Perpetuating the overblown self-importance surrounding their role in the Super Bowl, Audi's latest press release announces they will debut the "Audi Forum Phoenix." The play station "will offer athletes, celebrities, and VIPs access to exclusive events and a level of intimacy and privacy unavailable to them elsewhere in the chaotic social landscape of the Super Bowl." In the week leading up to the big game, the Forum will offer the beautiful people indoor/outdoor bars, a pool with private cabanas, tennis, golf and outdoor fire pits (no "luxury experience" is complete without outdoor fire pits, you know). Not wanting to brag or anything, Audi of America's chief marking officer Scott Keogh stated it was "the only viable destination for VIPs seeking a true luxury experience at this year's Super Bowl." Good for them (and them alone). But how does any of this "redefine luxury?" I guess we have to wait until their Godfather spoof ad to discover the meaning of Audi's "new era." If I'm off having a piss, will someone please post a description on the following Monday? Much obliged. 

OK, this one can cut both ways. If you're a GM jump-down-turnaround-pick-a-bale-of-cotton kinda guy, Cadillac's determination to consult the rest of the world before building their luxury car flagship is a smooth move. You will be glad to hear Automotive News [sub] announce that "In yet another attempt to turn Cadillac into a successful global brand, General Motors this year will take a group of designers to China, Russia and other countries to learn what it might take to get BMW and Mercedes-Benz buyers behind the wheel of a Cadillac." If you're a look-what-they-done-to-my-brand, Ma kinda guy, you're notice the words "In yet another attempt." Even the Generally enthusiastic scribe Rick Kranz has to admit that "trying to sell U.S.-oriented vehicles globally has been a dismal failure for Cadillac." Ah, but if you're a booster, you'll clock the "U.S.-oriented" part of that sentence, and say, "See? Caddy needs a world potentate-friendly luxury car like BMW and Mercedes!" But if you're an adherent to the "GM is the Gang Who Couldn't Shoot Straight" school of thought, you'll remember that the European-spec BLS is a, well, what's beyond dismal in terms of automotive failure? Anyway, the new sedan will replace the ancient STS and DTS by "around 2011 or 2012." If GM's still in biz, we can discuss it then.

The Mercedes CL is a high-price, low-volume product, but the car usually points the way to the future design of the entire Mercedes line-up. Divining the model's next iteration is both incredibly difficult and tremendously exciting. My guess: the new design will incorporate trademark elements like the C-pillar, fully retractable side windows (no B-pillar). The chromed radiator grille will blend seamlessly with completely new styling details. Mercedes have shown their future intentions for the luxury segment with the F700 concept. While it's not exactly (or even generally) what you'd call "pretty," the research car has a few interesting touches that could be adapted for a classy coupe like the CL. This approach is dedicated to those who consider Mercedes automobiles a little bit dull, and don't want to see their billious Bangle-ization continue.

[For more Avarvarii photochopistry, click here]

The British media is all a-twitter this morning over a video posted on YouTube that shows a driver pushing his Vauxhall Cavalier to 125mph down the the M23 in Sussex. According to BBC News, the police are looking for him. They've also warned other potential scofflaws that anyone filming such activities could themselves be filmed and hauled into court. While YouTube said the video was not "considered offensive" and would not be removed, apparently the user, "paulscav," took it down (when I searched for it, YouTube said the account was closed). Meanwhile, the Royal Auto Club (RAC) Foundation is calling for all website operators to remove clips "that glorify speeding on public roads." In the spirit of international relations and all that, we'd like to do our part by showing the RAC how it's done right– I mean, wrong, in a Ford GT at 200mph.

If the refreshes go as well as the Five Hundred to Taurus redo, it may not make a Hell of a lot of difference. But it probably will. This website has constantly derided The Big 2.8 for letting popular (and unpopular) models wither on the vine, as their transplanted competition raced one or two or even three (four?) steps ahead with newer, shinier, better versions of existing products. So we're happy to report that FoMoCo's global product chief Derrick Kuzak put his hand on a stack of Automotive News' [sub] sales stats and swore by all that is saleable that his employer will now be "carrying out a product cadence that calls for change at three-, six-, nine- and 12-year markers." And Derrick's he's not weaselling, either. "At every one of those milestones, every one of our products, (we will make) a change that is marked and recognizable by the customer." Yes, well, that assumes consumers can identify Ford, Lincoln and Mercury's anodyne models in the first place– never mind their updates. But we quibble. Clearly, Ford CEO Alan Mulally's desire to emulate Toyota continues apace. Which is just as well; the clock is ticking. 

