Not content to simply rebadge a Chrysler minivan, Volkswagen has putting on a brand-destruction clinic by pairing its Routan with a brand new marketing gimmick incentive. If you inexplicably want to pay extra to have a VW badge on your Dodge Caravan and put a down payment on a Routan, VW will give you $1,500 back. Except that it won't. The Wall Street Journal explains: "The money — held by Upromise Inc., a subsidiary of SLM Corp., which also owns Sallie Mae Bank and is the largest maker of college-funding contributions– can then be moved into a college savings fund known as a Section 529." This would be bad enough if VW were simply admitting (via cashback) that its cynical Chrysler rebadge is DOA, but instead it's offering an incentive that makes Chrysler's "$2.99 gas" gimmick look reasonable. The weirdest part? VW claims that 6k buyers have already signed up for the offer. But with analysts projecting Routan sales capacity of 20k to 40k, Volkswagen has lots of suckers still to round up. Let's just hope that claiming a single-digit-percentage slice of the shrinking minivan market is worth the epic brand dilution that the Routan– and its ridiculous incentive– are sure to cause VW.

My wife doesn't believe me, but I'm a taking week off, my first in more than two-and-a-half years. This is my last opportunity to take a breather before Frank exits stage right and Justin gets up to speed. Rest assured this won't be one of those "paved paradise" deals; the website will be in Frank's capable hands, aided by our expert team of bloggers, reviewers and editorialists. While you're exploring the autoblogosphere, I'll be changing light bulbs (with help of course), taking my driving test (really), playing with my pre-schooler and generally decompressing. I trust you will, as always, keep us honest. Thanks for being there, even when I'm not. Oh, and we crested 700k uniques for the first time ever this month. I look forward to chasing the million. Later.

Given its "what economic downturn?" price tag and profit-sucking development costs, you'd think VW would just let the Bugatti Veyron slip into unobtainable-classic status. After all, developing a new Veyron makes about as much sense as a creating an all-new Phaeton, right? Nein, Bugatti Boss Dr Franz-Josef Paefgen tells Autocar UK that a new Veyron will be arriving around 2012. "We will be staying on top of everybody else and we will not be producing a smaller, or cheaper car and we will not be moving volumes up. Bugatti customers are very extreme people," says Paefgen. But not so extreme as to rule out a little platform-sharing, apparently. Bugatti boffins are considering building a Rolls-Royce Phantom competitor based on the next-generation Bentley Arnage platform. Word has it they're even considering fitting the luxobarge with "advanced biofuel technology… and even diesel." And just to prove that everyone who bought a Veyron thinking it was the best of the best are saps, Bugatti is also rumored to be building a 1200 hp Veyron GT model. Though Bugatti denies these rumors (what, they think 1k hp is enough?), Autocar says it has learned that customers have already put deposits down on GT versions. Any guesses as to how many million extra those 200 hp will set you (or the Sultan of Brunei) back?

In George Orwell's Animal Farm, the farmyard creatures create seven commandments to ensure harmony and protect against human cruelty. The seventh commandment, "all animals are equal," eventually gets a rider: "but some animals are more equal than others." For most, it's satire. For others, it's a way of life. To wit: federal politicians, whose interest in special interests far outweighs their concern for the "average" voter– if only because taxpayers are too busy earning money to pay their taxes to notice how the cash is being wasted. Except when they're not. The plan to bailout Detroit's automakers looks set to be one of those times.  

And so it begins. The Wall Street Journal' s lead editorial makes it perfectly clear that Motown's plans to tap your taxes is well advanced. And guess what? It's a god damn conspiracy! "Earlier this month… the top dogs at Ford, GM and Chrysler had a meeting of the minds and decided that the way out of their current losing streak would be to ask the feds for a lifeline. They figure they'll need $40 billion or so to ride out their current troubles until they reach the promised land of hybrids, the Chevy Volt, and, who knows, maybe even profits. We've since heard that lobbyists for the car makers are taking their pitch for direct federal loans around Washington, with a goal of unveiling the plan after Labor Day — conveniently in the frenzy of the fall election campaign. They've briefed Congressman John Dingell, the dean of Michigan Democrats, as well as officials in the Bush White House… The plan is for the government to lend some $25 billion to auto makers in the first year at an interest rate of 4.5%, or about one-third what they're currently paying to borrow. What's more, the government would have the option of deferring any payment at all for up to five years." TTAC will have an editorial on this shortly. 

