This marks the fifth generation of the Legacy, which received a complete redesign for 2010 as Subaru’s mid-size, but does it really improve the love? Because it’s been a struggle to remotely even feel anything that slightly resembles love when it came to writing this review.

The Legacy comes in eight different trims starting at $19,995 to $29,995 not including options. Each Legacy comes equipped with the norm such as ABS, Vehicle Dynamics Control (VDC) and the only car in this class to offer AWD standard. Legacy also earned the IIHS Top Safety Pick for it’s ring-shaped reinforced frame that includes Subaru’s advanced frontal air bag system, side curtain air bags and front seat side-impact air bags. To date, the NTSHA has yet to release their rating. The Legacy comes standard with a 2.5-liter SOHC 170-hp engine with the optional 2.5-liter DOHC turbocharged 265-hp or the 3.6 liter DOHC 256-hp– all of which earn the Boxer status. Our GT version came with the 2.5 turbocharged Boxer engine along with a 6-speed manual transmission, option package ‘08 and the Sirius Satellite kit topping out at $34,146.

The Legacy did not fail to provide silly grins as the gas pedal was mashed into the floor with the whistling of the turbo. Sadly, the 6-speed manual transmission did not provide the enthusiasm it needed in order to be the perfect match with the turbocharged delight. The transmission felt like how a 14-year-old, 6-foot-4-inch boy appears– lanky and out of place. The Legacy’s handling along with the AWD and turbocharged engine made for a responsive suspension that handled very well. If the transmission could just get in tune with the power and handling, I was starting to think that the Legacy could be a packaged performance bargain for under $35,000 as an alternate to its upgraded German same size class competition.

Exterior wise, the redesigned Legacy appears fuller and not so boxy as its predecessor but in comparison to the previous models, the exterior took on an even more common look. Dare I say the Legacy had once resembled a former Camry but now it seems to lean more towards the last generation Mazda 6. I actually liked the previous version better then the current only because it wasn’t so rounded and puffy. Our 2.5GT Limited version came equipped with a hood scoop look to be borrowed from the Subaru stock pile making the Legacy appear to be a beefier WRX. The 2010 version does have extra interior space for a total of 103 cubic feet thanks to those rounded and smoothed out areas, making this a mid-size that can actually transport three adults in the back seat without whoever gets stuck in the middle feeling as if they’re four years old.

I found nothing superb about the design or the quality of materials used on the Legacy’s interior; it was all extremely average. The leather along with the dual heated seats did come in handy on one of our unusually cold mornings here but with the GT package the seats should offer more of a sportier feel then they did. Despite the 60/40 rear seat and now wider rear doors, do not be prepared to pack too much into the trunk. The trunk lid opens rather low and is prepared to nail you in the forehead if you are over a certain height, so beware. Not to leave out the fact that the opening does not provide many options for stuffing large flat packaged boxes that one just might acquire while on a trip to a certain local Swedish store.

The instrument cluster was basic but easy to read despite the annoying, ever-fluctuating gas mileage gauge. It annoyed me with the fact it it did not specify what the mpg was. If there is going to be a gauge even for this purpose, shouldn’t it be one that tells exactly what you are getting like most cars already do?

The upgraded Harman/Kardon 440-watt audio system provided enough for my boys to enthusiastically get their “gotta get that” groove on while riding in the backseat. The only feature the radio lacks is the auxilary jack for the now common mp3 accessory we all have. The audio controls located via fingertips on the steering wheel were nice, but my biggest annoyance with the car is the now in demand technologically advanced touch screen that happens to control everything.

Okay, so there was a calender to program important events that you would need your car to remind you of or that handy dandy calculator available at just a touch of your index finger, but working the GPS or changing the damn radio station was completely ridiculous. I am technically savvy, and have no other problems figuring out an array of common devices used on a daily basis, but getting into the Legacy made me feel as if I was completely incompetent. On Day Three of having the car, the home screen became stuck on the language selection screen and even with the time spent reading the owners manual and repeatedly selecting English there was no reversing it back to what it had been before. Despite the ever so clever rear vision camera that comes along with the upgrade the only thing it reminded me was that we have been driving for how long now without the assistance of a camera in a car this size, so why is it necessary now?

I just found it quite silly for a car this size. The one time I actually plug an address into the GPS, which thankfully I knew where I was going, it had me going on a goose chase around town. After reaching the destination and restarting the car, I was unable to clear the destination and to avoid hearing the annoying voice of the GPS giving a constant reminder to make a u-turn. By the way, this all comes with a price tag of $2995. Add to the package a sunroof that when open (between the overbearing wind noise and the feeling of being sucked out of the opening) makes you want to keep it closed despite the fact that you did in fact pay extra for a feature you cannot even use at speeds over 25 mph.

Overall, I am completely underwhelmed with Legacy. Based on the sticker price, I was expecting to be wooed but instead I am left asking, is that it? For a class full of plenty of other delightful options, Subaru has done nothing spectacular to catch the eye of this less than quirky driver.

Photos by Joanna Cifrian

When Kia debuted in the United States, it was with the reputation of offering a cheap car and nothing more. First came the Sephia then Spectra but the Forte comes as a whole new replacement to two previous cars that just were so-so. Unlike most auto makers, there was no rebadging or smoothing out the surfaces; a whole new car was in order down to the chassis when it came to the design. The Forte was launched around the same time Kia itself launched a complete overhaul on their line and company. With recalls and slumping numbers from most manufactures, sales are on the up for Kia with an entire lineup that offers high safety ratings, great fuel economy and a 10-year/100,000 mile warranty to match others manufactures.

The Forte comes in three trim levels, the base LX, EX both of which share a 2.0L 156-hp with a 5-speed manual and an optional 4-speed automatic with a starting MSRP $13,695. We were lucky enough to score the SX model which came equipped with a 2.4L 173-hp with a standard 6-speed manual (an optional 5-speed automatic is available, too) MSRP of $17,495. Standard features with this trim level include heated power mirrors, a AM/FM/CD/MP3/SIRUS 6 speaker audio system, Bluetooth wireless, cruise control, remote entry, air conditioning, dual front and side impact airbags and abs. The optional SX leather package ($1000) includes heated seats and a windshield de-icer and power sunroof ($700) and topped the Forte out at $19,890. The only factory option that is not included at the moment is a navigation system, but a deal is in the works with Garmin.

The Forte’s front facade provides headlights that appear to squint, with a sleek wrap around front that continues down the sides to where the smooth wrapping finishes off the rear of the car. The SX comes with 17-inch alloy wheels that give it an slightly aggressive stance. It sits just a little lower to the ground thanks to its independent front with MacPherson struts, a stabilizer bar, and a torsion beam rear with struts and coil springs. There was little to no roll in the curves and loopty-loos I searched for all over town. The Forte hugged the road no matter what the speed. The 2.4-liter engine coupled with the 6-speed manual transmission was a complete blast to drive. There is a slight hesitation starting from a dead stop while quickly launching the car from first to second gear but was soon not an issue while easily moving into the higher gears. Kia offers 0-60 times in the mid 7-seconds for the SX. The Forte comes with standard four-wheel disc brakes along with ABS, ESC (stability control), BAS (brake assist), EBD (electronic brake force distribution), and TCS (traction control) that ensure stopping to be just as effective as mashing the gas. While zipping down brick roads or cutting through traffic on the interstate the car held its own. The SX offers more power and better fuel economy, 23/31 mpg, then other leaders in this class.

