From The Detroit News story on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards: The agency reckons it’ll cost automakers $47b to comply with the new regs. Automakers say more. As in please sir, can I have some more? Well, they would say that, wouldn’t they? But check this from the NHTSA “There is evidence that manufacturers cannot pass on to buyers the full costs of complying with higher CAFE standards.” Huh? Has the NHTSA been going over Detroit’s books? Or Is the evidence in question the existing Department of Energy’s $25b low-interest loans (the ipso facto answer)? Or has automaker lobbying already had an effect behind the scenes (the “here’s what we want to do but we all know they can’t possibly do it so maybe we should give them the money to do it with” answer)?

Translation: NHTS = National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. They’re the federal agency in charge of setting and enforcing federal fuel economy regulations, amongst other things, as directed by the U.S. Congress. CAFE = Corporate Average Fuel Economy. Those are the fuel economy rules which dictate the combined (i.e. overall) fuel economy of a car manufacturer’s entire U.S. product line. 4.5% p.a. = the annual overall efficiency increase that the NHTSA will require from manufacturers selling cars in the United States. 2020 = the year during which people stop giving a shit about fuel economy because everyone’s driving plug-in electric hydrogen fuel cell CNG diesel hybrid vehicles. 39.4mpg = the completely unrealistic end-point when you do the math at 4.5 percent per year. And get this my beleaguered auto-building brethren: it’s actually a higher number than that stipulated by Congress. Equally important, we still don’t know how the standard will be calculated. Auto industry reaction after you go ahead and jump.

(Read More…)

The [UK] Daily Mirror reports that Top Gear curmudgeon Jeremy Clarkson has been injured in a head-on car crash. “He suffered minor injuries to his legs, hand and back in the head-on collision during filming for the BBC show. He described it as his first serious road traffic accident in 31 years. Clarkson, 48, said: ‘My right index finger looked like a burst sausage, my left shin was fatter than my thigh and my back felt like someone had driven over it with a pile-driver.’ Yesterday, from their Cotswolds home in Chipping Norton, Clarkson’s wife Frances said: ‘My husband is fine.'” And the other driver/passengers? Apparently not worth a mention. Also, it’s important to note that the accident is the second to occur during Top Gear production; there will no doubt be a BBC investigation (which could permanently shut down filming). It’s equally certain that police will mount their own inquiry (which could remove Mr. Clarkson’s right to drive). We’ll provide details of the crash as and when they become available.

Toyota’s been pulling its punches in the U.S. market for years– to avoid the political backlash and lowered profits that a Chrysler, Ford and GM’s collapse would create. Surveying the damage left by a 32 percent drop in September sales, ToMoCo is now saying fuck that shit [paraphrasing]. “The ‘Saved by Zero’ ad campaign began Oct. 2,” Automotive News [sub] reports. “It promotes a 0 percent financing program on 11 vehicles. Dealers say Toyota will shell out at least $250 million this month to cover the cost of the subsidized loans and to fill the airwaves with commercials. Calling it ‘mind-boggling,’ one dealer who asked not to be named said he doesn’t believe Toyota has ever spent so much in a single month on incentives and advertising.'” [That’s what passes for independent, authoritative sources these days.] As one of only two AAA-rated auto lenders (GE Capital is the other) left in the biz, Toyota Financial can do what its competition can’t. And even though U.S. consumer confidence has hit the skids, whatever’s left will soon be headed ToMoCo’s way. In other words, the Japanese automaker is about to eat the lunch AND dinner of the aforementioned domestics.

According to Automotive News [sub], Boot ’em Bob is having visions of Carmegeddon. “Bob Nardelli, just 14 months into his tenure as CEO of Chrysler LLC, now fears the collapse of an ‘extremely fragile’ auto industry amid the credit crisis and Wall Street meltdown.” Uh, I think Big Bob means the domestic auto industry. And anyway, why would the ChryCo’s CEO conjure visions of doom when his company is OK? I mean, Chrysler’s doing fine right? “Nardelli said cash is ‘the number-one metric for the auto industry.’ In Chrysler’s case, he said: ‘We’re concerned about it. We’re monitoring it, but we’re not on the edge.'” The entire industry’s about to collapse but we’re good? Parse that. Meanwhile, the rest of the article makes it perfectly clear (in the Nixonian sense) that Nardelli’s comments are a prelude to a kiss. With Uncle Sam. “Nardelli said federal officials, preoccupied with trying to unfreeze credit, don’t appreciate the importance of the auto industry.” I know, insulting the feds doesn’t seem like the best way to make them want to give you billions, but, well, that’s how Bob rolls. “Nardelli said the auto industry faces unique federal regulatory burdens, such as increased fuel economy requirements. ‘I’m not sure it’s registered at the highest levels the impact of losing the auto industry. When I say the entire industry, it’s not only the OEMs; it’s the Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3 suppliers.”

