This is the latest commercial spot for Mazda’s new line of Skyactiv cars and SUVs … and, with its great music, thrilling visuals, and a surprisingly non-preachy green/sustainability message, it’s pretty awesome.

I didn’t see this ad on TV, though. Or on Hulu. Instead, I caught it on Jalopnik, where Matt Hardigree said it better than I ever could:

Who cares that this ad features clips of people driving Chevys and video of the 787 that, for all we know, was pulled from Forza 4? It translates exactly what I want to feel about environmental technology.

Pretty much, Matt. Thanks for bringing this little Bo Diddley-powered ad gem to our attention. Enjoy!

As for why you probably haven’t (and probably won’t) catch this commercial on the tele, Mazda has been hit pretty hard, lately, with last year’s earthquake and strong yen conspiring to generate a 1.3 billion (with a “B”) dollar loss for Mazda in the past year. This, despite the company being something of an auto-media darling and having some pretty exciting green tech aboard its new small cars. Quite beyond that, parked just feet from Mitusbishi’s 30+ thousand-dollar MiEV at the 2012 Chicago Auto Show, as they were, the $15K Mazda 2 model felt like a Rolls Royce in comparison.

A bit of a puzzle, that, but it’s a hard truth many carmakers who build cars for the automotive media rather than simply “building what people want to buy” must eventually learn: most “car guys” don’t buy new cars.

Source: Mazda, via Jalopnik.

The discerning reader will note that most of these are not particularly green cars – and just riding in them, the amount of fuel burning is nearly tangible. (Also the Ram was bizarrely stiff and bouncy, despite talk from the Dodge rep about how smooth the ride was supposed to be.)

Jo was super excited for the Fiat (our second to last track of the day), and I did have to agree that it’s super cute. I was, however, expecting to be cramped and bounced around. I was so very wrong.

The Fiat, as has been said on Gas2 before, has the MultiAir engine. It controls the valves in order to regulate how much fuel is injected into the engine; mileage goes up, fuel consumption goes down, and everyone wins. The EPA rated the 2012 automatic model at 30mpg combined, which is somewhat short of what Fiat’s initial estimates were, but still respectable for a small car.

It was actually a fairly smooth and quiet ride. Admittedly, there’s not much opportunity to test how the car handles when driving at 2mph, but by the time the ride was over I really wanted to take it out onto the street and try to have some fun. The bucket seats in front were even really comfortable.

I can now blame both Jo and Fiat for adding to the list of cars I want to buy (and it’s not a long list).

Questions or opinions? Let us know in the comments below the gallery.

Source: 2012 Chicago Auto Show

CNG vehicles (NGVs) are still somewhat of a niche, mostly due to natural gas stations being a little hard to find (the US Department of Energy does have a locator application to find alternative fuel stations), but natural gas burns very cleanly. Just about the only way to be greener with your vehicle is to get something purely electric and then power it with solar panels alone.

In addition to being much cleaner-burning than gasoline-powered cars – the Civic GX has an AT-PZEV (Advanced Technology Partial Zero-Emission Vehicle) rating as certified by CARB – the mileage is great. The Civic GX has a 31mpg EPA rating (combined – 27mpg city and 38mpg highway, gasoline-gallon equivalent). The actual volume of fuel burned, since it’s natural gas, is a little higher, and that brings us to the one sacrifice that an NGV driver will be making.

The 2012 CNG Civic has not solved the problem of the 2011 CNG Civic, which is namely this:

There’s very little trunk space, since the fuel tank has to be quite a bit larger than a standard Civic. On the other hand, low emissions plus good mileage plus eligibility for energy efficiency incentives more than make up for a lack of trunk space in my book. The Civic GX is available in California, New York, Utah, or Oklahoma.

Questions or opinions? Let us know in the comments below the gallery.

Source | Images: 2012 Chicago Auto Show.

As you may recall from my thrilling and engrossing commentary a year ago, the then-new Scion iQ was my favorite car of the 2011 Chicago Auto Show. After spending several hours listening to GM flaks, checking out new Hyundais and Dodge Darts, and driving around in a Fiat 500, however, it looked like the year-old Scion iQ was going to be my favorite car at the 2012 Chicago Auto Show, as well …

… but then I saw this: the Scion Pit Boss Cartel iQ.

Ladies and gentlemen, I am in love. Not some crude, lusty sort of pseudo-love like the kind I wanted to slather onto the flanks of the new NSX (Oh no, Sir!). This was the kind of love that blindsides you while you’re holding a weeks-old puppy at the pound and it falls asleep in your arms.

If you don’t take that puppy home, then you’re a jackwad.

Sadly, I was NOT allowed to drive the angry little blue Pit Boss home. I named him “Bossy”.

