C/Net reports that Zap, failed smart importer and provider of the TTAC one-star Xebra electric vehicle, has big plans. Again. Still. Two years ago, Zap was trash talking about a luxury, all-electric SUV called the Zap-X. It was due, uh, now. Anyway, forget about that, for now (Zap says later, Dude). Zap is now busy hyping the three-wheeled Alias, supposedly set for production in 2009. Following the Tesla template for over-promising and under-delivering, Zap says the $30k Alias will top-out at 100mph and travel 150 miles on a single charge (or less, obviously). The Alias will "likely" come with a hybrid range extender: a small gas motor that can power the car or charge the battery. And just in case that doesn't sound totally Tesla-like, "Zap and China's Youngman Automotive Group [the same carmaker responsible for the execrable Xebra], through a joint venture called Detroit Electric, will then follow up with an economy car, roughly coming out in 2010 or 2011, then a four-seater sedan similar in size and price to a Honda Civic. Subsequently, it will come out with a four-seater sedan that will compete in the Audi class." As if.

Bloomberg reports that workers at Toyota's Cambridge assembly plant (Corolla, Matrix) will vote on whether or not to join The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM). Organizer Ian Morland says the union filed the necessary paperwork with Ontario's Ministry of Labor to mandate a vote by 3100 of the plant's 5,059 employees next Thursday. Morland says 40 percent of the required survey cards favored union representation. "The support we're seeing is overwhelming." IAM Canadian General Vice President Dave Ritchie's statement on the union's official website must send chills down ToMoCo suits' spines: "We welcome the opportunity to act as the representatives for the Toyota Canada assembly plant workers, in order to ensure that fairness and equity will always be a part of their daily lives in the work place." Saying that, members of Toyota's workforce at their Freemont, California NUMMI (New United Motor Manufacturing Inc) are UAW members.

As TTAC revs up its engine and stares down the ramp at the shark tank– just kidding. I have every faith that the TTAC team can maintain this e-brand's identity and integrity ad infinitum. And beyond! Well, at least until we start making some real money. And then after that (relax, we're good, it's been a long week). That's not to say we won't make some missteps along the way. We won't. I mean, we will. Today, I published two blogs posts that I later removed. The first described the plight of a Dodge Charger owner whose lights went all screwy when it rained. While the dealer's disinterest was the point of the piece, commentators rightly pointed-out that such difficulties afflict buyers of other brands. Our focus on the Dodge Boys was unfair. The second post covered a GM recall of Buick and Pontiac models. KatiePuckrik reminded me of my pledge not to run recall stories in general, as the selection process is inherently biased (either do them all or don't do them). Again, I hit delete. I bring this up because I want you to know that as TTAC grows, I am determined that we won't fall victim to "big company disease." We will stay true to our url. And we will always rely on you, dear readers, to keep us honest. 

You may recall this most excellent dispatch re: sourcing a new Nissan GT-R at list price. It was penned by TTAC car reviewer and bon vivant Jay Shoemaker. Since writing the epistle from the "budget supercar front," Shoes managed to source the beast. As the headline attests, it all ended in tears. At my request and considerable risk to his rep, Jay has allowed us to publish his email on this abortive venture. [Note: no flaming the rich guy.]

"I was successful in finding a way to acquire one of the first US GTR's at MSRP. I had to pull strings to accomplish this, but I suppose that is what strings are for. Anyway, Nissan USA gave me a nice letter of introduction and I flew to Tokyo last week to see and sit in the GTR (I did not get to drive it). As a prospective owner, I hated it; the external appearance is too boy racer and the interior is pretty much basic Nissan with one or two extra leather pieces. It gave me claustrophobia to sit inside it and was terribly uncomfortable. So after all I went through, I came home and cancelled my order. I suppose I should regret that I will not have the opportunity to drive one of the first U.S. GTRs, but I have never liked Nissans, don't like V6 engines, don't like turbocharged engines in general and definately don't like the idea of 20-inch run flat tires. Next month, I am off to Germany to pick up my Audi R8 at the Neckarsulm factory and drive it on the Autobahn to console myself."

The recently enacted U.S. Energy Independence and Security Act mandated 36 billion gallons of biofuels by 2022. Good luck with that. Purchasing.com reports that soaring corn prices, a go-go ethanol industry and so-so E85 sales have turned the current bio-fuels boom into a damp squib. "Late last year, about 5.6 billion annual gallons of new or expanded fermentation ethanol capacity was due for completion in 2008, reports Nathan Schaffer, a fuels analyst with PFC Energy in Houston. Of that, he says, about a quarter has been 'put on hold or taken off the boards' since the start of the fourth quarter of 2007." Maybe that's because America already has an eight billion gal/year ethanol production capacity, relative to six billion gallons worth of domestic consumption. As R. Jeffrey DeReamer, president of EthanolMarket.com puts it "Supply is not going to be an issue for [ethanol] buyers this year." Ya think? Oh, and "domestically produced ethanol will be supplemented by imports of the commodity from Brazil and the Caribbean this summer." If the ethanol industry is going to stand on its own two feet (i.e. stop sucking on the government tit), consumers and retailers better fall in love with E85 STAT.  