Offering more interior space than three of the main sellers in this group, the interior of the Forte was just as thought out as the exterior redesign. The moment I first sat in the drivers seat I immediately loved that the dash did not seem so far away. Add one smaller sized leather wrapped steering wheel with both audio and Bluetooth controls that were incredibly easy to navigate that also happened to fall exactly where I rest my thumbs when driving. I was in lust. I programmed the Bluetooth quickly and went through the radio as if it were second nature. Everything from the air conditioning to the heated seats to the sunroof controls were as if they were positioned in a reflex mode instead of actually having to reach for any of them.

The overall design and quality of the materials were, in my opinion, above average. Flat black dash with satin nickle-like detailing broke up what would be an excess of black plastic. A cubby large enough for your phone and mp3 player sat below with charging ports and auxiliary plug-in sat under the air controls in the center cubby leaving two cup holders in the center as well as the typical console and one slot above for your sunglasses. In the rear seat, my the drivers seat all the way back there was still plenty of leg room and I did not feel cramped. There was more than enough room for two adults to comfortably ride in back.The part I enjoyed the most about the interior was how quiet it was inside. Even with the sunroof open there was minimal wind drag, reducing the cabin noise one normally gets with such a feature open. The trunk provided massive cargo space that was able to extend into the interior space with the rear sat laid flat.

Overall, I’m sold. The Kia Forte is everything a car this price should be; it’s sporty, has spunk (making it a fun car to drive), and handles surprisingly well. It is also aggressively priced with a ton of standard options and not-so-pricey upgrades. And it just looks good! The Kia Forte could be considered the underdog, but with these shining qualities in such a full class of contenders it won’t be like that for much longer. When it came time to hand the keys over, I was willing to give my own car up as collateral to keep the Forte longer. But no such luck.

For the seven days of pure driving pleasure, Kia made a point to show that they are ready to take a firm hold on the market with something other than a minivan. I truly enjoyed driving the Forte and would recommend it highly for anyone who thinks the only options in the sporty compact category belong to the norm.

Think outside the box. You just might be surprised, too.

Photos by Joanna Cifrian

The 4th generation Elantra received an overall makeover with an exterior that is smooth in appearance and not at all ugly but still doesn’t really stand out. The rounded front and rear make the car tasteful without looking like a bubble. As most of the Hyundai models, it is similar with the front grill and headlights as the rest of the lineup. What personality it lacks on the exterior is made up with by an unexpected interior.

Hyundai Elantra offers a spacious interior and unobstructed view to the outside. With 112.1 cubic feet, it has the largest interior of any car in this class. There is seating for four adults comfortably with room for five if needed. An impressive amount of head room, front and rear leg room and comfortable seating took us by surprise. The above average trim did not appear cheap or haphazardly put together, and the dash and surround were clean and thought out even with the large amount of plastic covering the deep dashboard. The instrument cluster was easy to decipher and all controls were well within reach. Little things like placing the trunk release button in the driver side door exactly where your hand naturally wants to reach instead of up under the dash, a rear seat fold release in the trunk and plenty of storage compartments around the driver were nice added touches. The ridiculously inconspicuous trunk that extends with the 60/40 split rear seat were more than enough to carry home two Adirondack chairs along with a week’s worth of groceries. Standard dual front, dual front seat-mounted side airbags and dual side curtain and ABS are an added bonus to what we expect a new car should offer to keep us safe.

The Elantra-Blue as tested came equipped with the Comfort Package ($1700) that added a six-speaker audio system with the essential iPod and MP3 auxiliary jacks, XM radio, cruise and air conditioning. Carpet floor mats ($95), iPod cable ($35) and an easy to use Bluetooth hands-free phone system ($325) along with the freight and handling ($720) topped our total price as tested to $17,020. The base model Elantra unfortunately does not come equipped with air conditioning, which in these days one wouldn’t even consider an option. The price tag slowly creeps towards the $20,000 mark with the upgraded trim packages such as the GLS or SE that the air is standard on.

The manual transmission was confident enough to merge into rush hour traffic as it helped boost the 2.0 liter, 138 HP DOHV 4-cylinder up and down the road. The clutch was easy but the short throws of the shifter were clumsy and felt tightly placed together. With the average 35 highway mpg and combined average 29 mpg, you could easily get past the awkward set up with the fewer trips to the pump. As it was, it felt like it took forever to move the gas gauge off the full indicator and down below the halfway mark. I found the engine to be incredibly quiet even while accelerating and on the highway at higher speeds. There were a few times that if it had not been for the tachometer, I wouldn’t have even known it was running. The ride and handling of the car exceeded expectations by providing more then what I initially expected– but no rally races in its immediate future.

Overall, if you are in the market for a first car or second car to add to the family lineup, put the Hyundai Elantra on your short list. Hyundai offers a great value, long-term backed reliability and you can’t beat the great fuel economy. The car isn’t going to stop traffic with great looks or performance but it will allow you to arrive comfortably and with a realistic price. The Elantra just might be exactly what you are looking for.

Photos by Joanna Cifrian.

With a blizzard expected to hit New England this weekend, here’s what we recommend:

1. Get yourself TWO windshield scrapers. We’ve all done it – opened the door to grab a scraper only to watch a small avalanche make its way from the roof into the drivers seat. Keep one in the car, and one in the house. And don’t buy one of the 6″ travel-size models; while they look handy in the store, your handy is going to get pretty cold the first time you need to remove 7″ of fresh powder. Invest in a nice, big scraper/brush combination tool and be done with it. We found a crazy, out of control scraper from Oxo in their Extendable Twister Snowbrush.
2. Top off your wiper fluid. This one is a no-brainer. Even when it isn’t snowing, the truck ahead of you is going to throw a nasty salt/mud concoction right in your windshield any time the road gets wet. Don’t use water, as it will freeze (duh); a gallon jug of quality Smurf juice can be found for less than $5 at your local gas station or supermarket. Buy two, and check your owner’s manual for filling instructions.
3. Check your wiper blades. If your wiper blades struggled to keep your windshield clear in the spring and fall, don’t expect them to put up much of a fight to rain’s colder sister. Check the rubber for cracks, tears, or any signs of wear. If they don’t make the grade, a new set of high performance Rain-X blades go for about $20 at any auto parts store.
4. Inspect your tires. First, check your tire pressure. The pressure in your tires falls by 1-2 PSI for every 10-degree drop in temperature, so don’t be surprised if you have to fill up. You can find the recommended range on the yellow sticker in your doorjamb, and a pressure gauge will deflate your wallet by about $10. If your pressure is low, top off at a gas station.

   Then check your tread depth. To do this, stick a quarter into one of the treads with Washington’s head upside-down. If any part of his head is covered by rubber, it means you have at least 4/32″ of tread depth – good to go. But if his wig doesn’t reach the rubber, you might want to replace your rollers. Studies have shown that braking distances on wet pavement nearly double when your tires wear from 4/32″ to 2/32″ (Lincoln’s head on a penny).

   Finally, figure out exactly what kind of rubber you have wrapped around your rims. Find the make and model on the tire’s sidewall and check the specs online. Chances are your shoes are of the all-season variety – which are OK – but you want to make sure that don’t have summer tires. While they’re great for dry pavement, summer tires are downright dangerous in winter conditions. You owe it to yourself (and everyone else on the road) to check, especially if your two-owner vehicle spent its early years anywhere south of Pennsylvania.

