In keeping with the horsepower numbers for the Hemi in the new Challenger, Dodge has announced that the Hemi in the Charger sedan will get an upgrade for 2009 as well. Rather than continuing to produce a puny 340 horsepower, the newly revised 5.7 liter Hemi will now crank out 368 horsepower. Take THAT, Pontiac G8 GT. In addition to the increase in ponies, the Charger R/T will also benefit from an additional 5 lb ft of torque, raising the total to 395 for 2009. The Hemi adds variable valve timing as well, meaning highway fuel economy gets a modest bump from 23 to 25 mpg (city remains the same at 15). You think this isn’t enough to save Chrysler? That they really need competitive small cars? That Chrysler is dead in the water? Well yeah, probably. But they only had enough money to either give the Charger R/T a little more power, or to buy Bob Nardelli a new toupee. Frankly, I think they made the right choice.

As we’ve argued before here at length, Chrysler’s current “worst of the worst” predicament boils down to one word: product. And it’s not just that Chrysler’s current batch of products suck, there’s not much coming down the pipeline that shows any real promise. But that’s not stopping Auburn Hills from rolling out a new hype offensive, touting the awesomeness of Chrysler’s forthcoming 2010 lineup. Leading the charge is President and Vice Chairman Jim Press, who sees the Chrysler turnaround in historical terms. “For our company, we’re going to have a product renaissance in 2010 … just as the market is coming back,” Press is quoted as saying in the Detroit Free Press. “We’re not on the ropes,” he insists. “We’re not worried.” Why aren’t ya worried Jim? Because Chrysler’s going to be launching seven new vehicles in 2010, according to Press. Pinky swear. But then supply-chain philistine John Campi chimes in to promise “eight or nine” new Chryslers in the mythical 2010 model year. So which is it? Ask an analyst, and he’ll tell you that Chrysler is likely to have five new models for 2010: a new Jeep Grand Cherokee, a Dodge midsized SUV possibly called the Durango, a refreshed Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger, and a reskinned Nissan Versa. Ask the same analyst (in this case Erich Merkle of Crowe Chizek and Co) where Press and Campi came up with their numbers, and your expert will suddenly be out of answers. “Maybe there is some variant that you could start counting. There are ways to double-count some things sometimes. It’s a bit of a stretch,” admits Merkle. Possibly indicating what the Cerburian dog might pull out of its “product pipeline” in 2010, Jim Press is going after the Chevy Volt. Having shown three “post prototype” EVs to its dealer council, Press notes “We don’t have enough money for a PR stunt. All we have is enough money to build a car that we can sell.” Luckily Chrysler still has the Freep for fawningly credulous no-cost PR. After all, getting a Chrysler dealer to publicly admit that “I am more excited about their product line than I have been in years and years and years,” is surely worth some kind of consulting fee. Or ad revenue.

As the U.S. struggles to adjust to fuel prices that the rest of the world has been living with for years, European cars offer the most obvious template for model-line reform. Flexible, fuel-efficient vehicles have thrived on the continent for decades, and the European’s have gotten good at squeezing space for a whole family from compact platforms. So when GM first started showing images of its new Cruze compact, this blogger bemoaned that “while the old Chevy Cruze (Suzuki Ignis) was a tall, flexible wagon, the new model sports a long front overhang and a tight greenhouse.” Long, low and wide, the new Cruze felt like downsized Americana (we don’t need no headroom or no stinkim’ hatchback), rather than a platform built for utility and flexibility. Well, my worries were mistplaced (sorta). GM is showing pictures of its Orlando concept, a three-row MPV based on the Cruze platform and aimed squarely at the Mazda5 and Euro-proven Ford Focus C-Max, headed stateside in 2010. Jalopnik notes that there aren’t currently a huge range of small, fuel-efficient family haulers for sale in the states, but this simply proves that (for once) the General may actually be ahead of the curve. There are likely  shortcomings, including an emphasis on “American” styling that appears to sacrifice space and visibility for the tight greenhouse that is so fashionable here. Still, by leveraging platforms and offering fuel-sipping transport for large families, GM only improves its chances of success. And no, I’m not kidding. Now, get ready for some major brandgineering….

