I was a little taken aback by the new Mercedes SL65 AMG Black Series' 661hp. I remember when my M5's 400hp was considered excessive. These days, German uber-brutes' horsepower and torque figures are higher than Jeff Spicoli. Obviously, the numbers have no relevance to anything whatsoever. But the whole "how much power does anyone really need anyway" has never been more important– what with CAFE regulations demanding 35mpg fleet averages by 2020. Tom and Ray addressed the question today, when an F-150 refugee obsessed about the power of a Ford Focus vs. a Nissan Sentra. Ray reckons "If you're like most people, and usually drive alone or with one other passenger, and death-defying highway stunts aren't a regular part of your routine, almost any four-cylinder car will provide adequate power." True?

The breakup of Chrysler has begun. It’s been done quietly, in the open, but under obnubilating nomenclature. That last phrase says it all. Why lie when you can make the truth so damn confusing? While Cerberus denies imminent sell-off, a cadre of automotive executives has Chrysler on a hook, passing around a felt tip pen. In fact, a pre-break up party is the only way of explaining some of the crazy-ass deals the three-headed dog has been fetching lately.

To wit: April 15. Chrysler and Nissan agree to build big vehicles for each other. Nissan will make a small, fuel-efficient car for Chrysler, shoring-up a hole they created by letting the once successful Neon whither and die. This makes sense, kind of, for the dog.  Chrysler has no small car in a blooming small car market. 

Nissan, on the other paw, generates a new competitor for itself. The Versa and Sentra are performing well in the new $4.25 a gallon US. But not as well as Honda’s Fit or Civic, or Toyota’s Corolla.  So let’s see… if you are in third place, what’s the best thing to do? Take a lesson from the leaders and refine your product? Or, take a lesson from the guys running in the opposite direction and badge engineer your current cars into vapor?

And that’s just half the deal. Chrysler’s going to build a new full-size truck for Nissan. Who the what now?  Chrysler’s truck business fell 48.1 percent in June. It’s off 30.4 percent for the year, and last year wasn’t that great. Nissan wants a piece of that? Doesn’t Nissan already have a full-size truck?  Built in Canton, Mississippi? Yeah, let’s ditch that for a Ram knock-off from Saltillo, Mexico. 

Again, let Toyota keep working their platform till they get it right. It’s foolish when you can just go buy a bunch of Dodges. That’s supposing that you need a full-size truck on your lots in the first place, which is debatable when you’ve made it from 1914 to 2004 without one.

Exactly how much of Renault – Nissan’s resurgence can be attributed to CEO Carlos Ghosn’s brilliance is always up for discussion. It’s tough to find someone who says he’s outright stupid, though. Most reports label him smart. Ghosn says the Chrysler deal will save millions in development costs and provide more efficient use of manufacturing capacity. It’s the kind of statement that seems to make sense– until you place it in context. The American market has contracted, the dollar is down against the everything and trucks are no one’s growth potential. 

Ghosn also said he wants a third, preferably North American, leg for his stool. He played with GM two years ago, but that went the way of the Datsun. Nissan and Chrysler forged a transmission deal in 2004 and announced a Versa re-badge for South America back in January. He’s been trying to form a backroom mega manufacturer for years. Ghosn doesn’t want trucks. He wants inroads.

Nissan is not the only “strategic partnership” with a knife and fork, waiting until everyone is seated. Chrysler builds the Routan for Volkswagen (a match made in purgatory.) They buy hybrid systems from General Motors to disguise Durangos and Aspens as modern vehicles. Chrysler has some kind of deal with Chery Motors, though its importance outside of China is unclear. They’ve also had talks with Mahindra & Mahindra. (Although who hasn’t, really.)

Chrysler has lost billions of dollars for its canine overlords, none of who got into the car business to make cars. They want to make money. Exactly how long they are going to wait for a profit is an X in the equation. Anyone looking at current sales figures and all the new product Chrysler’s not preparing can tell you positive cash flow is years away. As opposed to slicing off branches, divisions and units, which can serve-up cash tomorrow.

It is easier to sell to people with whom you are already doing business. If your plant is tooled-up to build Nissan Titans, why not become a Nissan Titan plant? Getting a hold of 3,700 Chrysler dealers across the heartland of America is, conceivably, a good idea for someone who needs a U.S. presence. OK, maybe not all of the Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep shops. But about 1400 stores might look tasty. 