5. Consider snow tires. As I said, all-season tires are OK, but they are nowhere near as cold-weather-capable as snow tires. Studies have shown that snow tires require 28 fewer feet than their all-season counterparts to halt a car traveling at 40 MPH. From 60 MPH, the difference is 59 feet. In low-visibility blizzard conditions, this kind of improvement can mean the difference between stopping safely and getting into an accident. In addition to their superior stopping power, snow tires provide better lateral grip (which will come in handy if you decide to turn) and acceleration (which will come in handy when you need to get from zero to moving). A set of four can run anywhere between $300 and $400, and most shops will mount any tires you purchase from them for free. While they aren’t cheap, snow tires make winter driving safer for you, your car, and everyone else on the road.
6. Check your battery. If it sounded strained in the fall months it’s going to sound a lot worse on those 10 degree February mornings. Freezing temperatures can cut battery output in half. Most auto parts stores will test your battery for free and let you know if it’s going to leave you stranded. A new battery can cost anywhere from $100 to $200, but will provide you with years of cold-cranking power that you can count on.
7. Check your coolant. Even on the coldest of days, your engine gets very hot and relies on coolant to keep from overheating. That’s why you need to make sure the magical liquid is, well, a liquid. Coolant becomes solid if it isn’t mixed with the right amount of antifreeze. The ideal ratio is 50:50, and the only way to be sure that you have it right is by flushing the radiator system. It’s a good thing to do anyway if your car has over 50,000 miles, and should set you back less than $100 at an independent shop. A dealership will probably charge you more.

Take the night vision-technology that comes, optionally, built into these vehicles. In its first incarnation, night vision cameras could see the road ahead of you by amplifying the ambient light and displaying the resulting picture on a dashboard LCD. Later developments added infrared sensing, which blasts the road directly in front of you with IR light to see when ambient conditions are dark, to far-IR temperature detecting.

The system detects changes in temperature to help you distinguish between a parked car, a deer, or a human. Better yet, the imaging software from Autoliv can recognize the heat patters, and display a “pedestrian” warning as well as tinting the person standing in front of you in yellow to make them stand out on the black and white display.

Of course, the biggest downfall to these systems is that you have to pull your eyes off the road to use them. Its one thing to glance down at your speedometer, but it’s a whole another thing to try and process images from a screen and maintain safe control of your vehicle. In the future, the company might integrate the warnings onto a heads-up-display across the windshield, which is equal parts futuristic and cool.

Several years ago, cruise control was a fancy gadget relegated only to the most expensive luxury vehicles. Now, you’ll find it on just about every car. Luxury offerings have a way of trickling down to the average consumer, and mabye one day, you’ll climb into a night-vision equipped Civic.

(image via)

GMC had announced earlier in the year that it would continue to manufacture Saturns until 2011 but in April they stated they were looking to sell or close the brand.

In June, negotiations began with Roger Penske, and his company Penske Automotive Group Inc, to sell off Saturn. In the deal Penske would get roughly 350 dealerships and 13,000 employees. The deal, which was supposed to close today, fell through because Penske could not find a manufacturer to provide the vehicles. GM had previously agreed to continue producing the vehicles until 2011, and after that Penske and Saturn would be on their own. Penske had a tentative deal with a third, unnamed auto company, but that company’s board of directors rejected the agreement, bringing the entire deal to its knees.

GM will stop producing Saturns as soon as possible and will phase out its dealerships. Saturn owners can still receive service at a Saturn Dealership or any GM certified dealer after the closures.

And nothing looks worse than a bubbled up blue tinted Walmart job. Of course, the bright side is that even if you completely muck up your tints, you can always peel them off and try again.

“Everybody has to try it once,” said Rick Maas, the owner of Eastern Glass Tinting Co. “That’s how I got started. My father was in the business, and I used to take the scraps and practice.”

Practice makes perfect. This is one of the few times we’ll tell you to just suck it up and call a professional. If you’re going to add tints, you want to do it right.

So we went to Rick.

Stuff for Your Car #3: The Tint Job

About two hours — $220 — Call a pro

Tinting adds a lot to the look of your car, and it keeps some of the rays out as an added bonus. It’s also good for some privacy here in Boston, since many of us have to park on the street.

There are other arguments that tinting helps glass stay together in an accident, so it doesn’t spray all over you or passengers and that tinted windows will prevent fading or cracking on leather seats.

Keep in mind that states have laws about tinting, especially concerning passenger cars. In Massachusetts, aftermarket tinting must allow more than 35 percent of light in on the front and rear side windows. The rear window can be tinted right down to the 35 percent level. You can’t add any reflective tint to your windshield, but most windshields already have the six inches of non-reflective tinting allowed.

And that’s just another reason why going to a pro is recommended. We’ve actually seen cops force people to peel their illegal tints off their windows. So even if you get out all the dust and bubbles, you might still be screwed.

Maas takes his time, using one spray bottle to get dirt and dust off and another to help the tinting film attach to the window. He didn’t say what was in the bottles.

He started by cleaning the outside of the windows and applying a square piece of film to the outside of the windows, carefully tracing a cutout. Then he put the cutouts on a large sheet of thick glass in the shop and flattened it out, making sure it was perfect.

Then he thoroughly cleaned the inside of each window and applied the film slowly, going over it several times to make sure all the bubbles were out.

If you try tinting on your own, make sure you don’t skimp on the cleaning, and don’t use cheap paper towels that leave lint. If there’s anything but glass on the surface, the tint film will stick to it, and you might as well take a picture and post it on the FAIL blog.

Maas did the same thing for the rear window, applying the film to a clean outside of the window first for measurement before applying it on the inside.

He warned against rolling down the windows all the way for about 48 hours, and he was done. The job took just under two hours. Maas charges $220 for a complete car.

After two weeks, there are no bubbles.

Eastern Glass Tinting Co. has locations in Charlestown and Marshfield and can be reached at 617-912-1040.

We could go on the interwebs for our data, and if you’re reading this you are going on the web because we DON’T PRINT Blast.

I took things into my own hands, took one for the team and did the only logical thing I could think of: I bought a car.

I did it for you, really. I traded in my dad’s old 2000 Ford Ranger for a 2008 Toyota Corolla (yeah, I’m ballin’ now, homes). It’s my first car. All previous vehicles were parental hand-me-downs. So this is something special. And since I’m single, I’m going to spoil my new car with gifts and toys and upgrades.

But I’m not going to chrome her out or put on decals and racing stripes. I’m not going on Ebay for a $2,000 “supercharger.” I’m not going to outfit it with 18″ rims that spin when the car is stopped. I’m a fucking journalist. I don’t have money for that shit, anyway.

So, over the next few weeks I’ll be doing some reasonable and practical things, taking pictures, consulting with experts and providing some step-by-step info on how you can do the same.

Some of the things to look for: Air filters, headlights, tinting do’s and don’ts, efficient use of trunk space, the oil, and more.

Let’s start simple.

The Corolla is the top selling car in America, and these tips are good for the 9th Generation Corolla. Consult your local Google for other cars before trying this at home.

Stuff for Your Car #1: Replace the cabin air filter

5 minutes — Less than $20 — Anyone can do it

I was shit-scared when I started these projects. I don’t tinker with cars. I’m Generation Y. We don’t change our own oil anymore or do our own tuneups. We go to Jiffy Lube and Firestone and pay good money to guys that drive better cars than us so that they can do all that stuff. My Firestone guy drives a BMW, by the way.

There’s also been a lot of talk about cabin air filters lately, and I figured that since I bought a slightly used car with just under 20,000 miles on it, that I might as well change it up. Rather than pay someone to do it, the really helpful people on Toyota Nation posted a ridiculously easy-looking do it yourself guide.