The 1.6-liter four-pot in the Chevrolet Aveo (né Daewoo Kalos) is the smallest engine GM offers in the U.S. Automotive News [sub] reports that's about to change, as The General goes smaller in a big way. The world's second largest automaker will introduce a 1.4-liter gas engine (that's just 250cc's more than half the displacement of the supercharger in the Corvette ZR1). What's that you say? GM will probably blow this one? Well, you're at least partially right. GM's boffins are going to take the 1.4-liter engine from the European Opel Astra, slap on a turbocharger and drop it into the Cobalt, U.S. Saturn Astra and God knows how many other small cars in GM's vast product portfolio. They're also looking at using it in some mid-sized vehicles. The question is, will a market that was built on "there's no replacement for displacement" take a hankerin' to the smallest engine GM's offered since the 1.0-liter three-banger in the Geo/Chevy Metro?

See? I knew this video box thing would come in handy again. Obviously, we need someone to scan and blog YouTube on TTAC's behalf (robert.farago@thetruthaboutcars.com). Meanwhile Frank ran into this gem of a site while looking for the official EPA mpgs for the Hummer H2. Did you know the mondo-SUV is still exempt from EPA mpg requirements (it gets "around" 10 – 12 mpg)? I bet the impolite webslingers at FUH2.com do. After all, the site's strapline and pretty permalink both read "Fuck You and Your H2." Their beef? "While our brothers and sisters are off in the Middle East risking their lives to secure America's fossil fuel future, H2 drivers are pissing away our 'spoils of victory' during each trip to the grocery store." More specifically, they claim the H2 is a polluter (producing "3.4 metric tons of carbon emissions in a typical year, nearly double that of G.M.'s Chevrolet Malibu sedan"), a death machine ("You'd better hope that you don't collide with an H2 in your economy car. You can kiss your ass goodbye thanks to the H2's massive weight and raised bumpers") and, most aggravatingly of all, a tax loophole ("Under the current tax laws, business owners can deduct nearly half the cost of their H2s"). Anyway, there's a certain monotony to the 4470 pics of one-finger saluted H2s, but we like page 355. What do the Padres have to do with this?

In '78, OPEC put America's balls in a vise. Responding to the Oil Crisis, Washington enacted a “gas guzzler tax.” The law levied a federal surcharge on the price of any new automobile that burned fuel at the rate of 21.5 mpg (combined), but less than 22.5 mpg (combined). The worse the car’s EPA mpgs, the higher the tax its buyer had to pay. The effectiveness of the federal gas guzzler tax is beyond debate. Literally. No one claims the purchase tax did anything whatsoever to reduce America’s oil consumption. And yet it’s still with us. What’s more, it’s about to make a comeback.

CSM Worldwide [via Automotive News, sub] is the bearer of bad tidings: the slowing new car market will force The Big 2.8 to cut even more production in the second quarter than the first. The auto forecasting firm says Chrysler will slash second-quarter production by 19.1 percent (compared to the same period last year). Ford will trim production by 16.3 percent. And GM production will drop 8.1 percent. Joe Langley, CSM senior market analyst for North American forecasts, sees an end to the pain for Ford and GM in the fourth quarter, with production edging ahead of year-ago levels. He doesn't see a Chrysler turnaround until 2009. Saying that, Langley attributes Ford's potential upturn to the debut of the MKS (Lincoln somethingorother) and Flex (xB on steroids) and ongoing sales of a TTAC Ten Worst finalist, the Ford Focus. And just in case you were thinking this is "a falling tide sinking all boats" deal, "the three biggest Japanese automakers expect to ride out a recession without serious pain. Toyota is expected to boost North American production 3.1 percent, Honda 1.9 percent and Nissan a whopping 11.0 percent."

The Wall Street Journal's "Boss Talk" chin wag with Nissan boss Carlos Ghosn begins innocently enough, providing a potted history of the Brazilian-born exec's career to date. As soon as the Q & A starts, things get ugly– for Detroit. "WSJ: Who is hurting the most in this market? Mr. Ghosn: Obviously, the Big Three. So how much more are they going to be able to sustain this kind of pressure and what's going to happen? That's a very important question for all the industry. WSJ: Can all the auto makers survive in such a difficult environment? Mr. Ghosn: No." And then, "WSJ: When it's all over, is there a native U.S. auto industry? Mr. Ghosn: Frankly, I don't know. I can tell you it's going to be very different from today. But whether there is going to be one left or two left or none left I don't know." Huh.

