We reported earlier on the gold standard in this genre: Scott Burgess' Aspen Hybrid review. Clearly, USA Today car reviewer James R. Healey suffers from the same truth-telling conundrum: how do you diss a hybrid, even if it's a ridiculous idea whose absurdity is only matched by its shoddy execution? You know there's trouble right from the headline: "Chrysler's hybrid SUVs pull in near front of pack." Near? What pack? The pack of hybrid SUVs? Yup. "What makes Chrysler models superior to GM's?" Healey asks. Talk about the wrong question. (The answer is price, apparently.) After that bogus comparo, Healey gets down to business, and it ain't good for ChryCo. "Starting from a dead stop was lazy unless you pushed hard on the throttle, thus undoing the fuel-economy benefits (but generating lots of fun from the willing and eager Hemi V-8). Once underway, the hybrid's switching among modes was accompanied by tiny jerks and shimmies… As with most hybrids [?], there's a shudder when the gas engine fires up to aid the electrics, but it was barely noticeable in the Durango. The bulky battery pack under the second-row seat was a hurdle for access to the third row." Oh, and "Quiet: But electric motor whines at low speed." 

GM Car Czar Bob Lutz' infamous pre-Katrina remark, "Rich people don't care about gas," has once again come back to haunt him. This time it arrives in the form of a $71,685 two-mode hybrid; a rebadged Chevy Suburban SUV called the Cadillac Escalade Hybrid. Here's the problem: Bob's remark implied that rich people are environmentally unconscious (and, by extension GM). If that's true– and I'm not saying it isn't– why would anyone pay an extra $14,795 (over the base 'Slade) or $3600 (for the two-mode propulsion system's premium) to buy a gas – electric version of the Escalade? Is it because they care about looking like they care about the price of gas? And if that's right– and I'm not saying it is– wasn't Maximum Bob wrong in the first place? And if these rich people really cared about looking like they cared about the price of gas, why would they buy a hybrid SUV (20 mpg city) instead of something more fuel efficient (if a lot less big and infinitely less bling)? How many rich, luxury-loving, boat-towing, gas price or carbon-footprint-aware SUV drivers are there, anyway? Last question (I swear): how much did this doomed PR-mobile cost GM? OK, one more. How long before those hybrid stickers and badges show up on eBay? [First photo of one of these in the wild– customer owned– gets an honorable mention.]

Thanks to the folks over at Edmunds Inside Line , the embargo is broken and pics are out of the 2009 Acura TL. It's a 28th century wedge of cheese. Acura is really taking their cyborg design theme to the extremes (they call it Keen Edge Dynamic), and while I don't like the general styling, it may look better here on the new TL than it does on the recently debuted Acura TSX. The TL's grill is all ready to plow your snow. That should be a fairly easy job thanks to the optional AWD, included on the higher priced 3.7 liter V6 models. The base 3.5 liter V6 puts out 280 horses through the front wheels only. Both engines route power through a 5-speed automatic: no word if a stick will be available, sorry to friend that like using the left foot. Like in the TSX, the interior on the TL is another Acura buttonfest – an ironic and sad development from the Honda folks that used to build ergonomically pleasant cabins. Since brands without an identity are now trying to sell themselves as the high tech gadget companies (Acura, Lincoln, Ford, Tesla, Nissan), the TL will be loaded up with bluetooth this and alphabet-soup that. Another one bites the dust? How will it stack up against arch rivals like the fellow front wheel drive, automatic only Nissan Maxima? We'll wait to drive it of course, but the TL is off to an ugly start.

                                          Pixamo Gallery

I think the Pistonhead's natural enemy is the home owner's association. There's no overnight curbside parking, no car covers and  zero chance of enjoying the suburban lifestyle while keeping your  toys. Then again, their rules and egos worked to our favor: our  team, Mad Cow Motorsportz, now has a power player in the 24 hours of  LeMons. Troy Hogan, our chief PITA fearless leader, got smacked with a home owner's complaint letter, forcing him to remove his (hidden in the weeds) 1973 Datsun 240Z. Troy is attached to that rotting hulk of crap, so we dashed the Lincoln LSC's racing dreams.  Now the Z goes in for major cancer  resection (with a mandatory roll cage) and we get another Craigslist sweetheart: a 1983 Datsun 280ZX for the tidy sum of $150. The 240Z shall be healthier with the ZX's bigger long block and beefier  brakes. Amazingly, the switch to a basket-case 240Z made fiscal  sense: we underestimated the ZX's valuable componentry and astounding  $118 crush value at the local scrap-heap. So don't worry Capt. Mike, we'll do you proud in H-town.

