In tune with the times, automakers are making their vehicles easier to recycle. But is this effort making the vehicles less durable?  Look at the designs Toyota put into the Prius to make it easy to dismantle for recycling (to comply with the Japanese recyclability laws). Wiring connections that come loose when you pull on them? Soundproofing held in place with a few “ultrasonic spot welds” instead of glue? Reading lights secured with bent metal clips instead of screws? Instrument panels made so they can be pulled out easily? With design features like this you have to wonder about the vehicles’ durability and wonder what other manufactures are doing—-especially when you combine “easy to disassemble” with the beancounters’ mantra of “cheap to build.”

The Economic Times of India reports that Tata is considering offering knock-down kits of its Nano microcar and allowing franchisees to offer the world’s cheapest car as a private-label brand. The move is being considered as Tata’s dedicated Nano plant is still ramping up to its 350k unit annual production level, and the company is still having a hard time filling demand. Can’t you just see twelve-packs of Nanos at Costco?

The Guardian reports that in the first 9 months of 2009, Volkswagen/Porsche made 4.4 million cars whereas Toyota made 4 million. Naturally, the majority of VW’s growth has come from the area which is growing even faster than VW, China. But the lads from the Middle Kingdom weren’t the only modes of growth for Volkswagen. The Wolfsburg warriors were also beneficiaries of European stimulus packages (A.K.A: Cash for Clunkers) where Volkswagen have large market share (Germany, UK, etc). Charity really does begin at home!
Read More >

A US District Judge has ruled that South Carolina’s proposed “I Believe” license plate (modeled on the already-banned Florida model, above) violates the First Amendment’s establishment clause.

GM CEO Fritz Henderson’s promises of independence for Opel made the right noises, but they carefully avoided any discussion of the actual role GM envisions for its German division within its global strategy. The latest updates seem to indicate that GM will keep Opel for its engineering expertise, but that the brand will be subordinate to Chevy’s global ambitions. Henderson delivers the slapdown [via Reuters]:

Opel is a regional brand and I don’t see that changing. That doesn’t mean I’m closed to ideas about how it can be used elsewhere; but the measure of the Opel brand’s success will be Europe, because if you don’t win here all the discussion of exports will be irrelevant

Read More >

TTAC Commentator Volvo writes:

Sajeev, today in a parking lot I was approaching a new Toyota Avalon from the side and at first thought I was seeing a recent Chrysler product. It had the bottom of the window about shoulder high to the passengers and the windows seemed rather short. As I walked through the lot I saw that many of the newer cars had that same look.  When I was a child it was called “chopped” and seemed to be a favorite way to customize post war Buicks. It went away until the early millennial Chrysler products (300 series as an example) and I hear it referred to as the “thug” look. The look now seems to be expanding across many manufactures’ lines.  Why is this? Fashion, safety, or efficiency? Wikipedia says it started in the late 40’s with Salt Flat racers to reduce aerodynamic drag by lowering the car’s profile. It then became popular as a Kustomizing look. I have not spent any time in these vehicles. How is the outward visibility? Do you have information or an opinion on this subject?
Read More >

GM’s government-appointed Chairman of the Board was out and about last night, speechifying at Texas Lutheran University. Ed Whitacre used the occasion to plea for the “modification” of Pay Czar Kenneth’s Feinberg’s pay caps. To recap the caps, the nationalized automaker’s top 25 executives took a 31 percent hair cut since joining the federal payroll. Aside from CEO Fritz “Opel Eyes” Henderson, that is, who had his cash compensation trimmed by just 25 percent (from $1.26 million to a paltry $950,000). Leaving only one other unnamed GM executive—cough, transparency, cough—who will “earn” more than $500,000 cash money for 2009. ‘Cause $500,000’s the new limit. And Ed’s not happy about that. “To find top-level people where you need them, that’s a more difficult thing to do at that salary level,” Whitacre said. “I don’t think [the caps] will be lifted, but hopefully they’ll be modified.” Now there’s a man who knows the value of politics. As for the value of GM stock, same deal. Or, in this case, no deal.

Read More >

Rhode Island Governor Donald Carcieri (R) on Monday vetoed legislation that would have imposed privacy restrictions on the use of E-ZPass toll transponder data. The scuttled bill also included a ban on schools and government agencies from using the same Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) transponder chips to track schoolchildren. Carcieri focused on the positive aspects of tracking children in his veto message. “Why would the General Assembly therefore place restrictions on the use of this technology as an option for all students?” Carcieri wrote. “In certain circumstances, it may be helpful for schools to have the ability to quickly identify where each of their students is located… Such circumstances may include weather-related natural disasters, terrorist or criminal events or even a need for use during field trips and outside school activities.”

