The AP reports that GM is suing supplier JTEKT North America Inc. of Plymouth, MI for faulty steering systems used in 2005 model year and later Cobalt, G5 and HHR models. GM’s suit alleges the JTEKT steering systems exhibited “excessive gear backlash,” causing a variety of noises that the General has spent $30m fixing under warranty so far. “JTEKT contends the components all met the specifications and testing requirements that GM gave it,” says the supplier’s lawyer. “The issues do not affect the operator’s ability to control the vehicle. This is a noise issue.” GM admits that the issue does not affect safety, but claims total repair costs could continue to rise as more vehicles receive upgrades under warranty. Current Cobalts and derivative models have received upgrades, although the AP does not specify when they took place. Keep an ear out for this problem if you’re considering a used Cobalt.

I have driven a Spark around Michigan and have had some (GM executives) out for Saturday afternoon driving. We’ve cruised Woodward. North America has been an on-and-off thing for (the Spark). At the present time, though, it is very much on. Most of the world’s minicars were not designed for North America. The safety and repairability standards are different for side, rear, front crash and rollovers, as are emission standards and other things. They are difficult to meet if they weren’t planned for in the original engineering build. We can meet the U.S. standards. We can even package the Spark for Big Gulp cupholders

GM’s Jack Keaton [via Wards Auto] on the Chevrolet Spark (neé Daewoo Matiz Creative) and the many modifications needed to ready the 1.0/1.2-liter A-segment hatchback for the US market. Including making the cupholders large enough to hold a soft drink cup that’s nearly double the displacement of the Spark’s engine. The 6′ 4″ Keaton swears the Spark’s front seat is comfortable for him, and that he “didn’t mind” the back seat on a recent 35 mile drive.

General Motors made one point very clear, 100 percent clear, the restructuring plan could only be achieved when European member states with Opel plants give some financial help. So the plan works only with state aid. The idea that General Motors can finance this on its own was not shared by General Motors, this possibility does unfortunately not exist

EU Industry Minister Guenter Verheugen reveals to Automotive News [sub] that GM does indeed seem to be trying to limit the amount of US taxpayer money spent on its $4.9b rescue of Opel. GM’s Opel fixer Nick Reilly explains “we have indicated that we will inject some GM funds into that requirement too. That is quite difficult because we are also going through a restructuring of our U.S. operations and other parts of the world.” We’ve already seen loans for jobs floated in the UK, where Reilly came up just short of offering to save Vauxhall jobs for government restructuring loans on a quid-pro-quo basis. And GM will have to continue walking that fine line, as EU competition rules forbid member states from offering financial support in exchange for jobs, especially if the saved jobs come at the expense of jobs in another EU member state. But Germany’s leadership was humiliated by GM’s decision to drop the sale of Opel to Magna, and has already ruled out funding an Opel restructuring that would keep the automaker under GM control. Will Belgium, Spain and the UK be able to come up with enough money to make the restructuring happen? Or will GM simply be forced to dip deeper into its taxpayer-funded escrow account? GM’s plan will be announced this week, and we’ll be watching.

The Chevrolet Volt can very nearly be boiled down to a single a function: range extension. The Volt’s gasoline range-extender is the car’s major technological advantage over other electric vehicles like Nissan’s Leaf, promising consumers freedom from the terror of range anxiety. But how does it actually work? TTAC’s Volt Birth Watch has long asked the question, and GM has assiduously prevented journalists from describing the Volt’s transition from initial EV range to “generator mode.” Until now. The NY Times‘ Lindsay Brooke recently took a pre-production Volt for a spin at the Milford Proving Grounds, and files this report on the generator mode experience:

It takes a few laps of Milford’s twisty, undulating 3.7-mile road course to deplete the remaining eight miles of battery charge. With the dashboard icon signaling my final mile of range, I point the Volt toward a hill and wait for the sound and feel of the generator engine’s four pistons to chime in.

But I completely miss it; the engine’s initial engagement is inaudible and seamless. I’m impressed. G.M. had not previously made test drives of the Volt in its extended-range mode available to reporters, but I can see that in this development car, at least, the engineers got it right.

Or did they?

