Rocky Mountain Driving Experience 2022
Time to get back to reviewing cars. I re-joined the Rocky Mountian Automotive Press and today is the annual Rocky Mountain Driving Experience.
A day full of driving and forming opinions of some of the newest cars on the market
Should be fun.
Time to get back to reviewing cars. I re-joined the Rocky Mountian Automotive Press and today is the annual Rocky Mountain Driving Experience.
A day full of driving and forming opinions of some of the newest cars on the market
Should be fun.
JD Power IQS ranks Detroit ahead of imports for the first time
JDP has released their latest Initial Quality Survey (measuring problems encountered during the first 90 days of ownership) and had one big surprise in store.
While the industry average went down slightly (from 108 problems per 100 vehicles in 2009 to 109 in 2010), this year's results are the first time that the Detroit 3 have come out ahead of imports. The Detroit brands actually improved their quality over last year's results by 4, bringing them to a score of 108. The import brands matched the overall industry average of 109.
Ford was the highest ranked US brand with a score of 93.
JD Power ranks lists the top 3 models in several segments and Ford had a model represented in the top 3 in a dozen segments. They had 3 models that topped their respective segments, tied with Lexus for most top-of-segment honors.
GM had 10 models in the top 3 of their segments.
Chrysler's results were mixed with Ram coming in just shy of industry average with the Dodge car brand (Ram split from Dodge recently, taking the truck lines away from Dodge) coming in as the worst Detroit brand in initial quality.
It is interesting to notice that Toyota's recent troubles have pulled its ranking down significantly falling from 6th place last year to 21st in the 2010 survey. It is significant to mention that IQS has its detractors since any complaint on the survey is listed as a problem (recent high profile examples were Mini dropping low in the list in part due to poor cupholder design). This means that IQS scores can be highly dependent on the level of picky-ness of the customers of a brand during a given year.
Highest in the rankings this year was Porsche with a 83 and lowest went to Land Rover with 170.
While the industry average went down slightly (from 108 problems per 100 vehicles in 2009 to 109 in 2010), this year's results are the first time that the Detroit 3 have come out ahead of imports. The Detroit brands actually improved their quality over last year's results by 4, bringing them to a score of 108. The import brands matched the overall industry average of 109.
Ford was the highest ranked US brand with a score of 93.
JD Power ranks lists the top 3 models in several segments and Ford had a model represented in the top 3 in a dozen segments. They had 3 models that topped their respective segments, tied with Lexus for most top-of-segment honors.
GM had 10 models in the top 3 of their segments.
Chrysler's results were mixed with Ram coming in just shy of industry average with the Dodge car brand (Ram split from Dodge recently, taking the truck lines away from Dodge) coming in as the worst Detroit brand in initial quality.
It is interesting to notice that Toyota's recent troubles have pulled its ranking down significantly falling from 6th place last year to 21st in the 2010 survey. It is significant to mention that IQS has its detractors since any complaint on the survey is listed as a problem (recent high profile examples were Mini dropping low in the list in part due to poor cupholder design). This means that IQS scores can be highly dependent on the level of picky-ness of the customers of a brand during a given year.
Highest in the rankings this year was Porsche with a 83 and lowest went to Land Rover with 170.
New EPA mileage numbers for hybrids
One of the major complaints from consumers about hybrids is that most people can't manage to get anywhere close to the EPA ratings.
Starting for the 08 model year, the EPA is adjusting their mileage numbers to reflect something closer to real-world numbers. Of note is that the testing procedure has not changed - the EPA is basically running the existing numbers through a correction formula to get the new ratings.
Also of note is that the fuel consumption really has not changed. The EPA is merely trying to give consumers a more realistic expectation when they are comparing vehicles.
So, here is what the changes give us (when available, comparable non-hybrid models are also listed). The each set of numbers are city/highway/combined ratings. The first set are the old ratings while the last column are the ratings under the new formula.
Starting for the 08 model year, the EPA is adjusting their mileage numbers to reflect something closer to real-world numbers. Of note is that the testing procedure has not changed - the EPA is basically running the existing numbers through a correction formula to get the new ratings.
Also of note is that the fuel consumption really has not changed. The EPA is merely trying to give consumers a more realistic expectation when they are comparing vehicles.
