Review: 2015 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel Outdoorsman 4x4 Quad Cab - How Much Money Can You Save On Fuel In A Full-Size Truck?

You want a full-size pickup truck.

But there's one thing holding you back from pulling the trigger, from signing on the dotted line, from explaining to your friends that you need a pickup truck because you're "renovating" your condo.

It's not the MSRPs of modern pickup trucks – you know the steep discounts and low interest rates will make it doable if you avoid the options sheet. 

It's not the modern prettification of pickup trucks – black wheels, not chrome, will make your truck look tougher than Tonka. 

And it's not the loss of flexibility – modern four-door pickups can be family haulers.

THE GOOD • Incredible fuel economy • Plenty of power • Terrific 8-speed automatic • Impressive dynamics for a full-size truck • Stand-out styling

THE BAD • Huge diesel price premium • Not all interior bits up to snuff • Quad Cab not an ideal family layout • Lack of air suspension noticeable • Chrome bumper/black wheels/blue body?

No, it's the fuel bills that have you worried. That's why you're considering this 2015 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel. Sure, our Outdoorsman tester was fitted with $6,925 in options besides the $5,700 cost of the 3.0L EcoDiesel/8-speed automatic powertrain. But you don't need that stuff, right? You just need four doors, a bed, and reasonable fuel consumption.

But how much money can you really save? To what degree can a 5,400-pound full-size pickup truck's consumption truly be reduced? Can you buy a Ram 1500 EcoDiesel and feel comfortable taking pointless drives along the coast on a summer's evening, safe in the knowledge that you're not breaking the bank?

We have answers to these questions. Based on back-to-back week-long tests of the 2015 Ram 1500 Outdoorsman Quad Cab 4x4 EcoDiesel and the 2015 Ford F-150 Platinum SuperCrew 4x4 EcoBoost, we've determined just how much more Eco the EcoDiesel really is.

There are, of course, a number of qualifiers we must get out of the way. These trucks aren't perfectly comparable. The Ram's Quad Cab format is a truck that competes somewhat indirectly with both Ford's SuperCab and SuperCrew. For a true SuperCrew competitor, you'd need the Ram 1500 Crew Cab, which we've tested twice before. The trucks aren't equipped all that similarly, either, with the Ford lopping an additional $20,000 onto the sticker. 

2015 RAM 1500 OUTDOORSMAN QUAD CAB 4x4 ECODIESEL Base Price: $44,990 * As-Tested Price: $57,615 * Drive Type: four-wheel-drive Transmission: 8-speed automatic Engine: 3.0L DOHC 24-valve V6 turbocharged diesel Horsepower: 240 @ 3600 rpm Torque: 420 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm Curb Weight: 5406 pounds Length: 229.0 inches Width: 79.4 inches Height: 78.4 inches Wheelbase: 140.0 inches Tires: Goodyear Wrangler SR-A Tire Size: 275/60R20 Passenger Volume: 3302 litres Cargo Volume: 1628 litres EPA City: 19 MPG EPA Highway: 27 MPG NRCAN OEE City: 12.1 L/100km NRCAN OEE Hwy: 8.8 L/100km Observed: 24.2 mpg Observed: 9.7 L/100km * Canadian dollars, includes $1795 in fees.

Rather obviously, the Ford's 3.5L twin-turbocharged V6 EcoBoost isn't a diesel engine; the Ram's EcoDiesel is. Both are the most expensive engines in their respective lineups. (Ford also offers a more efficient EcoBoost, the 2.7L V6, which still makes plenty of power.) 

Although we didn't drive the two trucks on all the same roads with the same pedal pressure all the time, the trucks were driven by the same driver in the same environs – a mix of Halifax city driving, urban Dartmouth driving, and very little highway time – with similar prevailing temperatures over the course of two weeks.

The Quad Cab isn't nearly the family truck that the SuperCrew is. Rear seat legroom is tight, and rear-facing child seats are likely to be a pain. In terms of capability, the new F-150 is also a class-topper in terms of payload and towing capacity. 

