When I reviewed the current Chevrolet Malibu, I was generally impressed with GM’s effort in a highly competitive segment, but I had a few complaints. One of those complaints had to do with the ‘bu’s back bench, which prompted me to note
the rear seats seem like almost an afterthought compared to the well-appointed front row. Low seat height, a relatively narrow bench and unsupportive seating make for a poor combination
With images of an updated Malibu making the rounds of the blogosphere, and the Detroit News reporting that its production has been pulled ahead by six months by the order of Dan Akerson, you might think GM had taken the opportunity to improve the Malibu’s second-row shortcomings. But, according to Automotive News [sub]’s product editor, Rick Kranz, it seems that GM has done the opposite of improve rear-seat interior space… because of yet another of the ‘bu’s shortcomings.
Over the weekend, Chinadaily [via CarNewsChina] reported that China’s General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine had halted imports of Jeep Wranglers due to what was reported as
fires [caused by] a problem in the vehicles’ automatic transmission and related systems.
And though for some this story’s value may begin and end with the ironic humor value of China recalling unsafe American products, there’s more to this than meets the eye. As it turns out, NHTSA has investigated a suspiciously similar transmission-related fire risk in Wranglers, and made Chrysler fix it. What’s not clear is why China-bound Jeeps don’t appear to have received the upgrade that US regulators required for American-market sales.
As I’ve explained many times before, it can be very difficult to know when a recall is worth covering. Drawing too many conclusions from a single defect can be dangerous, as defects are a fact of any industry that balances quality and cost as closely as the auto business. But in this case, I’ve received enough emails about the video above that I’m willing to open a discussion about it here. But before you jump in, be sure to read the caveat after the jump. (Read More…)
In the grand old days of the European auto industry, rival houses would battle for supremacy in endurance, road, rally and formula racing, the results of which were treated as far more important than (or, at least the basis for) such prosaic concerns as sales volume or profitability. In the modern era, this fierce competition slacked, as racing became about brand-building and competition moved into the arenas of sales and profits. Now, however, a new competition has erupted between every brand with a presence in the European market, only this time participation is compulsory and the stakes are survival in a super-competitive, mature market. And neither speed nor endurance will win this race against time: only reaching an EU-mandated carbon emissions goal by 2015 will do.
Lexus’s GS-series of sports sedans has been a perennial sales dog for years now, winning Toyota’s luxury brand few converts from its 5-Series, E-Class and A6 competition. In fact, it’s a testament to Lexus’s successes in building unconventional luxury niches with the RX and ES lines that it’s been able to become a major US market luxury brand without a popular full-sized luxury sedan. But with luxury sales competition heating up under pressure from BMW and Audi, it’s clear that Lexus isn’t willing to let the GS’s underachievement continue unaddressed.
Exactly a week ago, Fiat said it would up its stake in Chrysler “within weeks,” and according to the Detroit News, the deed is now done. Having earned 5% of Chrysler’s equity by building a FIRE-family engine in the US (for use in the Mexico-built Fiat 500), Chrysler had to confirm that it has brought in $1.5b in non-NAFTA foreign revenue, and (according to Chrysler’s LLC agreement [PDF])
[execute] one or more franchise agreements covering in the aggregate at least ninety percent (90%) of the total Fiat Group Automobiles S.p.A. dealers in Latin America pursuant to which such dealers will carry Company products
in order to bring its stake up from 25% to 30%. We already know that Fiat will achieve this goal by rebadging Chrysler vehicles as Fiats for Latin American markets, a move that is technically compliant with the letter (if not the spirit) of the LLC agreement. But, it turns out that Fiat still had to get the Treasury to amend its agreement in order to bend the rules just a little bit more.
Three companies, each alike in dignity. Or not. Don’t look at the numbers just yet. Instead, consider the following. One of these companies is Japan’s largest automaker and relies heavily on that country for its production and its profit. Another one, although Japanese, produces the bulk of its vehicles overseas. The third company is American and relies very little on Japan for production.
Baseline their stock at Jan 1, 2011. When an earthquake, a tsunami, and an authentic nuclear disaster strike, which of the three end up with the same stock price as the baseline afterwards, and which take a big dive?
Activists in Winnipeg, Canada have hounded city officials about problems with the photo radar program. The group WiseUpWinnipeg caught the city using improper warning signs, hiding information from freedom of information requests and exploiting short yellow timing at intersections. The group’s leader, Larry Stefanuik, believed it was time to “amp it up” after his findings have been ignored.