So, here is what the changes give us (when available, comparable non-hybrid models are also listed). The each set of numbers are city/highway/combined ratings. The first set are the old ratings while the last column are the ratings under the new formula.
GM Brands - Live or Die?
I'm sure you've heard by now about the piece in Fortune (my least favorite source for automotive content) about what GM should do to get back in the game...
It's strange to me how a company that is as large and successful as GM, is the only one of the 'big 3' that isn't either in serious trouble or for sale...is considered by so many journalists as a failure.
So, Toyota sold more cars world-wide than GM in the first quarter of 2007...okay. The margin is still tight and with GM's turn-around plan fully in motion, there is no reason to believe that their market share slide will not slow, stop, or even turn around soon.
But, let's accept for a moment the concept that they have not changed enough structurally and need to do more drastic things to match the Toyota machine...do they need to slice off brands and shrink down to a more manageable size?
Fortune suggests killing off Saab, Hummer, Buick, and Pontiac. Moving GMC to a commercial-only vehicle brand, repositioning Saturn as a Scion killer, and leaving Cadillac and Chevrolet as full-line brands to compete against Lexus and Toyota.
Well - I doubt I'd go nearly that far. But, the idea of bringing some coherency to the GM lineup has some appeal.
Here's my plan for GM's brands:
Saab - this brand has no place in GM's future. As a global luxury brand - it competes with Cadillac. As a competitor to Volvo - it ends up in the no-mans land between Buick and Cadillac. As a beloved quirky brand of hatchbacks and a favorite of college profs everywhere...you're killing me with a lack of attention/attempts to mold the brand into something it isn't and shouldn't be. Find a company that could understand what Saab is about and sell it to them ASAP.
Hummer - the brand everyone loves to hate, but a success story if ever there was one. Who would have ever thought that GM could have a viable competitor to Jeep so soon after launch. Sure, there are other GM brands with trucks, but Hummer has such focus and such credibility as a producer of off-road vehicles that this brand will go down as one of the success stories of the early 21st century.
Will it sell in huge numbers? No. Should GM keep it anyway? Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. This brand shows exactly what laser-like focus on a brand's mission gives you. Everyone knows a Hummer on sight, everyone knows what it can do, and it is true to these brand traits from top to bottom.
Not to mention, that it doesn't cost a lot to keep them around and they don't compete at bit with anything else GM sells (incremental profit - thy name is Hummer).
GMC - in the dictionary under 'redundant'... GMC sells rebadged Chevrolet trucks and, in the case of the Acadia, a rebadged Saturn. I understand this brand is cheap to maintain and successful in certain markets...but unless GM is serious about 'Professional Grade' enough to drop the crossovers and light-duty trucks from GMC and drop all heavy-duty trucks from Chevy - leaving GMC as a heavy-duty and commercial truck division, then just kill them and let Sierra buyers get Silverados. I can't imagine that the extra dealer body and marketing efforts are made up for by the incremental GMC buyer who would not ever buy a Chevrolet.
Chevrolet - full line, all the time. Assuming that Chevrolet keeps their truck line (it will), then Chevy can easily become the full-line brand that Toyota is. Chevrolet should be your source for everything from micro-cars through leather-lined Impalas. It is a hodge-podge brand that can be just about anything to anyone with a smattering of high-performance products, mainstream front and rear-drive product, trucks, etc.
Cadillac - 'Standard of the World' in the making. Cadillac will be a major beneficiary of a lean, mean GM. The money saved by not supporting Saab product development and GMC can be funneled into an expansion of Cadillac into a true Mercedes/BMW killer. A smaller-than-CTS sedan and coupe, a CTS coupe and wagon, a smaller-than-XLR sports car, a small SUV, as well as an ultra sedan and coupe on the upper end would book-end GM's offerings on the upper end.
Pontiac - focused like Hummer only for the on-road enthusiast. Word is that Pontiac is going all rear-drive. This is going to tick off the Pontiac dealers that are used to being a sporty Chevy...but the success of Pontiac needs to be by offering something focused. A rear-drive line, from a sub-compact through a Grand Prix sized rear driver (the new G8) in sedans/coupes/convertibles...allowing for a resurrected GTO, the Solstice, and possibly a Firebird (as more of a 2-seat, smaller, V-8 equivalent to the GTO) - then Pontiac will mean something. Think of Pontiac as a rear-drive Mazda without the SUVs and minivans and you will see the idea.
