In addition to the recent tales (and sitcom gags) of GPS units leading hapless drivers into bodies of water, we have a new twist on the theme: GPS units leading hapless drivers astray in Death Valley. NPR reports
After a long day, [Donna] Cooper and her family asked “Nell,” the GPS, for the shortest route back to their home.
“Please proceed to the highlighted route,” Nell said.
But what came next did not compute. The GPS told them to go 550 feet, then turn right, Cooper says.
“Well, at 550 feet it was like a little path, and then it was like, go a quarter of a mile and turn left. There was nothing there. She had me running in circles for hours and hours and hours,” she says.
A park ranger explains that this happens “a couple times a year now,” including one incident two years ago in which a mother and her son were lost on an abandoned mining road for five days and the boy died. Rangers are now working with GPS firms to update their data on small and closed-down roads, but say no amount of work will ever replace common sense when it comes to navigating desert roads. Speaking of which, what happened to Cooper’s family? (Read More…)
Over the last several years, Toyota has fought off suits by a firm called Paice, which claimed to own patents on technology used in Toyota’s hybrid drivetrains. Toyota settled that dispute a year ago, but now Bloomberg reports that another firm is going after Toyota’s hybrid Intellectual Property (IP). According to the report
Efficient Drivetrains Inc., based in Palo Alto, California, has an exclusive license from the University of California for use of the technology, including the way electricity is drawn from a battery to power an electric motor and an internal combustion engine, according to a July 20 federal court complaint filed by Toyota in San Jose… The five patents at issue also include technology, invented by EDI co-founder Andy Frank, on ways to control the power output of an internal combustion engine and a method to draw electricity to operate the electric motor and the internal combustion engine, together or separately depending on driving conditions
Over a month ago now, I was told by several people who should know that the 2025 CAFE standard “number” would fall between 60 MPG and 50 MPG. When I pressed for details, the only answer I got was “at or slightly under 55 MPG.” So when the Obama Administration opened the haggling at 56.2 MPG, I wasn’t sure if he would stand fast by that number or come down a little. Certainly the auto industry and its allies have been portraying the 56.2 MPG proposal in apocalyptic terms, running attack ads against it like this one hosted at the Freep [MP3]. And apparently the opposition paid off, as the WSJ [sub] reports that the Obama Administration has caved, reducing its proposal from 56.2 MPG to 54.5 MPG… and that’s not all. According to the report
The plan calls for a 5% average annual increase in fuel economy for cars and a 3.5% increase for light trucks through 2021. After 2021, both cars and trucks face a 5% annual increase… Included in the plan are credits for hybrid vehicles—including large trucks —and measures that will give big pickup trucks and sport-utility vehicles more leeway in meeting the target.
We’ll have to wait to see the proposal in detail before we know for sure what happened here, but it seems that the industry has largely gotten what it asked for. Not only is the overall number decreased, but truck compliance has been slowed and “advanced technology credit” loopholes appear to have been expanded. This is fantastic news if you sell a lot of trucks and SUVs, and not so fantastic if you care a lot about dramatically reducing fuel consumption over the next 10 to 15 years. But again, we’ll just have to see what specific proposals are included in the new deal, and how automakers react before we jump to too many conclusions.
With only a tiny bit of front-end camouflage left, the new Porsche 991 has been almost completely revealed… can you tell? One thing is for certain, Porsche’s not about to lose its reputation for evolutionary styling anytime soon.
Ford’s Q2 results [Presentation in PDF here] were mixed, as deliveries and revenue improved (7% and 13% respectively, compared to Q2 2010) but profitability slipped, but the automaker still ended the quarter with $2.4b in profit and $2.3b in operating cash flow. Debt was reduced by $2.6 from the first quarter of this year, and total Automotive debt landed at $14b, while gross Automotive cash landed at $22b. So, what happened to Ford’s operating profit margin?
