My WRX's temperature gauge indicated it was 98 degrees yesterday in Los Angeles. It felt hotter. Muggy, too. I'm at a red light when a beautiful brunette pulls up next to me in a white Camaro, her hair blowing in the wind. Got to love LA, right? Well, the thing is, there wasn't any wind. In fact, she was driving a hard top with windows rolled up. Her hair was blowing because the A/C in that old F-body was so damn mighty. On a race track it's said that a car's only as good as its brakes. Out here in what's essentially an overpopulated desert, the same can be said about a vehicle's air conditioning. At that moment, my rally-bred Subaru was feeling pretty damn poor. In that moment in time, I would have killed for my old Pontiac Station Wagon, whose chiller could keep a side of beef fresh. Say what you want about American cars (and TTAC says a lot ), but USDA Choice A/C is still the envy of the world. So, my dear TTACers, what's your favorite automotive national trait?

Maybe I should put "smart" in quotes. But then again, maybe I shouldn't. I was commiserating with a friend of mine the other night how are respective 401k plans lost a third of their value last quarter. In his case, it was actual money. He commented that he had a lot of money in Blue Chips. I told him that GM's stock is worth less than two gallons of (Los Angeles) gas. He asked why. And I explained that the General had made billions of dollars selling trucks, bought Saab and then redesigned their trucks while losing over 30 percent of their market share in a decade and that Mr. Wagoner got paid $14,000,000 for his troubles, pre-bonus. My friend was incensed. "How is that American? That sounds like some third world, nepatistic despot shit?" He has a point. And what of the Japanese, he asked. Well, I began, Honda now makes the best-selling car in the country, Mazda and Subaru sales are up and Toyota has the ability to shift gears (and production) when they sense a looming great depression crisis. He asked me why, what is it about Japanese culture that lets them succeed where Detroit just falls flat on its face? I have my suspicions. But, I'd rather just ask you.

Due to the inherent constraints of an 800-word (or so) review, TTAC reviewers don't always get to say everything they want to say about a car. With an editor as, uh, tenacious as Farago, you have to beat him back with all your strength pick your battles. In my Infiniti FX50 review, I wanted to call the CUV the "ultimate wine tasting machine" (some of you may have noticed the pictures hail from Sonoma County's Russian River AVA). Think about it. The FX50 can handle as well as any sedan-on-stilts; perfect for those windy wine roads. It boasts a phalanx of electronic aids to defend against tipsy drivers, and Lane Departure Warning. [ED: I say nothing.] And just like a Mercedes S-Class, in the event of a fast-moving tree oncoming car, the FX50 will apply the brakes and snug-up your shoulder belt. The real clincher? Wine carriers fit perfectly in the cargo hold. As you can see from this photo, the ubiquitous cases are the exact same height as the FX50's parcel shelf. And whle you can't tell from the photo, the carriers' ziggurat-like top is actually at the correct angle for the kink in the back of the FX50. I can almost hear Shoemaker's synapses firing up…

You can tell by my phrasing that I don't like it. Not one bit. In case you haven't been paying attention, first term congressperson Jackie Speier– California's latest offering to the pyre of political lunacy– is proposing a Federally mandated national limit of 60 mph. I'm so angry I could spit. First of all, NO!!!!! Leave me alone! If I want to pay a bit more to get somewhere quicker that's between me and my bank account. Don't tread! Second, will hybrids, ethanol burners, hydrogen fuel cell and electric cars be limited to 60 mph, or just the dino-juice drinkers? And if all cars are limited, why? If I'm getting veggie-diesel from the local Thai joint what possible business is it of the Feds if I'm driving down the road at 80 mph? Can't they just get back to launching unnecessary wars, illegal phone taps and Alaskan bridges? You know, their core competencies. So what do you think?

I lusted after Infiniti’s “Bionic Cheetah” from the moment I saw the renderings in a buff book (remember those?). After climbing behind the wheel of the first-gen FX, I knew that if I ever needed an SUV without cargo space or off-roadabilty, the FX45 was the truck crossover for me. For one thing, it was carved from a block of sex. For another, the stiff-legged handling was righteous. But there's a new sheriff in high center of gravity town: the FX50. Can Infiniti’s new model match the moves, let alone the lines, of it's much admired (by me anyway) predecessor? Well, lemme tell ya…

