KTVU.com reports that an unspecified Japanese newspaper reports that Toyota has decided to shut down its Fremont, California, plant as of next March. New GM has already announced its decision to pull the plug on its share of the plant’s production, which last consisted of the Pontiac Vibe version of the Toyota Matrix. Speaking off the record, a U.S. Toyota spokesman told TTAC the writing’s been on the wall for some time. “NUMMI (New United Motor Manufacturing) was only profitable for a single year.” If this story pans out, production of the Tacoma pickup and Corolla sedan will move to ToMoCo’s mothballed—but brand spanking new—Mississippi factory. Which is, unlike NUMMI, a non-union shop. [Thanks to jmhm2003 for the link.]
TTAC Commentator Boff says the new Porsche Panamera sounds like Ye Olde 928—which would make my previous headline seem pretty pig ignorant. He may be right. We retort, you decide.
Nor, in fact, does the Panamera look like any Porsche I’ve ever seen before, although it’s vaguely reminiscent of the 911. I wonder if they can match the shag carpet in my basement . . .
One of our Best and Brightest, Kixstart, sent us this heads-up:
Jeff Belzer Chevrolet in the Twin Cities is running a newspaper ad today suggesting you “Order Your 2010 Chevy Volt! 230mpg EPA City!” Who could resist? When I called the dealer, “Mary Jo” answered. After a preliminary question or two Jeff Belzer, himself, called me back. Yes, they’re really taking orders. They want $10K down. The price of the Volt will be $40 to $50K, plus $10K on top. (Belzer wasn’t even slightly embarrassed by the surcharge.) If I wanted, I could pick a color. But there are no specific delivery dates. If I don’t like the car when it arrives, I can have my money back. According to Belzer, this is not a dealer cashing-in before time. “It’s official.”
The Cash for Clunkers (a.k.a. C.A.R.S.) program is a car industry bailout dressed-up as a green initiative. The University of California has put some numbers to the boondoggle. According to a study by UC Davis transportation economist Christopher Knittel, Uncle Sam’s taxpayer reach-around is paying 10 times the “sticker price” to reduce emissions of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide. At least. “While carbon credits are projected to sell in the U.S. for about $28 per ton (today’s price in Europe was $20), even the best-case calculation of the cost of the clunkers rebate is $237 per ton. When burned, a gallon of gasoline creates roughly 20 pounds of carbon dioxide. I combined that known value with an average rebate of $4,200 and a range of assumptions about the fuel economy of the new vehicles purchased and how long the clunkers would have been on the road if not for the program,” Knittel said. “I even assumed drivers didn’t change their habits, although some analysts have suggested that the owners of new vehicles will drive more than they would have with their old cars.”
Darwin wasn’t kidding when he described the new GMC Terrain as “hideous.” Check out Susan Docherty’s video—no embed codes for New, transparent GM—over on the right hand side of the FastLane home page. GM’s GM for the Buick-Pontiac-GMC channel also tells us that the LaCrosse’s quad-pot powerplant will make it “lead within its competitive set as the only vehicle with a four-cylinder engine.” I don’t suppose anyone stopped to wonder why none of the LaCrosse’s competitors avoid that particular powertrain . . . There’s more, but it’s late. Have a look for yourself.
The latest stats from the Department of Transportation reveal that Toyota has replaced General Motors at the top of the cash for clunkers (a.k.a. C.A.R.S.) program. The Detroit News reports that “Toyota has sold 18.9 percent of vehicles purchased through the clunkers program, surpassing GM, which has sold 17.6 percent . . . Detroit’s three automakers sold 42.1 percent of all clunker replacements, which is down from an initial 47 percent of sales — and slightly below the automakers’ 44 percent U.S. market share.” GM responded to the news by saying that while it appreciated the taxpayer’s help in driving demand, it was focusing all its energies on long term, sustainable growth. Just kidding. Spokesman Greg Martin told the DetN that “The sales will be a lot like the weather in Michigan in the springtime: It will change at any given time.” [Note to Greg: check your calendar.] ToMoCo was down with that . . .