There remain some bits in the eminently useable and straightforward Ram 1500 interior that don't feel up to snuff when the price stretches past $35,000, let alone to $57,615. The Ram's UConnect operates like it's many generations newer than the F-150's MyFordTouch, which it essentially is. Though the coil spring rear suspension of this Ram doesn't offer the luxury-like ride quality of the two air-suspension-equipped Rams we've driven over the last couple years, ride quality was still better in this Ram than it was in the accompanying F-150 FX4. Both trucks ride on 20-inch wheels. The Ram steers more precisely, handles with greater alacrity, shifts up and down through the wide array of gears with more intelligence and smoothness, and never feels underpowered. 

The F-150 Platinum looks like a very premium truck and draws ogling eyes everywhere. The bed side steps and tailgate ladder are nice touches. EcoBoost power is jaw-droppingly impressive. We trust that the truck is lighter than F-150s were because of this new aluminum body, but it still feels like the heftier machine on the road: less nimble, more difficult to see out of, less structurally rigid.

All Photo Credits: Timothy Cain & Steffani Cain
 ©www.GoodCarBadCar.net- Click Any Image For A Larger View
Ram Photos Shot At Fisherman's Cove In Eastern Passage, Nova Scotia
F-150 Photo Shot in Hartlen Point, Nova Scotia 

In such a thoroughly modernized pickup truck arena, the differentiation which causes the Ram, Ford, and GM's trucks to feel like individualized specimens is quite a welcome turn of events. This isn't a game of samesies.

These two trucks do, however, share one thing in common. Both the 2015 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel and the 2015 Ford F-150 EcoBoost make forward progress by consuming non-renewable fossil fuels. In real-world driving, here's how the math breaks down.

---

---

Our 2015 Ram 1500 Outdoorsman EcoDiesel test vehicle consumed diesel at a rate of 9.7 litres per 100km, or 24.2 miles per gallon on the U.S. scale. The 3.5L 2015 Ford F-150 Platinum EcoBoost consumed regular gasoline at a rate of 13.2 litres per 100 kilometres. This means that for every 100 kilometres of mixed driving, the Ram drinks 3.5 fewer litres of fuel.

But the fuel consumed by the Ram is more expensive than the F-150's regular gasoline. In Halifax, Nova Scotia, regular gasoline costs $1.01 per litre; diesel costs $1.05. (That's a per gallon difference of $0.15.)

As a result, over the course of 15,000 kilometres of annual driving, the Ram 1500 EcoDiesel requires 1,455 litres of diesel fuel, or $1,527.75. The Ford F-150 EcoBoost requires 1,980 litres of slightly less expensive regular gasoline, or $1,999.80. On a monthly basis, the Ram 1500 EcoDiesel driver saves $39.34.

Over the course of five years and 75,000 kilometres, the Ram 1500 EcoDiesel driver saves $2,360.25.

On a weekly basis, the Ram 1500 EcoDiesel's $29.38 fuel cost compares with the F-150 EcoBoost's $38.46 figure for a $9.08 savings, or enough for a medium cup of Tim Hortons coffee every morning on the way to work.

There are greater financial issues to consider. At Ford, the least expensive 2016 F-150 XLT SuperCrew EcoBoost 4x4 costs CAD $47,449 before discounts. In a Ram dealer, the least costly Ram 1500 SLT Crew Cab EcoDiesel 4x4 currently costs $52,290. 

That's not the end of the money story, however. Ford Canada currently shows just $3,250 in discounts for that specific F-150, but the Ram is discounted by $8,500, changing the F-150's price to $44,199 and the Ram's to $43,790. 

That's not the end, either, because Ford offers 1.99% financing over five years for a taxes-included monthly payment of $891. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles' current 0% interest rate over five years generates a taxes-included monthly payment of $839.

This isn't to suggest that these are the prices you'll encounter at your local dealers, with your deal subject to whether you remembered to buy on the last day of the month, the level of interest one dealer may have in your trade-in that the other dealer won't, and ever-evolving incentive schemes. But one thing is clear: the Ram 1500 EcoDiesel's frightening $5700 upgrade cost probably shouldn't be quite so frightening, washed away as it is by attractive offers from FCA Canada's accounting department.

Better yet, after an introduction phase that made it difficult to find Ram 1500 EcoDiesels on dealer lots, availability has dramatically ramped up. At Halifax's two Chrysler dealers, 29 of the 89 Ram 1500s available are equipped with the 3.0L EcoDiesel.

