In 2007, the United Auto Workers came to a defining decision: rather than sharing sacrifice equally in the spirit of solidarity, the union divided its membership into two tiers. Tier one was the old guard, existing UAW workers who continued to receive relatively generous wages. Tier two was made up of all new hires, who were paid about half what their tier one “brothers” made. As the bankruptcy and bailout of GM and Chrysler brought the UAW’s internal divisions to the fore, second-tier workers have become more and more vocal about their second-class status. The excellent Changing Gears project (a “public media conversation about the future of the industrial Midwest”) speaks with several second-tier workers about the challenges and frustrations of earning half as much as their union brethren. In the words of one worker

There’s a joke within the two tier people, that if two two-tier people died in a fire, they’d say “one GM employee lost.”  You feel like half an employee… It’s not like we have to wear a badge.. or drink out of a seperate drinking fountain, it’s just, you know every day that when you go in there, the life these people have made for themselves is something you’ll never have.

Panther Appreciation Week rolls on with this look at the platforms sales since 1995 (sorry, our sales data doesn’t go back farther) compared to some key competition. As the last several years of the graph prove, large sedans were hit fairly hard by the “Carpocalypse,” but Panthers were in a terminal sales decline anyway. In the mid 90s, Ford was selling nearly 100k each of its Ford, Lincoln and Mercury-branded Panthers, but steady updates from large, cushy FWD competition like the Avalon slowly eroded sales.

Meanwhile, the 300/Charger combo from Chrysler looks to be the Panther of the 21st Century. Beloved by fleets and Donkophiles alike, the LX sedans beat the mass-market-branded large, RWD competition… such as it is. Heck, it even beat FWD rivals like the Avalon, the Genesis (21,889), the Lexus ES (48,485) and the Taurus (45,617) in 2009. And with the updated 2011 Charger in strong competition for police fleet business, Chrysler could just be building big, old-school, rear-drive sedans in the American style for some time to come. The Panther is dead… long live the LX?

With the second annual Distracted Driving Summit underway, Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood has announced his latest cure for what he terms the “epidemic” of driver distraction. According to a NHTSA presser

In kicking off the 2010 national Distracted Driving Summit this morning, Secretary LaHood announced that he is initiating a new rulemaking to prohibit commercial truck drivers from texting while transporting hazardous materials. In addition, Secretary LaHood announced that two rules proposed at last year’s summit have now become the law of the land. Rules banning commercial bus and truck drivers from texting on the job and restricting train operators from using cell phones and other electronic devices while in the driver’s seat have been posted today.

Another year, another public display of governments inability to actually make progress on its overly-ambitious campaigns.

No, not the silly humpbacked 911. That’s just Porsche’s latest wallet-lightening technology. Porsche’s nod to heritage is in the fact that it’s building only 356 of these 911 “Speedsters.” Because, you see, the first Porsche Speedsters were based on the Porsche 356. Oh yes, and by limiting an “exclusive” to a few hundred units means Porsche can charge $204,000 for a 408 HP 911. Which, after all, is actually the more significant nod to Porsche heritage: the 911-based Speedsters, which arose in the cocaine and yuppie-fueled 80s, have long been a high point in Porsche’s proud tradition of charging silly money for ever-so garish “special editions.” Doesn’t heritage just make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside?

As Sajeev points out, America’s police forces could well be the savior of large, rear-drive sedans in the American market. Which is hugely convenient for Chrysler, which recently spent big bucks updating its 300/Charger LX platform. Much to the chagrin of Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne, in fact. A devotee of per-platform volume-based “industrial logic,” Marchionne has publicly stated that he would never have spent the money to update a platform with so few “applications,” had he been in charge during the Cerberus era. But winning police fleet business could change all that, and Chrysler is clearly going all out for it.

