Earlier I pointed out that Jack Baruth's GT-R prognosticating isn't exactly up to Nostradamian standards, at least as far as Britain goes. But then I remembered that I agree with Jack about most things (he still might be right about Skylines in the USA), so I thought I'd check and see what he and the boys at Speed:Sport:Life are up to. Turns out, they just bought a Porsche Cayenne with a six-speed manual. As Jack explains, "Normally, when a magazine talks about a 'long-term test,' they mean they've finagled a free press car from a manufacturer for somewhat longer than the normal one-week period, but this time we mean long-term. As in, we've managed to drop almost ninety-four 'stacks,' which is to say, $93,800, on a 2008 GTS of our very own." Our kinda dudes. But why on earth would they spend so much on a 4,900 pound, 4-seat SUV with 21" rims? To haul their Dodge Neon ACR race car, of course! True, for that much scratch they could've got the Turbo Porker, but as Mr. Baruth points out, "But which would you rather have: a bare-bones Turbo with cheap wheels and plastic grab handles, or a fully loaded GTS complete with wacky biplane rear spoiler and an Alcantara roof?" Seems obvious to us. Also, their Cayenne has bright red gauges. You just gotta have those. Put it this way, if the BMW X6 came with a row-your-own box, I'd force Farago to buy my LeMons team one. Ooh, wait a second — Jack's on my LeMon's team. Life just got much more interesting. And covered in Alcantara.

Since Bob Lutz revealed the Volt concept that made the rounds at the auto shows is more aerodynamically efficient going backwards than forwards, we've known there was much work to be done in the wind tunnel (and no, we don't mean the marketing depatment). CBS auto beat reporter Jeff Gilbert got a look inside the Volt development center, and brings us some of the first images of a camouflaged one-third scale model of what just might be the production Volt. Gilbert doesn't think the model is "all that exciting," saying it looks like little more than a Pontiac G6 or (inexplicably) a Chevy Camaro. But lack of enthusiasm for the mock-up doesn't mean Gilbert won't regurgitate GM's lies marketing playbook verbatim, incredulously spouting such obvious untruths as the long-abandoned $30k pricetag. In fact the "GM wants to sell 100k Volts at $30k by 2010" pablum comes immediately after GM's chief engineer for hybrid electric vehicle programs refuses to say that things look good for the 2010 goal. "Well, it's very clear what our target is, and leadership has asked us 'what do you need to make it happen?' and we have not been turned down once," says the sultan of sliderules. Gosh, that sounds like the development process of every $30k car, doesn't it?

Sometimes, the spin is so obvious it speaks for itself. This official post-Press announcement re: the former Toyota current Chrysler exec's claim that the Japanese government funded the development of the Prius— since denied by Toyota– is a perfect case in point. "Chrysler Statement on Hybrid Battery Development: There have been several news reports today concerning statements made by Chrysler LLC Vice Chairman and President Jim Press on battery development for hybrid vehicles. First of all, Press was not speaking negatively of Toyota. In a recent interview, he referenced the close cooperation between the Japanese government and Japanese industry. He said the Japanese government strongly supported R & D (research and development) investment in battery development, and the Prius and other Japanese models benefited from that investment in industry. He cited this as an example of cooperation between government and industry working together on public policy issues. He went on to say that he would like to see similar cooperation in the United States in order to find technological improvements that help give U.S. companies a competitive advantage." I guess that's what goes for an apology in this biz.

One topic that TTAC has steered clear of is the constant liveblogging of announcements about Knight Rider. I realize that retro-1980s stuff is cool for some people, and Knight Rider is nominally about a car with gadgets. But seriously, who cares? It's not previewing some heretofore unseen production model, and it's got all the same boring action as modern action films with fake car-chase scenes so over the top they're just mundane. How many times can we watch a car leap off a bridge, enter orbit, fix a satellite, re-enter the atmosphere, stop at Taco Bell and then land on a Persian rug? The Knight Rider debut had 13 million viewers, which is comparatively pretty high for fiction shows (but a fraction of what American Idol gets), but much like initial car interest, new TV shows often do well the first time, then their ratings fall off a cliff. Worst of all, this "futuristic" car isn't even that cool. If they really wanted to appeal to the male youth demo, why not have KITT be an Evo instead of a Mustang? Oh right, because Knight Rider is a giant commercial.

