Why aren't Chrysler mentioning the fact that the Dodge EV is clearly a Lotus Europa with added batteries? Nothing wrong with that, but it just seems a little impolite not to mention it (and pass it off as all their own work).

They claim these are electric cars, but the design doesn't make me want to vomit and put my eyes out at the same time. Shome mishtake shurely?

Can't wait to see what happens in a front-end collision with the sports car. SQUISH!

Not so fast, are they? Metres per hour is an odd way of expressing things, too.

What's with the "But it's a rear wheel drive", a sports car _should_ have rear wheel drive. It'd be rubbish if it didn't. Can anyone name a sports car with FWD?

NB: Just because a car has 'sport' written on it, doesn't mean it's a sports car. (As I am fond of telling the PFY at work: Your Clio sport is just a normal Clio with a slightly larger engine and all the bolts tightened up properly.)

Two critical bits of information are missing from the article: (1) Can you plug the vehicles in instead of using the gasoline engine, and (2) What is the expected price of each vehicle?

If the answer to (1) is "no", then they're just hybrids, so Chrysler is misleading us. They're significant improvements on existing hybrids, but they're still hybrids. (My Prius handily beats 50 mpg on long trips, but drops to 36 in our day-to-day use because we make lots of short (<5 mile) trips. If these really do use up their electric charge FIRST, before charging, and give 50+ mpg for short trips, they'd be a big improvement over both existing hybrids and diesels).

If the answer to (2) is, "We don't know that yet", then they're just concept cars, and really not worth reporting on or getting excited about.

Is that meters per hour? Damn, that's slow!

-dZ.

"Chrysler claims eight gallons of fuel will allow the Jeep to run for 400 miles. "

So why can't ALL of Chrysler's cars get 50 MPG? If you can do that with the inherent power losses involved in converting internal combustion to electric to drive the wheel motors, why not just drop the battery and announce your 50 MPG fuel economy?

If it still works and hasn't been redesigned to a new EU standard, I think you got the 15 and 30 amps backwards!

To see what kind of numbers these cars turn in a mixed usage test. One of the downsides to living in the Los Angeles area is the fact that for most of us the MPG claims made by car manufacturers usually mean exactly shit. Due simply to the fact that the bulk of our driving is mixed use or in the midst of rush hour traffic which means our actual gas milage relates more to a mixed usage rating than what is claimed by the car maker.

What the hell is m/h? Has the author lived on the moon for most of his life, or did he just miss mph or not understand what it meant when reading it for the past 100 years? (Or less depending on age - clearly).

It doesn't matter what your usage is if the journey remains under 40 miles round trip, the petrol used will be zero gallons... hence the NOT hybrids angle, over that mileage it would seem pointless them being electric!

well it is american cars so they must be miles as americans do not use meaters aprently they are to complex for them