VW wants to increase North American sales by a billion percent. In this economy, if you want to sell cars in the States, you better build them in the states. Yes, VeeDub’s looking to cut a deal down south. Meanwhile, anyone got a Sebring plant they’re not using?

Cerberus can tout all the synergistic original equipment manufacturing global positioning alliances it wants. The lines will have been drawn. Dotted lines. As in, cut here. 

Honda got out of the supercar game when they discontinued the NSX in 2005. However, spyshots and gossip indicate they're about to get reenter the fray. By 2010, HoMoCo's supposed to show us another "New Sports eXperiment." Unfortunately (or not) the newcomer will no longer be mid-engined (I guess they learned that's "sacred territory"). Instead, the engineers will opt for the "GT approach," aiming their range-topper at the Lexus LF-A, Nissan GT-R, and (with some luck) European GTs. Camouflaged test vehicles show a sharp nose and dynamic side-line. The whole assembly reminds me in silhouette and proportions of the LF-A. I can say the same for the NA V10 engine. Let's just hope it doesn't turn out to be another "Not So eXotic". 

Setting aside the fact that an indeterminate number people buy hybrids for reasons other than saving money (green props, emissions, etc.), what about Ye Olde Hybrid premium? Where are we on that score these days, what with $4 the new $1.50 down at the pump? NADAguides has done a little number crunching on that score. They reckon "only a handful of hybrid cars make financial sense for a consumer who buys a new car every five years." Warning that miles driven and local gas prices are significant variables, NADA conclude that the following gas – electric cars recoup their "extra" cost within the five-year time frame (presented in order of fastest recoupage to slowest): Toyota Camry Hybrid, Chevrolet Malibu Hybrid, Nissan Altima Hybrid, Toyota Prius, Honda Civic Hybrid, Cadillac Escalade Hybrid (just kidding). NADA's press release gives us a big ass chart of local gas prices and uses EPA stats and manufacturers' MSRP. But they don't make mention of the single largest expense of car ownership: depreciation. And here's a question: to what "gas equivalent" did they compare the Prius?

Everyone in the car biz knows that June was a catastrophic month for the U.S. new car market. Total sales dropped by 18.3 percent. The big change this time 'round: it wasn't just light trucks that took it on the chin. Car sales received some body blows, as well. If you're an auto industry exec [still] living in denial, it's best to stop here. If not, read 'em and weep. [NB: As per TTAC policy, sales numbers not adjusted for "sales days."] 

Family Cars

As SUV refugees seek car-shaped shelter, there were some big winners in June. Sales of the Chevy Malibu* rose by an astounding 73.4 percent over last June, up 31.2 percent year to date (YTD). Honda's Accord chalked-up a 37.3 percent gain for the month, up 12.9 percent YTD. Ford's Fusion finished the month 18.4 percent ahead of last June, up 11.7 percent YTD. Meanwhile… Chrysler's once-proud full-size sedan continues to tank; 300 sales dropped 61.6 percent from last June, down 36.5 percent YTD. And surprise: the Toyota Camry took a hard hit, dipping 10.8 percent below last June, posting a 0.3 percent loss for the year.  

Compacts

The Chevy Cobalt was another winner for GM, up 21.6 percent for the month and 18.5 percent YTD.  The Dodge Caliber was another loser for Chrysler, down 43.6 percent for the month and down 0.5 percent YTD. Worryingly, Ford's Focus dropped 5.5 percent in June. But it's still 27.6 percent ahead of last year. The Toyota Corolla** continues strong sales, up 15.6 percent on month. Yet it still trails last year by 3.8 percent. Honda's Civic* finished the month 9.5 percent ahead of last June and 17.9 percent ahead of last year. The Sentra didn't do as well for Nissan.  It was down nine percent on month, struggling to finish the first half of the year up 3.5 percent.

Subcompacts

Honda's fuel-efficient Fit was a big winner. Sales leaped 78.2 percent ahead of last June, finishing the semester up 67.4 percent. Nissan's Versa finished the month up 17.4 percent for June and 20.7 percent ahead YTD. GM's entry in this genre ran out gas. Sales of their Korean econobox Aveo were down 19.7 percent; down 1.7 percent YTD. Toyota's Yaris also lost ground, ending June down 7.5 percent; though staying 39 percent ahead YTD. 

