As the Porsche brand has expanded in recent years to include sedans and SUVs, and as overpriced special editions and cynically neutered products propped up an increasingly bloated pricing structure, Porsche fans have had plenty of opportunities to wonder “what are those guys smoking?”  And now, thanks to Autoblog, we have part of the answer answer: we may not know exactly what Porsche is smoking, but we know what they’re smoking it out of. According to Porsche Design’s presser

The extraordinary Porsche Design Shisha combines high-quality materials such as aluminium, stainless steel and glass with the timeless and unique design approach of the luxury brand. Puristic and stylish at the same time. The Porsche Design Shisha is made in Germany and stands at a height of 55 centimetres. It only shows a discreet branding on the aluminium top of the Shisha and comes with a long flexible tube made out of TecFlex material, which is also used for the classic Porsche Design TecFlex writing tools.

So… when is Chrysler going to get in on this cross-branding opportunity?

In my review of the VW Golf blue-e-motion on Tuesday, I noted that “the holy grail of EV development is a multi-speed transmission,” but that nobody has been able to build one that can reliably handle the 100% torque at zero RPM characteristics of an electric drivetrain. Tesla tried two different multi-speed transmissions (from X-Trac and Magna), before giving up and going with the single-speed setup that every production EV now uses. Nobody has even talked about a multi-gear EV since… until now. With Fisker’s Karma about to go to market, CEO Henrik Fisker tells Autocar that his firm is developing a multi-speed EV gearbox, and that it would improve performance in EVs like the Karma, saying

With the torque at the wheels increased by the use of a gearbox, Veyron levels of performance should be possible.

We’re as excited as anyone else by the idea of an EV with shiftable gears, but this sounds more like Fisker trying to drum up some hype for the Karma launch. After all, the Karma launches to 60 MPH in a leisurely 7.9 seconds in “stealth” (EV) mode and 5.9 seconds in “sport” mode with gas power to up the wattage… a far cry from Veyron performance. As C&D puts it:

The Karma’s initial surge is sufficiently potent to avoid damnation as a slug. But the physics conspire against it keeping pace with other $100K sports sedans.

Lugging over 4,000 lbs is certainly easier with a multi-gear transmission, but given the reliability challenge, we’d be more likely to trust an EV transmission from a reliable supplier rather than a boutique luxury PHEV maker. And until Fisker can back up the Veyron reference with some hard evidence, we’re filing this one under “intriguing but unlikely.” Still, it’s exciting to know that this technical challenge is still out there, unconquered by major manufacturer or feisty startup… in a world where cars are becoming increasingly mundane, the multi-gear EV transmission challenge is a throwback to the golden years of automotive development.

It was quite a coincidence when, just last week, Audi restated its interest in US production facilities on the same day that the UAW announced it was in talks to possibly organize VW’s new Chattanooga plant. At the time we noted that

With Audi execs insisting on the need for more US production capacity, a UAW win in a Volkswagen vote could have serious implications for the firm’s future expansion.

Turns out, it didn’t even have to come to a vote. Just over a week after CEO Rupert Stadler insisted that “It is totally clear that we need new production capacity in the U.S,” Audi has suddenly decided that things look nicer in union-free Mexico. Automotive News [sub] reports that Stadler wants a new Mexican plant to build the Q5 SUV, but notes that

it was still unclear if Stadler would have his way in the face of opposition from some of Volkswagen’s top managers, who wanted Audi to make use of the new VW plant in Chattanooga, Tennessee.

Did the UAW’s sudden announcement that it was in talks with VW’s global works council about organizing Chattanooga have anything to do with the decision? AN [sub] won’t say, but the timing can’t be ignored. Audi’s US production may just have been the first victim of the UAW’s transplant organization campaign.