Timothy Cain is the founder of GoodCarBadCar.net, which obsesses over the free and frequent publication of U.S. and Canadian auto sales figures. Follow on Twitter @goodcarbadcar and on Facebook. The Ram was supplied by FCA Canada's press office; the yet-to-be-reviewed F-150 by Ford Canada.

Scion iQ Fuel Economy Ratings

Oft-discussed but never touched, official fuel economy figures for the 2011 Scion iQ are now available (and now, official U.S. numbers too.) Canada's Office Of Energy Efficiency has ratings for numerous new models available in their searchable database, one of which is the anxiously awaited Scion iQ. Expected to be Canada's sixth most economical car, the iQ's figures are jaw-droppingly good.

2011 Scion iQ city fuel economy: 5.5 litres/100 km
2011 Scion iQ highway fuel economy: 4.6 litres/100km

These numbers translate to 43 miles per gallon in the city and 51 miles per gallon on the highway.

It should be noted that the OEE/Natural Resources Canada figures aren't as close to reality as their U.S. counterparts from Fueleconomy.gov. GoodCarBadCar.net's 2009 smart fortwo, like the 2011 smart fortwo, is rated at 33/41 miles per gallon by the EPA - quite attainable numbers - but 5.7/4.8 L/100km by the OEE - quite challenging to attain. Expect the EPA's numbers eventually manifested on Fueleconomy.gov to be more in line with reachable figures. Nevertheless, The Good Car Guy is prepared to up GoodCarBadCar.net's April prediction from 35/42 mpg to 37/45 mpg.

As for the Scion iQ price, we finally have the answer.

Related From GoodCarBadCar.net
Scion iQ Projected Price & MPG
Scion Starts Off Slow In Canada
Toyota iQ Gallery & Dimensions
Top 5 Safety Facts From The Toyota iQ

Chattanooga Police Department's New Volkswagen Jetta SportWagen TDI

Unless you're located in Tennessee, you won't be seeing Volkswagen Jetta SportWagens as Police cars in North America anytime soon. For a few community policing officers in Chattanooga, Tennessee and the surrounding Hamilton County, the diesel-powered Volkswagen Jetta SportWagen TDI - with a lovely bodykit and requisite light bar - will make for a lovely ride through southeastern Tennessee.

From a purely financial standpoint, the main benefit of these Volkswagen-gifted Jetta TDIs is tremendous fuel efficiency. The EPA rates the Jetta TDI at 42 miles per gallon on the highway. Diesel fuel in Chattanooga is currently running about thirty cents higher than the price for regular gasoline.

And why the gift from Volkswagen USA? 12 miles northeast of Chattanooga is Volkswagen's new factory. Made in Germany? Not so much. Designed In Germany, Built In Tennessee? That's more like it.

The Good Car Guy acclaimed the Jetta SportWagen TDI in The Good 12 v3.0. But keep in mind, this Jetta isn't based on the new for 2011 Volkswagen Jetta sedan, a different car with the same engines. 

Related From GoodCarBadCar.net
The Good 12 v3.0 Part XII - Volkswagen Jetta SportWagen TDI
Ford Explorer Police Interceptor Utility Vehicle Gallery
Hyundai Genesis Police Car Snapped In.... Korea
The Future Of Police Cars In Pictures
2011 Volkswagen Jetta Photo Gallery & Style Analysis
Fuel Economy In Car & Driver November 2010

ACROSS THE POND - MEGA FUEL ECONOMY FROM VOLKSWAGEN POLO BLUEMOTION

Take one relatively fuel-efficient U.S.-market car. Let's say.... the Toyota Corolla. On the highway, the best the Corolla will likely achieve is 35 miles per gallon. Don't forget, the Corolla also offers Toyota quality, five seats, and a somewhat peppy four-cylinder engine, too.

Keep those five seats. Exchange the Toyota quality for Volkswagen Euro cachet and feel. Swap the "somewhat peppy four-cylinder" for something a little less.... er, zippy? Lop off a cylinder, bring displacement down to 1.2 litres, sacrifice some horsepower, and fill'er up with diesel.

Most importantly, double your fuel economy.