Trucks

Brace yourself. Chevy's Silverado* sales tumbled by 23.7 percent on the month, 25.6 percent YTD. Dodge's Ram fell 48.1 percent in June, down 30.4 percent for the first six months.  Ford's F-Series sales dropped by 40.5 percent from June '07, ending the first two quarters down 22.7 percent. The Toyota Tundra , which had posted sales gains for the first quarter, finished the second quarter down 52.9 percent from last June; down 7.6 percent YTD. The Texas-built Tundra may soon drop below 2006's sales line.

Truck-Based SUVs

Chevy's Tahoe* showed a surprising gain from May (fleet sales?), adding about 2.5k units to the tally. finishing the month "just" 9.8 percent below last June. However, Tahoe sales are still down 26.6 percent YTD. The Dodge Durango continued its descent into oblivion, dropping a massive  67.3 percent in June, down 48.4 percent on the year.  The Ford Explorer showed an equally abysmal June, losing 52 percent from last June and 33.2 percent from last year.  Toyota's Sequoia continued its death-defying growth, surging by 25.1 percent in June, showing a 28.8 percent gain YTD.

Crossovers

The crossover bubble's burst. Thanks to a slow start last year, GMC's Acadia is up 8.5 percent on the year. But June sales fell off a cliff, down 40.1 percent from last June. Ford's Edge also dropped in June, this time by 19.9 percent. Robust sales earlier this year puts it 16.9 percent ahead of last year– for now. Toyota's woes continued, with Highlander* sales down 38.9 percent in June and 5.2 percent compared to 2007. The new Honda Pilot wasn't exactly pulling them in either; sales were down 29.8 percent for the month and 16.7 percent YTD.

Prius

Toyota's Prius dropped for the second month in a row. Due to short supplies and high demand worldwide, stateside sales are down 33.7 percent from last June. Sales drops in May and June pulled its year-to-date sales to 3.2 percent below last year. Toyota plans to produce 450k Priora in 2008; they've already sold 91.4k of them in North America alone so far this year. So look for their sales numbers to remain relatively low, in spite of growing demand.

By Manufacturer

GM's Hail Mary end-of-month 0% financing deal helped stave off a total rout. The General managed to finish June a "mere" 18.2 percent below last June's pace, down 16.3 percent for the year. Toyota's performance was June's shocker. ToMoCo ended the month 21.4 percent below June '07 (well below GM's dismal performance), dropping 6.8 percent on the year. Meanwhile, Chrysler sales fell by a staggering 35.9 percent for the month. ChryCo's trailing last year's sales by 22 percent. Ford was down 29.5 percent for June, 14.5 percent YTD. Honda managed to finish the month relatively unscathed, showing a 1.1 percent increase, with a 4.1 percent increase year to date.

Looking Ahead

July's misery may well eclipse June's. GM ran their 0% financing deal for the first week of the month, so they've up you-know-where without a you-know-what (small car?). Ford, Chrysler and Toyota are all offering incentives of varying sizes, particularly on the trucks and SUVs nobody wants. At what point will the deals become sweet enough to overcome the fuel bill? The sales numbers show we aren't there yet. As fuel prices climb, or even just hold steady, as the Fed declares that the economic gloom will extend well into '09, it's clear we're still a long way from the bottom of this combination of a violent contraction and a wholesale shift in product preference.

*Includes hybrids
** Includes Matrix

Click here for June's market share numbers 

Guess what? SUVs are dead and gone, nearly buried. Goodbye, nice knowing ya! When the future business case histories are completed, the research will show that while some people bought big boys to compensate for small johnsons or to venture off pavement, others purchased SUVs because they were a lot like station wagons. Sure we have CUVs (crossovers) to (kinda) plug the gap. But here's the thing, putting a sedan up on stilts adds weight — a lot of weight. Turning a 4-door into a 5-door? Not so much. A top spec Nissan Murano weighs in at 4,130 pounds whereas a fully optioned Altima sedan is just 3,292 lbs. 838 pounds of flabola. Of course, there's no Altima wagon, but we can look at Subaru. A Legacy 2.5 GT Limited (with auto) weighs 3,490 lbs. Compare that to the essentially identical Outback 2.5 XT Limited's 3,605 lbs. That's just 115 pounds, the weight of a healthy teenage girl. For fun, a Tribeca weighs 4,129 pounds. A slushbox Impreza 4-door weighs 3,131 pounds. The 5-door? The exact same (though… Subaru's website may be mistaken). Long story short, wagons offer the same amount of practical utility as CUV/SUVs and are inherently better on gas. Yet I don't see a single Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, Chevy Malibu, Nissan Altima, Ford Fusion or Mazda 6 wagon. Not anywhere. Any thoughts?

