Is it dangerous to drive a Prius in the snow? ConsumerAffairs thinks so, based on reports they've gathered from several states. It seems that the traction control system in some of the gas-electric hybrids shuts down the power to the drive wheels when they start slipping, a complaint that's been around since last year. Back then Toyota admitted the traction control system could impact performance but isn't a safety problem. Spokesman Bill Kwon stated that a "fairly steep grade [eight to 10 degrees] and … snow would cause a loss of traction which will activate the traction control system and therefore reduce or cut power." Reducing power is one thing, but cutting it out altogether? "In my opinion, it's better to have the vehicle stop then to have the wheels spinning and out of control." That would be fine if the vehicle did stop, but on a snow-covered incline slippery enough to activate the traction control, a powerless car isn't going to stop. For our Prius-owning readers living in snow country, have you experienced this, or has your traction control been behaving itself?

In Harris Interactive survey-speak, "Influentials" are American adults who describe themselves as either 'very' or 'extremely' knowledgeable about cars. Harris estimates that around 19 percent of American adults fall into this category. These Influentials– or automotive alphas as we like to call them– are far more likely to use the internet for auto info than "Non-Influentials" (63 percent vs. 36 percent). Harris Interactive's Director of Automotive & Transportation Research says the research shows that "Non-influentials seek out Influentials for vehicle advice." But, Stephen Lovett maintains, "they are more likely than Influentials to rely on their shopping experience to make their final vehicle choice." It's nice to see TTAC Best and Brightest get the statistical recognition they deserve, and sad to see so many people fall into the clutches of nefarious car salespeople. Now can someone send a memo to our ad reps?

As we mentioned last September, Herpa secured the rights to the Trabant name. Rumor had it that the toy manufacturer was considering reviving what we termed the "plastic-bodied, smoke-spewing, two-stroke, two-cylinder rolling testimonial to everything that was wrong with communist East Germany." Well, it looks like Herpa's actually going to do it. Worldcarfans reports that Herpa is partnering with specialty car manufacturer IndiKar to form an initiative called "newTrabi." The plan's originator, Klaus Schindler, hopes to incorporate "the wishes and expectations of the cult car's many enthusiastic fans… in the development." They'll debut a 1/87 scale model of the newTrabi in February, shooting for a full-scale prototype for the IAA in 2009. Again we have to ask, WTH are they thinking? Perhaps our European readers would like to comment on the possible market for a machine with a well-earned reputation for being the worst car ever produced by hand of man. 

TTAC's flagged this issue before: as The Big 2.8 shutter factories, they're on the hook for cleaning-up decades of extremely toxic pollution. In fact, the costs of said clean-up could well run into the billions. StarTribune.com reports that the controversy surrounding the pollution left behind in Ford's soon-to-be-defunct factory in the Highland Park part of St. Paul, Minnesota continues. At a neighborhood meeting, Ford told approximately 50 local residents that the extent of the problem requires more testing and analysis. Ford plans to close the 138-acre truck assembly site in 2009, a year later than originally planned. Even so, "City planner Merritt Clapp-Smith said that the 2009 closure has pushed back everything [in terms of local redevelopment] and that the city won't be comfortable recommending a redevelopment option until after testing has been done, which could be in 2010." 

You might think that one's a no-brainer, what with 13 motorists killed by the Interstate 35W bridge collapse over the Mississippi River in Minneapolis, and the attendant media furore. But infrastructure improvements are about as politically sexy as woolen tights on a sumo wrestler. Actually, a minefield is a more apt analogy, as the hugely expensive improvements to bridges, roads, levees, school buildings and the like threaten the budgets of a federal government stretched thin by existing pork barrel projects. But it's a nettle that must be grasped. Unfortunately, New York Times Op Ed columnist Bob Herbert does so so gingerly he renders his rant meaningless. In other words, money is never mentioned. But jobs sure are. "Senator Dodd told me: 'At a time when we’re worried about rising unemployment rates and declining confidence in this country, infrastructure projects have the dual effect of putting people to work — and usually at pretty good salaries and wages — while also creating a sense of optimism, of investing in the future… In terms of stimulating the economy, there is nothing better than a job.”" And in terms of sucking money from the taxpayer? Look for this one to lie low until after the election– unless another tragedy occurs. 

