Nissan has decided that using Toyota powertrains in its Altima hybrid is a bit embarrassing. So they're working on one of their own. If CNet is to be believed, "Nissan's system is designed for a rear-wheel-drive car, and uses two clutches, doing away with a torque converter for more efficient power use." That's right sports fans, he said rear-wheel-drive. But before the hybrid Z-car rumors get out of control, consider that "Nissan hasn't released any details on performance yet, or when it might offer a car with this technology." Mes anwhile, they're charging ahead with Li-ion EVs, apparently. PC World reports that "Nissan has committed to launch its first all-electric car in the U.S. and Japan in 2010 and to mass market the vehicle globally by 2012." The latest prototype is a version of Nissan's Cube. PC World got to take the 80kw beast out on the track. The verdict? "On the test track it easily got up to a speed of 100 kilometers per hour." Breathtaking. But wait there's more! Nissan also has a new fuel cell stack that is smaller and lighter than previous models. And it uses half the platinum of previous fuel cells (a development that'll likely alienate literally hundreds of DUB readers from the green movement). While it's nice of Nissan to remind us that technology marches on, it's no substitute for a here-and-now hybrid system. Y'know, like the one they buy from Toyota.
Posts By: Edward Niedermeyer
Exchanging emails with GM's VP for R&D Larry Burns, Design News reveals that the plug-in electric – gas hybrid Volt's much-discussed 2010 "completion" date means "selling Chevrolet Volt to real customers in 2010." But Burns admits that there's a small "challenge." "One of the important challenges remaining is proving ten-year, 150,000-mile life when we're developing the battery over a three-year timeframe," acknowledges Burns. "Obviously, we'll protect the customer in this regard with our warranty, but we still need to prove out the required durability." Or… plan to take a bath on warranties six or seven years in? Then there's the issue of quality control; the Volt's "battery packs will each have 200-300 cells, which need to work all the time." As opposed to regular cars which you can just kind of slap together? Anyway, it's not long before Burns is making his case for Uncle Sam's assistance. "The industry is transitioning from the old automotive DNA of stand-alone vehicles that are powered by internal combustion engines, energized by petroleum and largely controlled mechanically," says the R&D VP. "We're moving to a new DNA that encompasses electrically driven vehicles energized by electricity or hydrogen, controlled electronically and 'connected' to other vehicles and the infrastructure." And that means "government is an equal partner with the auto industry and the energy industry in realizing the transformation to advanced propulsion vehicles." So… "we're also going to need government help in the way of incentives." Yes way.
While The Big D2.8 try to get their product-related shit together in a post $4-a-gallon world, their vulnerability in the still-shaky credit markets threatens to throw them into bankruptcy. Which is why Chrysler was so hell-bent on renewing its $30b credit facilities, regardless of the high costs of default protection. Automotive News [sub] reports that the facility has been rescued, although this time around Chrysler Financial could only hustle up $24b. No worries, say ChryFi spokesfolks. They claim that's all they need now that they've abandoned the leasing game. Some 90 percent of the new credit facility is being backed by banks that were part of the original financing, suggesting that financial firms are doubling down on the troubled automaker. Chrysler won't say exactly what interest rates are being charged on the facility. But given the high default risks of all domestic automakers, it's safe to assume that Auburn Hills isn't getting a charity handout. After all, that's the government's job, not Wall Street's. And until such time as government-backed cheap credit becomes available, Chrysler (et al) will continue to hemorrhage cash to keep credit lines like this one open. Like the poet said, mo' credit, mo' problems.
BMW was once known for the elegant simplicity of its vehicle lineup, but no more. Now the Boyz of Bayern must spend as much time imagining lifestyles and creating vehicles for them as they do developing new platforms. After all, if you can tweak a few chassis to reflect the infinitely variable lifestyle statements of postmodern life, why would you actually work on making your model line more broadly diverse? You wouldn't if you like profit like BMW likes profit. Accordingly, Auto Motor und Sport has spy photos of the latest BMW why-mobile, the "Progressive Activity Sedan" or PAS. What exactly are we looking at under the black camouflage? A fastback version of the five series, which will offer four-door coupe looks with better rear-seat room than say, a Mercedes CLS. Sound familiar? That's because it basically takes the X6 formula and plops it on the next-generation five series. Within a year or so of the PAS's 2009 launch (no word yet on American availability), BMW will sport no fewer than four four-door utes (X1, X3, X5, X6) and five four-door sedans (1, 3, 5, 7, and PAS series) in its European market lineup. In fact, Bimmer nearly went for a tenth model, the X7 (hilariously imagined as an extended model here), but AM und S says that it's been canceled. And if you think Norbert Reithofer's decision to can the X7 means BMW is aware of its bloated four-door lineup, think again. The weak dollar and high gas prices get all the blame. And shopping for a four-door BMW just got a tiny, tiny bit easier.
