I watched a video biography of Robert Duval this weekend. And then I caught the western flick Open Range, in which Bobby shares screen time with Kevin Costner. The great thing about Duval is that he always seems to be paying attention, Hell, thinking, whenever Kevin does his laconic integrity dialogue thing (i.e. speaks his lines). Nobody does listening better than Duval– even if he's probably thinking about shagging some young production assistant. Certainly not Top Gear's James May or Richard Hammond. (I mean pretending to think, not getting shagged by Robert Duval). As JC pontificates in front of hundreds of adoring fans, it's like Hammond and May are standing in front of the school principal, waiting for him to shut up so they can say something clever to get into even more trouble, Instead, anything they say can and will be used against them to make Clarkson seem even more bombastic than he already is– and that's saying something. Still, you've got to give The Great One and his production team credit. They really are… …. …. something else. As is, of course, the GT-R.

1. It's lazy journalism. You don't have to write a coherent thesis. Just pick a topic, choose ten cars that fit the remit and, perhaps, come up with a formula upon which to base your selections. 2. It's always wrong. There is always at least one car that doesn't belong on the list. Newsday's "10 new fuel-friendly cars the coming year may bring" offers patient readers the option of waiting for a hydrogen-powered BMW 7-Series. 3. The captions are uninformed, poorly written and condescending. In this case, the tasteless McNuggets are prepared with the help of Edmunds' road test editor Brian Moody. "The good news is that VW is going to put diesels into the hands of the average person who may just want good fuel economy in a normal car." Huh. 4. There's always a whiff of whore's perfume to the choices. "Brian Moody makes a valid point [about the Cadillac Escalade Hybrid]: 'GM was shrewd to put out a vehicle that basically helps luxury SUV owners feel better about driving a big SUV.'" All that said, these lists are ridiculously popular with the mainstream press. So… help us choose "The Top Ten Cars for People Who Don't Care About Top Ten Car Lists," based on the best cars not currently on a popular top ten list.

Full disclosure: I really like Audis. I own two of them: an A4 Avant and an A4 Cabriolet. So when Audi offered me the chance to review a Q7, Ingolstadt's answer to "how late can you be to an SUV party and still not wonder why you bothered to show up in the first place," I said game on. After all, it's an Audi. What's not to like? 

Presidential Candidate John McCain raised a few metaphorical eyebrows last week when he reversed an earlier, federalist policy position. The Senator from Arizona stepped-up to an MI microphone and declared he'd [now] support California's quest to supercede federal automotive C02 regs (i.e. set higher corporate average fleet mpg averages than the feds). According to The Detroit News, the Senator from Arizona has, uh, reconciled his position on the matter. "Later Friday, a senior campaign aide sought to clarify McCain's position. The aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said McCain supports the ability of states to impose regulations until a national 'cap and trade' program to limit carbon emissions, something McCain has proposed, is in place. Once carbon caps are established, the aide said, McCain would oppose state regulations." So McCain will oppose California's tailpipe regs… later. Which means the statement "It's hard for me to tell the states they can't set their own standards… At the end of the day, I think states should make their own decisions" was premature recapitulation. 

Kevin Bacon fans note: there are no degrees of separation between Tesla Death Watch 12 and this, Volt Birth Watch 67. They're both based on the same TTAC-mentioning New York Times article on mainstream electric vehicles (EV). The Death Watch revealed scribe Joe Nocera's skepticism for Tesla's four-door dreams– sorry "plans" for a mainstream EV. And wails on Aptera's ambitions. So how will we all live together, together in electric dreams? The plug-in hybrid electric – gas Chevrolet Volt ! "So where should we look, realistically, for a mass-market electric vehicle? Believe it or not, Detroit. In fact, the quick-fix approach that strikes me as the most promising comes from — surprise! — General Motors, the chief villain of 'Who Killed the Electric Car?' The Chevy Volt, which the company wants to bring to market in 2010, is a plug-in hybrid that aspires to be able to travel 40 miles before switching to gasoline power. But the best part is that the combustion engine will automatically recharge the battery — so it can switch back even while you’re driving." Huh? What about the here-and-now Toyota Prius? Especially as it's headed for plug-in-itude. Nope. "It’s not sexy like the Tesla, and it’s not aerodynamic like the Aptera Typ-1. But for a mass-market solution in the here and now, [the Volt's] the one to root for." 

