I'm sure many TTAC readers will recall the great Audi 5000 "unintended acceleration" legal turmoil of the mid-80's. The legal/media feeding frenzy set Audi sales back by a decade, despite the fact that every case of "unintended acceleration" was found to be caused by human, not mechanical error. Well, those bastions of quality journalism, the Detroit Free Press and Motor Trend blog, are trying to resuscitate the media frenzy, only this time Toyota's to blame for people mistaking the accelerator for their brake pedal. Apparently the NHTSA has received 33 complaints that Toyota Tacomas are driving themselves off the roads, and has launched an investigation into the 2006-2007 model years. "Toyota has said to us they've found nothing wrong with the truck and it's our fault," says one "victim." "They're basically calling us all stupid." Of course, after a crash nobody wants to take responsibility for the fact that they may have hit the gas instead of the brakes, but what is motivating this investigation has nothing to do with the facts of the individual cases. No, the investigation is being spurred by the fact that only four "unintended acceleration" complaints have been logged against non-Tacoma pickups in the period that 33 were logged against the 'yota. "If there were truly human error, there would be a proportional distribution across models," says Clarence Ditlow, head of the Center for Auto Safety in Washington. "It's very difficult to explain how some makes and models have higher numbers of complaints than others absent some flaw in the vehicle." Yes, but it's very easy to prove that your brakes are more powerful than your engine. In fact, if a TTAC reader out there has a Tacoma, perhaps they would do us the honor of standing on the brakes while mashing the accelerator for a few seconds. This should prove fairly simply that "unintended acceleration" is possible only when you are not actually on the brakes.

Sometimes I go overboard making fun of people who drive cars that I don't like. But not this time. Toyota's "Look at us – we're on the Internet" blog has a post about a guy who claims to have converted his Prius to look like a shuttle from Star Trek: The Next Generation. Whereas before he had a car that should have gotten all the chicks, he probably now has to scrape them off the hood of the car. Willie Yee – a psychiatrist! – has painted his Prius (Sharpie?), put on new space-age wheels, and a has a CD with sound effects from Star Trek that makes the sound system display look vaguely Enterprise-ish. Sounds like he really went overboard with the conversion process, which seems about as intense as a four-year-old pimping out his tricycle. So if you see Yee on the road, you don't have to think "A Prius driver… maybe he's a nerd." You'll know he's a nerd. And not a very good one; the blue uniform from Next Generation seasons 4-7 that he wears is for science officers. He wouldn't be allowed to drive. Now who's the king nerd?

March comes in like a lion and leaves like a lamb. As far as auto sales were concerned, the month came in like a dead fish and left like… a pile of dead fish. While the raw sales numbers rose from February's levels, total sales were down by 12 percent compared to March of last year. Year to date (YTD), total sales were off by eight percent. Reflecting higher gas prices, light truck sales dropped by 17.8 percent; car sales "only" sank 5.9 percent. Here's how our individual bellwether models fared…

Pickup Trucks

Between the downturn in construction and the upturn in gas prices, truck sales were dismal. Chevrolet Silverado sales fell 23.5 percent month, down 19.6 percent year-to-date. Ford's F-Series fared worse, ending the month down 23.8 percent; annual sales were down 13.7 percent. The Dodge Ram made the worst showing, losing 31.3 percent on the month and 24.6 percent on the year. The Toyoya Tundra actually showed an increase: up 8.4 percent for the month and 39.7 percent for the year. As noted last month, the current model was new on the market last year; sales were just ramping-up.

Passenger Cars

For the most part, as expected, passenger cars fared better than trucks. The Chevrolet Malibu, was down a bit: 0.4 percent in March. But GM's last Next Big Thing's overall sales are up 16.7 percent over last year's. The Ford Fusion was one of the few models to show an increase for both the month (0.6 percent) and year (0.9 percent). Chrysler's 300 delivered the same [horrendous] performance as the Ram, cratering 29.7 percent for the month and 17.9 percent on the year. While the Toyota Camry is still ahead of last year by 1.1 percent, it finished March down 4.2 percent. Honda's jumbo-sized Accord was only 0.8 percent below last March but still down 5.2 percent year to date.

Truck-based SUVs

SUV's suffered the same fate as pickups. GM ante-penultimate Next Big Thing, the Chevrolet Tahoe, continues to lose ground, dropping 34.2 percent from last March and 26.3 for the year. The Ford Explorer gained a bit from February, but still lost 14.8 percent for the month and 20.4 percent year-to-date. The Dodge Durango continues its death spiral; 38.3 percent below March 2007 and 36.5 percent for the year so far. Surprisingly, The Totoya Sequoia's monthly sales went up 11.2 percent month. Annual sales are up 13.1 percent. However, just like last month, the raw numbers are low. So a difference of just 300 sales constitutes a high jump in the percentages. 