According to UniCredit SpA [via Bloomberg], one of America's three biggest automakers is almost certain to default within the next five years. Extrapolating from risk premiums on credit-default swaps, GM faces an 84 percent chance of default, while Ford is looking at "at least 75 percent risk." Jochen Felsenheimer, chief of credit strategy at UniCredit, says "The costs imply there is close to 100 percent probability that one of the big three will file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy." And there's little the D3 can do to prevent default if the overall economic climate doesn't improve– and soon. "There might be a default at any time.'' It's the Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDOs), stupid. A variant of the Structured Investment Vehicles that brought down the mortgage market, CDO's are securities that repackage pools of bonds, loans and credit-default swaps and divide their cash flow into notes of varying risk and returns, which are then sold to investors. Credit-default swaps on GM and Ford were included in more than 80 percent of CDOs created before they lost their investment-grade debt rankings in 2005, according to Standard & Poor's. Bottom line: if one of the domestics goes down, it's taking a whole lot of market with it. With GM paying $4.7m upfront plus $500,000 a year to secure each $10m in financing, it's not a question of if, but when.
So, the Bugatti Veyron is an expensive buy at over a million bucks per. Buy it as a limited-edition model retouched by Hermes or some other fashion house and you'll have to phone Zurich to free-up another half-million plus. While you're liquidating your assets to buy your own piece of 1k hp heaven, consider for a moment that your Veyron investment isn't properly projecting your considerable status when it's sitting in the garage. Which will likely be most of the time. What's a plutocrat to do? Luckily, Bugatti is more than happy to sell you a whole line of clothing, luggage and accessories to remind the unwashed just how exquisite your taste is. Of course, the Bugatti Collection requires the same commitment to relentless status projection as the Veyron to justify its head-spinning price list. Want an official Bugatti keychain? That will be 99 Euros. An umbrella sells for 279 Euros, while clothing sells from 119 Euros for a Polo shirt to 399 Euros for a quilted jacket. The cheapest officially-licensed Bugatti gear to be had? A baseball hat for 39 Euros. Oh well, the Bugatti program has to make money for its Wolfsburg overlords somehow. God knows it's not making profit on the Veyron.
Inspired by the plight of blind and partially sighted pedestrians fearing hybrids running silently in EV mode, Lotus is set to replace the silent whoosh of a Prius' EV mode with some sort of engine noise. So how does Lotus' "Safe and Sound" system sound? In the videos provided by Lotus, it sounds a lot like a healthy four-banger. Hethel's engineers claim you could make your Prius sound like it's packing a desmo-head 1955 Mercedes 300 SLR engine or a breathed-on Chevy small block. Pity the poor gangsters of Agrestic who will lose their drive-by shooting advantages if Nancy Botwin upgrades her Prius with the Lotus system.
For the red-blooded enthusiast, it's the ultimate nightmare: a car that just doesn't want to be driven hard. For the under-frugal and over-cited drivers of the world, Nissan's ECO Pedal could be the mechanical conscience they need to adjust to our eco-friendly, speed-kills society. "Each time the driver steps on the accelarator (sic)," flubs Nissan's press release, "a counter push-back control mechanism is activated if the system detects excess pressure, helping to inform the driver that they could be using more fuel than required." Required for what exactly? An electronically-determined "optimal acceleration" based on transmission efficiency and fuel consumption rates. You know, like how polite people and Buick owners drive. Nissan claims that with the killjoy-graft "drivers can improve fuel efficiency by 5-10 percent, depending on driving conditions." Sadly, the intrusion is not limited to the gas-pedal recalcitrance. An "eco-driving indicator" on the dash stays green if your driving style does (get it?), but flashes and turns amber "to advise the driver of their driving behavior." Or remind the driver that they are merging onto an interstate. Luckily, you will still be able to eke whatever id-fodder is available to Nissan drivers who would consider this option by switching the nagging thing off. Nissan will "commercialize" the system in 2009, but they don't say what models it 'll be on. If it's cheap and it can be turned all the way off when the less-better angels of our natures need to have their way, it could be worth a look… if you're into that kind of thing.