Japan has laws mandating the size of your waistline. And now the auto companies are slimming down their cars–any way they can. Automotive News [sub] reports Nissan plans to reduce its fleet's average weight by 15 percent by 2015 (from 2005 levels). Toyota is looking for a 10 percent loss. Mazda wants to pare 220 lbs. from each of its new models. Honda's trimming down (2008 Accord notwithstanding), but hasn't publicized any goals. Automakers are doing what they can to lose weight, from using aluminum and plastic body panels to re-engineering existing components to make them lighter. For example, the next Prius' electric motor will be one-sixth as heavy as the current powerplant; the batteries will weigh half as much. Honda's even going so far as to shave off slivers of steel between spot welds on the Fit to save a few ounces overall. Adding lightness is an expensive business, but with existing safety regulations and new fuel efficiency standards, there may be no choice.

And BOY did they sneeze. Sales of the light trucks made at Nissan's Canton, Mississippi plant (Titan pickup, Armada/Infiniti QX56 SUV, Quest minivan) have cratered. The Clarion Ledger reports that a switch to Altima production has saved jobs at the five-year-old facility. But local suppliers geared-up for trucks have been hit hard; more than 200 workers have lost their jobs. MINACT/Yates Logistics laid off at least 64 workers, including supervisor Glenn Roberts. A struggling Roberts has "resurrected his resume and applied to dozens of jobs. He parked his gas-thirsty Tahoe and shares his wife's car. He's known by his first name at the WIN Jobs Center, where he goes twice a week for four or five hours at a pop." PK U.S.A. "downsized" Dave Taylor, who can't afford to keep his house– or sell it. Tower Automotive dismissed assembly line worker Carlos Johnson. "I pay $100 a week for day care. I've got my house note at $500 a month, car note at $350 a month, and insurance is $150. Bills can't care less whether you have a job or not; they're going to be rolling in. Unemployment is what, $215 or $230 a month, that's not enough to live on. It's enough to pay for your gas so you can go around and find another job."

Truck-heavy Detroit is in a world of hurt. Buyers have abandoned their former cash cow; light truck sales dropped 28.4 percent last month. July's numbers will be worse. August's worserer. And speaking of what's-blacker-than-black, even the remaining formerly bounteous bovines are looking distinctly Mary-Kate and Ashley. The Detroit Free Press takes a break from their barbecue to bring news that the genre's profits have dropped by half. Or more. "Many of the nation's automakers [read: all of the nation's automakers] have been jacking up the deals into territories not seen since the summer 'employee pricing' craze of 2005. Last month, automakers offered an average of $6,580 off pickups and $5,850 off midsize SUVs, according to Autodata Corp. of Woodcliff Lake, N.J., a private firm that estimates incentive spending. Automakers do not report that number publicly." Why would they? Six-plus-grand is the average. Of course, there will be a reckoning. Brian Johnson, an analyst with Lehman Brothers: "We believe that GM and the industry will see a large payback in the coming months." Ya think?

Nissan's numbers are finally available, and they're not looking hot, either. Unadjusted ('cause that's how we roll) June sales are down 17.7 percent overall, with trucks taking a 37.9 percent hit. Bright spots included the new Rogue CUV and a slight bump in Versa sales. Most cars held their own, with single digit percentage sales drops. Exceptions: the outgoing Maxima (uh, okay) and the incoming Murano (uh-oh, down 24 percent). Truck and minivan sales drops were impressive and as bad or worse than the other top six. Frontier led the way (-58.1 percent), followed by Quest (-62.3 percent), Armada (-63.4 percent), Xterra (-68.3 percent), Titan (-71.4 percent), and Pathfinder (-71.7 percent trailing. [Pause for picking your jaw up off the floor.] As bad as these numbers appear, the horrifying percentages were offset by Nissan's relatively small sales volumes; their truck line sold just 19K units last month. Still, Nissan has some production shifting to do, just like everyone else.