Way back in 1987, The New York Times began a story on GM with a lead that echoes through the ages: “Just about the last thing the General Motors Corporation needs these days is more ”cannibals.”’ With all the turmoil GM has endured since ’87, you might think that it would have taken The Gray Lady’s advice by now. But no. Motor Trend reports that the new Cadillac Escalade will be based on GM’s played-out Lambda platform, joining the Traverse, Enclave, Outlook and Acadia in cannibal Hell. As usual MT manages to look on the sunny side of the move, claiming that the Lambda’s “oversubscription” is precisely why “a Cadillac version makes economic sense.” And yes, it will likely be the only Lambda-based whip with a (small block- the new Northstar has been axed) V8 now that the planned Enclave Super has been canceled. Still, the new Escalade won’t just steal sales from well-equipped Enclaves, it will also put the squeeze on the Theta-based SRX CUV. Besides, if Caddy is still a legitimate luxury brand, shouldn’t its flagship Ute retain its fuel-swilling truck platform to keep it in line with such damn-the-fuel-prices competitors as the Range Rover and Hummer? After all, the new 2009 Escalade paid off its tooling costs within three months of going on sale. Unless of course this is just more cheap-and-dirty “retooling for increased energy efficiency” bailout loan fodder.

Yes, we all hate the alphanumeric nomenclature, snaking over the auto industry like poison ivy. And with only so many letters and numbers, we always expect some repeats (Lexus LS/Lincoln LS, Chrysler 300C/Mercedes C300, BMW X5/Mazda MX-5). Has Hyundai gone a character too far? The car we North Americans know as the Veracruz is being introduced to Europe as the ix55. Not only is this a bizarre thing to say down at the pub (Oh, I drove my ix55), but it’s awfully close to, well, a lot of other cars. Hyundai’s new scheme for European car names is to begin with the letter “i,” because if it worked for Apple, it’ll work for them. Or Mitsubishi’s “i car.” The X we can assume refers to this vehicle being an AWD crossover, and of course the 55 is because it has a 5.5 liter V8. Erm, no. Instead, it sounds to me like a mish-mash of BMW (xDrive 50) and the 55 immediately conjurs memory of a trillion Mercedes AMG cars with 55 at the end, from C55 to E55 to S55 to CL55 to CLK55 to ML55 to G55). Besides, what was wrong with Veracruz?

FIAT and Tata have been cosying up to each other for some time. Ratan Tata was elected to the board of Directors at FIAT at Sergio Marchionne’s request, FIAT are looking to supply engines for Land Rover and Jaguar (A Jaguar XK with a Ferrari sourced engine? Fancy that!) and their joint ventures in India. But it seems, FIAT want a slice of Tata pie now (no, dirty jokes, please). The Economic Times of India reports that FIAT want to launch their version of the “world cheapest car” by 2010. However, Sergio Marchionne (FIAT’s CEO) didn’t disclose the price of the car. I’m no Sherlock Holmes, but I’m guessing it’s got to be less that Tata’s $2500 for the Nano, if it’s to qualify as “the world’s cheapest car”. Marchionne also didn’t say how it would be built, where it would be built, how much would be shared with the Nano, or how many Bothans died to bring us this information. Meanwhile, doesn’t Tata need to sort out its own production issues first?

“‘The ultimate solution is the electrification of the vehicle,’ said [Ford Car Czar Derrick] Kuzak, who stressed he was speaking as an engineer and was not commenting specifically on Ford’s future product plans.” God forbid Ford should commit to a single technology, ’cause that might cause more of the old bureaucratic infighting for which The Blue Oval Boyz are famous. Anyway, The Detroit News reports that Derrick’s mate Jim Farley (of the RI Farleys) also reckons ethanol hydrogen the flux capacitor electricity is the “gas of tomorrow’s cars.” “Speaking to reporters separately [so as not to coordinate their stories], Ford’s chief marketing officer, Jim Farley, echoed Kuzak’s enthusiasm for electric vehicles. ‘All I know is that when I talk to customers about electrification they say, ‘That’s cool!’ We better be prepared as an industry.'” Yes, well, by the end of this electrifying cheerleading session, Kuzak backpedals from his “one alt power to rule them all” prognostication. “Kuzak said government intervention or consumer preference could ultimately make one of the other alternative power technologies a more viable choice and that’s why Ford is committed to developing all of them. ‘We have to, because we don’t know how it’s going to play out.'” That’s cool!