Acura sources tell Automotive News (sub) that the Honda luxury brand will add an all-new model to its lineup in 2010. Earlier reports suggest that this model could be a four-seat coupe to replace the CL which was cut in 2003. With a $50k target price and a possible folding hardtop version, the new vehicle will almost certainly occupy a niche spot in the market. According to the Acura corporate office, this new model is what it will take for Acura to assume its rightful position as a "tier one" luxury brand like BMW or Mercedes. But according to to Acura dealers, a new model is needed simply to pep up showroom traffic. Not that you can blame Acura for wanting to try something; June sales were down a staggering 25.7 percent. "We need to start creating more buzz about our products," says an LA Acura dealer. "I'm going to keep Acura in my prayers because they need it." But the NSX will create plenty of buzz before this new whip even arrives, so why go for it? Acura dealers currently sell only three cars and two crossovers, compared to Lexus' four cars, one crossover and two body-on-frame utes. And there are even more models from the true "top tier" luxury brands. But adding two-door and convertible TLs doesn't exactly banish Acura's rep as a seller of tarted-up Accords or launch it anywhere near the German teeth of the market. Which brings us to an interesting question about Acura's place in the market. With the economy flopping about an gasping for air, are "tier one" luxury buyers going to downgrade to Acuras, or are entry-level luxury buyers going to be squeezed out of the Acura dealership and into a Camcord? My guess is the latter.
Transplant firms pride themselves on running NA operations differently than the D2.8, but the body-on-frame tailspin has no interest in pride or strategy. Automotive News [sub] reports that Nissan, which has never laid off a North American worker, will buy out about 1200 employees from its Tennessee plants. Workers at Smyrna Assembly and the Decherd powertrain plant will be offered up to $125k to leave over the next three years, saving Nissan 18 percent of its TN payroll and shutting the night truck production shift. By Detroit standards, this measure is almost not worth reporting on. But for Nissan and its employees, the stakes are considerably higher. At least that's what the UAW wants us to think; they're playing the told-ya-so card to Nissan's worried Tennessee employees with more than a little schadenfreude. "As a union member, contractually, I know what my rights are," says Mike O'Rourke, whose UAW Local 1853 has twice failed to unionize Smyrna. "Unfortunately, at Nissan, they don't know what the bottom is. And they're afraid… In their employee meeting, one of the employees said, 'If we don't go, are you going to reduce our wages?' And management wouldn't answer," says the UAW honcho. "I think you and I both know the answer to that question." Except that, absent any actual examples of transplants screwing workers, the evidence points rather away from O'Rourke's scaremongering suggestion. For example, rather than abandon or otherwise its employees at Tundra/Sequoia plants, Toyota is keeping employees busy (and paid) by training them and improving operations. While UAW shops are cut and shut left and right. Funny how that works.
The Detroit News reports that Ford and GM boffins have spent the last month or so discussing joint-development of engines and powertrains. The usual anonymous sources say GM approached Ford first, and that Dearborn's initial response was "mixed." But the Blue Oval Board of Directors authorized negotiations. The two firms' heads of powertrain development have met at least three times. Neither company has commented on the reports, but analysts point to a jointly-developed six-speed automatic transmission as a sign that I know it sounds crazy, but it just might work. GM is said to be "ahead of Ford on four-cylinder engine development," while the General could learn a thing or two from Ford's Ecoboost program. And then there's the wild card: the plug-in electric – gas hybrid Volt. "If GM is smart [hold the guffaws please], they will proliferate Volt technology," says featured analyst Jim Hall of 2953 Analytics. "Ford has more experience in getting the costs down, and that could really help GM." Or is it that Ford is five years away from a PHEV of its own, and will do anything to get on board GM's moonshot? Or it could be as simple as splitting a development bill or two. Either way, file this under "How the Mighty Have Fallen" and block your nose. This collaboration reeks of desperation.