Perhaps this is one compromise too many. Then again, what's so bad about a unique, torquey, handsome, economical package? Volkswagen goes about making a Polo a BlueMotion with the help of that tiny 74-bhp engine. The VW Polo BlueMotion shuts off its engine every time it comes to a standstill. Regenerative braking like you'll find on a Toyota Prius is present and accounted for. Of course the transmission was revised slightly. Polo watchers will notice the lower ride height. Low rolling resistance tires are a mainstay of the hyper-efficient. And to show they've gone whole hog, Volkswagen has played with the aerodynamics of the Polo BlueMotion as well.

It all adds up to 3.3L/100km in optimum conditions. This translates to 71 miles per U.S. gallon; almost 86 miles per Imperial gallon. Take into account the tougher EPA testing procedure and Volkswagen's still probably looking at a 65 mpg car. This for a car that will be available in one form or another in North America in the next couple of years. As a BlueMotion? While I wouldn't be surprised at the marketing impact and the desire amongst image-conscious Californians to drive the most fuel-efficient five-seat car on the planet (a Prius, for instance, won't do more than 50mpg on the highway), it's tough to sell small cars over here. Across The Pond, diesel is more readily accepted. So is small. So is Volkswagen.

Nevertheless, the Volkswagen Polo BlueMotion's theoretical range of 847 miles (1,363 kilometres) means a drive from Seattle to Sacramento wouldn't even require a full tank. These days, that tank of diesel would only cost about $33.63, to boot.

HONDA DEBUTS CUTE LITTLE EV-N AT TOKYO AUTO SALON

Introducing electric cars in 2009 is as popular an idea as introducing pickup truck variations at SEMA in the earlier part of the decade. In other words, it's all the rage. Thankfully this little Honda that was introduced at the Tokyo Auto Salon is a cute little package with room for a unicycle in either door. Styling and a trick: that's enough to make us ignore the lithium-ion batteries and the unique key fob Loop thing which allows you to know the battery's energy level on your key fob Loop or something or other.

Appearing as the perfect successor to the original Mini (or Honda's own 600N) of the 1960s, the Honda EV-N isn't about to settle down on North American shores. Who knows what the Future may hold for stylish electric city cars, however.

'09 TOKYO AUTO SHOW'S HONDA CR-Z READY FOR PRODUCTION?

2007 brought the preliminary version of the Honda CR-Z; a concept which debuted at the Tokyo auto show. Visitors to 2009's Tokyo auto show will see a reworked version of the CR-Z, surely 99% similar to the production version we'll see in the summer of 2010.

Setting the release date of the Honda CR-Z for next summer and releasing this "concept" in Tokyo is the clear indicator that Honda has no plans to change the car. It's obviously highly unlikely that a production debut in the spring would change anything other than the wheels, mirrors, and bumpers (regulations of different countries mandate this anyway).

Plans to equip the CR-Z (Concept Renaissance Zero) with a 1.5L gas-electric powerplant are moving forward. Thankfully, as a car destined for sportiness, the CR-Z will not be fitted with a CVT but rather a 6-speed manual transmission. The design of the CR-Z is very, very CRX-like - a good thing in the eyes of The Good Car Guy. Small, sporty cars should appeal to a specific cross-section of consumers. The CR-Z's unique powertrain and unique design might be a precursor of things to come from Honda, a company criticized of late for.... well, letting go.

To better understand the Honda CR-Z's gestation, look back to the Honda Remix concept from the '06 L.A. auto show. Geneva's 2007 auto show was host to the Honda Small Hybrid Sports concept. Then, of course, came the '07 Tokyo show. This is Honda at its roots and we ought to expect great things from the CR-Z.

COMPLETE LIST OF ALL TRUCK-BASED, BODY-ON-FRAME SUVs ON SALE TODAY

Toyota's desire to push forward with a new genuine sport-utility vehicle at a time when most manufacturers are either leaving the category or never joined the fun isn't startling - Toyota has a handful of other truck-based SUVs - but it is surprising. Only 17 brands competing in the United States sell body-on-frame SUVs. In reality, only seven manufacturers have been motive forces in terms of seeing to the design of current body-on-frame SUVs.

Take a look at the full 4Runner Gallery of images here

Check the shortlist below for all truck-based SUVs on sale in America today. The Good Car Guy has joined platform sharers together for a clearer view of our genuine SUV dearth. Though GoodCarBadCar.net isn't a proponent of ridding the world of crossovers and all car-based SUVs (many made it in The Good 12 Supersize, after all), it's good to make sure everybody understands what real sport-utes bring to the table.

