Speaking at The New York Auto Show, GM Car Czar Lutz defended his view that anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is a crock of shit [not paraphrasing]. When manicmommies.com blogger Kristen Brandt asked Maximum Bob why GM didn't make a vehicle for breeders who want to save the planet, Lutz launched into an anti-AGW tirade. Maximum Bob said the recent 2008 International Conference on Climate Change (see video: Global Warming Snow Job) supposedly signals a turning point in the scientific community's opinion of AGW. "Don't worry about saving the planet," Lutz tut-tutted. "Trust me: the planet is going to save itself." "I didn't want to sound like a tree-hugger," the all-expenses paid blogger demurred. "Then don't sound like one," a bellicose Lutz replied. In other news, Bob is still hopeful the tree-hugger's four-wheeled poster child– the Chevrolet Volt– will be ready by the end of 2010.

The nice thing about security guards at auto shows is that they know very little about security and can't guard shit. As Justin and I were looking for the aforementioned free lunch (which indeed there is no such thing as), we headed into a conference room. "Are you with Toyota?" the guard demanded (in the sense of idly inquired). A simple "yes" and there it was: the new Scion Haku concept. The California sunset (TM) orange car looked like a chopped xB, with bells on. Unfortunately, I didn't have my camera with me. So… then I met Matt Hardigree of Jalopnik, who'd been given a magenta-colored press pass (PR) by mistake. I sent Matt back into the room to grab some shots of the top secret Scion, with the understanding that we'd post them simultaneously. Done. TTAC. Making friends wherever we go. 

We stumbled upon GM's NA VP of Design Bryan Nesbitt in a small, windowless room semi-populated by a brown-nose of bloggers (infiltrated by TTAC in search of free food). Justin and I arrived just in time to hear Nesbitt explain why station wagons are cool in Europe: because everything is smaller there and they shop more often and something about old guys not hang-gliding off of Mont Blanc. Anyway, the confab broke-up and I asked Nesbitt what he thought of fake hood scoops. After a moment of PR-related facial rictus, Nesbitt said he didn't personally like them, but you gotta keep the customer satisfied. Hence the new Z28 Camaro will have a massive [functional] hood scoop. Yes, but what of the Pontiac G8 faux intake? Nesbitt said that GM's design studio is at the mercy of its customers, specifically dealers demanding extra bling. For example, Lund Cadillac Hummer Saab (Phoenix) retrofitting the 9-7x with a 3X-sized Saab badge, telling Nesbitt to get with the program (sacrilege!). Nesbitt admitted that a large part of his job is making the best of an ugly situation. "I may not like Hawaiian shirts, but I can make sure it looks as good and fits as well as it can." Let's call it aloha aesthetics.

Previously, on "this is going to get really bad," analysts had predicted that the U.S. new car market in '08 would crater to 15.7m units. According to Dealer magazine, J.D. Power's mob have had another look at the situation and shaved another 800k units from the annual sales forecast. J.D. reckons the industry will only shift 14.95m "light vehicles" (cars, SUVs, minivans, etc.) this year. To put that in perspective, U.S. dealers moved some 16.15m light vehicles in 2007; down 2.5 percent from 16.56m in 2006. Or, less statistically, "New-vehicle sales in 2008 are expected to reach their lowest levels since 1994." J.D.'s executive director of automotive forecasting says the trend established in the last two months is a sign of things to come– only more so. "While the automotive industry's slow performance in January and February certainly contributes to the anticipated drop in new-vehicle sales," Jeff Schuster warned. "Declining consumer confidence and spending, as well as turbulent financial and economic market conditions, are primarily driving the decline." The good news: J.D. is predicting a "slow rebound" in auto sales during the second half of '09 into '10. The bad news: they could be wrong. 

Longtime readers of this website may recall my antipathy towards auto shows. I view the opportunity to watch new product reveals (and attendant spin mongery) with about much relish as I anticipate So You Think You Can Dance? And yet, I'm off tomorrow, dancing with suits. I'm Acela Expressing to the Big Apple to meet-up with Justin for the New York Auto Show. My goal: to ask the tough questions that my colleagues are unwilling or unable to posit. Suffice it to say, I don't think I'll be making any friends. But that's not my nature nor my vocation. I am concerned only with our mutual desire to discover and share the truth about cars. In this, I am your (I swear) humble servant. If you have any suggestions for lines of inquiry, please share them here. Meanwhile, wish me luck.  