Ford has canceled a Flex production shift, and the model's chief designer suddenly left the company. Still, as Berkowitz's review points out, the Flex isn't a horrible car. It's simply fighting for market share in the remnants of a burst (SUV) bubble. The Wall Street Journal scolds the whole segment for mediocre mileage, but blames the Flex flop on crashing SUV residual values. "With gas hovering around $4 a gallon, even the crossover category continues to show signs of slowdown, as many consumers looking to replace traditional trucks are experience falling resale value of their old vehicles, freezing buyers out of the crossover market and pushing them to look at options such as compact and midsize cars," says Brian Johnson of Lehman Brothers. Even so, Ford dealers are anxious to get a Flex on the floor. "Dealers think that the product can generate showroom traffic," Ford spokesman Jay Ward tells Automotive News [sub]. "[Customers] may not buy a Flex, but they may buy a Taurus X or an Edge." So the Flex is a highly-advertised vehicle that misses the mark but entices buyers into looking at other moribund models. In other words, the GT's replacement is the Windstar replacement. How great is that?
Volkswagen's newest Golf debuts at the Paris Auto Show in a few months. Ahead of that blessed event, unofficially official images are surfacing around the web. Motor Authority has assembled the "leaked" images for your perusal, but there's not much to see. From the outside, the new Golf retains much of its previous form, with Scirocco-inspired headlights providing the only major contrast with the outgoing model. The Golf's taillights have also been refreshed. Although the whole shape seems lighter and more crisply styled, its bland visage and vacant gaze suggest a lobotomized Mk. V; while the rest of the car suggests… well, a regular Mk. V. If you've been obsessing over the new (Euro market-only) Scirocco for months, you'll probably love the Golf's new looks, and notice subtle similarities between the two. But as the Scirocco won't challenge the GTI for the hearts of American VW fanboys, most shoppers will probably think the Golf just got uglier. Which, until we see it in the steel, we're afraid to say it has.
After two months of declining sales, analysts are losing faith in the European market. They predict that the down cycle could last until sometime in 2009. That's bad news for everyone, but it comes at a particularly bad time for America's automakers, who are banking on overseas sales to make up for a moribund US market. The Detroit News reports that Europe accounted for nearly a quarter of GM's global sales last year at 2.2m units, while Ford's (non Jag/Landie) brands sold 2.4m vehicles in the Eurozone. And though overall European sales are down only two percent on the year, declines have been increasing, with eight percent drops in May and June. The European automakers' association predicts a 2.7 percent decline this year, though individual executives say it could be as much as four percent. "Having seen the developments in some European markets in the last six to eight weeks, I think it could be worse than that (four percent decline)," Daimler's Dieter Zetsche told analysts during a quarterly earnings conference call. Even the once-hot eastern European markets are declining, eliminating further opportunities for European sales growth. Which means the D3 have less opportunity to squeeze sales from abroad while the American market corrects itself. Not good.
The newswires and blogosphere are flooded with stories about average Americans and the sacrifices they have been forced to make by high fuel costs. But what about the federal government? Are all the Presidents men cutting back on fleet size, fuel consumption or general wastage? Of course not. The Detroit News has some analysis of General Services Administration data, which says that the Government's vehicle fleet costs taxpayers $3.4b per year. For comparison, the proposed $25b in loan guarantees to bail out the Detroit 2.8 will "only" cost taxpayers $3.75b. So what's driving the high cost of government fleet use? Well, at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, they aren't sure. Fleet costs at HUD have jumped nearly 70 percent since 2004, to more than $2.1m last year. But during the same period, the agency cut its fleet size and fuel consumption. "Where that spike in overall costs came from, I have no idea," said Bradley Jewitt, director of HUD's facilities management. Meanwhile, the Department of Interior was told by its accountants to reduce inventory. And so it's increased its fleet. (Hey, the VA managed to just plain lose a car last year.) Get this: Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters has two chauffers, who made a combined $128k last year. HHS Secretary Michael Leavitt has one driver who earned $90k last year. So times may be bad, but at least your government is healthy enough to waste your money.
Recent Comments