The photo gallery above will run you though it.

I paid $15.99 for an STP filter at AutoZone. You could also go to Home Depot and buy a home A/C filter and cut it to size. You don’t really need to get fancy. Some people even say to stick a dryer sheet or two under the filter. I don’t like the idea. The fewer chemicals in my air, the better. Most new filters are white. Some contain activating carbon that turns it gray.

Open the glove box. There’s one black screw and some tabs holding it on. Remove the screw with a phillips screwdriver, and it comes off easy.

Your cabin air filter is in the rectangle above the cylinder marked “Toyota.” Push the tabs, and the cover comes right off. Just go easy. You’re not going to zap yourself or break anything.

The old, dirty filter slides right out. Now, a lot of dealerships are smart, and they’ll replace the cabin filter when they “re-certify” the car so you have good smelling air and powerful air conditioning. Mine was, as you can see, not new. But it wasn’t in terrible condition.

Slide the new filter in, replace the cover, replace the glove box and screw, and you’re done!

Toyota recommends replacing the cabin filter every 20,000 miles. It’s really up to you. I have allergies to things like dust, so I’ll be aggressively replacing it.

Special thanks to Exage on Toyota Nation.

“It’s a serious crime problem that’s being aggressively investigated by law enforcement,” the FBI said in a statement this week.

So how does this work? When your car gets stolen — FBI says it’s usually a luxury car or stacked SUV — the thief pries off the VIN number and replaces it with another number, the VIN number of a legitimate, non-stolen car with the same make, model and year but usually from a different state.

The thief also doctors up phony ownership documents that allow the vehicle to be easily registered somewhere else.

In the Tampa case, more than 1,000 cars were cloned and sold in 20 states with a $25 million loss to owners and insurers.

The tactic was highlighted on the USA Network television show “Burn Notice” recently.

If you buy a cloned car, and the police bust the thief and find you, they’ll take the car back. Then you’re out of luck.

Worse, if your legitimate car gets cloned, you could be the victim of parking tickets, toll violations, speeding, and other nasty offenses.

The good news is that a new national database may help get rid of car cloning.

“Enter NMVTIS, or the National Motor Vehicle Title Information System. This Department of Justice database, operated by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, is an electronic system that links state motor vehicle departments together … and once fully operational should go a long way towards shutting down car cloning activities,” the FBI said. “If a car is titled in one state, a criminal should not be able to steal its VIN and use it on another vehicle in another state — the database will spit out a hit showing that the number is already in use.”

So far, 37 states participate or are in the process of participating in the system. A federal law mandated the creation of the database and the participation of all 50 states by next year.

How can you prevent cloning?

• If you think your car was cloned (for instance, you receive notice of unpaid parking tickets that aren’t yours), contact your local police.
• If you’re car shopping, beware of a car being sold for substantially less than comparable makes and models.
• Get a copy of the car’s vehicle history report.
• Check out the VIN plate on the dashboard for any evidence of tampering (scratches, etc.)
• Look for incorrect spellings on paperwork, like vehicle titles.
• Trust your intuition—if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is!

When you compare battery to gasoline power, electricity wins hands down. A 2007 study by the non-profit Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) calculated that powering a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) would cost the equivalent of roughly 75 cents per gallon of gasoline-a price not seen at the pump for 30 years.

The calculation was made using an average cost of electricity of 8.5 cents per kilowatt hour and the estimated distance the car would travel on one charge, versus a car that gets 25 miles per gallon and is powered by $3 per gallon gasoline. Change any of those variables and the relative costs change. For example, substituting a car that gets 50 miles per gallon doubles the comparative electrical cost (though it still works out much cheaper than gasoline). On the other hand, in some areas where wind or hydropower is wasted at night-just when the PHEV would be charging-the utility might drop the kilowatt hour cost to two to three cents, making the charge much less costly.

And don’t worry that we’ll run out of electrical power: A 2005 study by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory estimated that three-quarters of the country’s current small vehicle fleet could be charged by our existing electrical grid without building new power plants. (And if all those cars were replaced by PHEVs, it would eliminate the need for 6.5 billion barrels of oil per day, or 52 percent of current U.S. oil imports.)

Regarding environmental impact, charging up your car with electricity from the grid also wins handily over filling up at the gas station. In the most comprehensive PHEV study to date, released in 2007 by EPRI and the non-profit Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), results predict that all greenhouse gases will be reduced as PHEVs begin to penetrate the car market. Estimated cumulative greenhouse gas reductions from 2010 to 2050, depending upon how fast PHEVs take hold, range from 3.4 to 10.3 billion tons.

More than one half of our national energy grid is powered by coal, and in areas where PHEVs are charged through coal-provided electricity, says NRDC, there is the possibility of increased levels of soot and mercury emissions. However, charging up can be much less of a guilt-ridden affair where cleaner electrical sources like wind and solar are available. The website HybridCars.com points out that as more power plants are required to develop green power and emit fewer greenhouse gases, the environmental and health benefits will further increase.

CONTACTS: Electric Power Research Institute, www.epri.com; HybridCars.com, www.hybridcars.com; Natural Resources Defense Council, www.nrdc.org.

Dear EarthTalk: What is aerial wolf gunning and why does Alaska governor Sarah Palin endorse the practice? — Vivian Anderson, Seattle, WA

Aerial wolf gunning involves stalking and shooting wolves from low-flying planes and helicopters. The practice yields better results than traditional ground-based hunting since it allows hunters to cover lots of ground quickly and track prey from an unobstructed “bird’s eye” vantage point. For these very reasons, some hunters-as well as many environmentalists and animal rights advocates-consider aerial hunting unsportsmanlike and even inhumane since it violates the “fair chase” ethic.

Aerial hunting is mostly forbidden on U.S. public lands per the Federal Airborne Hunting Act, passed by Congress in 1972. But individual states can allow it for the sake of protecting “land, water, wildlife, livestock, domesticated animals, human life or crops.” Alaska governor Frank Murkowski exploited this language in 2003 and signed a state bill allowing Alaskans to apply for permits to kill wolves-which some Alaskans’ fear take a large toll on the moose and caribou that hunters like to shoot-from aircraft.

But when Sarah Palin, herself an avid hunter, took over the governorship in 2006, she instituted a $150 bounty for any hunter who killed a wolf from an aircraft in select areas where moose and caribou populations were not as large as hunters would have liked. A state judge quickly put a halt on the bounty, ruling that the Palin administration lacked the authority to offer such payouts. But the judge was powerless to stop aerial hunting itself as long as it was done in a permitted fashion in the name of “predator control,” per the loophole in the federal ban.

Palin also approved a $400,000 state-funded campaign that helped undermine a recent ballot initiative to ban aerial hunting, and also introduced legislation to ease restrictions on the practice. In the four years Palin has been governor, upwards of 800 wolves have been killed by aerial hunting in Alaska. Palin has joined influential groups such as the Alaska Outdoor Council in maintaining that wolf populations need culling, as the great canines are literally stealing food from the tables of Alaska’s many subsistence hunters who rely on moose and caribou kills to feed their families through the long cold winters.

But Rodger Schlickeisen of the non-profit Defenders of Wildlife says that it is Alaska’s small but politically influential commercial hunting interests-not subsistence hunters-who want to keep aerial wolf-gunning alive in the 49th state. “Their clear intention is to eliminate as many of nature’s major predators as possible to artificially increase moose and caribou numbers where it’ll then be easier for urban and wealthy out-of-state hunters to shoot their trophy animals,” he says, adding that scientific data do not show the need for stepping up predator control efforts.