CUVs

CUV sales were a mixed bag in March. The GMC Acadia was still well above last year's sales stats, showing a 29.4 percent gain in March;76.6 percent ahead year to date. The Ford Edge continues its sales growth, ending the month 23.8 percent ahead of last year and up 47.2 percent for the total year. The Toyota Highlander and Honda Pilot didn't fare as well, finishing March down 7.4 percent and 29.1 percent respectively. For the year, the Highlander is up 7.3 percent while Pilot is down 7.8 percent.

Prius

With gas prices at all time highs and still climbing, Toyota's having no problems selling every Prius they can build. In March, sales of the Japanese gas – electric hybrid rose 7.7 percent month above last year. Year-to-date, they're up 8.1 percent. In March, sales of the Civic Hybrid were up 34 percent. Lexus' RX400h sales climbed by 6.7 percent. Camry Hybrid sales rose 34.7 percent (hybridcars.com reports that hybrid version of the Camry outsold the V-6 model in March).

Total Sales

The only word to describe the overall sales picture: "disaster." Whether we're talking about March or year to date, all five manufacturers were below last year's performance. GM dropped 18.7 percent compared to last March, down 10.9 percent year-to-date. Ford sales were down 14.1 percent for the month; so far they're trailing last year by 9 percent. Chrysler was a genuine disaster zone, finishing 19.4 percent below last March, down a total of 15.5 percent year for the year. Toyota's performance was surprisingly off, with a 10.3 percent drop from March 2007, down 5.6 percent on the year so far. Honda— the automaker with the lowest number of pickups and SUVs– was down 3.2 percent for March, minus 0.45 percent year-to-year.

The Future

The immediate future holds little prospect of any relief in gas prices or improvement in the economy.Truck and SUV sales– on which The Big 2.8 business still depends– will continue to fall. Small cars and smaller CUVs will continue increasing their market share. But don't expect any sales miracles. It's shaping up to be a long dry summer, sales-wise.

Bloomberg reports a recent survey that shows Ford's initial quality is at the same level as Toyota's and Honda's. The survey, which ranked problems per 1k vehicles in the first three months of ownership, showed Ford's vehicles scored 1,284 against Toyota's and Honda's "statistically equivalent" 1,250. GM and Chrysler didn't do so well, scoring 1,367 and 1,744 respectively. Of course, Ford will crow about their "achievement" in their "Drive One" ads. What they won't tell you, though, is that Alan Mulally signed the figurative check to RDA Group for performing the survey. That's right folks — Ford bought the survey in which they placed so highly. I vented the editorial spleen when they did the same thing last year, so all I'll say this time is that it didn't seem to help their sales then so I hope they get their money's worth this time.

The Financial Times reports that the UK is following former colony Australia's lead in ordering a government investigation into its flagging auto manufacturing industry. Minister for Business and Enterprise Affairs Baroness Shriti Vadera has put former Ford man Richard Parry-Jones in charge of the 10-member committee charged with tackling the twin challenges of competition from low-cost manufacturing centers and emerging low-carbon technologies. The committee will make recommendations to the government, which has vowed to use "all levers of government, both regulatory and fiscal" to address Britain's moribund auto industry. Once home of a thriving auto industry, with dozens of brands and world-class products, Britain has seen nearly every one of its domestic brands swallowed up by companies from countries like Germany, the United States, India, China and Indonesia. Although nobody expects Britain's car industry to return to its 1960's zenith, here's hoping the Parry-Jones committee comes up with solutions which are a little more inventive than simply writing checks to Toyota.

In our latest editorial on Australia's tanking car industry, I noted that a government report emphasizes future production of large vehicles with green powertrains. The Australian reports that the Aussie government's half-billion dollar green car manufacturing fund could be used to lure production of the next-generation Toyota Camry hybrid down under. Toyota Australia VP Dave Buttner says ToMoCo had been pushing to build a hybrid car here for five years but "policies conducive to investment" (a.k.a. public money) were vital to the plan. The plan seems to convenient to avoid: Aussie politicians get to check of the box next to "build large, green cars" on their bureaucratic checklists, and Toyota gets enough money to offset Australia's high labor costs and strong currency. Oh, and Toyotas actually sell well in the land of Oz as well, especially the Prius, who's sales rose 63 percent last year. So who loses out in all of this? Just Toyota's competitors and Australia's taxpayers.