Read More >

Responding to TTAC commentator Ohsnapback, Ford’s Communications rep defended his employer’s turnaround plan. “At Ford we have never said that we have won the battle already,” Jay Ward wrote. “Just that we are making considerable progress against our plan. You are right that the job is not done, but the evidence so far is overwhealmingly [sic] positive.” So far, so PR. And then . . . “We are managing our debt and working hard to pay it off. We are also going to pay back our loans unlike other companies (not just automotive – how about the banks while we are on the subject).” It’s a blunt and entirely accurate appraisal of GM and Chrysler’s chances of returning the government’s $72 billion (plus) “investment” in the failed domestic automakers. Ward goes on to underline Ford’s official position that its $10 billion no-to-low interest, 25-year “retooling” loan from the Department of Energy does not constitute a government bailout. ” . . . we did shun bail out money. We accepted government loans available to all auto manufacturers both domestic and foreign. We have committed to paying these back and I fail to see how we can be critisised [sic] for that.” And just in case you thought the attack on GM and Chrysler’s mega-suckle was a slip of the tongue, Ward makes a second strafing run. “If everyone else pays back every penny that Uncle Sam has ‘loaned’ them, I will eat my Mustang and my Flex.” Jay’s cars are safe. His ability to post on TTAC without interference from The Glass House Gang? Not so much.

There’s a backlash a brewing over Chrysler’s decision to axe its EV and hybrid program. The move makes sense from an business point-of-view; the company doesn’t have enough money to chase sky pie. Politically, it’s all kind of nuts. Lest we forget—and even the normally automotively absent-minded USA Today doesn’t—ChryCo trotted-out alt power vehicles to secure some $12.5 billion (plus) in federal bailout bucks. And while the zombie car company will import the fuel-efficient Fiat 500 to trigger a hidden-at-the-time clause which surrenders more ChryCo control to Fiat upon selling a new, high mileage vehicle in the U.S., that precious little jewel is NOT what the democratic party’s four-wheeled-oriented tree huggers had in mind. Surely pretending to continue develop the battery-powered vaporware would have been the better bet. That way, when Chrysler returns to the federal trough, they could have played the green card. Now? Fuhgeddaboutit. Which only leaves the jobs card, vs. popular sentiment against more bailout bucks. Methinks the move to kill the ENVI program means that Chrysler is doomederer than before. You?

You’ve got to wear some serious blinders to believe that New GM is in on course for that magic day when they de-nationalize themselves and return the U.S. taxpayer’s $52 billion (plus) “investment.” And Canada’s $10.5 billion, eh? In fact, Board Chairman Ed Whitacre just de-committed the company to a 2010 deadline for same. Still, GM and its camp followers have been in denial so long they’re in denial even when they’re telling the world they’re out of denial. Inside Line columnist Karl Brauer illustrates the conundrum: “Let me make one thing clear in the second sentence of this column. I am not saying GM has already pulled off a successful turnaround. But events of the last few weeks have established a momumental [sic] realization (at least for me): I think it’s possible GM might actually pull off a successful turnaround . . . And, as recently as four weeks ago, I commented that — despite GM’s latest rallying cry of ‘Let the best car win’ — I wasn’t convinced GM is offering the best cars on the market. I’m still not convinced GM offers the best cars available, but they do offer the widest range of really good cars I’ve seen from the company in my lifetime.” So what inspired Karl’s almost kinda maybe sorta don’t quote me on this ever faith that American’s nationalized automaker kinda maybe sorta might possibly potentially turnaround its miserable fortures? The new Medusa-class GMC Terrain, of course!

Read More >

Can you tell the difference between one of these:

and one of these?

Read More >

I have always had a soft spot for the post-war late 40s Detroit automobile look which looked eerily like the pre-war early 40s Detroit look. You can’t send Cadillacs into combat zones and DeSotos made poor amphibious assault vehicles, so Detroit became lead manufacturer for the war effort in 1941. Forget cars, the free world needed Sherman tanks until 1945. People just wanted cars in 1947 and supply fell well behind demand for the North American auto manufacturers. The 1947 market conditions must seem like a long lost beautiful dream for the former Big Three in 2009. But enough with the history lesson, I had a chance to test drive a very well preserved 1947 Dodge Regent with 38,000 original miles on it and I leapt at the opportunity. The car was a time capsule; complete with rear suicide doors, front and back vent windows instead of air conditioning, and human arms instead of signal lights.

Read More >