Chrysler doesn't do well outside it own backyard, or play well with others. The American automaker's attempts to expand globally in the early ‘60s ended with Chrysler selling their European operations (Rootes Group, Simca and Barreiros) to PSA Peugeot Citroën. In the 70's, Chrysler off-loaded their Australian subsidiary to Mitsubishi. ChryCo's last U.S. partnership with a Japanese manufacturer (Mitsubishi again) ended on less than cordial terms. The "merger of equals" with Germany's Mercedes-Benz almost [may actually have] killed it. So why would Chrysler entertain the idea of another off-shore partnership? And why would Nissan ever want to partner with an automaker as moribund as Chrysler?

Interesting review of the new Hyundai Genesis luxury sedan in today's Wall Street Journal , which makes the inescapable point that the car is a Lexus GS460 for nearly $16,000 less ($53,785 versus $38,000). It has the second (to the way more expensive Mercedes E550) most powerful V8 engine in the class, runs on regular, sources its gearbox from ZF, has a warranty 10,000 miles better than Lexus's or BMW's, more front and rear legroom than either one, and an interior of equal quality and tastefulness. For better or worse, the Genesis even has a mock-BMW iDrive. (The reviewer, Jeff Sabatini, says it's better than BMW's, though, precisely because it does less.) The assessment comes to an unfortunate but inarguable conclusion: aside from whether or not a strong market still exists for cars of this size and cost, Hyundai has missed the point of why Lexus buyers pay an extra $15,785 "just for that badge on the hood… the fact remains that these cars are immensely popular precisely because they are symbols of money, power and success. The people who buy them aren't likely to spend their year-end bonuses on a Hyundai…" Sad.

Alzheimer's disease compounds the physical changes that accompany aging, which can undermine driving skills. Yet, studies from Brown University and Washington University indicate that patients can drive through the very early stages of the disease. The August 2008 Harvard Mental Health Letter (HMHL; sub) reports the Brown study of 84 patients with early Alzheimer's and 44 healthy older controls. All of the latter passed an initial driving test as compared with 88 percent of those with "very mild" Alzheimer's and 78 percent of those with "mild" Alzheimer's. Time to failure of the driving test was a median of 324 days (~11 months) for those with mild Alzheimer's, and nearly twice as long, 605 days (~20 months) for those with very mild disease. To handle the situation, HMHL recommends broaching the issue early, "while discussing other aspects of care," and documenting the patient's driving patterns. "Although patterns of behavior are what matter, citing specific incidents [?] to make the case may help convince a patient to surrender the keys," according to HMHL. The newsletter also recommends having a third party, such as clinician or friend present during conversations about driving.

Having escaped The Bored of Directors' Night of the Soft Pillows, GM CEO Rick Wagoner once again watches as his employer takes a hit to its [somewhat nebulous] bottom line. Reuters reports The General is shelling-out $277m to settle a shareholders' lawsuit "contending the automaker made false and misleading statements." (Presumably, in its accounts, rather than generally.) You may recall there was a while there when GM restated its earnings more often than a squealing bookie– which is a bit bizarre (or not) as Wagoner ascended the throne from the Chief Financial Officer slot. Anyway, "In the regulatory filing [which exposed the payoff], GM also disclosed the tentative settlement of a separate lawsuit brought by shareholders, agreeing to make unspecified changes to its corporate governance rules. GM also agreed not to oppose plaintiffs' attorney fees of up to $7.5 million in that case." Unspecified changes? Hang on; is this a publicly-held company or not? And if you think this is bad, wait 'til you see the legal bills when the artist once known as the world's largest automaker files for C11. 

The federal ethanol mandate is the Mother of All Ethanol Boondoggles. The latest federal energy bill dictates that some 9b gallons of ethanol must be blended into gasoline from Sept. 1 to Aug. 31, 2009– whether consumers like it or not. How can the feds "force" the market to swallow all that corn-juice? The Renewable Fuels Standard sets the bar for all 50 states' gas blends; backed-up by the usual threat (loss of federal highway funds). According to The Detroit News, Texas governor Rick Perry has asked the EPA to cut that shit out [paraphrasing]. Perry wants the feds to "temporarily " reduce ethanol requirements to bring down the corn prices bedeviling his rancher friends. Oh, and people who eat. In a phone call with the Gov, EPA Administrator Stephan Johnson laughed, Joker-like at the idea [paraphrasing]. Perry was pissed [for real]. "I am greatly disappointed with the EPA's inability to look past the good intentions of this policy to see the significant harm it is doing to farmers, ranchers and American households," Perry said. "For the EPA to assert that this federal mandate is not affecting food prices not only goes against common sense, but every American's grocery bill." The Texas-sized battle against boondoggery begins.