The autopblogosphere is abuzz with Chrysler CEO Bob Nardelli's memo to his employees, ordering the entire company to take a two-week vacation on July 7. Nardelli said he was putting 19k white collar and 52,500 hourly workers on simultaneous furlough to "create better alignment and efficiency across organizational lines and boost productivity." Huh? While most analysts take Nardelli at his word, and a company-wide summer break is an industry norm, rumors are circulating that Chrysler is going to file for bankruptcy while its workforce is off-site. Chrysler's market share losses and cash conflagration has continued (if not escalated) unabated since Cerberus bought the ailing automaker from [what was then] DaimlerChrysler. Chrysler workers' summer "vacation" could well be permanent.

A reader emailed me recently, asking why I tolerated the following post by coupdetat: "I remember being at the old Ontario Motor Speedway and not being able to see the San Bernadino Mountains back in 1973. I figure the pollution controls on cars and industry allow us to enjoy the beauty of the state and have the beauty there for the coming generations. Now if we could get all these transplants to leave, it would be even nicer." The reader reckoned it was a racist remark. I saw it as a off-hand, tongue-in-cheek comment about out-of-staters. The reader was adamant. "It's an 'us vs. them' statement that definitely has nothing to do with the topic at hand," he protested. Barring some convincing argument here, I've decided to go with my gut and leave the post as is. Meanwhile, the debate got me thinking about the wider point: how life is, at its most fundamental level, a competition for resources. There are millions of battles every minute of every day; for clean air, water, steel to make cars, customers to buy the cars, readers to visit car-related websites, etc. Call me a heartless Darwinist, but I don't think 'us vs. them' conflicts are inherently bad. In fact, I believe humans were born to compete– in groups. If we weren't, I wouldn't be here. Nor, in fact, would you. And I mean that in the full, collective, inclusive sense of the word. 

TTAC's no apologist for any automaker. And we're big fans of the editorial equivalent of the arched eyebrow. But we call foul over Motor Trend 's coverage of Toyota's decision to extend its warranties on Tacoma pickups sold between 1995 and 2000 due to problems with rust. The mag's online scribe Andrew Streiber reports the facts– well, edits the press release slightly– with studied impartiality. "Though Toyota says the problems have been limited to trucks in states where salt is used to de-ice roads in winter, the company is extending rust-perforation warranty coverage to all 1995-2000 Tacomas regardless of location. The coverage will last 15 years from the original date of sale with no mileage cap. Owners who think they may have a rust problem can simply visit a dealer for a free inspection, and if damage is found Toyota will either repair or repurchase the truck (they decide)." But Streiber can't resist finishing with a cheap shot. "Given the well-publicized problems in early examples of the new Tundra, it's still another blemish on their reputation for quality the company didn't need." Note to MT: if the domestics had adopted a similar approach to similar problems, they wouldn't be in the mess they're in. 

Faced with a decision between a tax grab (a.k.a. closing a loophole) and environmentally-oriented political correctness, the UK government decided to take the money and run. Business Car (BC) reports that the UK's Chancellor of the Exchequer will shit can [paraphrasing] the current biofuel duty differential, That's the bit of the budget that subsidises E85 by up to 20p per litre. BC has no doubts about the decision's impact on the darling of America's corn growers, calling it "the death knell for E85 biofuel as a viable fuel in the UK." Minister Darling (true story) threw the bio-fuel boys a bone, creating the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation. The new boondoggle calls for all road transport fuels to contain 5.75 percent biofuel by 2010, well behind America's corn-fed 10 percent mandate.

If you were laboring under the impression that GM's European division was in the pink– after racking-up $4b in losses between 2000 to 2006– forgeddaboutit. [NB: freshly-minted GM COO Fritz Henderson was Chairman of GM Europe from 2004 to 2006.] Reuters reports that the Euro-turnaround has stalled– with an entirely predictable response. General Motors Europe is cutting 5k manufacturing jobs– about a tenth of its European workforce– as "the top U.S. car maker aims to stem steep losses in declining main auto markets." And if you think the United Auto Workers are tough (i.e. expensive to bribe), check out the European works council's response. "We want guarantees that there will be no plant closures in west Europe until at least 2020," Jean-Marc Ruhland demanded. And if that sounds familiar, so should the excuses. GM's Euro Prez Carl-Peter Forster said his employer's low profitability was "not confined to Opel but was an industry-wide problem among volume carmakers in Europe due to price pressure as Asian manufacturers exported cheap cars to the continent." America's tanking, Europe's struggling. Can the rest of the world buoy the corporate mothership? If so, for how long? 