(Read More…)

When I started writing for TTAC, I could never have imagined the wild ride I was in for. Luckily I’ve been able to draw on wisdom and support of a number of TTAC’s contributors, not the least of whom was my dad, Paul Niedermeyer. He first suggested that I start blogging for TTAC, and his seemingly infinite knowledge of all things automotive has been a constant resource for me. Now, I’m pleased to announce that he will be stepping up to be my Managing Editor. In addition to his twice-weekly Curbside Classic series (and who knows, maybe a few more Auto-Biographies), Paul will be developing new content, blogging stories in his formidable areas of expertise, and filling in for me when my work pulls me away from the keyboard. I can’t imagine a better person for the job, and together we hope to bring TTAC to new heights.

The most expensive Toyota ever made, the $375,000, “totally customizable” Lexus LF-A will not be available for sale to anyone, reports Automotive News [sub]. Not because nobody wants to pay that much for a Toyota though, but because the company is somehow worried about price speculation. “If someone buys it the first month and then decides to sell it, that could be damaging for the ownership experience,” says Lexus VP sales Brian Smith. “If it is not controlled and hits the speculation market, all bets are off. We want people out driving the car and not just parking it in a museum or selling it at an inflated price.” Which is why only 500 models are being produced? At the end of the mandatory two-year lease, customers will have the option of buying their LF-A outright. So how does the world’s largest automaker build such an advanced, limited production machine and not expect speculation and/or hoarding to take place? Moreover, how will they guarantee that LF-As are actually driven during the two-year lease period? One of the greatest sins of the auto industry is the reluctance to admit that a brand belongs to customers. For Toyota, it seems, not even its brand-defining supercar will truly belong to its customers… for two years anyway.

I was wandering the GM Heritage Center with Jaguar designer Ian Callum (yes, a write-up of that interview is coming), when a Cadillac PR man took me aside and offered to have me flown down to Los Angeles to “check out” this new CTS Coupe. My initial reaction was surprise that the offer was made at all. My second was to explain that I couldn’t possibly accept airfare. TTAC has a strict disclosure policy, and our Best and Brightest would doubtless take a dim view of any coverage made possible by an OEM picking up an airfare tab. Especially if I actually like the car, I explained, such a disclosure would create understandable skepticism. Paying TTAC’s way will always be self-defeating. Still, I thought, LA isn’t that far. I remained tempted to make the trip on the TTAC tab, right up to the point where I realized that by “check out,” Cadillac did not mean “drive.” An invite arrived, clarifying that this was an “opportunity to see the car before the LA Show and to visit with Bryan Nesbitt, general manager of Cadillac and Clay Dean, director of design for Cadillac.” No thanks. I saw the CTS Coupe before the LA Auto Show… in a Cadillac advertisement. Thanks for the invitation, Cadillac… but TTAC needs to drive something to drag itself away from the keyboard.

No, General Motors is not paying back the taxpayers, nor will it ever fully… it’s more like a partial refund. That’s not exactly fresh news around here, but the Grey Lady called wanting the breakdown. So here it is. Just don’t ask how they misspelled the byline.

Ford illustrates the ugly side of social media-based advertising: exploiting and promoting baseless prejudices by reprinting ignorant opinions. Like this misguided and misleading “thank you” posted at Thefordstory.com.

I am here today because 5 years ago, I was driving my 1993 Ford Ranger XL. Thats a midsize truck, but not midsize in saving my life. I have not ever written about this before, but I thought Ford (and all its engineers) would benefit in knowing that they have been instrumental in saving my life. The reason I can say this with certainty, is because of the nature of my car crash. I ask you, if you were broadsided at 60+ ( I was on a highway in Ca) and all that saved you was your vehicles chasis..if you were driving say, a Honda..would you be here reading this?? Maybe, but not likely. All that happened to me was, I had a heck of a bent truck frame (rear suspension) and a minor seat belt bruise! I almost tipped the truck over on its side, I was hit that hard..but luckily, she righted herself in time! (I know its silly, but you got to name your trucks) This was my first Ford, and god willing not my last. I may have lost traction, due to the road being wet..but I tell you I would not be soo lucky driving anything other than a Ford. Thank you for all your hard work and dedication. I just thought it would be nice to tell someone. Thanks..I could never be more grateful for your company, God bless you.

