The mayor of Warren, MI has the answer to The Big 2.8's woes. The MacComb Daily reports that in a letter to the Michigan Congressional delegation, Mayor James Fouts called for the reinstatement of the federal income tax deduction for interest on auto loans. "More new vehicle sales means more jobs, less unemployment and lower government costs to assist the unemployed," Hizzoner reasoned. Representative Candice Miller thinks "the mayor's idea is very creative." What neither of them seem to realize is that all of the Detroit manufacturers have offered 0% interest rates– and these promotions haven't exactly set sales records. Deducting the interest wouldn't have any effect on payments, and that's what floats buyers' boats. Also, Mayor Fouts better be careful what he asks for. The resulting legislation would be  industry-wide. It would likely hurt the American manufacturers more than it would help them.

Imagine you have a twin brother (or sister) and you both have a mad need for an Audi R8, but finances only for one car. What to do? How to share? Well, no worries. Audi's considered that possibility and decided to cut their R8 in half. Yes, you've read correctly. They will just divide some R8s by two and start selling little R4s. Number of cylinders, power figures and prices will follow the same simple scheme: R8 ÷ 2. Of course Audi isn't producing motorcycles yet, so each R4 will have four wheels, two chairs, etc. But it'll a little bit smaller than the R8. And to show just how confident they are with their R8 halves, they'll make them compete against entire cars, like the Porsche Cayman/Boxster or the Lotus Elise. Design-wise expect the initial coolness of the R8 but reduced by a half for the R4 in an attempt to avoiding cannibalism. Still, I bet we'll be seeing a lot of that as VAG wants to produce a Seat and a VW on the same platform. Some even say that the new VAG "sponsor" would like to develop the future Cayman/Boxster pair on the same platform. They should just offer interchangeable brand logos; that way you could change your car according to mood.

At one time, the nations of Europe took great pride in their cavalry divisions, horses and men numbering tens of thousands. Then the Gatling gun made its debut, and all those horses and all that equipment became sausages and bric-a-brac. And so it is with the SUV. The Gatling gun of rising gas prices has laid waste to The Big 2.8's armies, throwing their plans into complete chaos. To its credit, Ford is attempting to regroup, rearm and re-engage. So how's it going?

Thanks to politicians [bought and paid-for], The Big 2.8 are looking at a nice little earner courtesy of, well, you. The Detroit News provides the gory details. "The U.S. House passed a housing bill 272-152 late Wednesday that includes a provision allowing unprofitable companies to get credit for up to $30 million in capital investments. An earlier stimulus bill gave profitable companies $45 billion in depreciation credits for investments made during the year. Instead of the depreciation credits, unprofitable companies [that's Ford, GM and Chrysler] could accelerate R&D tax credits or alternative minimum credits in lieu of the depreciation provisions." In non-accountantant speak, The Big 2.8 get a $30m free ride for investing in their own biz, but not Toyondissan 'cause they're well-run companies. Meanwhile., Newstalk 1310 says Wisconsin is looking to claw some money BACK from The General, re: their Janesville Assembly Plant. "State leaders want to recoup about $8 million dollars of the grants given to GM a few years ago. They say the company is not maintaining required employment numbers. GM has eliminated hundreds of jobs in recent months. It plans to close the Janesville plant altogether by the end of 2010." 

But we've got to do it soon. Justin takes his New York bar exam on Tuesday and Wednesday, and our resident new car guy is no John F. Kennedy Jr. Fortunately for TTAC, the chances that Justin will hang out his shingle are about as high as a basil smoker (true story). In this job, I read hundreds of comments, dozens of articles and at least one porn site's fiction section per day. I can tell when a writer knows how to winkle-out the salient fact or dramatic moment that makes the story compelling. ("The western end of the beach has a 'certain' reputation. Nearly two miles from the access road it is the place where people go who want real peace and quiet, without interruptions.") It's an instinctive skill that Justin brings to this job. A skill shared by Frank, Eddy, John, the rest of the TTAC writing team and, of course, Lyle Lovett. When I began this website, I never thought I'd be spending most of my day polishing other writers' prose. But I got tell you guys, my hat's off to you. It's a privilege. 