I have no idea why Autoblog transcontinental trekker Sam Abuelsamid has suddenly and finally “woken up” to the fact that the U.S. new car market– indeed the entire U.S. economy– is in a deepy parlous state. But some prince has kissed our sleeping beauty. And now Sam is beginning to realize what we’ve been saying before he turned a wheel [slowly] in anger on behalf of Audi’s poorly-timed diesel-powered High Mileage Marathon: the whole project is a futile gesture. “The TDI technology used by Audi is available now with more coming to the U.S. market in the coming months. The question is will anyone be able to buy it or any of the future powertrains? Very few people buy new cars with cash. The industry relies on being able extend credit to drivers. The key element of what is happening this week is that financial institutions have become unwilling to loan money to anyone. After loaning way too much over the last decade to people who couldn’t afford to pay it back, there is now nothing going out. That creates a great deal of uncertainty in product planning. Audi made the decision to launch their new diesels in the Q7 long before this ever started and it’s unclear what their future path will be. The A4, Q5 and A3 have all been talked about as potential future U.S. diesel products, but without knowing where auto sales in general are going it’s hard to choose a direction. With Toyota already having canceled its planned diesel for the Tundra and rumors of other product cancellations on the horizon, the only thing we know for sure is that we know nothing.” Point taken.

It’s hard to know which aspect of hypermiling is the most dangerous. Switching off your engine to coast? A soup tureen of not good. Driving more slowly than the surrounding traffic flow? A plunge pool of uh-uh. How about drafting an 18-wheeler? Let me put it this way: I’m watching Final Destination 2 right now. And yet, in Sam Abuelsamid’s latest installment of “And Now for Something Completely Mundane,” Autoblog‘s main man is happy to do just that– as are some of his new best buds. Before I share this excerpt, a word to the wise: NEVER DO THIS. “Jim managed to get hooked up behind a semi that was cruising at a good clip for an extended period of time, while we had trouble finding any trucks running faster than 60-65 mph. The day before, on the trip from Chicago, we tied at 28.8 mpg although Jim and Kevin had a slightly higher average speed at 63 mph vs our 60 mph. We’ve since become aware of a couple of tricks that seem to be helping, which I’ll divulge at a later time. Never let it be said that journalists aren’t competitive. As I finish writing this paragraph, a slightly faster truck passed us, and Steve has slipped in behind it. As we slid past, I glanced over to see a very unprofessional finger gesture from Mr. Kelly. Kevin and I will be discussing that tonight over steaks in Amarillo.” Note to Audi PR minders: someone needs a bitch slapping.

Even before you read the review, it’s obvious Car and Driver scribe Mark Gillies doesn’t like the new Mazda 6 i Grand Touring. For once, the strapline accurately reflects the author’s take, without prevarication or sugar-coating: “Mazda’s new family sedan offers more of everything except excitement.” OK, the “verdict” below returns us to Car and Driver’s ad-friendly editorial style: “A worthy rival to the mid-size heavyweights” (instead of “Mazda sells its soul for sales”). And the article itself is one-quarter press release, one quarter praise and one quarter pulled punches (e.g. “Subjectively, the 6 feels good on a back road but not as athletic as you might like.”) But the real news arrives late in the fourth quarter. Car and Driver has declared metphorical war on TTAC’s simile-lade prose. And here we go… “The Gran Touring version of the 6 is as loaded as Keith Richards on tour in the 1970s;” “…setting up a Bluetooth phone connection is as simple as a plate of pasta con aglio e olio;” “The highway ride is as supple as an Olympic gymnast;” “Peel into a corner, and the 6’s tires squeal like a pack of preteen girls at a Jonas Brother concert.” Note to Csaba: sprinkles taste like shit on vanilla ice cream. Or something like that.

“I’m disappointed to hear of the upcoming General Motors plant closings. Hardworking people are paying the price because our country’s leaders have put Washington corruption and Wall Street greed before Main Street’s interests for too long. Change is coming. I know families across America are hurting, and as president, I will lead members of both parties in a fight to keep and create good jobs in communities across the country. Now is not a time for words and platitudes. Now is a time for action. That is why I supported auto-industry loan guarantees and will continue to work to create opportunities for American auto companies to build the car of the 21st century and put Americans back to work.”