Doom, gloom, Chapter 11, recession, housing crisis, credit crunch, Iranian missile tests, Dodge Journey — how much more bad news can we take? Well, lots. But that's not the issue. The issue is that I thought of a funny story and I'm going to share it with you and then ask you to do the same. Capiche? A few years ago I was dating a girl. One night some friends were in town and the four of us went out for dinner and drinks in their rented PT Cruiser Convertible. My gal had some fish and chips and perhaps one two many beers, though I think something may have been wrong with the fish. She got sick on the way to the car. Messy sick. Then, she demanded we put the top down, because she was still feeling awful. I got roped into driving because my friends also had too much booze. And then, as George Carlin termed it, the poor thing had an involuntary personal protein spill. At about 50 mph. And her spill got picked up by the wind and flung into the back seat. All over our out of town guests. The funny part is that later that night (after lots and lots of soapy scrubbing by yours truly) she asked, "What does PT stand for?" My friend answered, "Puke Tainer." You?

I'm not talking about Hugo Chavez-style ownership. My question was inspired by the rumor that China's Chery might be buying Volvo. Is this a big deal? Despite Ford's worst efforts, Volvo didn't lose too much of its Volvoness when Ford CEO Jac the Knife won the Swedish automaker in a game of bondtolva. Volvos are still [presumably] safe, boxy and not intended for hoons. Of course, Ford almost bought Ferrari, which surely would have strangled the fabled Italian marque in Dearborn's corporate tentacles. And Saab lost its soul the moment GM breathed on it. But how about Rolls-Royce? I say the company is better than ever under Bimmer's tutelage. Audi's done a bang-up job with Bentley and Lamborghini, too. The world didn't stop turning when India's Tata Motors bought Land Rover and Jaguar. And the fact that a group of Saudi businessmen own Aston is no impediment to the brand, apparently. So what's the big deal about a Chinese automaker buying Volvo? Anything? Everything?

Guess what? SUVs are dead and gone, nearly buried. Goodbye, nice knowing ya! When the future business case histories are completed, the research will show that while some people bought big boys to compensate for small johnsons or to venture off pavement, others purchased SUVs because they were a lot like station wagons. Sure we have CUVs (crossovers) to (kinda) plug the gap. But here's the thing, putting a sedan up on stilts adds weight — a lot of weight. Turning a 4-door into a 5-door? Not so much. A top spec Nissan Murano weighs in at 4,130 pounds whereas a fully optioned Altima sedan is just 3,292 lbs. 838 pounds of flabola. Of course, there's no Altima wagon, but we can look at Subaru. A Legacy 2.5 GT Limited (with auto) weighs 3,490 lbs. Compare that to the essentially identical Outback 2.5 XT Limited's 3,605 lbs. That's just 115 pounds, the weight of a healthy teenage girl. For fun, a Tribeca weighs 4,129 pounds. A slushbox Impreza 4-door  weighs 3,131 pounds. The 5-door? The exact same (though… Subaru's website may be mistaken). Long story short, wagons offer the same amount of practical utility as CUV/SUVs and are inherently better on gas. Yet I don't see a single Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, Chevy Malibu, Nissan Altima, Ford Fusion or Mazda 6 wagon. Not anywhere. Any thoughts?

Anyone remember the 1932 film If I Had A Million? Didn't think so. Long story short, a dying rich man picks eight people at random from the phone book and gives each of them $1,000,000. The best sequence (of course) belongs to W.C. Fields. Fed-up with "road hogs" and "Sunday drivers," he buys a phalanx of jalopies and begins to run the offending cars off the road. Then, when both the hog and Fields's jalopy have been totaled in a ditch, he climbs into the next junker (he's paying a a bunch of kids to follow behind him in "fresh "cars) and looks for a new target. I mention this classic scene because the Tata Nano's $2,500 price has given me ideas. I mean, for not that much money I could remove a lot of first gen Dodge Caravans from the road [Ed: Jonny's convinced that all traffic everywhere would improve if still existing K-Car Dodge Caravans were outlawed]. However, like most of my fantasies, this one ain't going to happen. Looks like the rising cost of steel is turning into the rising price of Tata Nanos. For their part, Tata ain't saying nuthin' 'bout nuthin'. But Automotive News [sub] is reporting that the Indian automaker is trying to cut deals with its suppliers to keep raw material costs down. Luckily for Tata, they happen to own Tata Steel Ltd., the largest steel producer in India. However, as John Adams said, facts are stubborn things– steel prices are up. As for my twisted plans, I should be able to get all the Hummer H2s I need for less than $2,500 real soon. 