Think of the new Toyota 4Runner and its fuel economy ratings of 17/22mpg for the V6 4x4 or 18/23mpg, one wonders at the amazing crossover fuel economy of the similarly sized Toyota Highlander. In all-wheel drive form, the V6 Highlander achieves 17/23mpg. Yes, it drives "nicer" and is "more car-like". But it won't tow or haul like a 4Runner and ain't saving you money on the highway, either.

Regardless, with a new version of the slow-selling 4Runner, Toyota assures real-deal SUV aficionados by supplying a tough SUV in which off-roading is a possibility. Even if it never ventures over a curb.

Be mindful of one other thing: the manufacturers of many of the body-on-frame truck-based sport-utility vehicles listed below are already making plans for the replacements to be unibody CUVs. And don't get all up-in-arms because some of these vehicles are quite car-like. The list viewable after the jump is still a list of the most truckish SUVs around.

-----

Cadillac Escalade EXT/Chevrolet Suburban/GMC Yukon XL
Cadillac Escalade/Chevrolet Tahoe/GMC Yukon
Chevrolet TrailBlazer/GMC Envoy/Saab 9-7X
Dodge Nitro/Jeep Liberty
Ford Expedition/Lincoln Navigator
Ford Explorer/Mercury Mountaineer
Hummer H2
Hummer H3
Infiniti QX56/Nissan Armada
Jeep Commander
Jeep Grand Cherokee
Jeep Wrangler
Kia Borrego
Lexus GX470
Lexus LX570/Toyota Land Cruiser
Mercedes-Benz G-Wagon
Nissan XTerra
Nissan Pathfinder
Suzuki Grand Vitara
Toyota FJ Cruiser
Toyota 4Runner
Toyota Sequoia

LAMBORGHINI GALLARDO/MURCIELAGO/REVENTON EMISSIONS "IMMEASURABLE"

After arriving in Nova Scotia, The Good Car Brother bemoaned his Chevrolet Suburban's poor fuel economy and envied the efficiency of GoodCarBadCar's recent long-term addition, an '09 smart fortwo. Traveling extensively on highways all across this continent, his Suburban was achieving somewhere under 20 miles per gallon. The smart? Routine driving sees near 38 miles per gallon.

Converted to people miles per gallon, however, his Suburban would have been rated around 108 pmpg. GoodCarBadCar's smart with full human capacity wouldn't be rated beyond 76 pmpg. While it's true that no current Lamborghini could attain a pmpg rating over 40, there is another argument - another perspective, really - that ought to be considered when attacking the manufacturer for the consumption and emission of its automobiles.

Over its 46-year history, Lamborghini has produced approximately 22,000 cars. Americans made the Hyundai Elantra the tenth best-selling car in the USA last month by buying 21,673 sedan and wagon Elantras. Context given.

Of the 22,000 Lamborghinis manufactured in the last 46 years, only 11,000 are driven regularly. Unfortunately, this means 11,000 sit in living rooms, museums, and.... avert your eyes, junkyards. More context required? Toyota sold 10,656 Highlanders in August. One can assume they're all being driven. On the school run.

So few Lamborghinis are being driven, yes, but hardly driven in truth. On average, those 11,000 Lamborghinis are driven about 3,000 miles annually. GoodCarBadCar's long-term smart is driven sparingly yet will cover that distance in six months.

Measure the equivalent this'a'way. Take 2,750 cars and drive them each 12,000 miles per year. In other words, that's about 7% of the Honda Accords sold in the U.S. in August driven a regular amount.

Finally, says evo's Harry Metcalfe on Stephan Winkelmann's subject, the "CO2 levels of all the Lamborghinis ever produced is almost immeasurable". And yet, even amongst the automotive enthusiast society, we continue to expect companies like Lamborghini, Ferrari, and Bentley to produce E85-burning hybrids with hydrogen fuel cells and curb weights under 2,000 pounds.

Just for full disclosure's sake, here are some of the Numbers from the EPA on Lamborghini's 2010 models. By the way, the EPA (@ fueleconomy.gov) uses 15,000 miles per year to calculate the carbon footprint of automobiles.