It's no secret that The New York Times hearts "congestion pricing" (not "Congestion Charging" as that sounds like a tax). As the deadline for scarfing major matching funds from the feds approaches, the Old Gray Lady is getting hysterical; for them. The editorial begins with a hosanna for The City Council and the inescapable, irrefutable benefits of the "pricing" scheme: "The City Council did right by New York City this week and voted to move forward on congestion pricing. If that brave action were enough, we would be cheering the advent of cleaner air, less gridlock and billions of dollars for mass transportation." The downside? None. And the villain preventing "pricing?" "Sheldon Silver, the Assembly speaker, has been his usual reticent self… Mr. Silver also asked for the City Council to approve the plan first, providing cover for state legislators to follow suit. Now it is Mr. Silver’s turn. He needs to schedule congestion pricing for a floor vote this week while there is still time to meet the federal deadline." So Silver's covered his ass. What's the holdup? Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that there are hundreds of thousands of motorists/taxpayers who see "pricing" as a cash grab disguised as a P.C. boondoggle. Nah. Couldn't be. 

It's not shocking that Jay Leno was the first guy NBC called to front their version of Top Gear. Leno's the biggest auto enthusiast in showbiz on this side of the pond, and like any good gearhead he loves the show's no-holds-barred, enthusiast approach. But Leno thinks that Top Gear won't work on American TV, and he penned a column for the Sunday Times of London where he says so– Jeremy Clarkson style. The American version of Top Gear was pitched to Leno by an unnamed honcho (who didn't know the name of the show) as ""Well, like, one week you build a car that flies and the next week you make a car that goes under water." Leno knows how Clarksonian slams go over on networks where the sponsor is king. "When Jeremy rips into some sponsor such as Ford or Chrysler, well, that's the last time they sponsor that show. Then what you have is 'the meeting' after the show, where they tell him to tone it down. That's just not what they do at Top Gear." Fearing a lethal combo of stunts, advertainment and a firm pair of editorial handcuffs, Leno passed on the job offer. "Cars are my hobby. Television is my job," says Jay. "For me, my great release from any sort of pressure is to go to my garage." And who can blame him? As great as Jay would be as an American Jeremy Clarkson, we would hate to see America's gearhead end his public love affair with the automobile over "that meeting." [Hit tip to QuasiMondo and AutoBlog for the link]

In a refreshing break with tradition, Patrick Bedard at Car and Driver admits to a lingering skepticism about the Malibu's glowing introductory reviews.  There's just a wee bit of history that informs his doubts: forty years of glowing reviews by C/D of pre-production GM cars that failed to life up to their hype. The most notorious example cited was the gusher of praise heaped upon the notorious X-bodies (Citation, etc.) based upon "specially prepped" pilot cars provided by GM. Although the Malibu managed a third place finish in C/D's recent comparo of sedans, Bedard admits that his employer's intro of GM's latest "import killer" might have (once again) raised hopes to unrealistic levels. The truth feels good, doesn't it Patrick?

As the latest GM Death Watch predicted, the GM apologists are getting warmed-up. Note to The Big 2.8's PR departments: hire the Detroit News' headline writer. Better yet, don't. Why risk losing such a public champion? After all, there is no evidence that GM, Ford and Chrysler ARE successfully clinging to their U.S. market share. Or WILL cling. And while you're wondering who to thank for cutting the words "try to" from the headline, it's best to keep scribe Sharon Terlep happy. Ms. T starts, helpfully enough, by moving the goal posts: "But preventing foreign-based rivals from stealing more buyers will be crucial to putting Detroit's automakers in a good position once sales eventually rebound." And then she trots out Michael Robinet, vice president of global vehicle forecasts for CSM Worldwide. "Robinet said GM is likely in the best position to hang on to market share with a string of popular new products such as the Chevrolet Malibu, Cadillac CTS sports sedan and the Buick Enclave crossover." None of which are conquesting transplant buyers or setting the sale charts on fire; all of which are the GM turnaround poster girls. And just because GM may be in the best position relative to Ford and Chrysler doesn't make it a good position relative to say, Toyota. Or Honda. Or Nissan. Or Hyundai. Or Lexus. Or… 

Move over, Christine– you're so last century.  Stephen King's furious Fury is being replaced by a hybrid. Variety reports Voltage Pictures is beginning production of "Hybrid," a horror flick "about a female mechanic in a Chicago police garage who spends a night of terror with a hybrid car." (No, I'm not making that up.) They don't give much more information about the movie except it's budgeted at $10m and is shooting around Regina, Saskatchewan. Nor do they say which hybrid is the objet terrible or how it goes about its evil business. Anyone want to make any suggestions on how a predatory Prius or internecine Insight would go about terrorizing its hapless (and oh so very cliché) female victim?