The 2011 Dodge Charger has not been shown anywhere in civilian guise, but several outlets including the Detroit Free Press have snapped shots of the new sedan testing for police buyers. Given Chrysler’s well–documented struggles with fleet sales addiction, giving police fleet buyers the first look at an “all new” car is an interesting move. Discuss the looks all you want, what I want to know is will consumers go crazy for a cop car? GM obviously doesn’t think so…

With Ford’s Ranger scheduled to expire sometime in 2011, Ford’s Derrick Kuzak spends most of a recent interview with Pickuptrucks.com proclaiming the death of the American compact pickup market. But after trotting out the numbers, and talking up the F-150 Ecoboost, Kuzak finally gets to the real reason Ford won’t be selling the new Ranger in the US market.

The new Ranger is 90 percent of the size of an F-150. In the rest of the world, compact trucks have grown over time. They’ve become dual-use [vehicles for work and family] and they’ve increased cab size, payload and towing.

D’oh!

As with most EVs, we knew about the CODA EV for a long time before a price was ever trotted out (the car was first mooted as the Miles XS500, and was scheduled for a 2009 launch before reality struck). And even before we knew the price, we reckoned that a Chinese-built sedan with Chinese battery cells thrown into it in Southern California would face its fair share of challenges. Now that the CODA EV has been priced at $44,900 (full specs here), we’re certain of it. Of course, Federal tax breaks bring the CODA down to $37,400, and a further California incentive could bring it as low as $32,400, or about $400 less than a Nissan Leaf… before tax breaks. Why would anyone pay $12,000 more for a Chinese fly-by-night when they could have a Nissan? CODA CEO Kevin Czinger tells Automotive News [sub] that

Price is not a decisive factor in the sale of electric cars. I think the 40 percent additional range, and 40 percent additional battery energy with all-season thermal management, is the decisive factor

UAW boss Bob King is taking the fight abroad, visiting Fiat’s Italian plants in order to take a look at the World Class Manufacturing system that apparently has not yet sufficiently taken hold at Chrysler’s plants to be viewed there. But the visit isn’t purely social. King tells Reuters that

We’re going to be pitching to suppliers that they should come and locate here in Michigan.

Because clearly everybody wants to do business with the UAW. Heck, American supplier firms are falling over themselves to move production to Michigan, but King just thought it would be nice to give the Italians a first crack. On the other hand, Italy hasn’t exactly been free of auto-sector labor strife itself. At least King can pitch Italian suppliers by explaining that, as majority stakeholder in Chrysler, the UAW makes Fiat-Chrysler’s US labor environment a lot less complex: all you have to do is keep the union happy. So much for Marchionne’s “culture of poverty.”

The Six Series has always been one of the more soberly-styled coupes on the market, favored primarily by the more conservative members of the medical and dental professions. And though the Bangle-designed outgoing model was no exception to this rule, it may end up making history as the most dynamically-styled 6-Series ever. After all, if these shots show the “concept” of the forthcoming 6-Series, and they make the outgoing model look like a concept car, you know BMW is atoning for Bangle’s excess. Next stop, Anonymityville.

This is a company that could not tell you, on any given day, within five hundred million dollars, how much cash it had… not only were they not prepared, but Rick Wagoner had very specifically said he didn’t want to prepare… frankly, it’s an irresponsible position [for a CEO to take].

What do you do when you’ve overseen a divisive bailout and an investment scandal all within the last year? Writing a book goes without saying, but it doesn’t hurt to bash on the executives you ousted while “Overhauling” the industry. That way, people who were (ahem) bearish on GM leading up to the bailout can at least be vindicated in their pessimism (and have the pleasure of imagining what might of happened if Ron Gettelfinger had been fired as Wagoner’s sacrificial lamb). In any case, that’s just what former auto bailout czar Steve Rattner has done in an interview with CBS News, and despite Rattner’s relentless striving to appear respectable and brave, it’s worth a watch. Especially in hindsight, pre-bankruptcy GM makes even Rattner look good.