Although TTAC remains highly cognizant of the difference between carefully-prepared press vehicles and the cars people buy off dealer lots, we are not against press cars or manufacturer's junkets per se. (Nor have we ever been.) Our policy is simple: we declare any and all manufacturers' contributions to our coverage so you can read our copy with your bullshit detector switched-on to maximum sensitivity. Jonny Lieberman's junket-fed X6 review (from Spartanburg) marks an important turning point– at least from the automakers' point-of-view. Longtime readers will recall that the German automaker banned us from their press fleet for dissing the Subaru Tribeca B9 (go figure). So now we're back in their good books; provided they don't take offense to today's review or read that link and have a "they shouldn't have had a V8!" moment. Anyway, the Texas Toyota rep who offered us whips has stopped answering our calls. And TTAC's still on Subaru, Honda and GM's shit list (amongst others). How reassuring is that?

In America, the Rogue is Nissan's compact crossover. The Qashqai (nicknamed Kumquat by Jeremy Clarkson of Top Gear) is the Rogue's overseas fraternal twin (shared DNA with some substantial differences). Nissan is rolling-out a long wheelbase, seven-passenger version of the Cash Guy in the near future; pictures have hit the Internet. Does this development portend a rogue Rogue coming to the U.S. in a stretched version? Probably. Toyota's RAV4 offers a seven-passenger option; or reasons I can't quite grasp, American consumers seem fairly hung-up on the notion of three row vehicles. Nissan, of course, has made no official announcement re: the Rogue. The spinmeisters would probably tell you there are currently no plans to sell a stretched Rogue in North America and that it's always looking at new market segments. Admirers of Turik nomenclature are advised to watch this space.

[Click here for Photobucket Gallery]

Spontaneous road trips are a like a treasure hunt without the clues. The prizes always appear unexpectedly. Like Goldendale’s night-shift police officer. “No, Mr. Niedermeyer, your speed was just fine. But you seem to have your high-beams on. That’s against the law within city limits. But… you’re free to go.” With those words of affirmation, our road trip to Wenatchee resumed. Adrenalin flowing, we were alert to the next roadside attraction. Read More >

Detroit News columnist Scott Burgess has picked-up the proverbial pom-poms on the Chevy Volt's behalf, cheerleading with Nietzschean abandon. "To the hundreds of people working double shifts around the world to make the Volt a reality, every disparaging comment is fodder for the bulletin board. It doesn't defeat them, it inspires them. Somehow, one of the world's largest automakers, facing declining market share, especially in the United States, has a new-found swagger." While it's nice to know that our Volt Birth Watch is doing its bit to help General Motors git 'er done, the word "swagger" sets off that big honking air-horn buzzer they use for basketball games. And if that doesn't do it, GM PR is pushing GM Car Czar Bob Lutz' "challenges of success" story line TTAC identified at its New York Auto Show infiltration: "Thousands more problems could creep up as one solution presents another obstacle. For example, in a car that may not run its gas engine for months at a time, how would GM design it to withstand long periods not running. That also means the gas tank would need special attention to handle fumes normally burnt off by running the engine. 'It's a good problem to have,' Gray said." Meanwhile… "'If I was preparing to produce this car by 2010, I'd be picking out the wood grain on the dashboard by now, not still working on the battery,'" Bill Reinert, national manager of Toyota Motor Corp.'s advanced technology group, told the Los Angeles Times."[thanks to RobKubler for the link]

In GM Death Watch 171, Mr. Farago contends that GM suffers from corporate-grade Attention Deficiency Disorder (ADD). He’s probably right. However, some ADD may be a good thing, if not a necessity, in an automobile company’s culture. Any carmaker operating in this period of uncertainty– recession, 25 percent higher Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, high fuel prices, CO2 emission concerns, and more– would be foolish NOT to invest the time and energy into developing as many alternative solutions as possible.

Yes, GM is definitely moving in several different directions at once. However, I’d also argue that the mandated fuel economy improvements over the coming years (both driven by federal regulations and demands of the marketplace) will require a multi-pronged approach to improving fuel economy/reducing fossil fuel dependence. I don’t think there is any one correct answer about how to get GM’s fleet to 35 miles per gallon.

In addition to fuel cells, hybrids and diesels, GM will also have to do work on lightening its relatively porcine vehicles and improving the economy and refinement of their traditional gasoline-powered engines. Pruning the remaining four-speed automatics from the lineup and replacing them with six speeds, CVTs or DSGs would also incrementally help both fuel economy and performance. Adding gasoline direct injection technology to more engines could also improve both economy and hydrocarbon emissions.

Each little piece of the puzzle gets them a little closer to the magic 35 miles per gallon figure (or 50 mpg if California gets its way).

GM has been (rightfully) criticized in the past for not bothering to make longer-term investments in technologies such as hybrids. Such failure to invest in advanced technologies during the SUV boom of the 1990s in large part led to GM’s need to play catch-up to Toyota’s hybrid juggernaut. Nobody knows exactly what form our personal transport will take in the next decade or two. It seems prudent for GM to try a few different technologies, so they're not left in the dust of a company that was lucky or smart enough to pick the right one to invest in.

