely purdy car

*is getting this vehicle*

Looks really nice:eek:
what kind is it? gasoline? electric? hybrid? etc?
gotz specs?

[TeeKup]

2010 Honda Insight. Hybrid.
http://automobiles.honda.com/insight-hybrid/