Full disclosure. I've made zero. I'm lucky enough to be in a socio-economic bracket (i.e. no mortgage, no children, write my gas off come tax time) where I haven't changed my driving habits an iota. Case in point, I enjoyed a 1,000 mile excursion up to wine country in a gas-guzzling FX50 (review pending) at pretty much 90 mph the entire time. But Sweet Pete doesn't not agree with my lifestyle choices. More on point, he's utterly dismayed at the direction our country is headed, and is using Detroit's tsores as a bellwether for all that's wrong with our country. According to Pete, plenty's wrong. Solution? He's calling for a near Manhattan Project-like national, "mustering [of] this nation's brilliant technical resources and mind power, and unifying it with our manufacturing expertise to forge a new urgency of purpose, with an unwavering focus on getting this country back in shape and on its game." Of course when people talk about big federal projects, what they aren't saying is that we all need to chip in. Only Pete is saying exactly that. Your thoughts?

OK, OK. I get it. Cars need less tech 'cause they're too heavy and gas and the polar bears and all that. BUT I saw something today that (kinda) changed my mind. Driving around Hollywood in an Infiniti FX50, my friend went to parallel park the sharp-looking beast. He shifts it into reverse and besides the de rigeur backup camera, the screen also showed a picture of the FX from above with video images of all four sides. No joke, I could see not only the curb, but the white markings painted on the street to indicate a spot. I kept looking and staring and asked, "Is that a satellite image?" I got laughed at. My poor little brain just couldn't handle the fact that four separate cameras were transmitting info back into the vehicle. But, they were. Brilliant. How many times have you smashed a tire or wheel or worse while backing into a spot? If you're me, many times. Conclusion, I love it. What's your favorite new piece of tech?

Before you answer, I suggest you click on over and check what Forbes' Senior car dude Jerry Flint has to say on the subject. Jerry blames "greens," the unions, California, the lawyers, the Asians, the Federal government, bad luck and then, ultimately Detroit's executives. He also raises an interesting point — do we need a domestic auto industry? Back to the blame game, I had a long talk with a friend about the Bullitt Mustang. Why, he wondered, could Ford make such a superlative, desirable muscle car but not a decent small car? And he's right — Detroit excels at making fantastic trucks and stonking sports cars. Viper, Vette, 'Stang? Hell yes. Caliber, Cobalt, Focus? Hell no! Here's my theory — the men and women that go to work for the big 2.8 like building muscle cars and boat haulers. They don't like fuel sippers, and don't want to build them. What do you think?

I've driven a lot of new Mustangs. Specifically, the V6 Convertible, GT, GT Convertible, GT California Special, Hertz GT-H, Shelby GT and the Shelby GT500 (coupe and convertible). The only ones I've missed are the V6 hard top (I'll pass) and the Shelby GT500KR. After last week, I can check the 2008 Bullitt Mustang off my pony car to-do list. Limited to "just" 7700 examples, the Bullitt follows the path laid down by its cinematic inspiration: green paint, black wheels, limited badging and more power. As a veteran ‘Stang wrangler, let me tell you how the latest iteration stacks up against the other stallions…

Today, as you know, is July 1st. To celebrate, California and Washington State have passed laws mandating handsfree devices; stick a phone to your ear and get a fine. Not just a fine of course. You have to (at least in CA) pay a gas surcharge fee, as well. These laws won't do a damn thing to increase safety; the supposed reason why they were passed. Here's my thinking… When you want to call someone, you still have to dial. Sure, lots of phones have voice recognition. With my supposed "smart phone" I say, "Call mom mobile" and get back, "Calling Tom Vogel." But here's the real cincher. This morning, for the first time, I used a handsfree device. I loved it. Normally when I'm driving I try to get off the phone as quickly as possible. I need a hand to shift gears and my arm gets tired. But with the ear dongle, I talked for half an hour– way longer than I normally would if I were holding a phone to my ear. So, does my State feel that the physical act of holding my hand to my ear is the danger? Because methinks these new laws will have more people driving and talking longer. Your thoughts?

When word that GMC wouldn't be bothering with a 2nd Gen Acadia hit, I was a bit shocked. But only a bit. The world needs more CUVs like I need a hole in my head. That said, of the three four Lambda based crossovers, I've always liked the Acadia's styling the best. As does the rest of The General's public; it's the best-selling of the bunch. Even weirder, GM is planning some Lambda-based SUTs (4-door pickups) and GMC, the truck division, ain't getting any. The General pulled a similar weird move a few years back when they neglected to kick down an Avalanche to their "Professional Grade" division. The elephant in the room seems to be saying GMC's about to be put out to pasture. Chevrolet is fully capable of handling GM's truck needs. Furthermore, with gasoline cresting $143 per barrel this very morning, an all-truck brand must be screaming "red ink!" into the accountants' ears. You think GMC has a future? Really?