As Darryl Siry promised, the Tesla Roadster will meet all federal safety standards. Well, all but the advanced air bag rule, that is. Yesterday, Tesla received a pass from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Tesla will not have to equip its Roadster with air bags that deploy with varying force depending on the weight of the passenger and force of the impact. That's not such a big thing– the Lotus Elise (upon which the Tesla Roadster is based) receives the same exemption. But the NHTSA's rationale is unprecedented: "public interest is served by encouraging the development of fuel-efficient and alternative-fueled vehicles." The AP reports that NHTSA was worried that the advanced airbag rule would bankrupt Tesla– given the erstwhile automaker's $43m operating losses from 2003 – '06. Tesla would have to "cancel its pending development of an electric-powered sedan, and would ultimately have to terminate its operations." So if GM can't meet some requirement with the Volt without spending tons of money, do they get to slide? Oh and "based on information provided by the automaker, NHTSA estimates the waiver will cover 3,825 Roadsters, including 625 vehicles this year and 1,600 in each of the following two years." Last we heard, Telsa was talking about building one car a week. 

OK, I get why Ford wants to build a more off-road capable version of the new F150 than the already capable FX4. Because they can. Although it's a waste of Ford's time and money (halo truck my ass), and the wisdom of equipping a consumer product with an extra long-travel suspension is highly suspect (red Rover, red Rover, my F150's rolled over), I grok the positive shock such a vehicle will give die-hard (one hopes) mud-pluggers. The modded machine's "Boss" V8, wider wheel arches and cosmetic bits ought to give them a major truckgasm. But Raptor? The name flies in the face of the F-22 Raptor's rep (so to speak) and steps on the marketing heels of the Cagiva Xtra Raptor motorcycle (and God knows what else). Luckily, Pickuptruck.com's Technical Editor says the name won't survive into production. Any better suggestions? You know, other than concentrating Ford's resources on a better small car. 

If you were 20 when GM equipped the Cadillac Seville with a 105hp 5.7-liter LF9 diesel engine– a powerplant whose feeble power, clattering noise, belching smoke, mechanical unreliability and brand defilement made oil burners about as fashionable as AM stereo– you'd be 43 now. So… I guess there's still a mountain for the marketing men to climb. Kelley Blue Book confirms this suspicion. In a January survey of an unspecified number of in-market car buyers, nearly half said diesels are "dirty and noisy." What's worse, "shoppers increasingly believe that diesel-powered vehicles get poorer fuel mileage than conventional gasoline engines, and fewer consumers are seeing diesels as fuel-efficient." That's right, diesel's appeal is actually declining amongst car buyers. Meanwhile, hybrids are ascendant, with 61 percent of shoppers claiming an interest in buying a car with a gas – electric engine. "When asked about the premium they are willing to pay for a gas/electric hybrid over a traditional gasoline-powered version of the same vehicle, this month shoppers are willing to pay an average premium of $3,135, up from an average premium of $2,645 a month ago in December 2007." Can any automaker break the American diesel curse? If they do, it's going to be a long, tough job. 

Back in the eighties, a GM executive congratulated a colleague who worked for the Cadillac brand. “Well done for reaching 300k sales.” The Caddy man was having none of it. “We didn’t sell three hundred thousand Cadillacs; we sold three hundred thousand Buicks.” The remark was prescient in two ways. First, it acknowledged Cadillac’s ruinous move “down market.” Second, more importantly, it reflected the fact that Caddy’s success was Buick’s failure. GM was already descending from a well-ordered familial hierarchy into the madness and chaos of cannibalism.

Fiat's CEO once called his employer "so worthless it could not be sold." As recently as 2003, Fiat lost $2.7b for the year. In the middle of its travails, Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne jumped in bed with GM CEO Rick Wagoner. The Harvard MBA swapped six percent of GM's shares for 20 percent of Fiat's. And get this: Wagoner signed a "put option" obliging The General to buy the remaining 80 percent of the Italian car maker between January 2004 and July 2009. In 2005, GM paid Fiat $2b– not including lawyer's fees– NOT to consummate the transaction. GM's epic stupidity funded winning new models like the Fiat 500, Panda, and Grande Punto. Five years later, a resurgent Fiat has paid off ALL of it debts, turned a profit and kept a few hundred million in reserve. And now… Moody's and S&P have looked at Fiat's balance sheet and returned Fiat SpA to "junk" bond level status (again). Sergio Marchionne's response: "that's obscene." If so, the fact that the man who funded Fiat's turnaround is still the head of GM is pure pornography.