Despite a $370m loss, Chrysler’s Q2 and first-half results [presentation in PDF here] were presented in a relatively upbeat tone, as a number of key metrics showed signs of improving. Chrysler’s revenue was up by over $3b in the second quarter compared to last year, EBITDA hit $1.3b, and “modified operating profit” was $507m, or about 3.7% of net revenues. Depreciation and Amortization costs were up slightly, as were income tax and net interest expenses, but the big loss that pushed Chrysler into the red was a $551m one-time charge associated with Chrysler’s payback of government bailout loans. Gross debt was up by about a billion dollars, to $12.287b, but net debt was down by over a billion to $2.1b, and Chrysler sees greatly reduced interest costs going forward, eliminating $2.6b in planned debt payments this year. And though free cash flow slowed considerably compared to Q2 2010 ($174m compared to $491m), Chrysler finished the half with $10.2b, up from $9.9b at the end of the first quarter.
If you don’t speak German, you can go ahead and skip to 1:30, where the magic happens. Essentially, the German safety nuts at the ADAC and DEKRA have been trying to scare motorists silly forsometimenow, shaming automakers and educating motorists about the dangers they face every day. The latest terror: a semi truck plowing into you from behind at about 43 MPH. The results? Well, they speak for themselves. The reason? Illustrating the need for Emergency Brake Assist in large trucks, which the ADAC argues should be mandatory for all trucks [per Autobild]. Though this does seem to be something of a case of legislating against stupidity, the ADAC certainly make a vivid argument for their cause…
Over the weekend we told you Saab-watchers to “expect a run on the bankruptcy court in the coming days and weeks,” and according to Bloomberg the process has already begun. Christina Lindberg of the Swedish Debt Enforcement Agency tells the news service that eight suppliers have requested that their portion of the 104 debts registered with the agency be collected and that
We will start the collection process in a few days.
The good news? A previous request to place a Saab subsidiary in bankruptcy has been revoked as the supplier in question there was paid off. Now, however, with eight more debts going to collections (worth an undisclosed amount, we know that one debt alone is worth around $70m and estimates put the total at around $1b), the situation has become dire once again. The answer? Vladimir Antonov, of course! Thelocal.se reports that suppliers are pushing for the EIB to approve Antonov’s ownership stake, seeing the Russian as the only way out of the situation. And because the EIB will clearly never approve Antonov, another report that’s just breaking now says that Saab is seeking to “replace” the EIB loan in order to bring Antonov on board. The looming question: who on earth is going to lend this bleeding-out corpse of a company $350m? Does Antonov even have a billion to spare for his pet project? Needless to say, nobody has the faintest clue… they just know it has to happen. Yikes!
Suddenly, automakers aren’t so sure anymore about all that pent-up demand that will bring back U.S. car sales back to their old glory… The big recovery has been postponed for a year or more.
But how much pent-up demand is there, really? According to Edmunds’ analysis of 12 Factors To Watch In The Industry’s Second Half, only about half of the sales lost between 2008 and 2010 were not lost forever to used cars, the inability to get credit and the “new austerity.” As a result, they calculate about 4.3m units of demand is “pent up.” But there’s a question of how accurate that estimate is, and beyond that there’s another question: what happens once the pent-up demand has been blown through?
Withe the Detroit Free Press reporting that combined Q2 profits for the Detroit automakers could hit $4b, the quadrennial negotiations with the UAW which opened today with a meeting between Chrysler and the union could be a tough slog. And because the profit outlook is mixed, with GM and Chrysler likely to improve profitability and Ford likely to see a drop in net takings, the long-standing tradition of “pattern bargaining” could come to an end. Ford currently pays about a dollar more per hour than GM and about $2 per hour more than Chrysler (which is partially owned by the UAW’s VEBA trust fund), and Ford also shoulders more of workers’ health care costs than its cross-town rivals. And UAW president Bob King admits
Being really blunt about it, when you don’t represent the overwhelming majority of an industry, which we don’t any more, then you can’t do pattern bargaining
Already unfairly disadvantaged by the UAW (Ford is the only Detroit-based automaker without a no-strike contract) and facing falling profitability, Ford is telling the union not to expect wage increases. But does that mean the union’s only choice is to bring GM and Chrysler up to Ford’s pay and benefit levels?