Your friend,

Rose

[Note: the Ranger pictured above is not the one from the wreck]

Despite already having some of the highest incentives in the game right now, Chrysler is joining GM in putting more cash on the hood to clear out year-end inventory. Automotive News [sub] reports that Chrysler will be adding $1,000 to $1,500 in incentives per vehicle, on top of October’s $3,219 per vehicle average (as calculated by Edmunds). According to the same Edmunds analysis, the average industry incentive is $2,468 per vehicle. This continued reliance on incentives contradicts a number of Sergio Marchionne’s statements at the presentation of Chrysler’s five year product and business plan, in which he argued that Chrysler could not rely on incentives to push volume. Marchionne claims to believe the incentive-based volume chasing is “insane,” but his commitment to a sustainable business plan is about to be tested. For Chrysler’s five year plan to succeed, its sales need to turn around fast, making 2009 the trough year indicated on this graph. But with no new product (and by new product, we mean refreshed product) due out until the fourth quarter of next year, such a turnaround seems impossible without huge incentives. And yet Chrysler also showed graphs projecting a direct relationship between volume and profit, meaning there is little to no wiggle room for profit-sapping incentives. Rock, hard place, I’d like you to meet Chrysler Group.

Reuters reports that Tesla is planning an Initial Public Offering, after postponing planned IPOs in 2008 and 2009. Tesla reportedly hopes to capitalize on the recent success of battery developer A123 Systems, on the assumption that the A123 IPO has raised interest in electric auto firms. According to one of Reuters’ sources, Tesla’s IPO filing could be made “within days.” And the Silicon Valley startup, which currently has only one product, the $100k+ Tesla Roadster, will most likely have to hurry. Both Nissan and General Motors plan to enter the electric car market this year, marking the initial entries by established auto OEMs into the American EV market. Both of their initial products, the estimated $30k Nissan Leaf and the estimated $40k Chevrolet Volt, will cost considerably less than Tesla’s estimated $50k Model S sedan and will beat it to market by at least a year. Acquiring funding after cheaper competing models go on sale could be extremely challenging for a boutique automaker like Tesla.

(Read More…)

We didn’t want a big fleet of electric vehicles. We’re only just over two years or so away from the games and time is running out to create a viable network. Many of the vehicles will be used for around 18 hours a day. It’s hard graft, and we knew BMW could supply the vehicles to meet these demands.”

Paul Deighton, CEO of the London Organizing Committee for the Olympic Games (LOCOG) explains to Autocar why the games won’t be relying on electric vehicles in 2012. Nissan had presented a bid to be the games’ official vehicle supplier which proposed using Leaf EVs for over half the planned fleet. A “small proportion” of BMW’s winning fleet proposal will be electric MINI Es, and all proposals were required to achieve a fleet average of 120g/km of CO2. But that hasn’t stopped Nissan from getting petulant.

(Read More…)

We got a good giggle (and several excellent limericks) out of Chery’s Bentley-aping Riich brand logo back in March, so we thought we’d show off a peek at what qualifies as upmarket for Chery. Priced at about $8,165, the Riich X1 makes do with an 84 hp, 1.3 liter engine which motivates the tiny crossover to 60 mph in a very un-upmarket 16 seconds. Which is no big deal, considering top speed is rated at about 93 mph. The X1 does offer alloy wheels, climate control, parking sensors and mp3 connectivity though. As tempting as it is to simply laugh off at the Chinese version of upmarket branding, a look at this advertisement for the X1’s sibling, the Riich M1, shows a young professional-oriented vibrancy that’s become rare in US-market auto advertising. What the Chinese market clearly lacks in technology and expectation, it makes up for with an enthusiasm born of seemingly limitless potential. [via Automotorundsport.de]

Jim Lentz, president of Toyota Motor Sales USA, sure seems to think so. “I think long-term, Prius as a nameplate could even outsell Camry as a nameplate, into this next decade,” he tells Wards Auto. When asked if the Prius’s success would trade off with the Camry, he replied in the negative, saying “I think Prius will become just that much stronger.” But it’s been a long time since a Prius-sized vehicle, let alone a hatchback, has been the best-selling car in the US. And perhaps Lentz was merely making the case for a full line of Prius-branded vehicles, an idea he says has not been approved, but remains his “dream.” Prius will need something to push it past its larger sibling. Both models set their all-time annual sales records in 2007, when the Camry sold 473,108 units, while Prius sold only 181,221 units.