one day, people will find it cumbersome to drive to a gas station to fill-up their cars.
They'd rather do that at home (plug-in).

Nissan will be lonely at the pump (but they'll get all the fuel)

I wish all manufacturer's would build at least one car in their fleets that would get this kind of mileage. The money you don't spend on gas is money you can spend on something else. It would also help with the pollution problem.

"Nissan is setting a goal to build a car that can travel 100km on just 3L of ordinary petrol by 2010."

I wish automakers would stop announcing these "amazing future cars" that never see the light of day.

"Mr. Noya is setting a goal to have 7% bodyfat and earn $250,000 a year by 2010."

Neat, reminds me of the CRX. Mileage of that pure gasoline car was on par with hybrids today, and that was in the late 80s.

The real battle that all automakes face is limiting weight. Weight is the enemy of performance, mileage and handling. I applaud Nissan for setting this goal. I hope to see it happen. However, in terms of safety and convenience items that modern consumers want, it will be an uphill struggle. A magazine article once suggested that if the Toyota Prius was powered by just a convential engine, that the mileage would be comparable, due to the weight savings of not having battery packs/motors/etc. It is not a slam on the Prius. The Prius is excellently packaged and marketed. However, I feel that hybrids in their current state are a stopgap measure for automakers to maintaine CAFE standards. I previous post compared the CRX to todays standards. Honda used a truncated civic platform, efficient engine, excellent handling and fuel economy that shames new B car fuel economy ratings.

After driving an underpowed civic around for the last 2.5 years, I will have no more of these "gas sippers". The new V-6's (thinking of Toyota’s 3.5 that started out in the Avalon, and is now in many other models) get 90% of the fuel mileage of the under powered 4 cyl, with twice the power. 78MPG is NOT what the market wants, even at 5 or 7$ per gallon. Give me 30MPG with the power to pass everyone in a while, and I will gladly pay the relatively cheap fuel costs...

If I had to pay $5-$7 a gallon, filling up a 15 gallon tank costing me any where between $75 and $105 I would opt for a car that gets better than 30mpg. I think the market will gladly support a car that gets that kind of mileage with the record high gas prices year after year. And you can pass them all day long, then they will pass you while you are sitting at a gas station.

Sorry wes, but most folks know there are better ways to spend your time and $ than on "saving" a few hundred dollars a year on gas.

Prices will really truly have to get above $7 (and that is not very likely at all) before 78MPG becomes anything other than a toy and trivial piece of the market...

"Sorry wes, but most folks know there are better ways to spend your time and $ than on "saving" a few hundred dollars a year on gas."

Do you even think before you talk? I have a '96 Mazda Protege with a 1.5 liter engine. I get about 38 mpg and I have no problem accelerating (well, part of that is that my car's a REAL car - three pedals) and I pass a fair number of people on the highway every day. If you think that being able to say "HAHA MY CAR IS FASTER (even though I can't take advantage of it most of the time since you can only accelerate as fast as the person in front of you)!" is worth several hundred dollars a year, then you're exactly the kind of idiot that gas companies love.

Do I plan on getting a nice and fast car when I'm out of college in a year or so? Sure - but it'll only go out on the weekends mostly. I'll have something that gets around 40 mpg (or something like this Nissan and getting way better than 40 mpg) to drive most of the time. Why? Because having the ability to say "my engine is more powerful than yours" doesn't just cost you extra when you buy the car, it costs you extra every second that engine is running.

The real limiting factor facing ultra-efficient cars isn't weight, or anything else technical, but getting people to actually buy the thing. Gasoline still isnt expensive enough to REALLY influence people's buying decisions. They might say that they want fuel efficiency, but not at the cost of comfort, hauling capability, and other features.

I agree with them, as it is their (and my) right to purchase and enjoy what we want, rather than what others think we should have.

So while one or two percent of the population can go have their hybrids and beer cans with engines, I'm going to enjoy my GTO while the oil holds out.

not hybrid? that is hard....
it could use 0.8 liter three cylinder turbocharged engine.
with not more than three doors.

well, who knows what technology could come by before 2010.

NEWS:

Nissan announces a two-seat advanced-mode tricycle that is powered by a small Nissan petro motor capable or propelling the two passengers + load basket and achieves ~78mpg.

More details to follow.

Some of the comments here show the arrogance and ignorance of Americans. We as Americans generate more pollution per person than any other country in the world. I enjoy driving my sport vehicle, but only as an occasional treat. I drive an astro van for work, and commute on a scooter when weather permits(100+ mpg). I don't need to know that I can pass everyone on the road. Having a car around 80 mpg would do us all a world of good. Bring it on!!

Mike

Either you are very young or just not very smart yet. The ignorance and arrogance of Americans is what has given the world automobiles, nearly every major advancement in healthcare as well as raised the standard of living in the world. Instead of being proud of that heritage you have bought into the lies of the left. Besides feeling good driving your scooter what have you done? Go and vote for Hillary!!?