Buick or Saturn - pick one. As you have likely heard, Buick is going after Lexus (but given Lexus is totally in Cadillac price territory...why?). Saturn is expanding with sophisticated and stylish product to compete against imports (how antiquated a niche is that in this day and age?). Both are aiming at front-drive for the majority of the lineup. However, Saturn is going for everything from mid-teens hatchbacks (the Astra) through mid-30's crossovers (Outlook).
Buick is at the early stages of a resurgence with the Enclave SUV (based on the same platform as the Saturn Outlook) and will have mid and large sedans (and coupes?) as its basis.
GM needs to make a decision here. Buick or Saturn, but not both.
Saturn is becoming a full-line manufacturer (which seems to get in the way of Chevrolet). However, on the plus side, they have a young buyer and a great reputation through their dealer body and no-hassle philosophy.
Buick, on the plus side has decades of history, loyal buyers, and would carry a stately, elegant, American Jaguar aesthetic quite well. As a softer, less sporty, front-drive alternative to Cadillac's rear-drive lineup - it could work. However, with its aging buyers and less focused niche, I'm not sure how it will fit in with smaller Cadillacs and larger Chevrolets.
I can make a case for either, but better if Chevrolet is limited to softer, middle-of-the-road, tuning for their larger stuff and by merging Buick and Saturn into a single entity that sells sophisticated, stylish, near-luxury product.
So, for me, the ultimate GM would be one that sells Saab, kills GMC, merges Buick and Saturn, moves Pontiac into a hard-core sports brand, and gives the savings to Chevrolet and Cadillac to compete with Toyota and BMW, all the while spending a little bit of money giving Hummer 3 or 4 models that are various sizes of the hard-core off-roader concept.
It isn't as shocking and likely to get me press as Fortune's story...but it might be the one that gives GM an even better shot at long-term success.
It's strange to me how a company that is as large and successful as GM, is the only one of the 'big 3' that isn't either in serious trouble or for sale...is considered by so many journalists as a failure.
So, Toyota sold more cars world-wide than GM in the first quarter of 2007...okay. The margin is still tight and with GM's turn-around plan fully in motion, there is no reason to believe that their market share slide will not slow, stop, or even turn around soon.
But, let's accept for a moment the concept that they have not changed enough structurally and need to do more drastic things to match the Toyota machine...do they need to slice off brands and shrink down to a more manageable size?
Fortune suggests killing off Saab, Hummer, Buick, and Pontiac. Moving GMC to a commercial-only vehicle brand, repositioning Saturn as a Scion killer, and leaving Cadillac and Chevrolet as full-line brands to compete against Lexus and Toyota.
Well - I doubt I'd go nearly that far. But, the idea of bringing some coherency to the GM lineup has some appeal.
Here's my plan for GM's brands:
Saab - this brand has no place in GM's future. As a global luxury brand - it competes with Cadillac. As a competitor to Volvo - it ends up in the no-mans land between Buick and Cadillac. As a beloved quirky brand of hatchbacks and a favorite of college profs everywhere...you're killing me with a lack of attention/attempts to mold the brand into something it isn't and shouldn't be. Find a company that could understand what Saab is about and sell it to them ASAP.
Hummer - the brand everyone loves to hate, but a success story if ever there was one. Who would have ever thought that GM could have a viable competitor to Jeep so soon after launch. Sure, there are other GM brands with trucks, but Hummer has such focus and such credibility as a producer of off-road vehicles that this brand will go down as one of the success stories of the early 21st century.
Will it sell in huge numbers? No. Should GM keep it anyway? Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. This brand shows exactly what laser-like focus on a brand's mission gives you. Everyone knows a Hummer on sight, everyone knows what it can do, and it is true to these brand traits from top to bottom.
Not to mention, that it doesn't cost a lot to keep them around and they don't compete at bit with anything else GM sells (incremental profit - thy name is Hummer).