Lamborghini Gallardo 6-speed manual: 12 mpg city/20 mpg highway, 12.2 tons of CO2/year

Lamborgini Murcielago 6-speed manual: 8 mpg city/13 mpg highway, 18.3 tons of CO2/year

Lamborghini Reventon Roadster: 9 mpg city/14 mpg highway, 16.6 tons of CO2/year

AUDI E-TRON CONCEPT : ANOTHER ELECTRIC SUPERCAR; THIS TIME WITH 3,319 LB-FT AND A PHOTO GALLERY

Audi just introduced an electric car based on the R8 at the Frankfurt auto show. The Audi e-tron uses four electric motors and has a theoretical range of 248 kilometres, about 154 miles. For three quick performance-related points, read below the Gallery. And don't forget to click over to see other Frankfurt debuts here.

The Audi e-tron accelerates to 62mph in 4.8 seconds.

313 horsepower is nice. 3,319 lb-ft of torque is no typo.

470 kilograms of battery sits out front. That's over 1000 pounds of dynamics-altering weight.

CHEVROLET SAYS THE VOLT IS A 230MPG CAR

This just in: General Motors hypothesizes, with the help of "a draft EPA federal fuel economy methodology for labeling for plug-in electric vehicles", the Chevrolet Volt of 2011 will sip just one gallon of gasoline for every 230 miles of city driving.

Yes, you read that correctly. The Volt should be rated at 230 mpg when the EPA performs its testing in advance of the Chevrolet Volt's on-sale date. Arriving at this number involves a complicated procedure, one that starts with the Volt using 25 kilowatt hours per 100 miles. GM says the average cost of electricity in the United States 11 cents per kilowatt hour. The Volt's ability to travel 40 miles without using a drop of gasoline is tantalizing enough; its cost per mile figure of less than $0.03/mile is disarming.

GM's latest Volt press release explains its powertrain in this way: "In electric mode, the Volt will not use gasoline or produce tailpipe emissions when driving. During this primary mode of operation, the Volt is powered by electrical energy stored in its 16 kWh lithium-ion battery pack. When the battery reaches a minimum state of charge, the Volt automatically switches to Extended-Range mode. In this secondary mode of operation, an engine-generator produces electricity to power the vehicle. The energy stored in the battery supplements the engine-generator when additional power is needed during heavy accelerations or on steep inclines."

GALLERY - FERRARI 458 ITALIA - 4 PICTURES

4.5 litres of thumping Italian metal built to send power to the rear wheels of a red supercar: a wonderful thing, indeed. Named after its displacement (4.5L) and the number of cylinders (8), the 458 Italia by Ferrari is an attempt to take Ferrari into the next era of automobile production. The 2011 model year marks Ferrari's start of a green era..... well, sort of.

The 458 Italia uses high-end materials that cost a bijillion to actually put together. Moreover, this Ferrari will still use a lot of gasoline. However, thanks to direct-injection for the engine; a very compact and aerodynamic shape; a shockingly light chassis; and a 7-speed transmission; the Italia should return improved economy compared with the F430 while also being quicker. Quicker, they say, than the Ferrari Enzo.

With the purpose of showing the 458 Italia's true colours, The Good Car Guy edited hue right out of two preliminary Italia photos. In order to truly see its profile and its lines, a lack of colour is necessary. To compensate, red was punched up a notch in the other two. Enjoy the viewing. Ferrari hasn't made a car this good-looking since the 456M. There's a little dose of Dino in here, as well. That can't hurt.

LOTUS DESIGNS THE FUTURE OF URBAN TRANSPORT CIRCA 2014

Four seats. Zero gallons of gasoline. 15 miles of range when fully amped. Characterful and cute without being overtly weird.

What vehicle are we discussing? A publication known as Automotive Engineer asked Lotus what the city car of 2014 would look like. Actually, AE wasn't just interested in the appearance but in the vehicle as a whole. Thus, the 15 mile range; approximately twice the length of 51% of personal car journeys in the UK. Electric power is an obvious must when discussing the future of urban transport - it has been the obvious future theory for decades. Lotus's design boss doesn't want prospective buyers to look at their '14 Future Car and think, "Wow", unless the second glance is just as appreciative.