Autoblog: "You're going to be reading in the mainstream press about how horrible sales were in the U.S. during June, 2008. Yes, they were bad for many automakers, but consider that there were only 24 selling days last month versus 27 days in June, 2008. This makes comparing raw sales numbers misleading, since there were three fewer days to sell. Thus, as always, all the percentages below represent the change in Daily Sales Rate, i.e. the average number of vehicles sold per day, not the change in raw number of vehicles sold." TTAC joins Automotive News in rejecting this metric. We go by cars sold per month. Period. That said, TTAC got caught-out when Automotive News started with adjusted numbers, then revised to non-adjusted numbers. But no matter how you crunch these stats, they ARE horrible. "Not That Bad Edition"? The idea that any credible news organization would say otherwise is almost as astounding as the chaos afflicting the U.S. new vehicle market. How about this: there are industry players in Detroit who ascribe to Autoblog's Pollyanna philosophy. And while you're thinking about that (or something), Justin and I perform our usual reality check. 

Last we heard, Ford tried to shop Volvo to China's SAIC. Now Automotive News [AN. sub] reports that The Blue Oval Boys are trying to dump sell its troubled Swedish division on to Renault. We now learn that initial talks with Renault began last fall. But those broke down over "price differences" (as in Ford thought Volvo was worth something). Apparently, talks have now resumed. Renault/Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn has said on numerous occasions that he's looking for a partner in the American market. Someone. Anyone. GM? Chrysler? So, why not Volvo? You know, other than the fact the brand's only successful U.S. product– the XC series SUVs– just rolled-over and died. Of course, Ford continues to deny Volvo's on the auction block. "We are focused on improving Volvo's business results," says FoMoCo spinmeister Mark Truby. Meanwhile, AN says that Ford is also talking  with Dongfeng Motor Group. With Ford burning cash, and credit in short supply, expect a Volvo sale as soon as a sufficiently gullible partner is found.

Source Interlink Media owns Motor Trend magazine. Both conglomerate and car mag are heading south, quickly, in a big way. Ad revenues and circulation are in free fall. Motor Trend (MT) is fighting for it survival with glossy pimpatorials for equally doomed advertisers. The August issue features a glossy "special advertising section" for Buick ("Drive Beautiful") and a slick "advertisement" for the Dodge Challenger ("Motor Trend drives the new Dodge Challenger Through Europe"). Meanwhile, the chronically undercapitalized columnist arthur st. antoine takes a whack at a premium car brand: BMW. Huh? 

Start with this: BMW doesn’t advertise in Motor Trend. GMC, Extenze (male enhancement pills), Mercedes-Benz, The Sinclair Institute (“Better Sex for a Lifetime”), MINI, Xomax (male enhancement pills), Infiniti, MAGNA-RX Inc. (male enhancement pills)– but no BMW. You could say with all those pills readers need not buy a BMW– but I couldn’t possibly comment.

Anyway, no feeding hand is bitten, bitte. If MT’s Editor at Large had taken a shot at the Chevrolet Aveo on the mag’s back cover– now with extra hideousness (courtesy of an Audi meets Malibu snout)– I would have been impressed. But he didn’t so I’m not.

“We car journalists are suckers for BMWs. Every model the Bavarian Brand produces is an engineering masterwork, manna for driving enthusiasts, an internal combustion mallet for pummeling comparison-test rivals into humiliated awe. Why even bother to conduct such tests? We’ll choose the machine with the blue-and-white propeller every time. Right?”

Clued-in parsoholics will realize that “Right?” signals st. antoine’s sarcasm. Clued-in pistonheads will realize antoine’s defense comes hot-on-the-heels of Car and Driver’s July comparo, where the mag rated a BMW M3 higher than a Porsche Turbo and Nissan GT-R. Though st. antoine is a former Car and Driver writer, doesn’t he have anything better to do than defend his erstwhile rivals? Apparently not.

“That’s the cliché… But the reality is this: BMW’s supremacy is a myth, one based in part on some historical validity but sustained in recent years largely by a single model, the 3 Series (okay, the new 1 Series seems strong, too). As for the rest of the lineup… where are the superstars? M5 sedan? A thrilling drive, yes, but in its most recent comparo (February 2007) a second-place finisher to the sweeter, sleeker Audi S6.”

Is it me or is st. antoine trying to gum BMW to death? The new BMW M5 blows compared to any car in the entire world that doesn’t have an SMG gearbox. The latterly six-speed manual M5 is OK, and plenty damn quick by any metric, but the Bimmer is a bling-bang-boom travesty when contrasted with its legendary predecessor.