TTAC is often accused of torturing prose in the name of… showing-off in a smarmy-ass, we're trying too hard to be funny kinda way. We prefer to think of it as cutting edge infotainment, part of the "TTAC School of Automotive Criticism." Of course, that's about as pretentious as it gets. Unless you happen over to The Old Gray Lady for Ezra Dyer's psychographic breakdown of Scion's recent model moves. "The old xB was like a newly arrived Japanese exchange student who dresses like Max Headroom and pulls live sea urchins out of his lunch bag, blissfully naïve about his lack of assimilation. The new xB is like the same kid six months later, still unquestionably the product of a different culture, but now self-conscious of that fact and beginning to temper his perceived eccentricities with trips to the Hollister store and the occasional McRib sandwich for lunch." Translation: the xB's been assimilated– and not in a good way (a fact that's been well and truly documented hereabouts). I do like Dyer's xD vs. Matrix comparo leading-up to this mondo-metaphor. "Driving an xD versus a Matrix doesn’t mark you as antiestablishment any more than wearing an Old Navy sweater instead of one from the Gap." Now that's funny! 

I've got more reason to hate Edmunds than anyone at TTAC. After all, they recruited me away from both here, Jalopnik and a good day job, then 4.5 days later fired me for having an unpaid speeding ticket (55 mph in a 35 mph) and saying dirty words on my old movie review site. A month later, I was contacted by an Edmunds recruiter and asked if I was still in the job market, as they were hiring for an Associate Editor. The very same position I was canned from. Talk about piling it on. Another Edmunds employee (that I stayed friendly with) said one of the rumors floating around the office was that I was fired for a DUI. Which is not only totally false, but in this business a death sentence. So, I don't like them very much. However, there ain't nothing wrong with taking a Nissan GT-R out and seeing what it can do. First of all, high speed hijinks are why people read about cars. It's the vicarious experience, stupid. Seriously– I owe the IRS $3,000 because of all the money I make writing about cars and I can't even get into a GT-R, let alone run one (nearly) flat out. Second, since our dear leader admitted to traveling faster than 170 mph in a $400k Porsche. Is RF admitting that video is more relevant than text? Thirdly, since when is speed dangerous? Especially in the hands of an experienced driver, such as Ed Hellwig? As Clarkson said after showing the video of Hammond's 300+ mph crash, "And remember, speed kills."

I know we're not exactly safe on the moral high ground here. Eagle-eyed readers will be sure to scan TTAC's archives for any and all admissions that the reviewer drove at extra-legal speeds. (My entirely fictional take on the Porsche Carrera GT.) But it's clear from Edmunds' blog of their current road trip that they have no compunctions telling the world that they're driving the new Nissan GT-R at monumental speeds on public roads. The "Making Time" video of the GT-R's speedo shows Senior Writer Ed Hellwig pushing the car to somewhere between 165 and 170mph on a Western highway. In fact, the blog contains numerous off-hand (if not downright boastful) references to law-breaking velocities, including a flippant description of getting pulled-over for [a reported] 91mph. There's a video of Bonneville Salt Flats' hoonage sans helmet with the comment "that was only 130." I know many of you will view any objections to this type of journalism as sanctimonious codswallop, but doesn't the fact that impressionable teens idolize the GT-R oblige Edmunds to show a bit more journalistic responsibility? And aren't they criminally liable for that video?

We don't usually crib from The Car Connection (TCC), thanks to an ancient feud involving TTAC's call for automotive websites to publicly declare their junketeering and press fleetage in their posts (a call that Edmunds kinda sorta answered). But credit where credit's due: the guys have stumbled upon a true jewel of a YouTube clip. This ad is more than just "I can't turn away from the weight challenged guy" fascinating. It represents a tacit admission from a car dealer that la règle du jeu have changed. Of course, we don't know if the Clay family dealerships put their fine words into practice, but they are the right words. And the ad doesn't scream or try to sell on price. We applaud Clay for their, uh, courage and [once again] ask TCC to tell their readers when they're sucking on the manufacturers' tit– although this is probably not the best time to use that metaphor.

Although this story about the fracture of the Antarctic's Wilkins ice shelf isn't strictly car-related, TTAC's Best and Brightest are well aware that global warming is the intellectual justification for draconian CO2 tailpipe regulations. As far as The New York Times is concerned, the "broken ice" is proof positive that humans are warming the planet. Needless to say, something must be done (but not about the fracture, silly reader)! "Nothing dramatizes the urgency of global warming quite like a fracture of this scale. There is nothing to be done about a collapsing polar ice sheet except to witness it. It may be too late to stop the warming decay at the boundaries of Antarctic ice, yet there is everything to be done. Humans can radically change the way they live and do business, knowing that it is the one chance to find a possible limit to radical change in the natural world around us."  Make no mistake dear Pistonheads, your non-hybrid anything is directly in The Old Gray Lady's– and like-minded regulators– crosshairs.