While GM, Toyota, Nissan and Mitsubishi are readying their electric vehicles, a new contender has emerged and is aiming to beat them all to the punch. Tata motors, in conjunction with Norway’s THINK!, plans to launch an electric car themselves. Reuters reports that the car will be based on the Tata Indica and be launched in Norway within one year. S. Ravishankar, senior general manager at Tata Motors’ engineering research centre, says that the car can run for 175 km (110 miles) to 200 km when fully charged with a “two-pack” battery, but mileage could vary according to the battery used. (Ya think?) There’s little doubt that, if successful, Tata will use the Jaguar/Land Rover global dealer network to sell these cars. “Could I interest sir in a Jaguar XJ? A Supercharged Range Rover sport? A Tata Nano? or an Electric Tata Indica?” Uh, maybe not.

Or the concept version of it, at least. Honda says what you see here (and what they will show at the Paris auto show) is 90% of what we can expect when they roll out the production version – on sale in the US next spring. While Honda has said it will be the best priced car in the segment (what segment? It’s the Prius and nothing else), many have estimated its price will be below $20,000. Unlike the first generation Insight, which was a 2-seat bicycle, this new one very much follows the Prius layout: 5 passenger, 5 door (that means hatchback), and lots of high-tech gadgets. Making those gadgets optional should help to add high-profit margin items to the sales sheet, as well. While we have no information on engine or mileage, I’d be willing to bet that the all important MPGs will be very impressive. Honda is hoping to sell 100,000 of these in the US per year, and another 100,000 per year worldwide. Something tells me that won’t be a problem at all.

Cars.com’s Kickingtires blog has a question: “With consumers so concerned about fuel economy, why is General Motors waiting two years to bring out the Chevrolet Cruze, the replacement for the compact Chevy Cobalt?” Of course, we would ask the question with more of a “if the Cruze isn’t being sold for two years, why is GM hyping it now?” slant. Either way, even Kicking Tires is saying something’s gone wrong, horribly wrong, here. But no matter, Bob Lutz has the answer. “We’re waiting on the new world car because that gives us time to develop the 1.4-liter turbocharged four-cylinder for it,” explains the man of maximum. And the way Lutz tells it, the Cruze’s new 1.4 turbocharged four-banger will be worth the wait. “The 1.4-liter is going to be more high torque than high horsepower,” explains the Car Czar. “High torque at the low end for power takeoffs and quick acceleration while still getting high mileage… We expect to get more than 40 mpg highway, better than with some hybrids.” Well, that sounds worth the wait, right? Well, in yet another Lutzie-worthy performance, Maximum Bob shoots his argument in the foot by revealing that “The 1.4 liter goes on sale in Europe in a couple weeks.” So then why is the Cruze not available until the mythical land of “late 2010?” Instead of waiting for the engine, is it possible GM’s waiting for, say, low-interest government loans for retooling factories to build more fuel-effiecient cars? Bet on it.

No, Chrysler doesn’t have any plans to show its three reported EV prototypes to the public. After all, that might imply that these mythical vehicles have some chance of making it into production. Instead, the Auburn Hills mob will be displaying the unnamed, unhinted-at prototypes to dealers only. Because what dealers doesn’t love cars that they can’t sell? Anyway, mission accomplished for Chrysler co-president Jim Press, who leveraged the announcement to make the dubious claim that “we are making substantial progress on electrification of our vehicles.” No, seriously; Chrysler is focusing on developing hybrid electric plug-in vehicles with a range of 300 miles. Not only that, but Press claims ChryCo can “move forward with advanced products for electrification with or without partners.” With the current crop of Chrysler products making a compelling case for suicide, it seems that they’ve learned [from GM] that It doesn’t matter how bad your products are right now. If you swear you have a world-beater just around the corner, the government will bail you out. Press is right on message: “The biggest issue for the auto market today is getting adequate credit, not $4.00 a gallon gas.” Just so.