"At its core, the film is about a struggle between old and new power. In precisely that fashion, Audi represents the rise of a new force in luxury." God I hate hype. I don't blame Scott Keogh, Audi's chief marketing officer, for trying to build some anticipation for Audi's Godfather-themed Superbowl ad. If their ad– which will only air twice— doesn't cost them the better part of $10m, it won't cost them a pfennig. But c'mon guys. It's a TV ad, not a Francis Ford Coppola meisterwerk or the Declaration of Independence. Try as I might, I can't think how Audi is about to "redefine luxury." I find it hard enough to define luxury, never mind come up with a new concept for the term. As far as I'm concerned, Audi can claim to build luxury cars by dint of the brand's peerless interiors– and that's about it. (I want you should do me a favor. Do not speak here of the brand's reputation for building unreliable automobiles. I don't want its mother to see it that way.) And you know what? It's enough. Really. He who builds the world's best interior wins. Ipso facto. 'Cause other than Quattro, I see little else that elevates the Audi brand above Lexus, Mercedes or BMW. So why not just tell the world you build the world's most comfortable carcoon and call it good? Why not reaffirm your brand values rather than redefine them? The word I'm looking for here is… hubris. Or is it hype? Same thing. 

As part of Chrysler's "all hands off deck" plan to trim production, the domestic automaker is offering ALL United Auto Workers employees at its Metro Detroit plants buyouts and early retirement packages. The goal: to eliminate 8500 to 10k hourly jobs. Although the Detroit News is quick to point out that most UAW members have been with Chrysler longer than a year, the $100k offer is open to any union member who's put in their 365 days. Well, less, counting holidays and possible sick days, etc. Like Ford, Chrysler has expanded its buyout program to just about everyone with a union card, save workers at Chrysler's Newark (Delaware) Assembly plant– and it's only a matter of time before the sayonara swag heads in their direction. Will the last high paid union worker switch off the lights? Of course not.  [thanks to starlightmica for the link]

I think it's kind of sad that car dealers are so scared of the manufactures who supply them vehicles that they can only criticize the automaker on an unattributed basis. In other words, it's too bad they're scared shitless of the suits. But hey, that's the way it is, and I can well believe Ward's Dealer Business couldn't find any VW dealers willing to go on record and say “The names (are) consistently insane. First we get Touareg, which is crazy, and now Routan, which is equally crazy." Scribe Byron Pope says "most dealers contacted by Ward's" (how scientific is that?) are just happy to have new product, while "some" are bewildered by VW's bewildering product names. VW's nameless spokesperson defended the new– well rebadged Chrysler minivan's name. It’s a “white space on our product map, and (it will) bring more people into the showroom. In some ways, the naming is secondary.” Of course, in other ways, it isn't.

Does the American Family Association have a Canadian chapter? If so, someone better alert them to avoid all cars built by union labor there. Marketwire is carrying a news release from PFLAG Canada (Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) that the Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) union has donated $25k from CAW's Social Justice Fund to the organization. CAW President Buzz Hargrove explained: "The donation recognizes the important work of PFLAG and underscores the ongoing commitment of the CAW to creating a positive environment for LGBT members and their families." I don't know what kind of car American Family Association chairman Donald Wildmon drives, but he'd better be careful. Not counting the Candaian-built Fords he's busy boycotting, CAW labor builds 15 other vehicles for the U.S. market. I'm sure Donnie wouldn't want to be exposed as a hypocrite of some sort.

Biofuels are driving up the price of food. Biofuel production threatens to worsen water shortages and force poor communities off their land. That’s the damning conclusion of a United Nations bioenergy forum, as reported by CNN. In its opposition to the biofuels boom, the U.N. is not alone. The Hartford Courant reports that residents of Suffield, Connecticut are none too pleased with CT Biodiesel's plan to build the largest biodiesel plant in the Northeast in their town. "No Biodiesel" signs sprouted up on front lawns. Vexed by health and safety (especially fire) concerns, residents flooded planning meetings, chanting, "Get out of our town." CT [Biofuels] responded in the time-honored American tradition; company officials offered the town 35k gallons of free biodiesel a year, more than $400k a year in projected property taxes, guaranteed first crack at new jobs and aid for the town's fuel bank, student scholarships and charitable organizations. “Resident Laureen Peck had a message for company officials at a recent town meeting: ‘There are safety issues here, and money will not override us.’”