GMC - in the dictionary under 'redundant'... GMC sells rebadged Chevrolet trucks and, in the case of the Acadia, a rebadged Saturn. I understand this brand is cheap to maintain and successful in certain markets...but unless GM is serious about 'Professional Grade' enough to drop the crossovers and light-duty trucks from GMC and drop all heavy-duty trucks from Chevy - leaving GMC as a heavy-duty and commercial truck division, then just kill them and let Sierra buyers get Silverados. I can't imagine that the extra dealer body and marketing efforts are made up for by the incremental GMC buyer who would not ever buy a Chevrolet.
Chevrolet - full line, all the time. Assuming that Chevrolet keeps their truck line (it will), then Chevy can easily become the full-line brand that Toyota is. Chevrolet should be your source for everything from micro-cars through leather-lined Impalas. It is a hodge-podge brand that can be just about anything to anyone with a smattering of high-performance products, mainstream front and rear-drive product, trucks, etc.
Cadillac - 'Standard of the World' in the making. Cadillac will be a major beneficiary of a lean, mean GM. The money saved by not supporting Saab product development and GMC can be funneled into an expansion of Cadillac into a true Mercedes/BMW killer. A smaller-than-CTS sedan and coupe, a CTS coupe and wagon, a smaller-than-XLR sports car, a small SUV, as well as an ultra sedan and coupe on the upper end would book-end GM's offerings on the upper end.
Pontiac - focused like Hummer only for the on-road enthusiast. Word is that Pontiac is going all rear-drive. This is going to tick off the Pontiac dealers that are used to being a sporty Chevy...but the success of Pontiac needs to be by offering something focused. A rear-drive line, from a sub-compact through a Grand Prix sized rear driver (the new G8) in sedans/coupes/convertibles...allowing for a resurrected GTO, the Solstice, and possibly a Firebird (as more of a 2-seat, smaller, V-8 equivalent to the GTO) - then Pontiac will mean something. Think of Pontiac as a rear-drive Mazda without the SUVs and minivans and you will see the idea.
Buick or Saturn - pick one. As you have likely heard, Buick is going after Lexus (but given Lexus is totally in Cadillac price territory...why?). Saturn is expanding with sophisticated and stylish product to compete against imports (how antiquated a niche is that in this day and age?). Both are aiming at front-drive for the majority of the lineup. However, Saturn is going for everything from mid-teens hatchbacks (the Astra) through mid-30's crossovers (Outlook).
Buick is at the early stages of a resurgence with the Enclave SUV (based on the same platform as the Saturn Outlook) and will have mid and large sedans (and coupes?) as its basis.
GM needs to make a decision here. Buick or Saturn, but not both.
Saturn is becoming a full-line manufacturer (which seems to get in the way of Chevrolet). However, on the plus side, they have a young buyer and a great reputation through their dealer body and no-hassle philosophy.
Buick, on the plus side has decades of history, loyal buyers, and would carry a stately, elegant, American Jaguar aesthetic quite well. As a softer, less sporty, front-drive alternative to Cadillac's rear-drive lineup - it could work. However, with its aging buyers and less focused niche, I'm not sure how it will fit in with smaller Cadillacs and larger Chevrolets.
I can make a case for either, but better if Chevrolet is limited to softer, middle-of-the-road, tuning for their larger stuff and by merging Buick and Saturn into a single entity that sells sophisticated, stylish, near-luxury product.
So, for me, the ultimate GM would be one that sells Saab, kills GMC, merges Buick and Saturn, moves Pontiac into a hard-core sports brand, and gives the savings to Chevrolet and Cadillac to compete with Toyota and BMW, all the while spending a little bit of money giving Hummer 3 or 4 models that are various sizes of the hard-core off-roader concept.
It isn't as shocking and likely to get me press as Fortune's story...but it might be the one that gives GM an even better shot at long-term success.
Check your politics at the door - changes in the auto business and global warming.
Our world is changing.
Dispute the causes all you want, but the truth is that our climate is changing and we can either sit on our hands or we can do everything in our power to try to stabilize the climate (using the things we agree we can control) and protect the lives we've all become accustomed to (whether that means having to run your A/C a certain number of days a year or keeping your beach house above the ocean - though the whole in-house aquarium thing might become a selling point down the road).
There are countless little things that we can do as individuals to try to help. They all center around using less energy (either directly or in the things we buy).
Since this is a blog about cars...I'm not here to talk to you about switching to florescent light-bulbs (though that would be a cheap and easy start, if you are interested).
