Jerry Garrett of The New York Times has “driven dozens of new cars each year for nearly 30 years.” Who knew? Even though I’m not familiar with Garrett’s car canon, it’s clear the writer’s time was well spent, in an Andy Rooney “Have you ever looked at a doorknob?” kinda way. “‘Does this bother you?'” Garrett’s rant begins. “Well, actually, shining a bright light in my eyes from out of the darkness does bother me; when I’m behind the wheel, it drives me nuts. It reminds me of an interrogation technique. This bright light in question is actually the map light. It is positioned above my rearview mirror. Of course, it renders the rearview mirror useless, but more than that, it blinds me when I drive. It is a real safety issue, but my passenger wants to read while I drive. Who would design such a thing?” Damn his eyes! Why doesn’t Garrett doesn’t name names? Anyway, the rest of his “Five Things I Hate About New Cars”? Too small sun visors, the lack of fish-eyed rear view mirrors, chimes that won’t shut up after ten dings and cars that don’t have a little arrow to show you upon which side of the car the fuel filler cap resides. And now, it’s your turn, overly-loud and cheap-sounding clicking noise or “how the Hell do I cancel these damn things” BMW signals included.

Ford has a hit on their hands with the Ford Fusion Hybrid– at least from a media standpoint. The autobogosphere is abuzz with the announcement of the gas – electric fusion Fusion’s official EPA stat of 41mpg. Of course, that’s 41mpg in the city and 36mpg on the highway. But a headline’s a headline. More interesting yet, the Fusion hybrid can motor up to 47mph on battery-power. According to Hybrid program leader Praveen Cherian, the extended all-EV mode “allows drivers to maximize fuel efficiently in many driving situations. For example, this would allow drivers to travel around their subdivision and parking areas in all-electric mode.” What’s the speed limit in a subdivision these days? And doesn’t everybody switch off the engine and glide into a parking space (sarcastic driver, closed parking lot)? I know: I’m just being churlish. This is exactly the kind of evolutionary, incremental improvement we’ve been arguing for since the site began. Now, can I be churlish some more?

(Read More…)

A new CNN/Opinion Research poll brings Detroit one of those good news/bad news deals. The survey of 1000 voters reveals that “63% of Americans said they supported the government’s automaker bailout unveiled Friday. But if the companies ask the government for any more money, 70% said Washington should let the companies enter bankruptcy rather than give them any additional assistance.” To paraphrase the Temptations, get ready, ’cause here it comes! Uncle Sugar is set to dole out an additional $4b, already promised under the terms of the deal. Not to mention the $25b retooling loans– which seem to have disappeared off the outrage radar. And when the final final reckoning arrives in March… “With the current credit situation, it has been very hard getting debtor protection financing, so any automaker bankruptcy would have to be assisted by the government,” said David Weiss, chief economist at Standard and Poor’s. “If one of them enters Chapter 11, they would still need government funding to avoid failing.” CNN dutifully reports that “Some analysts estimate that the cost of an auto bailout will eventually run as high as $125 billion.” MORE? You want MORE? And there’s a twist to this tale…

(Read More…)

You know the sinking price of gas has stopped the E85 industry in its tracks when the corn growers’ local government turns its back on the biofuel blend. Indiana’s jconline.com reports that “After a 60-day trial run this summer, the West Lafayette Police Department has decided to no longer fill half of its patrol fleet with E85… Chief Jason Dombkowski said last week that officers making the six-mile trip to fill up ended up cutting too much into what the department saved.” Even with the .50 a gallon federal blenders’ credit, E85 just couldn’t make the grade. “We compared it by cost per mile,” [fleet maintenance director Tim] Bullis said. “When regular unleaded and E85 were $1 apart, it was a tossup. The closer the prices became, the less effective the savings from E85.” Oh, as a quick aside, the ethanol industry’s year in review has coined a pet name to demonize retail organizations who claim that corn-based E85 drives up food prices: Big Grocery.