Tesla will begin supplying Toyota with components for its electric RAV4 a year earlier than previously planned, reports Bloomberg, a move that will have Toyota paying $100m for the drivetrains rather than the previously-agreed-upon $60m. According to a Tesla SEC filing, the EV specialist firm will supply Toyota with

a validated electric powertrain system, including a battery, charging system, inverter, motor, gearbox and associated software which will be integrated into an electric vehicle version of the Toyota RAV4. Additionally, Tesla will provide TMC with certain services related to the supply of the Tesla Battery and Powertrain.

There’s still no word about how many of these RAV4s is Toyota planning on selling over those two years, or where will they be assembled, but it sounds like Toyota isn’t trying to launch quite the EV offensive that some green car blogs seem to be hoping for. As one analyst puts it to Bloomberg, $100 million “isn’t a huge amount for Toyota, so this allows them, with only modest downside risk, to participate in what Tesla is doing.” That sounds about right…

After the UAW threatened to start 2011 with a bang by going after foreign-owned “transplant” factories and accusing uncooperative firms of human rights violations, the union’s campaign suddenly went quiet earlier this year. With the union’s fate apparently hanging in the balance, all we’d heard was a polite “no thanks” from Honda and a more subtle message from Hyundai, and little else. Was the war still on, we wondered? UAW boss Bob King tells Reuters that yes, it definitely is… sort of.

To our pleasant surprise a lot of companies have agreed to confidential discussions with us. What they’ll lead to, I don’t know. Some days I’m worried, some days I’m frustrated. Are we putting too much hope into these discussions? I don’t know, but we’re continuing them and we feel like we’re making some progress

And that’s not all…

(Read More…)

[UPDATE: GM responds to this piece here]

With environmentalist groups on the warpath over forthcoming 2017-2025 CAFE standards, trucks sitting on lots, and the Flint HD Pickup plant idled for much of the month, this is probably not exactly the moment GM might have chosen to put $328m into tooling for new full-sized pickups to be built at Flint. But time and the market wait for no company, and because the Silverado is GM’s single best-selling product, the investment isn’t tough to justify:

“Truck sales play an important role in the success of General Motors,” said Joe Ashton, UAW-GM Vice President. “We are confident that the next-generation of trucks will continue to be an important source of revenue for the company and jobs for our members

In case there’s any confusion though, GM is making perfectly sure nobody thinks they’re making any product choices because of union demands. At the investment announcement ceremony at Flint, Cathy Clegg, GM vice president of labor relations told Reuters [via Automotive News [sub]]

We certainly aren’t going to make a decision and make a commitment solely as a way of getting an agreement. If the market doesn’t drive it, we can’t do that

So, how is that truck market?

(Read More…)

I may be going out on a limb here, but I would guess that something like half of the men in the developed world have drawn, sketched or doodled a Ferrari at some point in there lives. Given this seemingly inborn tendency, you’d think that young, ambitious design students would jump into a Ferrari design challenge with shockingly distinctive, radically passionate, heart-wrenchingly beautiful designs, matured by years of fixation on the most aspirational sportscar brand in the world. And yet… many of the designs at the Ferrari World Design Challenge 2011, depicting a “Ferrari of the Third Millennium,” seem like they could be any brand’s “car of the future.”

Some may put this down to the fact that these are design students, not the trained teams that come up with Ferrari’s current designs, but I have another explanation: good design, even for something as frivolous and over-the-top as a Ferrari, has to have function at its core. But what is Ferrari’s function in our uncertain future? What is Ferrari without V-12s? Where does performance go in the next millennium when the current “base” Ferrari hits 60 MPH in just over three seconds? How can a brand like Ferrari maintain its exalted position without breaking down major performance barriers in each generation? Rather than knocking these students for their sometimes-disappointing designs, let’s take a moment to appreciate just how tough their task is.

