That reminds me of highschool. My best friend and I wanted to use Estes rockets to power a toy car. We went through quite a few iterations before we got something that didn’t flip upside down, just spin in circles, or take off in random directions.

Or not just pushing down, but pushing the exhaust across a wing so that as the air flow from the rocket is dying down, the air flow from the car is coming up so that the wing keep on making downforce.

I had no idea these weren’t just Jeeps. <shrug>

IF, this is a huge if, the Roadster ever pulls off such a feat I’m sure there will be a handful of footnotes under it.

The last car I bought was flat out of gas, like no movement to the gauge. The nice little car lot I purchased it from ask how the fuel situation was, when I said it was flat out he opened his wallet handed me $100 and said fill the tank and buy dinner on the way home. It was super awesome of him to do that.

Welcome to the self-checkout of automotive journalism.

ETH Zurich Mayhem EV did 0-62 mph in 0.956 seconds back in 2023 also just using its tires. Of course the car weighed a lot less.

The idea of the cold air boosters is that they are providing additional acceleration force by pushing on the air directly so you aren’t using the tires limited traction to do all the work.

KITT used a ramjet IIRC.

The Rimac Nevera can hit 60 in 1.7, powered through its tires. I did reach out to a tire group, who said that a 0-60 of less than one second didn’t seem feasible on current tire technology without the help of a “rocket booster”

Providing a full tank of gas upon purchase is one of the rules. Is this not an industry standard? In the past 30 years of buying vehicles, private or dealer based sales, I have only once not gotten in to it without a full tank. Weirdly, that was a Jeep (see user name), but they also gave me $40 in cash to top off the…

Dude, that’s the wrong image for slide 2.

Jeep and Premium don’t belong in the same sentence, unless “is not” is in between those 2 words.

I call the validity of this list into question.  Where is the Miata?  There are numerous vehicles that require 2x-3x the resources, and have worse mileage and are on the list (Ranger, or 500H).  A minimalist sports car that can hit 40mpg should have made this list if they were being honest.  Reduce is the most…

The elephant in the room is also... Not in the room... Where are the Teslas?

One caveat in the study is the ACEEE assumes Prius Prime owners were using its all-electric range for a “little over 50 percent of their driving.”

I find it hard to believe the Hummer EV, as bad as it is, would be worse than a Ford Raptor. Something is fishy about their calculations.

This list is not measuring efficiency. Energy conversion of a BEV is about 3X better than an ICE. Blending the two can improve the ICE energy conversion efficiency but the ICE simply cannot match the energy conversion efficiency of an electric machine. This article is simply misusing the word “efficiency”.

What a complete Bullshit report!  Where is Tesla?  Are they trying to say Tesla's are not available nationwide and Nissan Leafs are?

Someone do me a favor and go into a Toyota dealership and ask what the wait times are for the Rav4 Prime and Prius Prime.