A Washington-based spokesman for the automaker, Greg Martin, said the effort is to make sure policy makers “are aware of GM’s contribution to our nation’s economic and competitive strength.”
GM has a broader story than just profits and sales, he said.
“GM has started an ad campaign in select Washington publications because there’s more to GM’s resurgence than just increased sales and profitability,” Martin said. “GM is also an auto company investing heavily in America’s future, creating new jobs and inventing solutions and technologies that will make a real difference in energy and safety.”
But the waves of coming auto-related regulations may not actually have motivated the ad so much as the fact that the government is likely to sell off its remaining 26% share in GM by the end of the year (if not by the end of the Summer), and they’re facing an $11b loss at current stock prices. By emphasizing that the auto bailout created a positive corporate citizen rather than just a newly-profitable company, GM likely hopes to convince the government that the political downsides of taking a big loss on The General was ultimately worth it. And that’s an important PR step in the short term as well, as CAFE negotiations are giving rise to bailout-tinged rhetorical attacks on the automaker. For example, Ralph Nader tells the Freep
We give GM billions of dollars, and what do taxpayers get in return? Opposition to a policy that will clearly save them money and give them better cars,
Has Honda been gazing longingly at the new crop of Kia crossovers? From the pulled-back, smoked headlights to the sharp Hofmeister kink in the C-pillar, this “concept” version of the forthcoming 2012 Honda CR-V looks like it’s been stealing cues from Peter Schreyer’s sharp-looking lineup. Which is not to say the design is wholly unoriginal: the grille protruding into the headlights is one cue that I’ve seen precisely nowhere before. And lest we draw too many conclusions from this “near production” design, let’s just remember that the real thing won’t debut until later this fall.
Dare to suggest that a strong CAFE standard won’t ruin any automaker, and you’ll be overwhelmed by deafening cries of “what about the market,” “think of consumer choice,” and “don’t you tell me what to drive.” Now, I’ve made it very clear that I’m not a huge CAFE fan, but the fact of the matter is that since nobody is leading a charge for a gas tax (least of all the industry that says it would be a good thing) it’s the only option on the table. Which leaves just one question: why regulate fuel economy at all? There are all kinds of arguments against regulating fuel economy, but most stem from a desire to “let the market do its thing.” That’s an argument I’m highly sympathetic towards, but it doesn’t necessarily require that the government but out and let the era of cheap, thirsty trucks roll on unabated. What maybe, just maybe, if the market actually wants more fuel economy? Well guess what campers… according to research by IHS Global Insight [via Automotive News [sub], the market does want more fuel economy.
BMW’s forthcoming “i” series of high-efficiency vehicles will launch as a two-vehicle brand, spanning the gap between high-end hybrid supercar (i8) and small, premium, rear-drive electric hatchback (i3). So, how can BMW style two such divergent vehicles in such a way that both fit into the same brand? That’s the subject of this video, which previews some of the design cues that mark these cars as BMWs, but also as “i-cars.” And if you’ve forgotten what an “i car” is (something BMW doesn’t want anymore than people forgetting what an “M Car” is), hit the jump for a brief video refresher… (Read More…)
With Opel planning to pull itself into the black within the year, the brand’s thoughts are turning from survival to “luxuries” like a flagship model planned for around 20k units starting in the 2016-2017 timeframe. Codenamed “TOL” for “Top Of Line,” the sedan will be designed to highlight one of GM’s many alt-drivetrain technologies, but according to Automotive News [sub], nobody yet seems sure which. Opel labor rep and recent champion of the brand’s forthcoming products Klaus Franz explains:
Already with the our Ampera electric vehicle, we have shown what we are able to do and enjoy an advantage of two to three years compared to the competition
But with the TOL is planned for 2016, Opel may have to dig deep to jump out ahead of the market, which is why a fuel cell-powered electric drivetrain is being considered (also, after decades of FCV research, GM has to build a production model someday). And if the eventual product has a truly ahead-of-its-time drivetrain, and looks as good as last year’s Flextreme Concept (above), this flagship could be an exclamation point on Opel’s turnaround. Unfortunately, neither of these things are a given…
Recent Comments