Schlickeisen insists that most regular Alaskans are opposed to aerial hunting, even for the purpose of predator control. “Twice in the past 12 years, Alaska voters have approved state ballot initiatives to limit the use of aircraft to kill wildlife-and twice the state legislature, encouraged and abetted by the [appointed] board of game, has overridden the citizen-passed laws to restore use of aircraft,” he says.

CONTACTS: Alaska Outdoor Council, www.alaskaoutdoorcouncil.org; Defenders of Wildlife, www.defenders.org.

SEND YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS TO: EarthTalk, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; earthtalk@emagazine.com. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php. EarthTalk is now a book! Details and order information at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalkbook.

No doubt, rental car companies large and small have responded to increased consumer demand for fuel efficiency in the last few years by stocking up on gasoline-electric hybrids and other vehicles with better mileage and lower emissions. But whether or not these companies will continue their commitment to fuel efficiency as gas prices fall and consumers begin to look again at bigger cars remains to be seen.

Hertz may have sparked the trend in 2006 when it launched its Green Collection, which includes thousands of fuel efficient cars such as the Toyota Camry, Ford Fusion, Buick LaCrosse and Hyundai Sonata. These models, now available at 50 airport rental locations, average 31 miles per gallon (mpg) on the highway, and most carry the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) SmartWay certification, indicating lower greenhouse gas and other emissions. In June 2007, Hertz bolstered its green offerings significantly by incorporating some 3,400 Toyota Prius hybrids into its American rental fleet.

Meanwhile, other companies are towing the line as well. Avis and its partner Budget offer 2,500 hybrids (Toyota’s Prius and Nissan’s Altima) for rent in the U.S. And Advantage Rent-a-Car, a smaller but up-and-coming player in the industry, has pledged to turn 100 percent of its rental fleet “green” by 2010.

Not to be outdone, Enterprise-the nation’s largest rental car company with a total fleet of 1.1 million rental vehicles-offers some 440,000 vehicles that get 28 mpg or better in highway driving. Some 5,000 of the total are hybrids (Toyota’s Camry and Prius and Ford’s Escape SUV), while another 73,000 can run on the ethanol-based biofuel or on regular gas. Customers of Enterprise (or one of its sister brands, Alamo or National) can also opt to pay an extra $1.25 per rental to offset their carbon emissions. (Funds go to Terra Pass, which funds clean energy projects.) And last year the company opened several new “green branches” where 60 percent of the vehicles for rent are hybrids or other fuel efficient models.

Of course, green car rentals do come with a premium. Renting a hybrid typically costs $5 to $15 more per day than an equivalent conventional car. In a recent comparison on overall costs (including gas expenses), SmarterTravel.com’s Sarah Pascarella figured that a two-day trip from San Francisco to Yosemite National Park was $55 cheaper in one of Hertz’s Hyundai Accent economy cars than in a hybrid Prius from their Green Collection. Comparisons with vehicles from Avis and others yielded similar results. “I found choosing an economy car over a hybrid was often the more economical choice,” she reports.

In order to encourage greener rentals despite the cost premium, San Francisco International Airport now offers travelers a $15 credit if they rent a hybrid from any of the companies operating there. Elsewhere, in-town rental locations usually offer better deals on hybrids, although customers should still expect to pay a premium for renting green no matter where they are-at least until both supply and demand for such vehicles rises, which will inevitably lead to price reductions.

CONTACTS: Hertz, www.hertz.com; Avis, www.avis.com; Advantage, www.advantage.com; Enterprise, www.enterprise.com, EPA SmartWay, www.epa.gov/smartway/; Terra Pass, www.terrapass.com; SmarterTravel.com, www.smartertravel.com.

Dear EarthTalk: Are any major brands of disposable tissues, paper towels, napkins and toilet paper yet using recycled content and chlorine-free bleaching? — Sylvia Comstock, Montpelier, VT

Not many. In fact, some of the biggest names in disposable paper products are the worst offenders. According to the nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), forests at home and abroad are being destroyed to make toilet paper, facial tissues, paper towels and other disposable paper products. Giant paper producers such as Kimberly-Clark (Scott, Cottonelle, Kleenex and Viva) and Procter & Gamble (Puffs, Charmin and Bounty) are, in the words of NRDC, “forcing the destruction of our continent’s most vibrant forests, and devastating the habitat for countless wildlife species in the process.”

Much of the virgin pulp used by these large manufacturers comes from Canada’s boreal forest. Some 500,000 acres of boreal forest in Ontario and Alberta alone-key habitat for caribou, lynx, wolves and scores of birds-are felled each year to provide pulp for disposable paper. Beyond wildlife concerns, Canada’s boreal forest, which stretches from coast to coast, comprises perhaps the world’s largest terrestrial storehouse of carbon dioxide, so it is critical to keep it intact to help mitigate global warming.

Kimberly-Clark uses some 1.1 million cubic meters of trees from Canada’s boreal forests each year to produce 465,000 metric tons of pulp. Only 19 percent of the pulp it uses to make home use disposable paper products comes from recycled sources. Some of its brands, including Kleenex and Scott, contain no recycled content whatsoever. Nor do Procter and Gamble’s Bounty, Charmin or Puffs, says NRDC.

Another issue with tissue (and paper overall) is the use of chlorine for whitening. Chlorine used in many bleaching processes contributes to the formation of dioxins and furans, chemicals that end up in our air and water and can cause cancer. Safer processes use oxygen compounds and result in paper that is “totally chlorine free,” “process chlorine free” (chlorine free except for recycled fibers that were previously chlorine-bleached) or “elemental chlorine free,” which substitutes safer chlorine dioxide for chlorine.

NRDC and other groups are pressuring the tissue products industry to change its ways, and are working to educate consumers about their options when buying tissue paper products. NRDC’s online “Shopper’s Guide to Home Tissue Products” offers reams of free advice on which brands to look for-and which to avoid. Marcal is the only household name that NRDC rates high on paper sourcing (100 percent recycled and 40 to 60 percent post-consumer content) and chlorine use (process chlorine-free). Brands ranking highest (up to 80 percent post-consumer content and process-chlorine free) include 365 (the Whole Foods brand), Seventh Generation, Earth First, and Planet, among others. No brands are totally chlorine free.

In general, consumers should seek out brands that specifically tout use of 100 percent recycled materials with a high percentage (40 percent or more) of post-consumer waste, and not just keywords like “green” or “eco” on their labels, which may be misleading. Also, before you even purchase that next roll of disposable paper think about how you can reduce the amount you use in the first place. Paper tissues, towels and napkins, for example, have re-usable options in handkerchiefs and cotton towels and napkins.

CONTACTS: NRDC Shopper’s Guide to Home Tissue Products, www.nrdc.org/land/forests/gtissue.asp; Kimberly-Clark, www.kimberly-clark.com; Procter & Gamble, www.pg.com.

GOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION? Send it to: EarthTalk, c/o E/The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; submit it at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/thisweek/, or e-mail: earthtalk@emagazine.com. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php.

The intrusion of saltwater from the sea into rivers and groundwater is a serious issue, but the threat is not from a reversal of flow, and our far inland lakes and rivers are not expected to be directly affected by the salty water of our oceans. However, the sensitive areas around the edges of our continents, where fresh water meets salt water, are at risk, and greater efforts must be taken to protect them. Some 40 percent of world population lives less than 40 miles (60 kilometers) from the shoreline.