General Motors is also a victim of its own historical fits and starts; engineering by press release rings hollow after a few years.

Car enthusiasts are tired of hearing about the Camaro and Volt, neither of which can be purchased, yet are prominently featured in press releases, websites and even advertisements. Nobody believes GM when it says that it will be an environmental leader; how can the same company that builds the Hummer H2 and more full-size pickups and SUVs than any other company on the planet say that with a straight face? 

Because the automaker has very little environmental credibility, it feels the need to overcompensate with five-page advertisements in auto rags about their alt-fuel initiatives, while spending precious R&D resources on future technologies that may or may not come to fruition. But they really don’t have any choice, especially if they want to a) remain viable in a world of $5 gas and b) attempt to change perceptions.

GM is not unique in its shotgun approach to improving fuel economy. Ford, Nissan, Toyota, Mitsubishi and Honda (among others) are either considering or introducing diesels in their trucks (Ford, Nissan and Toyota) or cars (Acura TSX, Mitsubishi), while still developing hybrids (Ford, Toyota and Honda) and hydrogen fuel cells (Honda FCX). The differentiator may be management talent (or a lack of) among these companies. 

The better-managed car companies will manage to juggle all of the irons in the fire successfully, and the others won't.  From that standpoint, I share Mr. Farago's concern.

GM has not yet proven to me, or many others, that it has the capability or resources to follow through on the development of many of these projects.  However, it knows that it has to get the Volt out the door someday at some price, the light duty truck diesel’s development is finished, the two-mode hybrid is on the market, and the company now offers modern six-speed automatics on most of its vehicles. 

Other than the Volt, still left on the to-do list: taking some mass out of its vehicles without sacrificing comfort and safety and continuing with either hydrogen fuel cell development or further electric vehicle (E-Flex) development.

I believe that in the coming years, we’ll see each manufacturer taking a different approach to the issue of reducing CO2 emissions and fuel consumption. The creative ones that execute their strategies successfully will own the market. Those who bet on the wrong technologies will be left gasping for air. I don’t think we’re at the point where we can say that GM is trying too many different things, because we just don’t know what combination of GM’s projects will earn its keep. And then some.

Auto Motor Und Sport reports that Toyota boss Katsuaki Watanabe has told German TV that his company will decide by the end of the year whether or not to introduce an entry-level model for the developing world. Watanabe revealed that Toyota has been working for two years now on development of the entry-level model, but that more work has yet to take place. "Success in developing markets like Brazil, Russia, India and China are the keys to growth for the entire industry," says Watanabe-san. He sees developing markets as an issue of decisive importance to the industry on par with the environment, energy and safety. The "interplay of cost and quality" is the major unresolved issue in the proposed entry-level car, meaning we don't yet know if ToMoCo has the Tata Nano in its sights, or if it is aiming higher to protect the brand's reputation for quality. We'll be watching.

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.

The International Herald Tribune quotes unnamed sources who are "not authorized to comment publicly on the matter" as saying that ToMoCo may double its stake in Fuji Heavy Industries, makers of Subaru vehicles. Toyota currently owns 8.7 percent of Fuji, and would be looking to spend some $295m to raise its stake to 17 percent. "Toyota wants to mitigate the risk of building new plants by utilizing Fuji Heavy's facilities both in Japan and the United States," says Seiji Sugiura, an analyst at HSBC Securities. "Other automakers would also want to reduce risks for each other by boosting ties, even if that wouldn't amount to mergers and acquisitions." According to reports from the Nikkei business daily, Toyota may be looking to subcontract its subcompacts (say that ten times fast) to a Japanese Fuji plant, and jointly develop a sports car and environmentally-friendly technologies. Toyota has said it will not increase its stake in Fuji beyond 20 percent, keeping the relationship with Fuji as a partner rather than a subsidiary.

Chrysler VP (and 37-year Toyota veteran) Jim Press ruffled some feathers at old mother Toyota yesterday when he claimed that the Japanese government had footed "100 percent of the bill" for the development of the Prius powertrain. ToMoCo didn't waste a second refuting the allegation of its former head of North American operations. "I can say 100 percent that Toyota received absolutely no support – no money, no grants – from the Japanese government for the development of the Prius," Toyota spokesman Paul Nolasco tells the AP. The story also notes that while the Japanese government often assists private development projects, particularly for clean energy projects, the collaboration is not typically hidden from sight. That Press' allegation is the first whisper of any public-private cooperation in the development of the Prius could be an indication that he might not be working with all the facts. The irony of all this is that if our own government's massive public-private green car initiative of the nineties, the Project for a New Generation of Vehicles, had produced the Prius, every politician in America would be falling all over themselves trying to claim credit.