Government’s solution to distracted driving: hold summits and tweet at Jersey Shore cast members. The OEM solution: run ads legitimizing unfocused driving and then sell an electronic solution (in the example above, a $2,950 “Driver Assistance Package” for the $49,400 Mercedes E350). Or argue that voice-controlled in-car Facebook updates pose no more of a distraction than, say, radios. Or roll out a “feature-disabling feature.” What Ray LaHood calls an “epidemic,” and “menace to society,” the automakers call big business. If LaHood is as serious about distraction as he says, should he not be calling out the trend towards increased in-car communication? And if he is exaggerating the problem, shouldn’t the automakers be more actively defending their decision to market distracting in-car technology?

If LaHood keeps his rhetorical War On Distraction alive long enough, the current OEM approach will inevitably come under the microscope. Given that private concerns generally prefer self-regulation to government regulation, what should the automakers do to keep the government off its back? Ignore LaHood and hope his crusade blows over? Fight him, commission studies, and definitively prove the safety of in-car communication? Or change course, risking a huge disadvantage but possibly carving out a new branding opportunity? Now that the least safe part of the modern car is the human doing the driving, everything has become a lot more complicated…

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood’s second annual distracted driving summit begins tomorrow, and the party’s getting started right: with the release of 2009’s distracted driving fatality numbers. 5,474 Americans died as a result of driver distraction last year, according to NHTSA data [PDF here]. 448,000 “traffic injuries” were attributed to the distracted driving “epidemic,” an epithet LaHood has employed since his crusade against driver distraction began last year. Strangely though, distracted driving deaths remained flat as a percentage of overall traffic fatalities (16%) last year.

But, argues LaHood in an Orlando Sentinel op-ed, police often don’t report the role of distraction in traffic incidents, so the actual number could be higher. That’s an argument we’d expect from the guy hosting a database that is infamous for its inaccuracy, but we’re still struggling how a statistically flat phenomenon (in an environment of improving highway safety) qualifies as an “epidemic.” More importantly, we’re not sure that LaHood’s conference will have any more of an impact than last years. But hey, at least it’s better than scolding Snooki on Twitter. A cabinet Secretary can only do so much…

Discovered by Discover Magazine, this “speed bump” in a Vancouver BC parking garage is the creepiest application of the “trompe-l’œil speedbump” technology to date. Apparently,

the girl’s elongated form appears to rise from the ground as cars approach, reaching 3D realism at around 100 feet, and then returning to 2D distortion once cars pass that ideal viewing distance. Its designers created the image to give drivers who travel at the street’s recommended 18 miles per hour (30 km per hour) enough time to stop before hitting Pavement Patty–acknowledging the spectacle before they continue to safely roll over her.

In order to produce and sell cars in China, foreign firms are required to form joint partnerships with a Chinese firm. With a ten-year, $15b government EV stimulus in the works, automakers are complaining that a requirement to build EVs in partnership with Chinese firms amounts to government-mandated barrier to market access. A foreign automaker executive complains to the Wall Street Journal that the draft version of the government plan is

tantamount to China strong-arming foreign auto makers to give up battery, electric-motor, and control technology in exchange for market access… We don’t like it.

China’s automotive market is projected to grow faster than most, and with $15b of government assistance, the Chinese government has a big carrot with which to tempt foreign firms into sharing their technology. But the backlash is already building…

(Read More…)

Having applied for a trademark on the phrase “range anxiety,” GM seemed to have wedded itself to the idea that all-electric cars are fundamentally compromised in their ability to inspire consumers. But with its range-extended Volt costing $8k more than its prime competitor, the Nissan Leaf, GM appears to be backing away from that position as the International Business Times reports that The General will begin testing EV versions of the Chevy Cruze/Daewoo Lacetti Premiere in Korea. According to the report,

The Cruze EV is equipped with a 31-kWh battery that generates maximum power of 150 kW. On specific test schedules conducted by LG Chemicals, the demonstration vehicles may achieve a range of up to 160 km (100 miles).  The vehicles can go from 0 to 100 km/h (60 miles per hour) in 8.2 seconds with a maximum speed of 165 km/h (102.5 miles per hour).

The Cruze EV will be tested as part of a demonstration fleet, so don’t hold out for a Chevrolet EV anytime soon. Reports that GM has “redeemed” itself after “killing the electric car” may yet prove to be premature.