According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), global average sea levels should rise eight to 34 inches by the year 2100, a much faster pace than the four to 10 inch increase of the past century. Seas rise because of higher global temperatures, melting mountain glaciers and polar ice caps, and other factors. Higher temperatures also cause thermal expansion of ocean water, intensifying the problem.

Rising sea levels cause major problems as they erode and flood coastlines and, yes, as they mix salt water with fresh. A November 2007 article in ScienceDaily posited that coastal communities could face significant losses in fresh water supplies as saltwater intrudes inland. And whereas it had been previously assumed that salty water could only intrude underground as far as it did above ground, new studies show that in some cases salt water can go 50 percent further inland underground than it does above ground.

Salty water invading groundwater can reach not only residential water supplies but intakes for agricultural irrigation and industrial uses, as well. Economic effects include loss of coastal fisheries and other industries, coastal protection costs, and the loss of once-valuable coastal property as people move inland.

Estuaries at the mouths of rivers have in the past handled rising ocean levels. Sediment that accumulates along the edge of an estuary can raise the level of the land as the sea levels rise. And mangrove swamps, which buffer many a coastal zone around the world, flourish in brackish conditions. But because of our preference for living in coastal areas, and our habit of re-engineering our surroundings accordingly, humans make matters worse by preventing natural processes from managing the change. On the coast, we build roads and buildings, and replace natural buffers like mangrove swamps with dikes and bulkheads to control flooding, which make the problem worse by preventing beach sediment from collecting. And as we dam rivers and create reservoirs, we trap the sediment that would naturally flow down to the sea.

In some places, changes are happening. Governments are beginning to restrict or prohibit building in setback zones along the coast where risk of erosion is the greatest. A newer policy of “rolling easements” is also being tried, where developers are allowed to build in restricted zones but will be required to remove the structures if and when they become threatened by erosion. The IPCC recommends more drastic actions, such as creating more marshes and wetlands as buffers against the rising level of the sea, and migrating populations and industry away from coastlines altogether.

CONTACTS: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, www.ipcc.ch.

Dear EarthTalk: Is it better to drive an older, well-maintained car that gets about 25 miles per gallon, or to buy a new car that gets about 35 miles per gallon? — Edward Peabody, via e-mail

It definitely makes more sense from a green perspective to keep your old car running and well-maintained as long as you can-especially if it’s getting such good mileage. There are significant environmental costs to both manufacturing a new automobile and adding your old car to the ever-growing collective junk heap.

A 2004 analysis by Toyota found that as much as 28 percent of the carbon dioxide emissions generated during the lifecycle of a typical gasoline-powered car can occur during its manufacture and its transportation to the dealer; the remaining emissions occur during driving once its new owner takes possession. An earlier study by Seikei University in Japan put the pre-purchase number at 12 percent.

Regardless of which conclusion is closer to the truth, your current car has already passed its manufacture and transport stage, so going forward the relevant comparison has only to do with its remaining footprint against that of a new car’s manufacture/transport and driver’s footprint-not to mention the environmental impact of either disposing of your old car or selling it to a new owner who will continue to drive it. There are environmental impacts, too, even if your old car is junked, dismantled and sold for parts.

And don’t forget that the new hybrids-despite lower emissions and better gas mileage-actually have a much larger environmental impact in their manufacture, compared to non-hybrids. The batteries that store energy for the drive train are no friend to the environment-and having two engines under one hood increases manufacturing emissions. And all-electric vehicles are only emission-free if the outlet providing the juice is connected to a renewable energy source, not a coal-burning power plant, as is more likely.

If you want to assess your current car’s fuel efficiency or emissions, there are many services available online. The government website FuelEconomy.gov provides fuel efficiency stats for hundreds of different vehicles dating back to 1985. Websites TrackYourGasMileage.com and MPGTune.com can help you track your mileage and provide ongoing tips to improve fuel efficiency for your specific make and model vehicle. MyMileMarker.com takes it a step further, making projections about annual mileage, fuel costs and fuel efficiency based on your driving habits. If you have an iPhone, you can keep track of your car’s carbon footprint with the new “Greenmeter App” from Hunter Research and Technologies. The program uses numerous variables to make its calculations on-the-go as you drive, including weather conditions, cost of fuel, vehicle weight, and more.

If you simply must change your vehicle, be it for fuel efficiency or any other reason, one option is to simply buy a used car that gets better gas mileage than your existing one. There’s much to be said, from many environmental vantage points, about postponing replacement purchases-of anything, not just cars-to keep what’s already made out of the waste stream and to delay the additional environmental costs of making something new.

CONTACTS: www.fueleconomy.gov; www.trackyourgasmileage.com; www.mpgtune.com; www.mymilemarker.com; Greenmeter App, www.hunter.pairsite.com/greenmeter.

GOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION? Send it to: EarthTalk, c/o E/The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; submit it at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/thisweek/, or e-mail: earthtalk@emagazine.com. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php.

Eco-villages are essentially designed communities intending to be socially, economically and ecologically sustainable. Environmentalist Joan Bokaer developed the vision for the first eco-village, which would eventually be built on the outskirts of Ithaca, New York, while on a continent-wide walk for sustainability across the United States in 1990. In Context magazine publisher Robert Gilman helped refine the concept through his research, writing and speaking on the topic. In 1996, the first residents moved into the EcoVillage at Ithaca, and a movement was born. According to the nonprofit Global Ecovillage Network, some 420 eco-villages exist in both urban and rural settings around the world today. 

The defining characteristics of an eco-village, according to Robert Gilman’s seminal 1991 article, “The Eco-Village Challenge,” include “human-scale, healthy and sustainable development, full-featured settlement, and the harmless integration of human activities into the natural world.” Gilman also said that eco-villages should limit their populations to 150 individuals, which is the maximum size for any working social network according to the teachings of sociology and anthropology. 

While the term eco-village did not come into common usage until the 1990s, the concept may in fact be older. Arcosanti, a self-described “experimental town” in the high desert of Arizona, 70 miles north of Phoenix, has been under construction since 1970 and eventually will be the home of some 5,000 forward-thinking residents. In keeping with the concept of clustered development so as to maximize open space and the efficient use of resources, the large, compact structures and large-scale solar greenhouses of Arcosanti occupy a small footprint-only 25 acres-within the community’s 4,000-acre “land preserve.” 

Italian architect Paolo Soleri designed Arcosanti according to his concept of “arcology” (architecture + ecology), whereby, in his words, “the built and the living interact as organs would in a highly evolved being.” Underpinning the concept is that “many systems work together, with efficient circulation of people and resources, multi-use buildings, and solar orientation for lighting, heating and cooling.” 

Those interested in learning more can attend a four-week workshop at Arcosanti to study building techniques and arcological philosophy, while getting a chance to contribute to the city’s ongoing construction. To date, some 5,000 participants have all had a hand in the construction of Arcosanti. 

Some other “intentional communities” designed with sustainability in mind around North America include Cobb Hill in Vermont, Vegan in Hawaii, Dancing Rabbit in Missouri, Maitreya in Oregon, Dreamtime in Wisconsin, Paz in Texas, Earthaven in North Carolina, Prairie’s Edge in Manitoba and Kakwa in British Columbia. For information on these and other eco-villages, the Ecovillage Network of the Americas as well as the Global Ecovillage Network offer extensive resources for free online. 