TTAC's Best and Brightest have debated the position of The New York Times in America's psychosociopolitical gestalt. But one thing's for sure: if the Gray Lady pans your high-tech cutting edge PC EV, your five minutes of unadulterated upmarket adulation are over. "Costly Toys, or a New Era for Drivers?" asks Joe Nocera. Obviously, he's going to play it both ways. But the scribe's double negative about Tesla's mainstream ambitions. "Just because Tesla has succeeded in making an expensive electric sports car does not mean that it will be able to make a moderately priced five-seat sedan. The latter is a quantum leap more difficult… David Cole, the chairman of the Center for Automotive Research, is another Tesla skeptic. For one thing, he says, the battery solution in the Roadster probably won’t work in a heavier car. 'Lithium batteries are going to change the world,' he said, 'but they are not ready for prime time.' Tesla’s solution in the Roadster — tying together thousands of small batteries into one giant one — is 'suboptimal.' He added, 'On a degree of difficulty scale, building a sports car is a 2. Building a high-volume affordable car is a 10.'" Nocera gets seriously cranky, narked at Tesla's "petty dissembling." "The more I prodded, though, the more skeptical I became." Join the club Joe. And thanks for reading. 

Three years. That's how long an eight-member GM hit squad's been working on defining The General's eight North American brands. Let's start at the end of The Detroit Free Press article on Liz Wetzel's team in GM's Global Brand Studio. Pom-pom-wielding autoscribe Mark Phelan concludes "…the automaker appears to have a solid product plan and design vision for its other brands for the first time in decades." OK, now, here it is: "Buick and Cadillac owners both have money, but they choose to spend it on radically different things. A Buick owner would be inclined for a quiet vacation on an isolated beach, while Cadillac is more about dressing up for a night out on a weekend in the city. A Pontiac will be designed for the nightlife, too, but for a fashion-forward agenda with pounding bass and flashing strobes. Chevrolets aim to look good as well, but with the effortless appeal of blue jeans and a good shirt, not Pontiac's club-hopping flash. Saab sells cars around the world, so it can speak to a smaller audience: people who consider themselves independent thinkers and want a car with Scandinavian style and environmentally responsible performance. Saturn attracts buyers who wouldn't touch a Chevy or Pontiac with a 10-foot-pole and its theme will build on Opel's European strengths: design, handling, fuel efficiency and interior room." Before you ask, in GM's world, that IS a plan.

TTAC's Best and Brightest have spoken. They demand independent, truthful and snarky video content– in addition to the excellent prose they already enjoy. Being the Road Test Editor, I have listened,and heeded. Last month, while testing a Jaguar XF, I decided to record my roadtrip in the Jaguar to Shiprock, New Mexico with the 1.3 megapixel video camera on my cellphone, for my own sake. Most of the narration was done by Andrew Cleary, a Welsh-educated Canadian who will be moving to Syria. I have since spliced the clips together, in a small, and extremely low-budget preview of a semi-professional Jaguar XF Supercharged video shoot we wrapped last Sunday. Myself, and two of my Captain cohorts– one with a degree in film making, the other cast as an extra in the Transformer's movie (look closely, and you will see my crew onboard the AWACS, those were real Capt Mike's!). We spent an entire afternoon shooting scenes and even a car chase involving a Mustang GT around Lake Stanley Draper. So please enjoy this teaser while we get our very first TTAC Video Review together.

With the cat out of the bag, the embargo-conformists are no longer keeping the Camaro details quiet. Since TTAC's official policy on embargoes is "No thank you," GM decided not to include us on this one. Now that they are out though, we're happy to oblige. The base Camaro LS V6 is a steel wheel express, but it'll also be the cheapest point of entry, and features the same 300 horsepower direct injection V6 in the Cadillac CTS/STS. For comparison, Ford's V6 makes 210 horses – their upmarket V8 is still only 300 horses. For the Camaro, the uprated V6 car is an LT trim level, and gives huge alloy wheels and more toys inside. The transmission options for the V6, you'll all be happy to hear, are either a six speed automatic or a six speed manual transmission. Clearing up some earlier confusion, the sole V8 version of the Camaro thus far is the SS. With the stick, you get 425 horses, and 400 with the automatic. The block is a version of the 6.2 liter V8 from the Corvette – though dubbed L99 when paired with the automatic in this case. And all automatic transmissions – V6 or V8 – will offer rev-matching downshifts and paddle shifting. What it really means that this should be a stonking good deal if it's anywhere south of $40,000. To bring you to a halt, you get big ol' Brembo brakes, big wheels, and all other manner of kit. 

The Financial Times reports that new Jaguar owners Tata Motors are taking the leaping cat up market. What's more, "there are no plans to replace Jaguar's cheapest model, the X-Type." Not so strangely, the once interim and now permanent CEO of Jaguar and Land-Rover is lifetime Ford financial guy (and ex-Aston director) David Smith. But while Smith may have tactical control, group chairman Ratan Tata is the man with the plan. Booming demand for conspicuous consumption by the newly wealthy in China, Russia and the Middle East has driven Bentley and Aston Martin sales of over $200k vehicles into the 10k unit per year range. Jaguar (and Land Rover) are already doing land office business in these expanding markets; Ratan wants a serious slice of that scrumptious pie. How exactly Land Rover fits into this new picture is a bit fuzzy, but taking Jaguar up against Bentley and Aston-Martin seems clear enough. The X-type is dead. Long live Jaguar.