Don't think for a second that Lotus could draw or design or say whatever they wanted in reference to this car without being accountable. Contract development is a huge part of Hethel's business. One could easily imagine seeing this car pop up on an auto show stand in 2010 or 2011 as a Renault or Hyundai or Chrysler..... or Tesla.

If at that time one of those firms discovered that Lotus hadn't done its homework, the sports car-maker's reputation would be sullied. This is an accurate vision of what Lotus believes to be the future of urban transport for 2014. Will it be produced? There's plenty of reason to doubt that. Could it be produced? Absolutely.

2009 SMART FORTWO PURE DRIVEN

Not for a minute would any faithful GoodCarBadCar.net reader doubt The Good Car Guy's love for the smart fortwo. Mercedes-Benz's city car has been an economical competitor in the USA since model year 2008. North of the border, Canadians were served the diesel smart fortwo CDI as far back as model year '05. In both The Good 12 and The Good 12 v2.0, smart's gasoline-powered car made its presence known amongst eleven other admired vehicles.

Cutting straight to the heart of the matter, why is the fortwo considered by some to be wondrous but by others, it's wretched? Pay attention to this simple explanation: for those who wish to dine on a lovely barbecued steak for supper, a fork and steak knife will work perfectly. Does that mean a spoon sucks? No, but in this specific situation, the spoon can't accomplish the task. On the other hand, when it comes time for Frosted Flakes in the morning, that spoon will be the perfect tool.

Check Out The Smart Fortwo in GCBC's Top 25 Memorable Debuts

Let's get the smart's negative factors out of the way first. Cargo space isn't overflowing in true Grand Caravan style yet I'll still guarantee you'll be pleasantly surprised with the amount of cargo capacity found behind the two seats. Power is far from plentiful. For daily driving, however, you'll rarely want for more. Fuel economy isn't otherworldly. Still, the vast majority of vehicles available in North America use far more fuel.

What's to like? Highway fuel efficiency is better than any midsize hybrid (Camry, Altima, Fusion, Aura). A surprising ability to carry 12 cubic feet of cargo, as much junk as fits in the trunk of a Honda Civic, ain't bad either. And while 70 horsepower sounds piddling, so does 1,808 pounds, the weight of the smart fortwo. Apart from these three major categories, the smart's most charming feature is its driving quality; something that couldn't be said so strongly about the previous-generation car.

With slight increases in wheelbase length, overall length, and width, the smart fortwo now drives more like a "real car". That's not to say the first-gen car wasn't fun, but it was fun partly as a result of weirdness. The newer car copes with rough streets like a vehicle developed on roads outside of Catalunya.

Read About The Fortwo's Major Future Competitor, The iQ

Automatically, three sensations apply to anybody taking their first drive in a fortwo. Approach the car from the rear, take a look in the rear window, then approach the driver's side door to hop in. Expect to take one or three steps too far. Nobody anticipates gaining entry at the rear corner. Next up are the engine sounds emanating from something, somewhere directly behind and almost beneath you. The 1.0L triple produces a truly glorious thrum; Porsche-like in its rhythm. Up to this point you've accepted the fortwo's dimensions. Then comes the time for reversing out of your parking spot and, with a small right turn of the neck, your eyes see the rear window right there. Oh, so this car really is as small as they say? Yuh.

Ignition takes place between the driver and passenger smack dab behind the gear lever. Versatile cupholders sit ahead of the stick. Mechanisms for both windows can be found on the driver's side door now... thankfully. Switches for power locks are underneath the stereo, conveniently located in practice if not in theory.

Start up the 3-cylinder, move the 5-speed automatic's shifter back into drive (and over to find manual shift mode, which you'll almost always want) before setting off. Attention: shift into second when the time comes, lift off the throttle and get back on it as if you'd disengaged and engaged a clutch. Repeat for third gear; fourth; and fifth, although you'll be able to do so more quickly at higher speeds. Treat the smart fortwo's tranny like a truly clutchless manual and you'll enjoy shifting rather than be pained by its idiosyncrasies.

Watch The Smart Fortwo's Crash Tests

Whipping the fortwo out of a downtown parking lot into areas fully populated by vehicles and pedestrians is a revelation. Visibility is so complete, all fears of renegade walkers are stripped away. Don't think for a moment that 18-wheelers or cube vans become a menace, either. The smart is small enough and - it must be clear - powerful enough to intentionally squirt away from intersections into the path of larger oncoming automobiles. Considering the lengths to which new vehicles have gone (Honda's Accord gains 3 inches every generation), it's not difficult to understand the joys of zipping around cities in the smart fortwo, a car 88 inches shorter than a new Accord.