I'm sorry to keep harping-on about the U.K.'s draconian anti-motorist policies, but I'm gob-smacked by the country's endless parade of car-related taxes, fines and regulations. Pistonheads reports that the island nation's government has raised the cost of a London parking ticket to, well, you saw the headline. Outside the capital city, a parking ticket will cost a hapless parking scofflaw "just" £70. Folks, that's for overstaying a parking meter. The fines are higher for more serious offenses, such as parking on a double yellow line. And if you don't pay straightaway… It gets worse. The Peterborough Evening Telegraph reports that new laws transform parking attendants (a.k.a. meter maids) into "civil enforcement officers." These new "officers" can uses handheld numberplate recognition systems to identify persistent fine dodgers and call in the clampers. And worse. They'll be able to post penalties to offenders who try to drive away before a ticket can be issued. And worse. "The law will also give local authorities the ability to fine drivers spotted flouting parking rules on CCTV." In other words, they don't have to actually put a ticket on your car. Looks like Orwell was off by 24 years.

There are two main reasons why E85 is going nowhere fast: over-production and under-consumption. The U.S. Department of Energy has tackled the latter part of the non-equation with a federally-funded report exhorting gas station owners to get on the corn juice bandwagon. E85 Retail Business Case: When and Why to Sell E85 advises that "E85 offers relief from this [local] competition by differentiating a station as green, cutting edge, patriotic, and pro-farmer." So, greenwashing it is! What about, you know, making money? "E85 projects can be profitable investments. However, their profitability depends on numerous factors… This checklist includes robust local competition in the gasoline market, access to low E85 costs, mid-grade tanks available for conversion, large potential throughput of E85, and state or local incentives for E85 infrastructure." Large throughput as in sales? Good luck with that. Meanwhile, there's lots of agri-prop. My favorite argument: who cares about gas anyway? The money's in snack foods and car washes! And that's good news because "even if E85 drew no new customers but merely converted gasoline customers from the same store, the number of customer visits would increase. This is because a vehicle’s range is reduced by 23% to 28% when operating on E85 because of ethanol’s lower energy content compared to gasoline." The mind boondoggles. 

Since 1936, Oscar Mayer's hot dog-shaped vehicle has been keeping the company's weiners in the automotive limelight. (We're talking MECHANICALLY SEPARATED TURKEY, PORK, MECHANICALLY SEPARATED CHICKEN, WATER, CONTAINS LESS THAN 2% OF SALT, FLAVOR, SODIUM LACTATE, CORN SYRUP, SODIUM PHOSPHATES, DEXTROSE, SODIUM DIACETATE, SODIUM ERYTHORBATE (MADE FROM SUGAR), SODIUM NITRITE on wheels.) And during that time, the Wienermobile has always ridden on an American chassis. As The New York Times reports, the previous gen was no exception, sitting on a Chevy W-4 series truck platform. No more. As you can see here, the new Weinermobile is a based on the German-owned, British-built MINI Cooper (S no less). It's a change that didn't escape the attention of NYT scribe Robert Peele. "I asked [spinmeister] Big Dog Bill if the smaller vehicle was a signal that Oscar Mayer was adjusting to concern over gas prices and fuel efficiency. Was this an attempt at a greener Wienermobile? The answer was slightly disappointing. While the Mini Wiener will indeed be more fuel efficient, he said, its true raison d’être was to celebrate Oscar Mayer’s 125th anniversary." (Way to press the point, Mr. Peele.) Too bad the Weinermobile doesn't sit on an old Subaru platform. Then they could could take it international as a Bratwurstmobile. [thanks to starlightmica for the link]

Well, who doesn't? But Jonny's willingness to accept a Mercedes-engined Aston Martin highlights an important trend in upmarket automotive marketing: the end of mechanical snobbery. Yes, there are still brand purists who believe that the greasy bits' provenance is more important than a well-turned fender, a respected badge or comparative performance. That the connection between track and road is a holy one, whose realization establishes the brand's all-important bloodlines. But these engineering-savvy enthusiasts– who were always a minority of any luxury or high-performance marque's buyers– are a dying breed. Today's 30 or 40-something sports car buyer is likely to desire Nissan's GT-R because of its status as a Playstation plaything, rather than any racing glory. (Ferrari is the exception that proves the rule.) They're willing to judge expensive automobiles on their own merits, regardless of what lies beneath, who made it or how it got there. This open-mindedness (a.k.a. ignorance) is no bad thing. It gives a deluxe car company greater freedom to be itself, if you know what I mean.

Mr. Lieberman is right to call the musical metaphor informing TTAC's Question of the Day "seriously forced." In fact, it reminds me of 70's-era touchy-feely market research methodology. "If the Toyota Cressida was a dog [sic 'em], would it be more like an Australian Kelpie or a Petit Basset Griffon Vendeen?" And yet, the QOTD also reminds me of a long-ago survey– in the UK of course– where a researcher claimed that listening to loud music was more likely to cause speeding (gasp!) than alcohol consumption. True dat. I've always had a thing for [theoretically] driving fast whilst under the influence of music. But it's nothing like alcoholic inebriation. When music, road, man and machine meld, it's a far better high than anything supplementary chemistry can provide. And I get the parallel between engineering and music. In fact, I reckon if The Big 2.8's execs could "get" Little Feat, they'd have a chance of saving their own bacon. But then, most people that age consider Neil Diamond rock and roll. Go figure. 