Many equate China with smoke and soot belching cars. In reality, China’s emission and fuel consumption standards now generally follow the European roadmap. Implementation of standards trails the European role model by only a few years. Ironically, it is a European brand that just ran afoul of this misperception – if Chinese media is correctly informed. (Read More…)
In a memo that surprises no-one that has followed TTAC’s extended coverage of the March 11 earthquake and tsunami, Toyota’s U.S. chief Bob Carter warns dealers that deliveries of parts and cars could be severely restricted for months to come. “What we don’t know are vehicle production levels for May through July,” Bob Carter wrote in a memo. “The potential exists that supply of new vehicles could be significantly impacted this summer.” You have seen this coming. (Read More…)
After several abortive attempts over the last several congresses, the “Right To Repair” Coalition for Auto Repair Equality has had a new bill introduced in the 112th Congress with the goal of
requiring that car companies provide full access at a reasonable cost to all service information, tools, computer codes and safety-related bulletins needed to repair motor vehicles.
The auto industry has long opposed such bills, which have been passed on the state level but have never been passed into federal law. Back in 2009, then-head of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers lobby group, Charles Territo, argued against Right To Repair legislation in a TTAC editorial, calling it “a solution in search of a problem.” More recently, the AAM opposed a Massachusets Right To Repair bill on the grounds that it would increase Chinese piracy of auto parts. Needless to say, now that CARE has finagled HR 1449 into Congress with bipartisan sponsorship (from Todd Platts (R-PA) and Edolphus Towns (D-NY)), the debate is about to get fired up all over again.
Reuters reports that auto market research firm CNW Research is projecting April transaction prices to be the highest in 15 years, when measured as a percentage of MSRP. According to the report, early April sales show average transaction prices hitting 87% of MSRP, the highest such level since 1996. By comparison, transaction prices were running at around 77% of MSRP during the industry’s down year of 2009. Looser credit (subprime sales are up 92% from last year), tsunami-related production delays and lower supplies of used cars, particularly small cars, are all given credit for contributing to the rising prices, although bailout-era capacity reductions clearly set the stage for this comeback. And with tsunami-related interruptions still working themselves through the system, demand could push prices higher still. But, says CNW principal Art Spinella, don’t look for the manufacturers to reap all of the rewards of rising transaction prices.
Dealers are the primary beneficiary of these dwindling discounts since they are using fewer of their own dollars to close a deal than was necessary just a few years ago
American auto enthusiasts often bemoan the lack of diesel options offered on the US market, looking to Europe as the promised land of oil-burning efficiency. But Europe’s love affair with diesel, which has been manifested in a 50%+ diesel sales mix for years, may be coming to a close. The WSJ reports
The European Commission–which has executive powers in the European Union–will propose to levy a minimum EUR20 per metric ton of carbon dioxide emitted on products like gasoline, diesel, natural gas and coal starting in 2013. But it will also propose adjusting the existing legislation by gradually increasing a minimum levy on the energy content of diesel to bring it to the same level as that of gasoline starting in 2018
Here’s the key: in addition to basing taxes on C02 emissions, the EU tax structure shift will result in fuel taxation based on energy content rather than volume alone. Accordingly, diesel’s higher energy content means it will see a more dramatic increase in taxation levels. And this single common-sense proposal is unleashing an intense debate in Europe about energy, taxation and the future of the auto industry.
The Audi A8’s fifteen minutes of fame in Super Bowl XLV showed that Audi did not intend for its flagship to fall into the luxury sedan trap of courting mainstream aspirational lust with a stodgy, obviously “upscale” demeanor. And since America’s economic recovery is too halting to inspire over-the-top indulgence, and Mercedes owns the “bulk-and-bling” […]
Ford Motor Company has benefited immensely from its investments in its Blue Oval Brand, improving sales and profits, while wrapping its entire operations in an aura of invulnerability. But underneath all the Ford-branded success lies a problem that, more often than not, has been conveniently swept under the rug: Ford’s luxury offerings are in chaos. The last time we checked in on Lincoln, Ford was trying to convince dealers that Lincoln’s future product would be competitive in the tough luxury market… without disclosing any details that might give salesmen hope that future Lincolns will be something other than an obviously tarted-up Ford. But as tough a sell as that is, Lincoln’s dealers seem to be even more worried about the more prosaic elements of Ford’s luxury brand turnaround…
Recent Comments