With full-sized pickups taking a hosing, manufacturers may be looking towards smaller trucks to stem the bleeding. But a recent test of five compact pickups by the Insurance Institute For Highway Safety (IIHS) shows that they don't share the crash safety advantages of their full-sized brethren.The IIHS' first-ever side-impact test of compact pickups shows that all but the barely-compact Tacoma (which scored a "good") offer sub-standard side protection in crashes. The Dodge Dakota/Mitsubishi Raider, Nissan Frontier and Ranger/B-series earned "marginal" ratings, while the Chevy Colorado rated a dead-last "poor." The IIHS says that side-impacts are the second most common type of fatal crash, accounting for 9k deaths last year. Accordingly, the Institutes say that small pickups have the highest rates of driver deaths in accidents "of any vehicles on the road, including minicars," and that the small trucks "aren't good choices for people looking for safe transportation…until they improve." Still, some of the improvements that the IIHS recommends (stability control, side airbags) will soon become standard on some of these trucks, and optional on others. But if you think a compact pickup is any safer than say, a compact car, this might just be your wake-up call.

Edmunds (who else?) has pricing info on Porsche's Panamera sedan, under the guise "leaked document." If you read Edmunds (or any other car website), you know this already. You know there will be V6, V8, and twin-turbo V8 versions (the latter north of 500 horsepower). You know there will be a hybrid version, and that transmission options will include Porsche's new seven-speed dual clutch automatic. It's the sticker that's the kicker. For the Volkswagen-sourced 300 horsepower 3.6-liter V6 Panamera, we're talking $127k. If true, Porsche has priced the base Panamera straight into instant classic territory. Before you jump in and say "people said the Cayenne wouldn't sell and they made enough money on that porker to buy Lower Saxony," the Cayenne is very, very different. Porsche's so-not-a-sports-car wasn't $50k more expensive than its competition. And when you drop $130k+ on a Porsche sedan, you don't want to get smoked by an Infiniti G37 coupe at stoplights– let alone a 380 horsepower Mercedes S550. I give it an F-. But it's an epic car of legend and history. Thank you, Porsche.

With Hail Mary PHEVs and two-mode V8s leading the American automakers' charge towards fuel-efficiency, its easy to call Detroit's executives out of touch. But it turns out that the idea of applying simple fuel-saving technologies across product lines is finally taking hold in the corporate offices of our domestic auto firms. The Detroit Free Press reports that executives at Ford, Chrysler and GM predict that stop-start technology will find its way into every domestically-produced vehicle within the next five to ten years. Speaking at NextCruise, the eco-friendly sister event to the Woodward Dream Cruise, Detroit's finest fell over themselves trying to prove their companies' commitment to adding this (relatively) low-tech, fuel-saving technology. GM's Micky Bly went one further, saying future GM vehicles will incorporate weight-saving materials currently found in hybrids. Careful on that limb, boys.

The LA Times reports that a federal appeals court has ruled that the government may not withhold Early Warning data from the public. The info is collected in accordance with federal law requiring vehicle and component manufacturers to report information on their products (related to defects, injuries, deaths) to The National Highway Transportation Administration (NHTSA). The law was passed in 2000 in response to the Explorer/Firestone rollover scare. Until now, the information has been shielded from Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Public Citizen forced the fork-over. To which The Rubber Manufacturers Association said phooey [paraphrasing]. "With this decision, unverified information released by the government can be misinterpreted and thereby unnecessarily alarm motorists about products that are safe." The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers reckons "data that could cause a company commercial harm" should be withheld, including warranty and service information. The courts must still rule whether all Early Warning data should be made available, or just the information pertaining to cases involving injury and death.

Environmentally friendliness is the flavor of day in the world of marketing. But let's face it: eco-friendly claims usually begin and end with mileage and CO2 emissions. But what about the environment you occupy when you're driving your car? The Ecology Center has released its Healthy Car Report, which monitors toxic chemical levels in car interiors. Using a portable X-Ray fluorescence device, the Ecology Center tests 11 interior components on a range of new cars for toxic chemicals like Antimony, Arsenic, Bromine, Chlorine, Chromium, Cobalt, Copper, Lead, Mercury, Nickel and Tin. Some of the worst offenders? Mitsubishi's Eclipse and the Suzuki Reno, which have more Bromine than the salt marshes of Montpellier. The Kia Spectra has a particularly high lead count. And the Nissan Versa scores a worst-possible 5.0 overall thanks to a smorgasbord of toxic interior materials. For a complete look at the best and worst cars by class, check out the report's vehicles of most and least concern. Or, for an overview on the report, check out the Ecology Center's mildly sensationalistic video "Toxic At Any Speed." And enjoy that new car smell!