As TTAC's Best and Brightest know, Smart's proud parents, the German geniuses who adopted, abused and then disowned Chrysler, long resisted the calls to bring the Smart stateside. And then, eventually, did. In the first six months, 11,400 Smart fortwo have found new closets homes. If you're an aspiring American smarty pants, you'll have to wait a year; some 30k prospective buyers are holding their [70] horses. And while used full-sized SUVs are worth less than a plate of cocoa and lefse, you can sell your Smart fortwo with a nice profit. Elizabeth Szewczyk tells the Washington Post she gave up her Jeep Wrangler for a Smart car and never (couldn't?) look back. Szewczky (pronounced “Schwwwing”) remembers “watching the fuel gauge drop as she drove down the highway and realizing it was time to trade in her childhood dream." [ED: Safe driving or what?] And anyway the Smart gets her a lot more attention than the Wrangler did. Is that point? We report, you deride.

In 2001, Robert A. Lutz jumped on the GM gravy train as the automaker’s vice chairman of product development. Since then, The General has continued its inexorable march to oblivion. Car-wise, Lutz’ regime has been marked by brand-defiling badge engineering and a seemingly endless stream of “nearly there” products. And yet the automaker’s camp followers continue to give Lutz a free pass. There’s only one reason for this blind spot: they don’t pay attention to what he does OR what he says. Perhaps they failed to notice that the guy’s got a blog.

Ever since GM CEO Rick Wagoner announced his first turnaround plan (turn around while I pocket $100m), Wall Street and the mainstream media have reacted positively to his cuts. And every single time TTAC's responded with Death Watch warnings that the cuts don't mean jack shit. GM's octo-branded, dealer-bloated, product-lame, legacy-intensive, union-stifled, fiefdom-protecting business model is broken. Last week, Rabid Rick did it again. And once again, the stock emerged, zombie-like from its grave. Only this time, those supposed to be in-the-know are, in fact, in-the-know. CNNMoney [finally] rolls with the changes, proclaiming "GM's Stock Surge May Be Short-Lived; Earnings, Sales Eyed." Hmmm. Could be. "In announcing the liquidity-boosting plan, the company also said that it expects to report significant losses when second-quarter financial results are announced in the next few weeks. GM hasn't announced a date for the release of its quarterly financial report. July sales results, set to be released Aug. 1, could bring more bad news for GM and its Detroit-based counterparts, which continue to lose market share to foreign-based rivals." As sure as eggs are eggs, GM faces yet another credit downgrade. If GM hocks its foreign ops– it's only remaining asset of  value– then even Chapter 11 may not save The General. 

For the past six years or so, I steered clear of SUVs. A car guy bought cars. End of story. And now, suddenly, I want one. Not a cute ute or anything as sensible as a Honda Pilot, mind you (I'd rather ride a Vespa). But an authentic, gas-guzzling off roader: a Land Rover Discovery or whatever the stupid alphanumeric is for it now [LR3]. Or a Jeep Wrangler. I'd even go supervulgar and ride around in a Mercedes G500. Or a Toyota Land Cruiser, FJ Cruiser or Nissan Xterra. If a stick shift is available, even better. Not that I'd actually take my SUV off road. I just like the image. Is that so horrible? Does it really make me a bad person? I certainly hope so. 

Can't wait for some good news about Product Revolution 2.0 from GM? Well, surf on over to Edmunds Inside Line for the latest in grainy computer-generated images of the cars that are sure to make you forget that GM was ever in any kind of trouble. Think American automakers can't build an attractive, efficient small car? Um, you were right. The first look at Chevy's Cobalt quasi-replacement, the Cruze, reveal bland baby Malibu styling that even Edmunds calls "over-used and derivative." And while the old Chevy Cruze (Suzuki Ignis) was a tall, flexible wagon, the new model sports a long front overhang and a tight greenhouse. But fear not, wagon lovers because the Caddy CTS sportwagon is coming. And by the looks of it, it will be yet another fashion nugget designed to convince Americans that all station wagons have less luggage capacity than sedans. That's right America, if you want to buy a GM with actual storage space you have no choice but to keep buying thirsty crossovers for at least five more years. For example, take the Caddy SRX, the Saab 9-4X or the Chevy Equinox… no, seriously, take them. They'll just be occupying valuable Volt real estate on GM lots come 2010. Finally, we get a look at a mid-sized Buick, possibly to be named the Invicta. Sure it looks good, but will it be enough to rescue the dead brand walking? Speaking of which, is it a coincidence that GM isn't showing any new Pontiac or GMC product? Probably not. The future is now!