CONTACTS: EcoVillage at Ithaca, www.ecovillage.ithaca.ny.us; Robert Gilman’s “The Eco-Village Challenge,” www.context.org/ICLIB/IC29/Gilman1.htm; Arcosanti, www.arcosanti.org; Ecovillage Network of the Americas, ena.ecovillage.org; Global Ecovillage Network, gen.ecovillage.org. 

Dear EarthTalk: How can I determine if it is more eco-friendly to fly or drive somewhere? – Christine Matthews, Washington, DC 

The simple answer is that driving in a relatively fuel efficient car (25-30 miles per gallon) usually generates fewer greenhouse gas emissions than flying. In assessing the global warming impact of a trip from Philadelphia to Boston (about 300 miles), the environmental news website Grist.org calculates that driving would generate about 104 kilograms of carbon dioxide (CO2)-the leading greenhouse gas-per typical medium-sized car, regardless of the number of passengers, while flying on a commercial jet would produce some 184 kilograms of CO2 per passenger. 

What this also means, of course, is that while even driving alone would be slightly better from the standpoint of greenhouse gas emissions, carpooling really makes environmental sense. Four people sharing a car would collectively be responsible for emitting only 104 kilograms of CO2, while the same four people taking up four seats on a plane would generate some 736 kilograms.  

Journalist Pablo Päster of Salon.com extends the comparison further to a cross country trip, and comes to similar conclusions. (Differences in the math are attributable to the use of slightly varying assumptions regarding fuel usage and source equations.) Flying from San Francisco to Boston, for example, would generate some 1,300 kilograms of greenhouse gases per passenger each way, while driving would account for only 930 kilograms per vehicle. So again sharing the drive with one or more people would lower each individual’s carbon footprint from the experience accordingly. 

But just because driving might be greener than flying doesn’t mean it always makes the most sense. With current high gas prices, it would cost far more in fuel to drive clear across the United States in a car than to fly non-stop coast-to-coast. And that’s not even factoring in the time spent on restaurants and hotels along the way. Those interested in figuring out driving fuel costs can consult AAA’s nifty online Fuel Cost Calculator, where you can enter your starting city and destination as well as the year, make and model of your car to get an accurate estimate of what filling ‘er up will cost between points A and B. 

Once you’ve made your decision whether to drive or fly, consider purchasing carbon offsets to balance out the emissions you are generating with cash for renewable energy development. TerraPass, among others, makes it easy to calculate your carbon footprint based on how much you drive and fly (as well as home energy consumption), and then will sell you offsets accordingly. (Monies generated through carbon offsets fund alternative energy and other projects, such as wind farms, that will ultimately take a bite out of or eliminate greenhouse gas emissions).  

Of course, an individual’s emissions from riding a bus (the ultimate carpool) or a train (many of which rely solely on electric power generated by their own motion) would be significantly lower. Paster adds that a cross-country train trip would generate about half the greenhouse gas emissions of driving a car. The only way to travel greener might be to bicycle or walk-but the trip is long enough as it is. 

CONTACTS: Grist, www.grist.org, Salon, www.salon.com; AAA Fuel Cost Calculator, www.fuelcostcalculator.com; TerraPass, www.terrapass.com. 

GOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION? Send it to: EarthTalk, c/o E/The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; submit it at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/thisweek/, or e-mail: earthtalk@emagazine.com. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php.

Ford: Not Asking, but Doing

Ford is a classic name in cars. But in an age when most people want new cars, ‘classic’ is not a good association. Ford released an advertising campaign aimed at showcasing the ‘new’ Ford, with greater quality, fuel economy, and added features. You may remember the little jingle at the end of their commercials, “Have you driven a Ford lately?”

The problem with the jingle is that it only asked a question. Viewers would answer either ‘yes’ or ‘no.’ Ford has since amended its campaign with a call to action, encouraging viewers to do something after watching the ad. The ads feature testimonials of non-Ford drivers who tried a new Ford and were pleasantly surprised by the results. The action message at the end of the commercial now reads “Drive One.”

Mercedes: Targeting Those Who Can Afford

In a sports arena, there are hundreds of places to advertise-on the Jumbotron, on the wrap-around digital banners, or over the public address system. These ads are aimed at everyone in the audience. But Mercedes found a place to advertise at the Quicken Loans Arena in Cleveland, OH that targets only their ideal customers.

Mercedes has a permanent display on the base of the Jumbotron-the large scoreboard suspended in the middle of the arena-featuring their three-point star and the locations of Northeast Ohio dealerships.

What makes the ad particularly interesting is that the only people who can see the ad are the ones on the lower levels of the arena. Mercedes’ logic is, if these customers can afford the most expensive seats to Cavaliers’ games, then they are more likely to also purchase a Mercedes.

“Aesthetic maintenance is important to preserving a vehicle’s integrity and value,” said Ron Fausnight a technical expert for Shell Car Care. “Routine maintenance, including washing and waxing your vehicle, can be viewed as preventative maintenance that helps to preserve a vehicle’s paint from the elements while restoring a polished, new look.”

Tires and wheels are often overlooked when washing a car, but they are two areas that take the most abuse throughout the year. Road grime, salt and brake dust can quickly collect on wheels, and without proper removal, can lead to discoloration of aluminum alloys and corrosion and pitting of steel alloys used. When removing the debris, use a cleaner that is pH-balanced to avoid any potential damage to the composition and finish of wheels. A pH-balanced product like one you can find on auto store shelves is as gentle as soap and water, but contains stronger cleansing and shine agents that are safe to use on all wheel types.

“While all preventative maintenance is important, maintaining a vehicle’s safety features should be an even higher priority,” Fausnight said. “Roadway safety needs a multifaceted car care approach, and taking steps to ensure visibility is important.”

Changing wiper blades at least once a year, combined with using a hydrophobic windshield repellent such as Rain-X, can dramatically clear a driver’s vision. The treatment seals the microscopic pores of glass, causing any precipitation to bead up and roll off the windshield.

Incorporating these tips into an annual cleaning routine, and performing regular maintenance, are important steps to preventing the deterioration of a vehicle and may help to save money in the long run.

Courtesy of ARAcontent

“Gas consumption – and prices – historically rise with the temperature as more people drive for work or pleasure during the warmer months,” says Sue Pinera, environmental programs director of the Hertz Corp., leaders in the rental car industry.”

But you can definitely drive green and save yourself some money without having to trade in your reliable, reasonably priced family vehicle for a new one that features the latest eco-friendly technology.”

Summer vacations often mean extra driving, either to your destination in your own vehicle or, if you fly, in a rental car once you’re there. “Of all summer driving, vacation driving can be the most costly and least green,” Pinera points out. “Whether it’s spending time stuck in traffic or driving in circles looking for an attraction site in an unfamiliar location, there are plenty of opportunities to waste gas.”

Car rental agents, who work in tourist areas across the country leasing a variety of vehicles, have seen everything that works – and doesn’t work – when it comes to conserving gas, saving money and preserving the environment while vacation driving. Here are some tips from agents at Hertz for smart vacation driving:

In Your Own Car

* Have your car thoroughly checked out before going on a long vacation road trip. Be sure tires are properly inflated, oil and oil and air filters are fresh, and the air-conditioning is working properly. “Just $100 in preventative maintenance can save you real dollars in terms of fuel efficiency and a great deal of aggravation if you happen to catch a potentially serious problem before you break down on the roadside,” Pinera says.

* Drive smoothly and considerately. Aggressive driving – fast starts, excessive speed, abrupt maneuvers and constant braking – is not only dangerous, it significantly increases your vehicle’s fuel consumption. “You’ll enjoy the ride more and spend less on gas if you just drive friendly,” Pinera says.