Pity the poor U.K. motorist. On top of new "gas guzzler" showroom taxes, higher sky-high taxes on gas and diesel, 17.5 percent VAT on everything car-related (soon to include car insurance), increased CO2-based London congestion charging, the introduction of CO2-based parking space taxes and the ongoing prospect of road pricing (and all the other taxes), Heathrow Airport is considering imposing a £20 "drop off" fee for passengers arriving by car. Oh, and a £3 congestion charge for trucks using roads around the airport– including the M4. According to The Evening Standard, The British Airports Authority's (BAA) new taxes charges would raise £137m a year, which they'd use to pay for the costs of administering the scheme. Just kidding (kind of). BAA would use the money to pay for the airport's expansion and meet the Government's stipulation that Heathrow's growth should not result in an increase in nitrogen dioxide (NO2) levels. Meanwhile, environmentalists are giving British Airways shit [at the bottom of the same article] for flying three jets into LHR without a single passenger on board. Oy.

In an op ed entitled "Driving Miss Chloe," New York Times scribe Caitlin Flanagan argues that the drop in teenage drivers reflects over-protective parents. Seemingly oblivious to journalistic scandals involving fictional composites, Flanagan invents a teenage girl named Chloe and castigates her for riding with Mom in a Toyota Sienna– instead of learning how to drive. "When I was in high school in the 1970s, we had a name for teenagers like Chloe: losers… In my day, we did whatever was necessary to get out on a Saturday night: we climbed out of windows; we jumped on the back of motorcycles; God help us, we hitchhiked. We needed, on the most basic and physical level, to be out in the dangerous night, with one another, away from our parents and the safety of home. It was no way to live, and some of us didn’t. But it was a drive so elemental and essential that there seemed no way to deny it." In a nod to reality, Flanagan mentions the enormous cost of insuring a teen driver– and then dismisses it in her relentless assault on today's teens' lack of gumption. "Learn to drive? Why would they want to do that?" she concludes. Offer coherent analysis of teen driving trends? Why would Flanagan do that?

The Times pits a BMW 520d with Efficient Dynamics against a Toyota Prius to see which one gets better mileage. After a bit of Hollywood hybrid-bashing, the Times sets the stage for their battle of the fuel misers (meisters?). "To find out [which one gets better mileage] we set a challenge: to drive a Prius [and BMW 320d] to Geneva using motorways and town driving. The direct route is 460 miles but we drove almost 100 miles further to give the Prius the advantage of running in urban conditions where its petrol-electric drivetrain comes into its own." Strangely, the article doesn't follow the headline writer's "take no prisoners" style– "Toyota Prius proves a gas guzzler in a race with the BMW 520d." In fact, the authors don't pronounce a winner. But the chart at the bottom tells the tale. BMW 520d: 10.84 gallons (50.3mpg); Toyota Prius: 11.34 gallons (48.1mpg).   

Media-wise, the new Pontiac G8 is a hit. Obviously. The Aussie four door conforms to the pistonhead paradigm: a powerful, rear-wheel-drive sports sedan. According to the jobbing journos flown to a first-class California hotel to test the new machine on local roads, the G8 GT isn't aesthetically offensive, goes like stink and handles well. While hooning hacks are celebrating the return of the [imported] American muscle car, they seem to have forgotten the fact that the muscle car is dead. As is Pontiac. And, by extension, GM.

Rising U.S. gas prices and the American mortgage meltdown has hit sales of new vehicles hard. In terms of the product mix, a lot of ink has been expended on the rapid, ongoing transition from gas-guzzling SUVs to more miserly models– a change that's hurt the truck-heavy domestics particularly hard. There's been something of a presumption that luxury and near-luxury brands are safe from the tumbleweeds blowing through mass market showrooms. Marketing Daily reveals that it ain't necessarily so. "Recent years represented a boom-time for American investors and the luxury marketers that filled their homes with Lexus SUVs, Rolex timepieces and Coach handbags. Now, the net worth of even wealthy Americans is dipping as real estate prices slump and stock portfolios sag. And, as investment banks and government economists begin beating the drums of recession, even high-net-worth households are cutting back." Is this the right time for Mercedes to launch their AMG sub-brand, or VW to go upmarket? Hell no. And one has to wonder if [presumed] declining sales at Lincoln (the main cause for optimism at Ford), Land Rover (whose sale is already in jeopardy), Jaguar (mega-dittos) and Cadillac (whose CTS is the poster child for GM hopes of a product led turnaround) will stress the automakers to the point of no return. Watch this space.