The rising cost of gas and the small income of those 18-25 year olds may be another factory to consider, given the question asks "reduce how much I drive...".

Reducing driving (and taking alternate forms of transportation) is, at best, loosely correlated to desire to own a car.

This is frustrating to the informed buyer, the automaker, and in-turn the uninformed buyer.

This 'method' of rating the battery is actually discouraging auto makers from including an 80% charge mode. Include the 80% charge mode and your 100% and 80% range will be averaged. Don't include the mode and your 100% range is used?

This is worse the EPA test not factoring in the engine shut-off technology. Beneficial to consumers, beneficial to real world results, looks bad on paper.

This article has the journalistic significance of me telling you about my favorite Christmas present from 2012.

Great comments as always John. Keep em' coming.

Broken link: Tesla Using Dodge Magnum Bodies To Disguise Model S Test Mules?

Agree - the context of this headline is unjust. I cared not to a.) check the source or b.) reread this article again, but I assume this "champ" won by being the highest % above its EPA estimate. This is not a useful win by any means.

If I make a car that gets 5mpg by the sticker says it gets .5mpg does that make my POS 5mpg the new winner of this 'title'?

Worthless article IMO.

Laughable.

Like a hostess at a Vegan restaurant recommending a steakhouse down the street (owned by the same company of course) because the line is too long.

Alternatively the investment cost of the solar panels would have to include the investment cost of the vehicle if you're comparing the payback period of cost of gasoline saved.

The way the study should work, is show the increased power demand of an electric vehicle at some avg daily mileage, and show how having the solar panels offset this cost further adding to the value of the panels.

BUT, (please correct me on this if I'm wrong). Wouldn't this be the same as selling the energy back to the power company?

It almost sounds like the panel company is saying "buy our solar panels and an electric car" well, but then the numbers ignore the cost of the vehicle.

I'm confused... or maybe the data is.

The article talks about how owning an electric car may help cut the investment cost of solar panels.
"Based on an average mileage of 12,000 miles per year, British Gas said it would be possible for an electric car owner to see a complete payback on a 2.5 kWp solar installation in as little as 4.5 years thanks to an estimated FIT income of $1,626 per year and over $2,600 in saved gasoline bills."

The odd statement here is "over $2,600 in saved gasoline bills". Why are we comparing value of gasoline saved? The solar panels do not save money on gasoline. The solar panel saves money spent on electricity, and the electric car is what saves money versus gasoline usage.

Your links on the bottom should be phrased: "Check out our STYLING reviews of both"

Doesn't make much sense to link an article focused on comparing two vehicles' gas efficiency and emissions to the physical appeal of the vehicle.