* Only use premium fuel if your car’s manufacturer specifically recommends it for your engine type. Regular fuel costs less and premium will not improve your fuel efficiency in anything but a high-performance engine.

* Look for gas stations that offer pumps with vapor-recovery nozzles. They look like black plastic accordions attached to the nozzle. These curb emissions. Likewise, never try to “top off” your tank with these nozzles. They’re designed to shut off when the gas tank is at its optimum fullness. Continuing to pump could lead to overfilling and spilling.

* Try to pack light and avoid putting anything on top of your vehicle. Rooftop storage may increase the risk of rollover in some types of vehicles, and increases drag, which lowers fuel efficiency in all kinds of autos.

In a Rental Car

* Whenever possible, choose a fuel-efficient model, such as a subcompact, compact or economy car. The good news is that these are usually the least expensive to rent from any company.

* Consider renting a hybrid. Hertz, for example, offers a “Green Collection” of rental cars that includes fuel-sipping hybrids like the Toyota Prius or other environmentally friendly vehicles like the Toyota Camry or Hyundai Sonata, which feature an average Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) highway fuel efficiency rating of 31 miles per gallon.

* Paying the extra fee for a navigation system can go a long way towards saving you time (and money) driving around lost. “Navigation systems can help you find your way in unfamiliar territory, helping you reach your list of attractions with a minimum of time and gas lost,” Pinera says. “How you entertain the kids in the back seat, however, is entirely up to you.”

For more green driving tips, visit www.greencars.org or www.epa.gov/air/actions/drive_wise.

Courtesy of ARAcontent

I had the opportunity to spend some time with the 3.2L, 250 horsepower R32 last month, and it left me checking price quotes and option packages.

By the way, $32,990 unless you start stripping out the navigation system. You may be asking “can’t I get a smaller engine for cheaper?” Not on the R32 – if you want a four-cylinder model, you need to look at the GTI.

The R32 is named after its engine — the Racing 3.2 L naturally aspirated VR6 engine with 236 ft. lbs. of torque.

The package is completed by the VW 4Motion All-wheel-drive system and Direct Shift Gearbox (DSG) transmission, which takes the jolt out of changing gears. It’s an automatic transmission with optional Tiptronic shift-paddles for a “virtual manual” experience. DSG is a dual-clutch system that gives you racing-tuned shifting without a clutch pedal and shifter – like what I discussed in the Eos.

It does 0-60 in 6.5 seconds.

This car is fast, and it has a good roar to it when you rev the engine — this is not supposed to be the case with a small car. You expect a Fast and the Furious-inspired high-pitched squeal out of a small car’s engine, not something more suited to a Mustang.

It’s like this: when you’re in the left lane on I95 and someone is going 70 in front of you. If you let off the gas and then give it a good rev, they’ll get the picture and get out of the way.

Not that I did that or anything…

This is a hot car. In the $30,000 range, it’s priced between affordability and luxury, but it gives you a ton of the luxury features you’d expect on a $50,000 car.

I’m a satellite radio skeptic. But with the integrated system on the R32, (and many other cars starting to follow the trend) I liked being able to switch between my favorite AM, FM and newly found Sirius channels.

I wasn’t overly impressed with the navigation system. I would have much preferred a touch-screen to the dial and knob operation on the R32. I know you’re not supposed to touch your GPS while driving, but sometimes you just have to make an adjustment, and it’s a lot more complicated to make on-the-fly changes with the built in nav system than with a Garmin or TomTom. They charge you enough for it; it might as well be touch-sensitive.

The seating, on the other hand, is the picture of comfort for the driver. The racing seats hug you in, resulting in a quite comfortable driving experience. The car easily fits four and can do five if you need to.

I was amazed by how much headroom the car gives. It’s low to the ground, but once you get in it’s very roomy. There is also good cargo room in the hatchback trunk.

Overall, it’s a wonderful car to drive that’s packed with features. It’s fun on long journeys and decent on gas mileage (18 city, 23 highway).

Picture a car that can satisfy all three: the view of a moon roof, the breeze of a sunroof and the sheer satisfaction of a convertible.

Enter the 2007 Volkswagen Eos.

The Eos is the first hardtop convertible with a sunroof. While it may sound well overdue, this car has arrived right on time to usher in a new bar height for others to crawl under.

The secret is the coupe-sunroof-convertible (CSC).

“The CSC is a revolutionary five-panel roof that transforms the coup’es hardtop, with integrated sunroof and heated-glass rear window, into an open-air convertible,” said Kristin Lambert, spokeswoman for Volkswagen. According to Lambert (and first-hand experience) the whole transformation happens in 25 seconds.

Your editor spent a grueling work week between Miami and the Florida Keys in March with other members of the media. While there, we had a chance to check in on this German-engineered powerhouse and see what it can do.

The Florida Keys didn’t know what they were in for when the 3.2L turbocharged V6’s roared to life.

To be honest, I was a bit skeptical at first, not sure what the land of Bugs and Jettas was putting out in the Eos.

The Eos seemed strangely at home in Key West (which features the end of U.S. Rt. 1 and the southernmost point in the continental United States) enroute to Key Largo.

The 3.2L package I drove includes a double clutch automatic transmission system. You simply don’t feel the gears shift. It’s a computerized system that’s so smart, it could out-shift a professional racer, according to one Volkswagen spokesman.

While I tested the better engine package, the Eos comes standard with a four-cylinder engine and manual transmission also.

The convertible mechanism is a thing of beauty. As long as the Eos is stopped, one lever raises or lowers the top, sunroof and all, and folds it into the trunk in less than 30 seconds.

The Eos is also fast. 0-60 mph is well covered and (shh) so are 60-80 and beyond. The turbocharged engine performs amazingly well; stick your hand out the window in a Cali-style sloped motion if you need any visual help in that area. The car is just a pleasure to drive.

An onboard GPS navigation system is available to make sure your road trips don’t involve any more gas station stops than necessary. It’s built into the LCD on the dash and powered by DVD (by the way, there’s DVD too) so the system is constantly upgradeable.

One such upgrade-a partnership with Google Earth-is on the way, according to a VW press release.

Of course, AM/FM radio is included and satellite radio is an option that’s growing in popularity. This is powered by a 10-speaker Dynaudio sound system. A six-disc CD player in the armrest rounds off the audio/visual elements.

So those are the specifications and specifics. What makes the Eos better than any other sports car?

More importantly, what was it about the Eos that impressed an otherwise not easily-impressed media type?

As soon as I stepped into the driver’s seat, the Eos felt like it was mine.

It’s a hard feeling to describe. The smaller racing-style wheel and sleek racing pedals give the car an exciting edge. The side mirrors can be adjusted without looking away. The top comes up with a flick of the wrist. It comes in a variety of sexy colors. The seat was adjustable in a dozen different ways, including spinal support inward and outward; something swoon-worthy.

Basically, this car is actually comfortable to sit in and drive for several hours.

Think about that.

The whole concept of stretching legs was invented as a break in the otherwise uncomfortable long-form driving scenario. Here, it’s just not necessary.

The Volkswagen Eos is the ultimate cruising vehicle. It will seat four on your way to New England, Florida or California, no matter what season.

Skepticism resided, the Eos pleased me. It delivers. I just wish it was included in the “Three V-dubs for under $17,000″ campaign.

It starts around $27,000. The 3.2L is nicely equipped at $38,000.