Despite being pale and fat, I managed to successfully flirt my way into the spartan cockpit long enough to both make “Vroom!” noises while yanking the wheel back and forth like a mental patient and play some Michael Jackson and Bone Thugs n’ Harmony on Bossy’s brilliant (Brilliant!) Alpine audio system.

Aside: I’m old and I like that stuff. GET OFF MY LAWN!

The rest of the car was a cornucopia of trick racer kit, with on-board air tools to quickly swap out Bossy’s street-biased front tires with track-ready Toyo rubber mounted to lightweight performance rims (visible in the back of the car). A rollaway jack stows neatly in Bossy’s rear bumper, as well, making trackside service for the ACT clutch and uprated brake system a breeze.

With its combination of relatively low cost, high mileage, great, party-making audio gear and serious trackday fun just waiting to happen, I submit (for your consideration) that this little Bossy concept Scion represents the most (legal) fun you can have in a car, whether or not you’ve got your pants on.

Now, if only they’d build me one …

Source: 2012 Chicago Auto Show.

Mitsubishi brought a couple of i-MiEVs to the Chicago Auto Show, one in white and one in a gorgeous plum purple. Since I’ve written about the capabilities and specs of the i-MiEV multiple times, I don’t think I need to go into that here, but I did come to a realization while poking at the display. I think I have identified why the i-MiEV will not do well in the American market (and seriously, guys, this makes no one sadder than me, because it is still the cutest electric car I have ever seen).

The Cutest EV of 2011

On the outside, the i-MiEV looks great. It’s got the egg shape with the quizzical little headlights tilting forward, the tiny little grill at front looking like a happy cartoon mouth, and even the bigger bumpers actually look pretty decent in person. It looks like an actual car, not some kind of (admittedly adorable) toy.

One of the floor models had its hood up, and I have to give points to Mitsubishi for this. The vast majority of hybrid and electric cars we poked at had the hoods (and sometimes even the trunk) locked down tight. In stark contrast, the i-MiEV was just hanging out with its electric motor on display, as if to say, “Hey, look, electric cars aren’t scary or arcane at all. Come see how this works.” It was a display that encouraged all sorts of curiosity.

…But Not On the Inside

But then I opened the doors and got to poke around the inside of the car. It’s really easy to tell that it’s based on a kei car (the little tiny inexpensive ones with awesome gas mileage that come with the advantages of lower yearly taxes and fees but as a trade-off don’t go faster than maybe 60 mph with a stiff tailwind). And honestly, the inside of most kei cars do not really qualify as “nice.”

Don’t get me wrong – the Mitsubishi i and i-MiEV are perfectly serviceable little vehicles. They’ve got all the parts you need in the places you’d expect, they’ll go where you want, they’re super adorable and I would still drive either one into the ground. But when bringing the i-MiEV to an American market and charging upwards of $20,000 after the maximum tax credit has been applied… the consumer expects that the inside is actually going to look really nice.

And unfortunately, the inside of the i-MiEV looks and feels like a kei car. I don’t think the fact that it’s an electric car or the fantastic most-efficient-ever EPA rating will be able to overcome that impression. I am disappointed, Mitsubishi. For what it’s worth, the best impression I got from sitting in a battery electric car at the show was the Nissan Leaf. It was fabulous. And I wanted the i-MiEV to be fabulous, too, it just didn’t happen.

Questions? Opinions? Tell me I’m wrong or totally right? Let us know in the comments below the gallery.

Source | Images: 2012 Chicago Auto Show.

The Hybrid Jetta Has Good Mileage, Looks Great

Volkswagen wants you to know that the Jetta can be driven on battery power alone up to 44mph, that it goes 0-60 in under 9 seconds (perfectly average, by the way), and that it gets 45mpg combined. It only goes about a mile, mile and a quarter, under battery power alone, but that does still get you to the nearest station (hopefully) if you run the tank bone-dry.  No official word on emissions, though, carbon dioxide or otherwise.

The problem with the Jetta is the same problem that nearly every other automaker has with integrating an electric motor and its batteries – the trunk space suffers. Oh, how it suffers. There’s a giant shelf eating up much of the trunk space, and a tiny pass-through for when you’ve got skis or something. The seats do fold down, but the batteries take up so much space that whatever you’re transporting had better be fairly flat or it’s not going in there.

The Diesel Bug Is Manly!

We’ve talked about the problems with diesel here on Gas2, but the up side is that the Beetle TDI isn’t going to be burning a whole lot of it. VW wants you to know that it gets 29mpg city and 39mpg highway (much better than either the Beetle 2.5 or Beetle Turbo, but not the best diesel mileage out there), and that it’s “more masculine” than previous Bugs. No, really, that’s what the press release they handed us said. The press release was on a thumb drive shaped like a key, by the way, making it easily the most awesome hand-out at the show.