Reviving once-proud brand names as a way to sell more high-priced cars has been a favorite technique for low-volume production. Mercedes’ Maybach experiment may not have been a runaway success, but it’s not stopping Jaguar from talking about reviving the Daimler nameplate. And now Aston Martin CEO Ulrich Bez has announced [via The Autochannel] that his employer’s disinterring Aston’s old chum. “Revival of the Lagonda brand would allow us to develop cars which can have a different character than a sportscar, and therefore offer a perfect synergy.” And there you were thinking that Aston’s forthcoming Rapide four-door had all that hearkening stuff covered. Why not slap the Lagonda name on that bad boy? “Lagonda will use a unique design language as Aston Martin does,” Bez blustered. “We will take elements of DNA from the past but will be very future orientated as we are with Aston Martin.” AM plans a Langonda concept for the brand’s centennial anniversary in 2009, which could be a production model by 2012.

"As General Motors Corp. showed off its 2009 lineup Thursday," Scott Burgess writes in The Detroit News. "I found myself wondering, 'What's the next Malibu?' So I posed that question to a table full of GM employees during lunch at the automaker's annual event to roll out coming models for the media. The group looked at one another, stammered, and could not offer anything definitive." Wow, a cheerleader embarasses the football team? Well, not exactly. Despite Voltmania and Camarophilia, Burgess suddenly adopts the TTAC-standard position of evolution not revolution. (What else can he do?) "While no one at GM's lunch table could name the next Malibu, individually each of them talked about some of the changes being made to many of the vehicles. This year, the sum of the changes is bigger than any one improvement." Scott's talking six-speed Aura (remember that one?) and truck trannies, a hybrid pickup (good luck with that), the XFE Cobalt (don't they already sell that?) and… that's it. "It's refreshing to see GM take a good lineup and focus on how to make it better now," Burgess opines. "Instead of just talking about all of the vehicles in its product development pipeline. It may cut the lunch conversation short, but it will certainly satisfy consumers." Hang on; when did GM stop talking about future cars? And if GM customers are not satisfied now (never mind winning new customers), how will these changes change that?

Last time we checked in on McLaren's P11 supercar development, the British firm was descending into epic drama with engine partner and co-owner Mercedes. We're not sure of the current status of legal wrangling, but Autocar tells us a new designer has been brought in to completely restyle the mid-engine screamer. Former BMW, Mini, Fiat and Ferrari designer Frank Stephenson will begin designing the new McLaren after his customary "gardening leave" is complete later this year. Production has been delayed by at least a year, pushing the release to 2010, with ragtop and GTR racing versions arriving subsequently. Technical specs are said to be unchanged, which means Mercedes has yet to pull permission to use its 6.2 liter AMG V8 mated to a DSG box. The rumored 600 hp GTR version will get a mysterious German-built V10 which is still undergoing testing. Wrapped in a skin designed by the man who brought you the Maserati Quattroporte, Ferrari 612 Scaglietti, and 2001 MINI, this should be some serious kit. Unless the drama comes back with a vengeance.

Despite the headline claims of, um, some Motor Authoritative sources , Peugeot is not coming to the United States any time soon. And Canada would be a real stretch. The basis for the claim is that Peugeot is looking to expand the number of markets in which it sells cars, and the French company brass said "with the American dollar being weak, sure, it's possible." But that's not enough. This story comes out every few years , and it's no more true this time around. As much as this writer and probably many other European car lovers would be excited at the prospect of another affordable marque in this country, it's not gonna happen any time soon, or any time not as soon. Americans are still politically not so hot on the French, then there are dealer/service/parts infrastructure issues (namely that there isn't much of anything left from 20 years ago), the added cost of engineering for our emissions and crash standards, and the inconvenient reality that most Americans still aren't truly warmed up to small cars. Not to mention, the current Peugeot lineup is seriously strange.