Theories surrounding the smart's perpendicular parkability are challenging to reproduce in the real world. Contrasted with the aforementioned Accord, the smart fortwo is 33.4 inches longer than the Accord is wide. In certain situations the fortwo could be parked against the curb, opposite to the flow of traffic. In two weeks with the smart in a downtown environment I've yet to discover a parking spot capable of handling the smart fortwo in this unique manner.

For most people, however, the real world includes far more than urban situations. It's on a twisty backroad that the smart's surprises really kick in. Forget maintaining sight of almost any other car's rear bumper on the straights. Rear-wheel drive dynamics, paired with the traction given by the rearward placement of the engine underneath the floor behind the occupants, makes for joyous cornering. Keep the throttle pinned to regain sight of the car that had previously pulled away. Enjoy the jig and jag of the steering wheel while selecting your line. No, this doesn't compare with a Mitsubishi Evo X or Nissan 370Z. But it's a whole lot more fun than any of the other lowest-priced cars in North America. Moreover, it's a whole lot more fun than most mainstream front-wheel drive cars.

Passenger comfort is sublime. Seats are worthy of luxurious living rooms. In fact, recent flu-like symptoms culminated with back pain for which the smart's seats were the only cure; no joke. Reaching the iPod auxiliary jack in the glovebox is easy, which says a lot for the remainder of controls, all of which are closer. The wheel does not tilt or telescope, yet the perfect driving position is found quickly.

1 Year With A 2009 Smart Fortwo - July 2010

What's left to bring the smart fortwo down from its perch? Ride quality is stiff; very stiff. Two factors contribute to its spine-shortening ride: wheelbase length (rather the lack thereof) and decent handling. No vehicle this tall and narrow would be able to tackle the twisties this capably without a truly tight suspension. Besides this, most bumps and yumps and dips and holes are struck with the rear wheels at pretty much the same time as the front pair. That's a problem. For some people, it'll be so great a problem that they'll ignore the smart fortwo altogether. Others, The Good Car Girl and The Good Car Guy included, love the advantages a short wheelbase provides. The smart is lovingly small, spectacularly efficient, and wonderfully fun to drive.

MPG IN CAR & DRIVER DECEMBER

Under the right foot of numerous Car & Driver editors, efficiency is hard to come by. Nevertheless, some cars perform above all reasonable expectations.

For example, Chevrolet's basic Corvette - upgraded with the Z51 suspension package as well as dual-mode exhaust for 6 more horses - spent an afternoon lapping Gratton Raceway and sipped just a gallon of fuel for every 25 miles driven. True, it wasn't just hot laps. But still, this is a car with 436 horsepower, a top speed of 186 miles per hour, and a 0-60 time of 4.1 seconds. 25 miles per gallon? That's just 1mpg less than the Vette's official EPA highway figure. 

Not much worse is the Corvette Z06 with 505 horsepower, an extra 12mph at the top end, and a 0-60 time of 3.6 seconds. That Corvette travelled 20 miles on a gallon. Somewhat worse was the $117,750 Corvette ZR1. 638 horses need to fed. Apparently, they need to be fed a lot. Every 12 miles required a gallon.

That's still better than C/D's Bugatti Veyron tester. True, with over 1000 horsepower and almost 4500 pounds, the Bugatti is expected to guzzle. Indeed, smack dab in the middle of 8mpg and 14mpg (the Veyron's EPA city and highway figures, respectively) sits the 11 miles per gallon attained by Car and Driver. Not bad.

Others from C/D's December issue include:

- Honda's new Fit, in Sport trim with a 5-speed manual, at 31mpg.

- HKS's turbocharged first-gen Fit, at 24mpg.

- a Suzuki SX4 hatchback from Road Race Motorsports at 25mpg.

- C/D's long-term diesel-powered Mercedes-Benz GL320 CDI, at 22mpg.

- Volkswagen's Tiguan SEL 4Motion at 22mpg

- and the rotary-driven Mazda RX-8 R3 at 15mpg.