In addition to not burning too much diesel, VW is taking steps to reduce emissions; this diesel Beetle does have a particulate filter and three catalytic converters (for oxidation, nitrogen oxides, and hydrogen sulfide). The engine then makes only 140HP for a 3,000 lb. car, but it should be pretty drivable.

VW also pointed out that even though the roof is flatter, there’s still space in the rear seat. I did not actually climb into the rear seat, but since it’s not a hybrid, there’s plenty of storage space once the seats fold down. Points for the diesel hatchback.

Final impressions on the VW green display – not bad, not bad, definitely worth a test drive (we weren’t allowed to drive these display cars either, so you’ll have no preconceptions there).

Questions or opinions? Let us know in the comments below the gallery.

Source | Images: Chicago Auto Show.

I mean, there are a number of points to be happy about – it’s well proportioned, it makes that pastel blue look like a sane color choice for a car (why, no, I do not like pastels), it looks like it’s got room in the trunk without the rear end being weirdly huge… And of course there’s that “active hybrid” thing.

An Electric Motor for Extra Juice

The Active Hybrid 5 then reminded me of Peugeot’s 508 RXH – the electric motor is supposed to help more with quick acceleration and the electric motor will drive the car on its own for about 2.5 miles at speeds of no faster than 37mph. “Which is reassuring, if you manage to run the tank dry,” I said to fellow Gas2 writer Jo Borras, referring to the same statement made when talking about the Peugeot. Jo gave me a sort of pitying look, as if to say “You would have to be a total idiot for that to happen.” Okay, but everyone’s an idiot once in a while. And I still say this is a an excellent point in favor of the hybrid – emergency trips to the gas station can be made on battery power instead of on foot. (Or maybe that’s just me.)

On the subject of speed and acceleration, the Active Hybrid 5 is supposed to go 0-60 in under 6 seconds, which is fairly respectable. This is because of its 3.0 liter 6-cylinder 24-valve 300 HP twin-turbo engine, helped by an additional 55 HP from the electric motor. With all that, it should be fairly quick. (They wouldn’t let us take it off the show floor for a test drive, which I suppose is perfectly reasonable.)

There Is A Downside

So far so good, right? But then it started going a little pear-shaped. The Active Hybrid 5 is pretty, and it’s quick, but despite the electric assist, it’s kind of low on the green scale. Carbon dioxide emissions are disappointing to say the least – between 149 and 163 g/km, depending on the wheels, well above the stated EU goal of below 120 g/km for all new cars – and mileage is quite frankly astonishing for a hybrid. And when I say astonishing, I mean 20mpg city and 29mpg highway. That’s comparable to, oh, the Dodge Challenger (which we hopped into for a ride – more on the ride-alongs later), known for its total non-greenness.

The other oh-so-minor issue I took with the BMW hybrid was the trunk. I couldn’t get the seats to fold down, but even if I could have, I suspect the battery has gotten in the way of the storage space. What you see is quite literally what you get – if you head to IKEA for a new coffee table, it’s not coming home with you in the Active Hybrid, unless you somehow manage to attach a trailer hitch and hook up a trailer to tow it back (not one of the options listed). There are automakers who have managed to properly place their hybrid batteries, but BMW is definitely not one of them. See for yourself:

Oh, and the base MSRP is over $60,000.

The final verdict on the Active Hybrid 5? If you’re looking for clean and green, this one is not for you. If you’re a BMW or performance enthusiast looking for something that performs well and is just green enough to assuage your conscience, then go for it.  Either way, scroll down to the gallery. It’s not cute, but it is super pretty and well worth a look.

Questions, opinions, impressions of your own? Let us know in the comments below the gallery.

Source | Photos: Chicago Auto Show.

Focusing on Electric Mobility

Yeah, that’s a terrible pun. Let’s move on to talk about the actual car, which Ford likes to call “gas-free.” Ford claims it is “expected” to have an MPGe rating and a solar recharging option (yes!!), and that it’s supposed to charge faster than the Nissan Leaf. It will also seat five (although at least one person in back had better be somewhat tiny), and of course it has zero emissions.

In order to get the quicker charging (3-4 hours, which does sound pretty decent), one does of course have to buy the Ford 240V charging station. With the charging station, however, and Ford’s mobile app, a number of what Ford calls “key functions” (including programming the charge settings) can be handled remotely; I can’t decide if that’s neat, or just another opportunity for someone to break into your car.

We couldn’t open the hood on the Focus electric, or the trunk. We did get the back doors open and the seats folded down in case there was some kind of pass-through for larger pieces of luggage or furniture. I will let the picture below speak for itself:

Yeaaah. So there’s that small inconvenience. No word on range yet. Moving on…

Fusion of Electric and Gasoline, Apparently

Or something. Apparently there will be a hybrid, a plug-in hybrid, and a conventional gas-powered version available for the Fusion this year. The plug-in version of the hybrid is also supposed to get 100 MPGe (alongside the Focus up there), according to Ford, but we’ll see when it gets here (not until fall).