Anyone who can't guess where The Gray Lady stands on any given issue simply isn't paying attention. But today's New York Times Op Ed– The Oil Man Cometh– is harder to follow than Eugene O'Neill's seminal work. First, predictably enough, scribe Timothy Egan salutes T. Boone Pickens' anti-drilling, anti-Bush/McCain stance. "The 80-year-old T. Boone Pickens says, in a $58 million campaign, is that we can’t drill our way to lower gas prices. By implication, anybody who tells you otherwise — including the fellow Texan he helped put in the White House — is a fraud." And then, Egan rips Pickens a new asshole. "But before T. Boone poses for his statue, he has to answer to his past. Pickens was the moneybags, to the tune of $3 million, behind the Swift Boat attacks that made Senator Kerry’s honorable service in Vietnam sound like Rambo tangled up in lies." And then, he loves him. "No doubt, the Pickens plan makes sense." And then he loves him not. Or something. "Winning the argument may depend on who has the bigger megaphone. Advantage Pickens. Which means advantage Obama. Unless, of course, McCain wants to Swift Boat him, and then he knows who to turn to." Oy.

Since this summer's sales slump, Detroit's stopped bitching about the so-called "perception gap." That's the alleged difference between consumers' idea of their vehicles' quality– relative to their Asian rivals– and "the reality." Suddenly, the concept is a lot less important than finding something, anything fuel-efficient to sell. Besides, there's a far more catastrophic "gap" in play, one that threatens Motown's very survival: the "gap" between what a SUV is worth new and its value come trade-in time.

Bloomberg passed on an unsubstantiated report in Nikkei English News that claims Honda, Nissan and Toray Industries are teaming-up to develop new carbon fiber materials for mass-produced automobiles. Toray is the world's largest producer of carbon fiber. They're hoping to make it economically feasible to use the material in large enough quantities to reduce vehicle weights by up to 40 percent. Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry is kicking in ¥2b over a five-year period to help fund the research. It didn't say if this project would be an extension of existing carbon fiber nanotube research, or if it will explore new materials. Either way, with new tailpipe and fuel economy regs in the offing, the race to add lightness has begun, plug-in hybrid or no.

According to a report in yesterday's Chicago Sun Times, the City Council issued 345,206 sweeper tickets in 2006. At $50 a pop. And despite the fact that Chicago is fast becoming the most surveillance-intensive city in the U.S., initiating a camera-fest to rival London's Big Brotherhood, the Council has approved plans to install cameras to automatically ticket parking scofflaws. "Every sweeper would be equipped with a pair of cameras — one to capture the image of the “illegally parked vehicle and its surroundings,” the other to take a clear picture of the license plate. Video evidence would be forwarded to the city’s Department of Revenue daily, then mailed to motorists along with the $50 tickets." Strangely, the paper's City Hall reporter seems as fixated on the presence of paper warning signs as the Council, rather than examining the civil rights issues involved. Anyway, Traffic Committee Chairman Pat O’Connor (40th) swears to God it's got nothing to do with raising more money for the City. "I truly don’t look at it so much as a revenue things as much as it will make people move their cars."  

Ford's PR folks are busy weaving their tangled web. Case in point: in the press release announcing the dismal Q2 results for Ford Motor Credit, The Blue Oval Boyz state the net loss is "$1,427 million." I guess that doesn't sound as  as bad as saying they lost $1.427 billion in one quarter. Compare that to last year's second quarter earnings of $62m and that's quite a deep hole they've dug. Anyway, let's blame the economy! Yes, U.S. consumer preferences shifted "from full-size trucks and traditional sport utility vehicles to smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles… [which] caused a significant reduction in auction values for used full-size trucks and traditional sport utility vehicles." In other words, their parent company put all their eggs in the truck/SUV basket, gave credit where credit wasn't due, offered lease deals based on unrealistic residuals, and had nothing to offer in the subcompact market when the market shifted. But it sounds so much better to tell the stockholders "it's the economy, stupid" than to admit "we screwed up."