Well, not the test itself. The video of the test, which clearly shows the Top Gear crew pushing the Roadster back to base after, apparently, running out of juice. Only it didn’t. Wired reports that “According to Top Gear’s spokeswoman, footage showing the Roadster being pushed into the garage was filmed to show what would happen if the car’s lithium ion battery went dead.” So Top Gear didn’t drain the upteen hundred li-ion cells after 55 miles of hard-charging? “Top Gear stands by the findings in this film and is content that it offers a fair representation of the Tesla’s performance on the day it was tested,” the BBC said in a statement. Clear as mud, as the Brits would say. Does that mean we can trust Clarkson’s assertion that the Roadster requires 16 hours to charge? Or, indeed, anything he says? I’m all for infotainment, but Top Gear gets its street cred from telling the truth about cars. This is a major hit to the brand’s core.

Senators Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Richard Durbin (D-IL) have introduced Senate Bill 3737. You can read the full text of the “Sell Fuel Efficient Cars Act of 2008” after the jump. Suffice it to say that the bill is designed to stimulate new car sales by giving low-income ($40k family income) car buyers $10k worth of “federal assistance” towards the purchase of a new vehicle. Of course, not just ANY vehicle. The car, truck, CUV or SUV (of course) must come from a carmaker “with operations in the United States, the failure of which would have a systemic adverse effect on the overall economy of the United States or a significant loss of United States jobs, as determined by the Secretary; and operated a manufacturing facility that produced automobiles or automobile components in the United States throughout the 20-year period ending on the date of the enactment of this Act.” Guess who? And now, the greenwashing…

(Read More…)

When Chrysler stuck its nose in the bailout trough, the ailng American automaker’s executives  had to wonder what the Hell anyone within the company could possibly tell lawmakers/money givers about Chrysler’s viability. Except, you know, the fact that they don’t have any. But never underestimate the power of positive PR or, as we call it around here, bullshit. To wit: former ToMoCo Prez and current ChryCo co-Prez Jim Press’ comments to Automotive News [sub, AN]  last week. “He suggested that Chrysler could show the way to a sustainable model for a smaller U.S. auto industry. ‘If there’s one company in America that can build high-craftsmanship, innovative vehicles, it’s Chrysler,’ Press said.” Hey, is Jimbo saying American can’t build high-craftsmanship, innovative vehicles? Anyway, down ye olde rabbit hole we go…

(Read More…)

Egan-Jones Ratings is a relatively obscure little outfit out of Haverford, PA. It’s one of those companies whose website doesn’t have a flashy design or, for that matter, a phone number (just a contact form). Forbes rates them number 1 on their list of eight financial mavens (not ten!) “who saw the crisis coming.” “A vocal critic of rivals Moody’s, Fitch, and Standard & Poor’s, Egan has a track record of warning investors about poor credit quality long before the Big Three ratings agencies. Most recently he said to shun subprime-mortgage-backed bonds even while the other agencies said these were investment-grade credits.” And now Sean has a few words on Ford, via a ginormous Fordetorial in Bloomberg. ““It’s unrealistic of Alan [Mulally] to expect Ford to survive, let alone profit, when they’re experiencing a 30-plus percent decline in sales. Without a bankruptcy filing and a complete reorganization, Ford is not going to be profitable, period.” Egan ain’t kidding. His company rates Ford’s debt a D, its lowest level. And if that’s not enough blowback for Mulally-loving Fordophiles, here’s some more…

(Read More…)

Mark LaNeve is GM’s Vice President, North America Vehicle Sales, Service and Marketing. Still. As such, the marketing maven must motivate the masses of metal movers who are morose at the moribund market. Of course, LaNeve has a major victory to report: the corporate mothership no longer depends on its dealers for its immediate and, let’s face it, longer term survival. That sponsorship has been transferred to the U.S. taxpayer. Still, in a letter to the stores [full text below], LaNeve reminded the troops what it’s all about. “I pledge to all of you that my team and I will continue to work together with you as we make the necessary structural changes to prove the viability of a new General Motors –to the current and incoming Administration, to Congress and, most of all, to our current and future customers.” Ah, customers. Now you’re talking!