The hybrid version will go up to 62mph on battery power alone. It makes good use of its batteries, too, supposedly getting 47mpg in the city (due to the electric assist) and 44mpg on the highway. That may seem counterintuitive, but remember that battery-electric vehicles use very little energy when moving slowly and none at all when stopped (unless you’ve got something on inside the car, like the heater or the radio). So points to Ford if the Fusion works as advertised – that seems like a pretty good combination of batteries and combustion.

Of course, Ford didn’t get everything right. The Fusion hybrid has the same problem that nearly every other hybrid has. Trunk space is limited and while the seats do actually fold down, there’s that line of batteries limiting the pass-through to the middle of the car. At least it has more storage space than the Focus. See?

Which brings us to…

The CMAX

…I have no puns for this one. The CMAX is Ford’s answer to the Prius v, supposedly having better fuel economy and going faster on battery power only than any other hybrid. The plug-in version is also supposed to have a total range of 500 miles (that’s very likely better than you get in your ICE-powered car).

It still looks like a van, though. I mean, that’s a straight-out minivan. And a minivan can seem like the most reasonable thing in the world to own – it’s comfortable and roomy, it has tons of storage space, it’s big and heavy enough to be a comforting cocoon in case of a crash, and so on. The problem with a minivan, whether it has a turbo V6 engine and 300 HP or a super awesome hybrid system giving you 500 miles per tank, is that it’s a minivan.

Before you ask, the Prius v did not scream “minivan” at me nearly as loudly as the CMAX did.

Commercially Electric Transit

Ford’s Transit Connect has been around for years. It’s imported as a passenger vehicle and converted into a cargo van – they can be bought with or without seats, with lots of storage space on the floor or nearly none at all. They’re somewhat iconic of Ford’s commercial vehicles.

And, of course, the electric version has been puttering around quietly for a couple years now. We poked around display model this year, opening all the doors and trying to pry up the hood to see what was underneath. (We think we know where the hood is supposed to go, but the little lever had actually been removed. There were dangly wire-feeling bits and everything.)

You may have gotten the impression that I’m not particularly fond of vans; the electric Transit Connect is still a van. It does get 62 MPGe, and Ford claims a range of 80 miles. The EPA rated it 56 miles, though, which explains the numbering on the one thing I really love about the Transit Connect:

That is a range-o-meter. That’s not an electric display, that’s not a touch screen, that’s not a delicate electrical component that gets fiddled with and poked at and that’ll probably start going bad after four or five years. That’s a very familiar-looking dial with a little orange needle. It’s magnificent. It also only goes up to 60 (as per the EPA rating) although there is space on the dial to go up to 80 (Ford’s rating).

Questions or opinions? Let us know in the comments below the gallery.

Source | Images: Chicago Auto Show.

3 Key Differences Between Tesla And Fisker [GigaOm]

A High-Tech Home Made From Shipping Containers [Treehugger]

Mitsubishi i EV Tops ACEEE’s Green Car List For 2012 [ACEEE]

Drive Solar, Save $263,000 In 50 Years [Green Car Reports]

Penn Gilette Loves His Nissan LEAF [Autoblog Green]

A Solar-Powered Race Car For The Future [Inhabitat]

The US’ military has been pushing for more energy-efficient and oil-free ways to kill people protect America’s oil-supply freedom for several years now, introducing “super-efficient” HUMVEEs, diesel-electric hybrids, and this: the US Army CERV.

First shown at last year’s Detroit Auto Show and again at the Indianapolis 500 as part of that event’s Memorial Day salute to the US military, the Clandestine Extended-range Vehicle (CERV) was on display at Chicago. Both of the CERV protoypes were on-hand, in fact, to show off the Army’s dedication to new technology and (of course) to help Army recruiters hook prospective engineering students into patriotic service.

The recruiters on-hand knew a bit about the CERV, and even let me try the McLaren F1-style central driver’s seat on for size (it fits!). I was shown an electric motor that was positioned inboard (as opposed to several modern EV concepts, which use hub-mounted motors) to improve the CERV’s survivability and ease of maintenance (the motor could be unbolted and swapped out with a new motor in minutes, if not seconds). The ghillie suit version (shown, at top) was also on-hand, showing off a “more forest, less desert” version of the CERV might look like if we ever invade Siberia (for example) as opposed to Iran.

You can check out more pictures of the CERV below, and (if you’re local) head over to the Chicago Auto Show and try one on. While you’re there, say thanks to the servicemen and veterans you see there (they don’t get to choose where they go or why, they’re just doing the best they can to do what they think is right).

Source: 2012 Chicago Auto Show.