USA Today re-joins the cavalcade of media outlets helping GM destroy as much Volt “buzz” as possible via premature recapitulation. Yes, it’s a recycled review of the Volt that fails to address questions surrounding the Hail Mary-shaped plug-in hybrid’s internal combustion engine (ICE). When does it kick in? How does the car behave when it kicks in? What’s the Volt’s operating range? What’s the mpg when the ICE is operative? Of course, you can’t blame USA Today for this sin of omission. GM has point blank refused to let a journalist drive the car in “extended range” mode. But you can blame the media for pretending they’re reviewing a “real” car. Of course, they always mention it at some point in the “review,” but, by then, the un-damage has been done. As for “GM and the government are discussing how to calculate a realistic fuel-economy number,” we all know how that turned out.
Tuning of the gasoline engine. It wasn’t operable in the test cars, so there was no hint of how smooth and quiet it’ll be when it comes on to charge the batteries, if needed.
The numbers for the Chevrolet plug-in hybrid electric Volt—running costs vs. the competition and the manufacturer’s margin—don’t add up. Never did. Right from its inception, GM was demurring on the timeline for the theoretical vehicle’s theoretical profitability. Early adopters, economy of scale, yada yada yada. Even after GM’s prearranged a $7500 tax credit with Uncle Sugar—an outrageous tilting of the playing field in the former bankrupt’s favor—the Volt remains a guaranteed, sure-fire money loser. Even if the price of gas soars, the Volt will not be an economic proposition. These facts have been largely lost on the mainstream media (MSM), whose myopia for all things green and beautiful has blinded them to the equations that will seal its fate. And even when they do crunch the numbers, they refuse to see the light. To wit CNNMoney. Make the jump to do the math. Otherwise, GM’s headlong rush down the obfuscation highway has a new champion: “So it’s not impossible that the Volt could become a sales success, even if the strict dollar analysis does not work out for it.”
BusinessWeek (BW) offers its readers a look inside Brand Spanking New Chrysler, or whatever they call it these days. Although the article’s written in the style of a PR puff piece, there’s plenty to disconcert the inherently skeptical (guess who). For example, does this strike you as the best way to re-jig your executive ranks? “Rather than rely on suggestions from top management, Marchionne asked more than 100 middle- and lower-ranked staffers what they thought of their bosses. Then, say people familiar with the process, he picked people most respected by their subordinates. ‘If he didn’t hear expressions of leadership voluntarily from people, he took it as a sign that they didn’t view the executive as a leader.'” So no one lied about their boss? Or everyone did? Or Marchionne favored the suits favored by brown nosers? And how did he know whether a testimonial was voluntary or inspired by Christmas party pictures? Color me confused about Chrysler.
Autoblog—nope. Can’t do it. Not allowed. TTAC’s Best and Brightest have forbidden me from flaming AOL’s . . . uh . . . website. So I’ll just point out that the off-camera comments are largely supportive and wonder why AB’s crack team weren’t allowed behind the wheel of GM’s Hail Mary plug-in hybrid. I mean, there are plenty of prototypes plying the highway (at something less than 230 mpg, presumably). Oh, and as our ever-vigilant former Managing Editor Justin Berkowitz points out, who knew the Volt was not a quint-essential conveyance? [NB: Sarcasm Alert] Less prosaically, “That’s going to piss people off.”
TTAC recently published a Wild Ass Rumor about Buick LaCrosse wiring problems. Jim Federico breached the GM – TTAC wall to quash the suggestion that production vehicles suffered from electrical gremlins. “I can confirm there is NO truth to this RUMOR,” the LaCrosse Vehicle Line Executive/Chief Engineer wrote. So I called the man responsible for “any car on the GM Global Mid-Size platform until I retire or get fired, whatever comes first.” [Note: GM no longer uses Greek names for its platforms. Literally. Federico flat-out refused to identify the Buick’s platform as an “Epsilon.”] Federico told me GM has delivered roughly a thousand LaCrosse to dealers; only one has been marked return to sender. “It was a car with a burned-out starter,” he revealed. “We identified the problem as a defective component and contacted the supplier to rectify the situation.” Now, as for that wiring rumor . . .
Recent Comments