I kid. What we're looking at here is a hand-crafted aluminum body over a carbon fiber chassis with a bunch of bits from Aston's existing models. [There is some irony here. The man who created the current much-used Aston shape, Henrik Fisker, tried to make a go of it as a "coachbuilder," re-skinning and modding Mercedes SLs and BMW 6s. He's now a Karma chameleon, working on an EV sports car.] The new Aston whip looks sufficiently different from the "standard" Vanquish (or whatever they call their top model these days) for observers to ask One-77 owners, "I say, is that an Aston?" Which they bloody well better, given that it'll cost high-end collectors over £1m to add a One-77 to their climate-controlled garage. The real question is horsepower, the lack of which is hamstringing Aston's post-Ford aspirations. The absurdly minimalist one-77.com website only promises a 7.0-liter V12. Which Classic Driver posits at a ridiculous 1077hp. If there are anywhere near that number of horses under-bonnet, it ought to secure the Anglo-American-Arabian automaker's base, and please European and American efficiency-conscious regulators no end. 

This website has long argued that automakers should spend the majority of their resources nurturing existing autos. Introducing new models on a regular basis, constantly reinventing the wheel to follow fads and fashion, is an inherently expensive and dangerous game. Nissan's 350Z proves the point. It's a four-wheeled personification of not fixing what isn't broken. Better yet, it's a proper Nissan sports car at a price that shames the Ebay-adjusted, oversexed GT-R. Thankfully, the Z is still crazy after all these years.

When is enough, enough? GM has to be asking that about their former subsidiary Delphi. The AP [via Forbes] reports that The General has agreed to lend the parts maker another $350m "so Delphi can maintain a minimum level of liquidity." That brings GM's financial stake in the company they thought they'd dumped spun-off to $900m in loans. And that's on top of the $3.6b they paid out to cover Delphi's UAW pension liabilities. Delphi has been in Chapter 11 since October 2005. Their bankruptcy original plan included exiting Ch 11 this past spring with an equity deal and massive loans. When Appaloosa Management and other investors backed out of a $2.55b equity deal at the last minute, Delphi had to go back to square one. Last week, bankruptcy Judge Robert Drain ruled that Delphi can file a lawsuit against Appaloosa and the other investors. Until that's settled (and assuming the lawyers don't eat up whatever settlement they get), it looks like GM will continue bailing out their largest supplier. The question is, who will bail out GM?

And here it is [maybe]: Chevrolet's plug-in electric – gas hybrid Volt. Weʼve admired (more or less) the widely-touted concept and glimpsed the camouflaged 1/3 model. Iʼve photchopped my personal guess for the finished model, based on Bob Lutz' contention that the production version will still be recognizable as the Volt. The small cabin silhouette is clearly not making it into production (as we've seen on the scale model). However, the doors' transparent upper sides are a Volt-specific design element; I think they could make it out of concept stage to act as a visual trade-mark. They're not all that useful, but they give the Volt a suitably high-tech appearance. Some mechanical components like the door-locking mechanism or the window crane could be seen through that glass; eye candy for kids and first-time car-thieves. I kept the glass-roof, but I doubt it will be standard equipment. Some high-tech lights (but not as fancy as those seen on the concept) should differentiate the Volt from the rest of the Chevys. The result isn't beautiful, but then, neither is the Toyota Prius.

[More of Andrei's photochoppistry at avavarii.com ]

RF just shot me a press release that claims a Peugeot survey discovered that drivers use their owner's manuals now more than ever. According to their findings, 79 percent of customers have consulted their handbook and learned about features on their cars that would have otherwise gone unnoticed. Some 93 percent of drivers have read or do read their handbook. Fully 82 percent feel it necessary to have a paper copy of the handbook rather than access the info electronically. The entire story sent alarm bells off in my head. I mean, the last time I used an owner's manual was when my 2000 Nissan Sentra's engine warning light started flashing at me (it meant my gas cap was loose). And, that's it. OK, in the interest of Truth, I did thumb through the Jeep Wrangler's book to try and figure out how to remove the top, the doors and the windscreen. But I put it down when I came across an image of a rubber mallet. You?