(Read More…)

With GM, the bailout is pretty straightforward. Give us money or the economy dies. With Chrysler, it’s a lot more… complicated. In case you hadn’t noticed, ChrCyo owner Cerberus is looking for an exit strategy. Give us the money and we’ll sell/give our 80 percent share of the company to someone else. The United Auto Workers. Suppliers. Someone. Anyone. The New York Times quotes the official statement: “Cerberus has advised the Treasury that it would contribute its equity in Chrysler automotive to labor and creditors as currency to facilitate the accommodations necessary to effect the restructuring.” How… magnanimous. Meanwhile, president Bush is throwing a quartet of billions Chrysler’s way– without anything resembling a specific plan for recovery (’cause there ain’t one). And here’s the [non] money shot, from the privat eequity firm’s own mouth : “Unless Chrysler’s labor costs can achieve parity with the foreign transplants and without the restructuring of Chrysler’s debt,” Cerberus announced. “Chrysler cannot be restored to long-term health and the government loan will be unlikely to be repaid.” So, unless the UAW capitulates (which it won’t) and the feds bailout Chrysler Financial Services (which it will), you can kiss the Chrysler bailout bucks goodbye. It’s an extraordinary, and extraordinarily honest, admission. But it seems that honesty’s got nothing to do with it…

(Read More…)

You might think that Barron’s would ease-up on the “bet on GM” advice. In a June 2 cover story, Barron’s told its readers to buy shares in the ailing automaker. At the time, The General’s stock traded at $17.10. “GM’s turnaround will accelerate over the next two to three years, even if the U.S. cyclical downturn dims the outlook for the next 12 months,” Barron’s prophesied. “The shares could rise to at least 30 and maybe as much as 45 once those big cost reductions drop to the bottom line in 2010. And if the stars align perfectly — the economy enjoys a second-half uptick and the housing market and consumer confidence turn for the better sooner than expected — the stock’s rebound could be quicker. Even a small improvement in sentiment could bring a disproportionate rise in the stock.” To be fair, in November, when the excrement and air movement device had already collided (but good), Barron’s did the mea culpa thing: “Our enthusiasm for GM was clearly wrong, as was a suggestion that its bonds, like the senior note maturing July 15, 2041, would be more valuable.” And now, Ward’s Auto reports “GM restructuring may make bonds best bet-Barron’s.” There’s more, but we’re not subscribers– to either publication. At close of play Friday, GM’s stock traded at $4.49 a share– and that’s AFTER the bailout.

Island Chevrolet’s general sales manager doesn’t like transplanted products. (Yes, I know: any car on The Big Island is an import. But you know what I mean.) So James Severtson commissioned a Chevrolet Suburban-bodied monster truck to kill, crush and destroy a Honda Accord. On the first attempt, the Hawaiian Rebel blew a hydraulic hose and leaked vital fluid. The Honda was non-plussed. After several hours, take two. Wheelman Ryan Kepiki attempted to surmount a Hyundai Excel. The AP reports that “Kepiki drove over the cars’ hoods, destroying the windshields to the seeming delight of the rush-hour crowd. Severtson said the dealership had been planning the crush-fest for a while.” Appreantly, the Bush bailoutfest was a “happy coincidence.” “We’d like to send the message that the best way to support your country is to buy an American vehicle today,” Severtson said.

Fifty-two miles per gallon is, it has to be said, a lot of miles per gallon. And who better to say it than Pulitzer Prize-winning caramudgeon and Top Gear USA bullet dodger Dan Neil? In a column founded upon the old English expression “I can’t win from losing,” Neil lauds FoMoCo’s gas – electric fusion Fusion. “Wait, so, has somebody invented the car of the future and didn’t tell us? It’s a worthy question. The scolding undercurrent of recent congressional hearings on the auto-industry bailout was the notion that Detroit had failed to invest in next-generation technology that could help wean us off foreign oil. Not so. What they did fail to do was sufficiently commercialize this technology so that it was ready and waiting at dealerships when people got stampeded this year by spiraling gas prices. Had Ford made a few hundred thousand of these cars available in June — along with the financing to sell them — we’d be erecting 50-foot equestrian statues of William Clay Ford and Alan Mulally in city squares, and the streets of Dearborn, Mich., would be repaved with diamond cobblestones.” As if. “The price of gas has dropped by two-thirds in six months, thereby de-motivating buyers who might have been willing to bear the incremental cost of a hybrid. What we really need is an increased federal gas tax, but the chances of that getting passed in Congress are comparable to my chances of being named Miss Universe.” To quote another English aphorism, Dan, you gotta be in it to win it.