Like Lexus, Car magazine is having a little cognitive dissonance these days. While the former has decided to build a front mid-engined supercar, the latter seems to have forgotten how to tell the difference between a photograph and a rendering. Never mind: this is the pre-Frankfurt teaser shot of the luxury brand’s hybrid compact concept. Of course, if it “looks like the LF-Ch is good to make the leap from concept drawing board to reality, that’s because it is. We hear it will translate to showroom spec with remarkably few changes in a year’s time.” Meanwhile, the model designation will please the Swiss no end.

Oh my God. You blew it up! You really did it. Damn you all to hell! Well, actually, I don’t think anyone is THAT bothered about Buick’s future these days, as the sales charts indicate. Still, it’s a shame, isn’t it, that the once-mighty doctor’s brand has become the dictionary definition of amorphous. I mean, a compact Buick? Why? During her live webchat in the FastLane, Buick/Pontiac/GMC supremo Susan Docherty offered no explanation for the company’s plans to introduce not one but two models below the LaCrosse, in both size and price. Chevy overlap? Well I never. Nor would the Old GM vet answer the question “will future production vehicles will be designed for Buick and not simply rebadges from other brands?” But the badge engineering question simply refuses to go away, for some reason. csmcars asks “Susan, GM has eliminated a lot of redundant models in its recent restructuring. Why continue to have both GMC and Chevrolet versions of so many truck models? Will GMC trucks be further distinguished from Chevy trucks? Or will Chevrolet become more of a car-focused brand?”

(Read More…)

Sigh. On one hand, you have to give the brains behind Moller Skycar (guess who) credit for not giving up. On the other hand, enough already. The dream of personalized airborne transportation is a fund-raising MacGuffin. The company’s latest salvo in the BS wars: Moller Skycar Goes to War! Or, as the press release puts it, “Moller is pleased to announce today that its Skycar technology has gained ground within the military for its use in high-tech, demanding battlefield applications like those in Afghanistan.” Apparently, one Lieutenant Colonel James Thomas, 304th SB, 3rd Expeditionary Sustainment Command, recently issued white paper entitled “Winning an Asymmetric War with Skycars.” Google loves the story, but offers-up no such report or background on Col. Thomas. Still the press release, quotes from the heretofore unknown document:

(Read More…)

Alternatively, “The new Volvo C70 rewards the owner with self-assured elegance.” So what if you’re an owner without self-assured elegance? Thank God Volvo hasn’t cut back on the Swedish-to-English translation services. Not. “With its new front clip, the Volvo C70 reveals traces of the S60 Concept Car that was unveiled in early 2009. The C70 not relates more closely to the design language of the larger cars in the Volvo model range . . . Bodywork details such as the front fender have also been redesigned, contributing to the decidedly altered appearance . . . We’ve focused the new interior features around the driver to give the owner a stronger perception of being rewarded behind the wheel.” As opposed to the reality of being rewarded, I suppose. Pistonheads adds some kind words about the refreshed model’s performance . . .

(Read More…)

Caution: The sycophancy and silicone in this paint-by-numbers preview may make you want to hurl. Note to Mr. Piven: those who went before salute you, albeit with a single digit. Yes, the silver screen (or flat panel HDTV) has a long history of amoral, blood-sucking, lying, cheating, scumbag car salesman. As Slate’s Matthew DeBord points out, “Don Ready” isn’t the usual sad sack salesman. A distinction without a difference? Anyway, DeBord has a nice little rundown on nine (I’ve subtracted four) automobile-selling assholes. So which one was your fave? Any additions? And have you ever met a real world car salesman to rival any of these?

(Read More…)

If it sounds too good to be true, someone somewhere is scamming someone somewhere. This morning’s story in Automotive News [AN, sub] would almost have us believe that former Brilliance automotive CEO Yang Rong is “leading a venture to build a $6.5 billion auto plant in northern Mississippi, where he would hire 25,000 workers to eventually produce 1 million cars a year.” ‘Cause, you know, the U.S. market has room for another mainstream automotive brand. To its credit, AN sees a few problems with the concept: “It would be easy to dismiss his proposal out of hand. The plan has no brand, products or retail network. But Yang oversaw a rise from nowhere in Brilliance’s fortunes in the 1990s, and he has been attracting money from some of China’s wealthy residents.” The last part of that statement is the most credible; and it doesn’t bode well for anyone gullible enough to invest in Rong’s visionary vehicles. Oh, and Uncle Sam’s part of the scam . . .