There, that wasn’t so hard was it? And either the 1 Series is strong or it isn’t. It “seems” like a good time for st. antoine to get off the fence. Of course, attacking BMW isn’t really the point of this dietribe [sic]. It’s all about defending MT’s “objectivity” and “integrity” (har-har). Hence st. antoine presents a list of MT comparos Bimmers DIDN’T win within its increasingly tissue-like pages.

And now, a bit of dead horse beating…

“…the iDrive controller remains a poster child of frustration and feature-glut (do you really need a an electronic menu to adjust the airflow from individual vents?), we simply can’t heartily endorse a car– no matter how surgical its steering or smooth its inline six– blemished by that glaring chrome iDrive mole.”

Wow! That’s a LOT of punctuation. But little punch. Critizing BMW for iDrive is like slagging an Escalade for lousy mileage; it’s safe, well-trodden ground. Oh, and in this case, st. antoine's claim of withholding his love for the propeller people's products simply isn't true. st. antoine on the 135i:

“I'm blown away by this little stealth fighter. I can't recall another car that's been more surprising to drive; I expected the 135i to offer solid performance, but it's breathtakingly quick. Refined, too- it's a bona-fide BMW."

Sounds solid to me. Uh, where was I? More importantly, where was st. antoine? Ah, giving the BMW X6 what the Brits call a proper pasting.

“…the X6 is also grotesquely heavy, too small to carry anything, compromised in the back by that free-falling roofline, saddled with iDrive and a needlessly complicated shift lever, and absurdly expensive.”

Finally! st. antoine substantiates his contention that BMW ain’t so big (it’s just tall, that’s all). The paragraph is also a compelling argument that his employer isn't in BMW's pocket. So, a quick twist of the knife and out. Right?

“That BMW’s engineers are gifted goes without saying. As German-born architect Mies van der Rohe once said, though, “Less is more.” Also, “What is this big chrome mole here?”

You gotta admire a writer who can so deftly blend ass-kissing, name-dropping and a non sequitur. Still, at the end of page 24, st. antoine’s quasi-rant provides proof– if proof be needed– that MT is doomed.

After thirty-two years in the media, I know how this works. You take a popular, generally negative story like, say, rising gas prices. You think of a likely trend within the story: the effects of $4 a gallon gas on teenage cruising. Must be down, right? Makes sense, yes? So you find people who can validate the central thesis: teens, teens' parents, cops. You weave the tale with plenty of anecdotes and call it good. In fact, there's only one thing missing from this otherwise boilerplate New York Times feature: facts. "From coast to coast, American teenagers appear to be driving less this summer. Police officers who keep watch on weekend cruising zones say fewer youths are spending their time driving around in circles, with more of them hanging out in parking lots, malls or movie theaters." Note the word "appear." And the reliance on an unspecified number of police officers. To be fair– not always a NYT hallmark– The Grey Lady mentions the possibility that the dearth/death of cruising might have something to do with… something else. "To be sure, the number of teenage drivers nationwide was already on a downturn over the past decade, a trend fueled by tighter state laws governing the hours when teenagers can drive, higher insurance costs and a move away from school-sponsored driver’s education programs to more expensive private driving academies." To be sure, we expect better reporting from America's newspaper of record.

In case you missed it, a GM test engineer named Jim Mero just poppped off a 7:26.4 lap of the famed Nurburgring. This is just weeks after Nissan's GT-R ran the 'Ring in 7:29. What's significant about the ZR1's run: the Chevy did it quicker than the real record holder for production cars, the Pagani Zonda F (7:27). But don't despair– Nissan will soon have a GT-R Spec V with more power and carbon fiber (i.e. faster and lighter) to (probably) dethrone the fastest ever Chevy. And Honda's going to make a push with their new NSX. And Porsche's refreshed 911 Turbo might beat the ZR1. You know Lexus' LF-A will. And my question is: So? Who cares? What difference does it make if car A can go around a stretch of German road faster than car B? Right? But, there's always another hand. The Nurburgring Norschleife is favored by companies looking to tune road cars; the 'Ring offers nearly all possible road condition in one (kinda) convenient seven-mile stretch. Also, the track is in fact open to the public– which makes it much somehow more interesting. I mean, imagine you're hot lapping a billion dollar test mule, you come upon Bergwerk, heel and toe to slow yourself and suddenly come upon some jackass in a GTI having the joyride of his life. How cool is that? Or is it?