It's always good to know the boss has your six. Yesterday we reported HUMMER's general manager said all the talk about GM selling eco-unfriendly-brand was "just speculation." According to the Wall Street Journal, Rick Wagoner announced that his employer is "preparing data and other materials to open formal talks" with "potential buyers." So much for "speculation." The usual "people familiar with the matter" told WSJ that GM is no longer "seriously considering" revamping HUMMER. Basically, GM can't afford to do it because of "a potential liquidity crunch" (to put it mildly). Of course as WSJ points out, selling HUMMER would be only "a minor part of GM's plan to raise the $15 billion in additional liquidity by the end of 2009 that it needs to remain viable." The only real hurdle they'll have in shutting down HUMMER and shuffling it off to India, China or Russia will be dealing with approximately 170 HUMMER dealers who have state franchise laws on their side. No doubt the vultures lawyers are already circling.

Personally, I am offended by this "remake." While Death Race 2000 wasn't exactly Five Easy Pieces, Paul Bartel's 1975 cult classic featured motorized combatants competing to cut pedestrians into at least that many bits. Which was– and still is– deliciously politically incorrect. The new movie pits convicts against convicts for mass entertainment. Been there, Running Man'd that. Ho-hum? Nope. "The car chases and most of the characters are thrillingly executed, with 5,000-horse-power smash-'em-ups shredding the screen," writes New York Post critic (or not) Kyle Smith. "If you run over the right manhole cover, you can activate additional weapons or bloodthirsty traps, and there aren't a lot of environmental restrictions ("Give me the napalm" is as routine a command as "find something on the radio"). If the warden feels like cheating, and that feeling often comes over her, she can throw into the mix something called the Dreadnought, which is to the other cars what a Chevy truck is to a roller skate." 

This is the British TV car show's take of the AM Vantage iteration prior to the one Justin reviewed today. But still… I mean… wow. The noise! The noise! The noise!

5th gear. Aston Martin V8 Vantage roadster. Gorg

Five years have passed since Ferrari introduced the Enzo. I bet that in two or three years we'll get to see (at least in posters) another prancing horse wonder produced in three hundred-something examples. I took the liberty of rendering for you my impression on the subject, keeping in mind what the F60 should be: an uncompromising supercar filled with the latest F1 technology from the Scuderia. One good thing about such a car is that it can even use technologies that are not allowed in F1, such as auto-adjusting aerodynamics. (The Enzo was the first Ferrari to use a self-adjusting rear wing.) We can assume that the F60 could feature electronically adjustable front spoilers and variable capacity air intakes to finely tune Cx vs. downforce vs. air cooling depending on needs. The design path I've chosen makes subtle references to the F40 and to the F50, adding a drop of Italian fragrance from the next decade. My excitement and enthusiasm regarding this chop are toned down by the sad thought that this car will no longer be designed under the supervision of Andrea Pininfarina. May he rest in peace!

OK, someone needs to tell Ford's Presidente de las Americas that FoMoCo didn't invent direct-injection turbocharged engine technology. Oh wait, someone did. A comment underneath The Detroit News' article: "Why is Ford getting all this attention just for catching up with the rest of the automotive world? VW, Audi, Subaru, Renault and a number of other manufacturers have had turbocharged direct injection engines for years. While it's nice to see Fords pulled its head out of its corporate ass for once, it isn't like they've done anything original." In fact, The DetN reports that "Ford began working on EcoBoost more than seven years ago"– only to be stymied by the marketing guys. And now it's rush, rush, rush. All that said, it's also worth noting that Fields floored the Eco-Boosted MKS and then claimed "This will put a smile on your face. But you get 20 percent better fuel economy with 15 percent less CO2."  Note to Fields: not at WOT you don't.  

Want to see how wonderful EcoBoost is?  Click here.  