Government officials like Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood spend much of their time justifying their positions by tilting at national windmills like the “epidemic” of distracted driving, generally with relatively modest results. And yet, despite the massive increase in mobile device use over the last decades or so, on-road deaths per vehicle mile traveled are at an all-time low. So here’s a new “epidemic” for Secretary LaHood: lane discipline. Every time I take to the freeway, I’m absolutely shocked by the number of people driving at or below the speed limit in the left lane, and the number of people who stay in the fastlane even when there’s nobody to pass. And I don’t have to rely on anecdotal evidence to know lane discipline is a problem in America (or, at least in the Pacific Northwest). According to the PEMCO Insurance Northwest Poll,

43 percent of Washington drivers don’t know that impeding the flow of traffic in the left lane is against the law.

To which I say “bullshit.” Not only is it illegal to impede left lane traffic in Washington (and Oregon, where I live), but the freeways in both states have regular “keep right except to pass” signs, so the ignorance defense doesn’t really apply. People simply don’t care about maintaining lane discipline, and ignore any sign that urges them to do so. Clearly signage and the National Motorist’s Association’s Lane Courtesy Awareness Month aren’t doing the trick… and neither does giving the finger.

(Read More…)

The debate over 2025 CAFE standards will continue to rage all summer long, but if there’s one thing I learned from the industry lobbyists that I spoke to in Washington D.C. a few weeks ago, it’s that the media debate severely lags the conversation that’s going on behind closed doors. It’s a frustrating situation for commentators who hope to influence the process, but then D.C. debates are rarely about the ideas anyway. But environmental groups who hope to come between an industry that’s already relatively well-positioned for short-to-medium-term standards and a government that’s more interested in helping the industry than ever are still hoping to bring some public pressure to bear on an issue that, according to my sources anyway, was already largely settled weeks ago. Bloomberg [via AN [sub]] reports that

The auto industry is pressing the Obama administration for a promise to reevaluate rules that may more than double U.S. fuel economy standards by 2025 before they become final…

Still under negotiation are details of the midpoint review, including the timing, whether there will be a judicial review and whether the Environmental Protection Agency, the Transportation Department and California’s Air Resources Board will coordinate efforts, Gleberman said.

Environmental groups oppose the midterm review, saying it’s a gambit by automakers seeking to kill the program at the halfway point, when a president more friendly to the industry may be in office, said Dan Becker, director of the Washington-based Safe Climate Campaign.

According to my sources, a mid-way review of 2017-2025 standards was agreed to in principle by all the major stakeholder stakeholders some time ago. And for obvious reasons: with disruptive new technologies under development and the trajectory of fuel prices remaining an unknown quantity, nobody knows precisely what technologies will be available and what the market will demand come 2017. Like California’s ZEV mandate, a push to kill the mid-term review makes CAFE even less responsive to the market than it already is. If anything, environmental groups should embrace a review of current standards because there’s a good chance fuel prices will be higher and the nation will be more determined than ever to sacrifice for higher emissions standards. Besides, if CAFE loses touch with the market and has no opportunity to sync back up, the industry could be in for another disastrous downturn. And no matter how pro-regulation you are, it’s tough to argue that CAFE should be totally unresponsive to market forces. Unless you know exactly what the market will look like in 2025 (in which case, let’s start a hedge fund), trying to set 2025 emissions standards in stone now makes no sense at all.

What do we mean when we talk about assemblies of steel, carbon and plastic in terms of “emotion”? Every craft has a very narrow dividing line between mere technical proficiency and creating something that’s greater than the sum of its parts, but few crafts enjoy a cadre of critics that are as obsessed with constantly defining this line as auto journalists. I suppose that after spending enough time driving and trying to evaluate cost-no-object luxury items the line may become more obvious, as skills are sharpened and observational powers are honed. But more than increasing the ability to define the line between mere “excellence” and “greatness” or “proficiency” and “emotion,” a career of supercar driving largely seems to reinforce the importance of simply having that line. After all, what’s more important to the reviewer of supercars: preventing some poor soul from squandering a quarter of a million dollars on the wrong supercar, or establishing their own exquisite taste? Here’s a hint: only one of these things keeps the gravy train rolling. So when you’ve got two similarly-performing supercars competing directly for the attentions of the well-heeled, few will actually care which laps what the fastest… and when the going gets tough, the tough get wobbling.