I forgot to upload the podcast. Sorry Justin. In my own defense, I never thought TTAC's blog would take off like this. When we started, it was just Frank and me and sometimes Glenn. We struggled to make ten posts a day. Now we're nearasdammit outblogging the other guys, via regular snarks from Jonny, eco-actualities from Donal, new car buzz from Justin and occasional shots from Samir, William C and Sajeev. Oh, and Edward Niedermeyer, who's a friggin' blogging machine (and the only writer I know who has more snidely whiplash than me). And like the good brand that we are, TTAC has grown organically in this, dare I say it, comms post. For the first time in this history of the world (ever) we crested 600k unique visitors (that's you) per month, ascending to 1.8m page views. Equally heartening, we're e-fly paper; visitors hang around the site for an average for 4:16. The ad guys are talking about a demographic survey, and that's great– given that we haven't heard hide nor hair of them in the last six months. Anyway and meanwhile, I promise you more of the same. Fair enough?

When Plastech hit the skids and began its tussle with Chrysler for the tools that make the plastic parts for the cars ChryCo can't sell to the general public, Ford and GM made all kinds of soothing noises about their Plastech parts supply. Reuters reports that The General filed papers in U.S. Bankruptcy Court yesterday (Tuesday) to recover its tools from the embattled supplier. Ignoring/cognizant of the fact that 29 of its plants have been idled by a strike at American Axle, GM claimed "Any other course would constitute reckless endangerment of GM's production lines and those that rely on them." Given that the judge has denied Chrysler access to its tools, GM's petition doesn't stand a hope in Hell of satisfaction. No comment so far from either the Court or Plastech, which is busy trying to raise $14m to maintain operations through April Fool's Day (I kid you not). Under a court-approved bankruptcy agreement that expires tomorrow (Thursday), Plastech may borrow up to $35.1m. Yes, well, Plastech been "unable to complete long-term debtor-in-possession financing." Meanwhile, back in February, Ford told Reuters their supply of Plastech parts was cool. We shall see…

Just-auto [JA, sub] had a little chin-wag with Larry Burns, The General's Vice President of R&D and Planning. The man in charge of bringing Chevrolet's gas – electric hybrid Volt to market told JA that GM's plug-in Hail Mary will be in short supply when it hits the (a?) showroom. "We're not going to sell it in every city and we're not going to sell it though every Chevrolet dealership," Burns said. "It just doesn't make sense to do that yet. You'd have to set up the service parts in all of those dealerships and train all of those dealers to service the vehicles. We might concentrate it in five or ten cities and say that is where we want to start." Or they may not, for the simple reason that the Volt might not be ready by 2010. "When asked by just-auto if GM's timelines for any kind of launch in 2010, even a restricted one, are still realistic given that the company has only recently taken delivery of the first batteries for testing, Burns admitted: 'It's a challenge. I'm not going to mislead anybody about that but I'm proud that we've signed up to that challenge.'" So I guess GM Car Czar Bob Lutz is still in charge of the misleading part of the program. Hey Bob, here comes the Easter Bunny! 

Welcome to a new TTAC feature: Ask the Best and Brightest (ATBB). On an irregular, yet-to-be-determined basis, we'll post an auto-related question from a reader. You answer it. Yes (Jonny), it's a bit like Question of the Day– only a lot less philosophical. Yes (Frank), it starts with an email to frank.williams@thetruthaboutcars.com with the letters ATBB in the subject bar. Yes (y'all), we're asking you to share your hard-won automotive expertise for our financial gain. (As I told our writers back when I paid them $10 a pop, the pay sucks but the glory is infinite.) And yes, this is a stopgap measure while we wait– Camaro buyer-like– for the TTAC forums to magically appear. So… this whole deal with slowrideR's idea. And he wants your opinion. What's the best car for commuting: a 2004 Audi A4, a 2004 Infiniti G35 or a 2005 Cadillac CTS? 

Jack Gillis reckons the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) crash test ratings are misleading. "It's impossible for car buyers to separate the truly good performers from those at the bottom of the list," asserts the Director of Public Affairs for the Consumer Federation of America (CFA). Gillis points out that nearly every new vehicle sold in the U.S.– some 96 percent of them– are blessed with a four or five star NHTSA front crash rating. His Car Book provides a guide to the non-invidious distinctions between models, and our podcast clarifies Gillis' call for new testing standards. Meanwhile, here's the best/worst from the CFA's safety list, which combines front and side NHTSA ratings for an overall ranking. 

Category/Best/Worst

Subcompact/Hyundai Accent/Toyota Yaris
Compact/Chevrolet HHR/Chrysler PT Cruiser
Intermediate/Toyota Avalon/Pontiac Grand Prix
Large/Acura RL/Cadillac DTS
Minivan/Kia Sedona/Kia Rondo
Small SUV/Jeep Liberyty/Jeep Compass
Midsize SUV/Volvo XC90/Cadillac SRX
Large SUV/Chevrolet Tahoe/Chevrolet Trailblazer