(Read More…)

“We think in some markets Chevrolet dealers will be able to improve their sales and profitability by 20, 30, 40, even 50 percent.” GM’s vice president of U.S. sales made his promise/prediction/delusional rant to GM’s remaining bow tie-branded store owners, as reported by Automotive News [sub]. The remark comes hot on the heels of Chevy supremo Brent Dewar’s pronouncement that the U.S. new car market will grow by 15 percent next year. I suppose LaNeve reckons Chevy stores will capitalize on this fantastic rising tide. “GM expects each surviving dealership to increase sales next year by at least 25 percent over 2009.” Yes, well, will Chevy dealers’ [theoretical] sales increases match the overall market? In other words, NOW how much will they get paid? But wait, there’s more! “Over the next 18 months, GM will boost advertising spending for each division well above amounts in the first half of this year. LaNeve said advertising that starts next month will be a ‘creative breakthrough’ intended to quickly change consumer perceptions.” Hey, wasn’t Cadillac the break on through brand? And wasn’t LaNeve its head? How did that turn out, then?

Huh. And there I was thinking that The New York Times was pro-Cash for Clunkers. Now that all’s said and done (well, done), the paper slates the government program as . . . wait for it . . . inefficient. (Well, they did call for a “well-designed” program.) Post-mortem, the Gray Lady does the math. “On average, cars are driven 12,000 miles per year, according to government statistics. Considering that the traded-in clunkers had an average fuel economy of 15.8 m.p.g. while the new ones deliver 24.9 m.p.g., a swap saved some 278 gallons of gas per year — which would have released almost 2.8 tons of carbon dioxide when burned. Assuming the clunkers would have been driven four more years, the $4,200 average rebate removed 11.2 tons of carbon from the atmosphere, at a cost of some $375 per ton. If they would have been driven five years, the carbon savings cost $300 per ton. And if drivers drive their sleek new wheels more than they drove their old clunkers, the cost of removing carbon from the atmosphere will be even higher.” So how does that compare with the Times’ new red-headed, planet-cooling stepchild?

(Read More…)

According to CBS News, an ex-lawyer for Toyota of North America has filed a racketeering suit against his former employer. ToMoCo’s former managing counsel Dimitrios P. Biller accused the automaker of illegally withholding evidence in hundreds of rollover death and injury cases, in a “ruthless conspiracy” to suppress evidence of its vehicles “structural shortcomings.” Further, “Biller’s 75-page complaint [download pdf here] says that when he came to Toyota after nearly 15 years in private practice, he was ‘surprised and alarmed’ to discover that the company was not producing e-mails and other electronically stored information to plaintiffs as he said was required. According to the lawsuit, Biller repeatedly complained to supervisors that the company was illegally withholding evidence. The lawsuit further states that the resulting conflicts ultimately caused Biller to suffer a mental breakdown and led to his forced resignation in September 2007. He left with a $3.7 million severance agreement, court records show.” [thanks to Dennis for the link]

Sometimes companies do the right thing because it’s the right thing to do. Sometimes expediency rules the day. Not infrequently, legal compulsion provides the motivation. Whatevs. The Detroit News reports that New Chrysler has donated Old Chrysler’s Political Action Committee (PAC) lobbying fund to the United Way. The semi-nationalized automaker will write checks to local chapters totaling $525,000. This also means that New ChryCo will not use union/taxpayer money to support/reward the election/re-election campaigns of politicians friendly to the unions/federal bailouts. Chrysler gets props for avoiding an obvious conflict of interest. Or it that confluence The ball’s now in their fully nationalized cross-town rival’s court. “GM transferred its PAC from the bankrupt Motors Liquidation Co. — the GM entity that remains in bankruptcy — to the new GM. The fund had $418,000 in cash through May 31. GM has said political contributions will not resume until next year at the earliest.” I’ve got an idea: how about never?

Clearly, GM’s top suits missed the memo about the end of empire. While the artist formerly known as the world’s largest automaker clings to dreams of holding onto Opel with your (and German) tax money, the company has unveiled plan B: Chevy attacks! The Wall Street Journal [sub] reports that “Brent Dewar, recently named to head Chevy’s global operations, told reporters Friday that Chevy sales in Europe are expected to expand to one million from the 500,000 vehicles — or 2.5% of the market — sold in 2008. He didn’t provide a timetable for the growth target, but said new products — including Chevy Volt electric cars and Malibu sedans shipped from the U.S. — will fuel the effort.” Huh? “We’ve got to take this brand and truly make it global . . . a true relevant global participant,” Mr. Dewar said, admitting that the effort is “a work in progress.” Oh, so that’s what you call it . . .

The GM Opel saga continues—at least until it doesn’t. Meanwhile, Spiegel is reporting that GM pressured the German government to separate the Russians (OAO Sberbank and automaker GAZ) from the Canadians (Magna) to make an Opel sale more palatable to its owners (the American government). Spiegel’s sources say Germany nixed the request; it had made promises to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev about the sanctity (if you want to call it that) of the deal. For those of you who want a little background on this international game of chess, the World Socialist Website has the 411.

(Read More…)