This is all well and good… after all, everyone wants to drive a Ferrari 458 and a McLaren MP4-12c, but nobody wants to go through the motions of justifying why you think one is fundamentally better or worse than the other. Besides, consumers are free to understand that one man’s “lack of emotion” is another man’s everyday usability… or “waste” their money on the car the journalist says he prefers. But when McLaren comes out and gives the latest mid-engined Ferrari a run for its money with its first roadvcar in over a decade only to be met with accusations of a “lack of emotion,” there’s no way a self-respecting sportscar firm would make a change to their baby. But that’s exactly what’s happening…

(Read More…)

Hey, it’s a station wagon… and it’s built by Audi. Also, you may not be able to tell from this angle, but it’s new. Really. What, you couldn’t tell?

Despite signs that the horsepower wars are over (or have at least been refined), nobody would argue that the American market lacks for high-powered offerings. Except, apparently, Dodge and its crack ad team at Wieden + Kennedy who have based the latest Durango ad around the idea that performance is dead in America. This canard is so preposterously misguided and thoroughly misinformed that I can’t even bring myself to lay out the all-to-obvious critique piece-by-piece. Instead, let’s turn to the legendary auto ad-blaster, the Autoextremist himself to point out why this may well be one of the most stupid car ads in a long time.
(Read More…)

As I noted in an earlier piece on the macro-level issues with EVs, it’s dangerously misleading to assume that electric cars can simply replace internal combustion-engine vehicles without a basic re-think of nearly every way in which we relate to our cars. That’s true in terms of consumer-end issues like refueling grid impacts and “range anxiety” […]

Based on spyshots and patent drawings obtained from Al Volante, Auto Motor und Sport was able to commission what is probably an accurate depiction of the next-gen Fiat Panda from Schulte Design, giving us an early look at a small car that will provide the basis for Chrysler’s long-awaited foray into subcompact cars. Chrysler’s product plan [PDF] calls for 2013 model year subcompact (B-Segment) vehicles for the Dodge, Jeep and Chrysler brands, based on Fiat platforms. The Chrysler-branded model was supposed to be a rebadge of the Lancia Ypsilon (itself very similar to the Fiat 500), but that model is reportedly on hold. The Dodge and Jeep B-Segment offerings are still on though, and the Jeep has long been thought to be a lightly-facelifted version of the Panda 4X4, meaning this model could be an early look at the smallest-ever Jeep.

(Read More…)

My, what a busy morning it’s been for EV news! Now Nissan is jumping into the fray by bumping the price of its 2012 Leaf EV by $2,420, reports Automotive News [sub]. But don’t worry, you’re getting something for that extra money…

Compared to 2011 model year’s $33,630 base price, including delivery, the 2012 model will begin at $36,050. The car’s upper-grade SL model will sell for $38,100, an increase of $3,530 over 2011.

Brian Carolin, Nissan North America Inc. senior vice president of sales, was to tell an electric-vehicle industry audience in Raleigh N.C., this morning that the 2012 model will contain two new standard features, according to his prepared remarks.

One is a cold-weather package that includes heated seats and steering wheel and a battery warmer. The other, available on the car’s more expensive SL model, is a standard quick-charge port that allows the vehicle to be recharged up to 80 percent of capacity in under 30 minutes.

So, just as Toyota goes public with its fears about the ChaDeMo DC rapid charge protocol, Nissan doubles down on the standard by offering compatibility on the higher trim level (incidentally, Nissan says that 93% of sales are of the upmarket SL trim, and “most” customers opt for the optional ChaDeMo DC charging compatibility). As if raising prices by over two grand after less than a year of sales weren’t risky enough, Nissan is also gambling that ChaDeMo will win out when the SAE rules on a DC fast-charging protocol for the US market. At this point, it almost seems as if the charger compatibility issue might be more of a risk than tthe price…