Sean Connery's Bond, James Bond, would punch you in the face while kissing your girlfriend. His Aston Martin DB5 was beyond cool. By the 1990s, Bond drove a range of product placement-mobiles, and Astons looked like Jaguars (and vice versa). While devastatingly quick, Astons handled like trains. And then the Vanquish, DB9 and V8 Vantage restored a sense of dignity. But– the Vantage's 4.3-liter V8 stumped-up "only" 380 hp. When critics questioned, Aston did the English version of flipping them off: nodded their collective head and shrugged their shoulders. But now, finally, Aston unleashes the 2009 Vantage with a 4.7-liter V8. Power jumps from 380 to 420. Torque is up, and the dashboard is new. I recently exercised the convertible version, the Vantage Roadster, for a few hours on a sun-drenched day to see if Bond's whip is suitably… nasty.

The last we heard (yesterday), GM NA VP of Chevy said the new Cruze will be "targeting having the best fuel economy in the small-car segment with Cruzeclass-leading mpg." Har-har. But seriously folks, where did the Detroit News come up with its new headline "GM plans $500M for 45-mpg small car." Extrapolation? Nope. Expectation. "The Cruze is expected to get about 45 miles per gallon and serve as a counter-punch to $4-per-gallon gasoline once it goes into production in April 2010." There's nothing in GM's press release suggesting that kind of fuel efficiency. The Freep reports "The Cobalt is rated at 33 highway miles per gallon and the new Cobalt XFE model gets 37 m.p.g. on the highway. The Cruze is expected to get closer to 40 m.p.g."  UPDATE: TTAC commentator Buick61 quotes Edmunds to provides an explanation: “On August 12, Beth Lowery, GM’s vice president of environment, energy and safety policy, told the Management Briefing Seminars in Traverse City, Michigan, that the Cruze will get better gas mileage than the vehicle it replaces — the current Chevrolet Cobalt. 'The Chevy Cruze will get an additional nine miles per gallon in fuel economy when it debuts in 2010 [versus the Cobalt].'"  

Not to belabor the point (much), but the Chevrolet Cruze is GM's next next big thing. As such, the future Chevy needs a steady stream of spin touting it as such. And so why-the-Hell-isn't-he-embattled GM CEO Rick Wagoner cruises over to Lordstown, Ohio to announce his company's intentions to someday rule the world. I mean, design, build and sell a competitive, profitable small car for the North American market. Automotive News [sub] reports that Rick promised Lordstown $500m to facilitate Cruze control. That ain't much in the new car development scheme of things. And once again, The General's spinmeisters are using every possible opportunity to amp-up the rhetoric re: GM's impact on the U.S. economy. "The investment in Lordstown is one of several that have been announced at U.S. plants in the past five years, adding up to over $2 billion total investment in Ohio and more than $20 billion in the United States." Federal loan guarantee much?

As you may have seen, Car and Driver did what they're supposed to do and stuck five Nissan GT-Rs on dynamometers to find out just what's up with the cars' world-beating performance. Er, I should say to find out what's up with the discrepancy between their various performances. C&D concluded that U.S. non-press cars make about 520 hp at the crank. Our man Berkowitz concluded that Nissan is feeding the buff books (and Edmunds) ringers. Regardless, does it matter? Here's a for instance… You know the Bugatti Veyron and how it makes 1,001 hp from its quad-turbo, 8.0-liter W16 motor? Well, in Europe it makes 1,020 hp. Something to do with the difference between our more accurate SAE net and the funny Euro (probably metric) whatever system. How does Bugatti explain it? The engines actually produce 1,040 hp, so who cares? And that's kinda my point. Remember when Mazda got "nailed" a few years ago for overrating the horsepower in the Miata. They said it made 155 hp, but in reality it only made 142 hp. Did it really effect the car? Or, closer to (my) home 2006 Subaru WRX had 230 hp when I bought it. Then a few months later the SAE rejiggered how they measure horsepower. Now my car makes 224 hp. Which is actually three horses less than my 2001 WRX. Do i care? Actually, I do. That really pissed me off. You?