New York Times scribe Bill Vlasic set the U.S. automotive industry abuzz last night, reporting that GM and Chrysler were discussing a merger. Careful reading of the article revealed that the story had more holes than a block of Emmantal. It included unocorrobrated, unnamed sources; backpedalling a plenty and language couching that seemed carefully designed to maintain what Ronald Reagan’s administration famously called “plausible deniability.” Oh, and it didn’t make any sense. Today’s follow-up— declaring that GM and Ford were looking to hook-up– is even less credible, AND less equivocoal. [NB: Again with the “two people.”] “In July, G.M. approached Ford with a proposal to combine the operations of the two biggest American automakers. The talks involved several meetings between G.M.’s chairman, Rick Wagoner; its president, Frederick Henderson; Ford’s executive chairman, William C. Ford Jr.; and its chief executive, Alan R. Mulally, people with knowledge of the process said… Ford broke off the talks in September, these people said. Mr. Ford and Mr. Mulally were said to have concluded that their company had a better chance to reorganize on its own than in tandem with another automaker.” TTAC’s take: While such a high-level meeting may have taken place (and it may not), again, the automakers had plenty of things to talk about other than merging: federal loans, federal bailouts, federal regulation, etc. [thanks to Robert Schwartz for the link]

See? I knew Sam Abuelsamid’s cross-country trek in an Audi Q7 TDI would ultimately descend into farce. On the positive side (at least for Sam): his most recent epistle has made it straight onto Autoblog, as opposed to languishing on the Autobloggreen side of the biz. On the negative side (at least for Audi): it’s got nothing whatsoever to do with Audi, diesels or fuel economy. It’s all about… a Porsche Carrera GT! I find it hard to believe that Sam reckoned he should abandon his oil burning focus to blog a “spotted in the wild” 11mpg (combined) V10-engined supercar. (Hence the reason Autobloggreen forgot to include this report in its Audi Mileage Marathon canon.) But then I know how the transcontinental thing can scramble your brains– even without popping black beauties and listening to Teenage Nervous Breakdown on a Nakamichi cassette deck. Ah, those were the days. Anyway, Sam shouldn’t have been so surprised to discover the car in Arkansas. It’s one of the fastest ways out of Kansas. Just kidding; the Sunflower State rocks! Well, the band did…

After our story on GM’s letter to its non-core suppliers changing payment terms to 60 days, I received a flurry of emails that asked, in effect, are you out of your fucking mind? For example, “I do not know of anyone in the Supplier, Engineering, Consultancy or Technical world who has EVER been paid by GM in anything less than 90 days.” And “a friend that owns a Tier Two company has to be a real pain in the ass to GM Purchasing to get paid anywhere near 90 days. They told him once on the phone ‘We pay everybody 180 days payable…that’s our policy, what makes you so special that you think you should be paid in less than 90 days?'” (Interestingly, when he stopped shipping Just-in-Time parts to GM, they overnighted him a check.) In general, we’ve learned that The General’s suppliers generally get paid in 60 to 90 days. And “Even 60 days is not so bad from an OEM.” TTAC apologizes for any misconception created by our earier report.

I know I said I’d be starting a Bailout Watch 2 series on Monday, but events have once again overtaken us. And to avoid confusion, I’ve decided to simply continue the orginal Bailout Watch series, as it’s all pretty much of a muchness: your tax money for GM, Ford and/or Chrysler. This morning, Barrons reports the inevitable: The General is looking to hit-up the U.S. Federal Reserve for a little walking around money. “How much the car producer would seek is unknown,” Barrons says. “but it needs $5 billion to meet its goal of completing a $15 billion liquidity program, much of which actually is coming from cost cuts.” So, can they do that? Of course they can! “Under the law, GM would pay a rate of interest that is higher than the top one charged to banks for cash advances. The Fed can lend to GM without demanding collateral if it gets the votes of five of its board members.” Check this from the Fed’s Discount Window Website: “In unusual and exigent circumstances, the Board of Governors may authorize a Reserve Bank to provide emergency credit to individuals, partnerships, and corporations that are not depository institutions.” Strangely, both this story and the GM  Chrysler merger non-deal rely on “two persons with first-hand knowledge of the situation.” Same two? Never mind. This one we believe.

The Wall Street Journal had a look at the idea of a GM – Chrysler merger. They say “Central to the plan is private-equity firm Cerberus, which owns 80.1% of Chrysler and 51% of GMAC, an 89-year-old auto lender that has been seriously weakened by its moves into mortgage banking. Cerberus proposed a swap in which GM would acquire Chrysler’s automotive operations, and in turn give Cerberus its remaining 49% stake in GMAC, these people said.” This is true. BUT it occurred well over a year ago, when Cerberus was hot to merge Chrysler Finco with GMAC. (In fact, when Cerberus bought Chrysler, TTAC suggested that this play was the reason for the purchase.) GM said no. We can now reveal that later, when excrement and air movement device collided, Cerberus proposed the exact opposite deal: selling their share of GMAC back to GM. That also went nowhere. Today, both Chrysler and GM– and Chrysler Finance and GMAC– are dead companies walking. So deal or no deal? No deal.