In round one, GM retained its crown as the world's largest automaker by cheating; counting vehicles it produces as a minority partner in a Chinese venture. In round two, GM beat Toyota for customer loyalty in a Polk Automotive survey; whose details the "we work for all the major automakers" company didn't want to discuss with TTAC (we'll keep trying). Now, in round three, we learn that Toyota may not have sold as many cars as GM in '07 (if you count the spurious Chinese models), but ToMoCo built more. The AP reports "Toyota Motor Corp. said Monday it had made a record 9,497,754 vehicles worldwide in 2007, up 5.3 percent from the previous year. That's about 213,000 more automobiles than the 9.284 million that GM made last year." Is this a case of The Emperor Strikes Back? Toyota brass say no. "Toyota's earlier, less precise production estimate for 2007 was 9.51 million. Toyota spokesman Paul Nolasco in Tokyo said there was no special reason for the change from the estimate." Other than what, accuracy? It looks like the numbers rivalry between the two automaking giants is the story that wouldn't die. At least here at TTAC.

The revival of Ford's defunct Windsor, Ontario engine plant may hinge on Prime Minister Stephen Harper's electoral ambitions. Here's the deal.. Each time the Canadian dollar rises, the divide grows between Canada's two most prosperous provinces. On one side we have Conservative Alberta, Harper's home turf, whose petro-success has strengthened the Canadian loonie. On the other side we have Liberal Ontario, the former industrial powerhouse, whose fortunes and competitive advantage have diminished in direct proportion to the loonie's ascent. In the past, Harper has rejected the call for manufacturing subsidies, pissing off Ontario no end. However, this time, an election looms; Harper needs votes in Ontario. Signaling a possible shift in government policy, Harper's industry minister Jim Prentice has hinted that Ford's Windsor plant may be eligible for a chunk of the $350m hardship fund earmarked for Ontario. The Globe and Mail reports that Prentice has pinned the chances of Ford receiving the money on just how much Ontario's provincial government, led by Liberal Dalton McGuinty, cooperates. And if neither Ford nor Dalton play by Harper's rules, well, GM is also lined-up to receive some that loot to build a six-speed transmission plant in St. Catharines, Ontario. Realpolitik, eh?

The San Jose Mercury News reports that tano kubwa have tested the Tesla. Yes, well, the buff books' jobbing journos only got a couple of hours behind the wheel. What's more (or less), Tesla gently revealed their Roadster is a "two mode" vehicle. Tesla now claims 220 miles per charge (down from 250) on "maximum range mode" and 165 miles in "standard mode." Motor Trend missed this wrinkle, and reported the higher number. Autoweek didn't mention the dual-mode deal, but reported they traveled just 93 miles on a single charge– with a limp-home aftertaste. And all the journos tested the Roadster with a "this is not my beautiful transmission" either locked into the higher of its two ratios, or, uncomfortably, not. Which doesn't square with Tesla mouthpiece Darryl Siry's claim to TTAC that the mags tested two different transmissions. In short, Tesla failed to provide journalists with a production-ready Roadster less than two months before its supposed production date. 

The days when Ferrari and Lamborghini were the sole, unquestionable, untouchable owners of the “supercar” moniker are gone. The Carrera GT’s clutch may have permanently besmirched Porsche’s “everyday supercar” rep, but the roadster's at least as dramatic as Maranello’s magic mounts. The SLR may be a dour machine driven by a brain-dead debutante, but the scissor-doored McMerc still has supercar written all over it. And those pesky Americans keep doing things to the Corvette that increase its credibility in the field of extreme machines. So is the “entry level” Ferrari F430 becoming a little, uh, pedestrian? 

The Winnipeg Free Press reports a Manitoba court ordered four “chronic” car thieves to attend counseling sessions, to learn the error of their ways. Plainclothes police re-arrested three of the teens minutes after their first session at the Winnipeg Training for Youth (TRY) program ended. You guessed it: they were about to drive off in a stolen car. The youths, aged 16 and 17, told officers they went to class in a hot car because it was "too cold to walk." (NPR reports that it was “40 below” in Winnipeg that day.) “Police said this is the first case they've seen where people allegedly stole a car so they could attend programming to learn about not stealing cars.” Uh-oh. Does that mean the story fails the modern media test (i.e. all bad news must represent a trend)? Not if you stretch… "This is what's pandemic in the whole auto-theft culture,” Crown attorney Scott Cooper announced. “These kids just don't think it's a big deal.” Gee, I wonder why…