Ultimately, there are decisions that need to be made with regard to what we choose to drive. Evaluations need to be made about what we really need in a car and what the environmental impact of said choice will be. Since CO2 is a direct by-product of the amount of fuel you burn, the flip-side of this coin is that you can not believe in global warming as a human caused phenomenon and still justify a low CO2 emitting choice on the basis of fuel savings or reducing our national consumption of oil.
Of course, the decisions may get made for us in light of the US Environmental Protection Agency's new mandate (via the US Supreme Court) to regulate CO2 emissions as an official pollutant. This may force our and automakers' hands with regard to vehicle choice.
I, for one, would much rather make conservation choices now and send a message to automakers - giving them a head start - then to live through another 1980's fiasco where awful cars get built to meet a deadline from the government.
As consumers and/or government shift their thinking and make environmental factors part of the buying decision/production requirements, automakers will add offerings (or alter current offerings) in response.
...and what companies are best positioned to take advantage of this shift most quickly? A couple names might not surprise you, but I'm sure one will. You can also check out the latest report from the Union of Concerned Scientists rating relative pollution (including CO2) from the major automakers - even though they disagree with one of my choices below.
Honda, already an established producer of economical cars has made an enviable position for itself with its hybrid models, but also its new Fit hatchback. 
The Fit is a roomy, versatile, economical product - all while being quite a little go kart that keeps you from feeling like you sacrificed driving fun for your lower carbon footprint. Combined with Honda's IMA hybrid technology that can easily be retrofitted to just about any product they make and they could quickly put a hybrid of just about any product on the road.
Toyota, the 800lb gorilla of t
he current eco-car movement (even though they sell plenty of guzzlers as well) has their green poster child Prius (as well as the related hybrid versions of several Toyota and Lexus products). Less expensive are the eco friendly cars in the Scion line (xD and xB) as well as the Toyota branded Yaris sedan and hatch. Toyota certainly has a nice niche carved out for itself with products in several categories that would make nice alternatives to its competition all while providing higher economy (and subsequently lower CO2 emissions).
Now for the unexpected player in this 3-way eco race...GM.
'What?!' I hear you saying. 'Isn't GM a long-in-the-tooth sign of everything that is wrong in the auto industry? Aren't they a company that has made their name selling low-mileage, CO2-spewing, low-tech junk for decades.' - not anymore (not to mention that their reputation of selling low-economy is way overblown) . Witness the following:
GM developed arguably the most sophisticated electric vehicle ever to see production, the EV1, in the 1990's. Lack of customer acceptance killed that electric car - GM was well within their rights to pull them all back in - given the legal requirements to keep parts on the shelf for years after they went out of production. The only reason you've heard that they 'killed the electric car' is because some very influential and money-ed individuals in Hollywood had their feathers ruffled when GM wouldn't give them exactly what they wanted.
GM is a global company with incredible reach with regards to technology that they can bring to bear. They have subsidiaries with incredible expertise in technologies as diverse as electric powertrains, biofuels, diesel, fuel cells, and efficiency increasing technologies for the workhorse gasoline engines.
One example of this is the 'skateboard' chassis that they have had in development for years. It would allow a wide range of hydrogen fuel-cell products to be brought to market quickly and cheaply (of course, first we would have to see significant efficiency gains for the fuel cells and a hydrogen infrastructure for refueling).
A second example is the recent Volt concept from Chevrolet - using a technology GM calls 'E-Flex' the architecture shown by this concept is much closer to reality than the 'skateboard' in that it uses existing electric powertrain elements from hybrid cars and allows for a supplementary power unit that could be a conventional gas engine, a diesel, a small fuel cell, or any of a wide range of biofuel options. The E-Flex concept would allow for high effective fuel efficiency products that could also leverage recharging via a conventional wall-outlet (and therefore drawing power from what could be a more eco-friendly point source of pollution).
A third example is GM's broad investment in ethanol fuels. Millions of GM vehicles already on the road could be fueled by an E85 blend of gasoline and ethanol - and, once ethanol production is shifted away from a corn-only system, would be close to carbon neutral. Saab is the GM subsidiary that is taking the lead in ethanol vehicles and has recently shown a Saab 9-5 wagon that is optimized to run on E100 (100% ethanol).
Forth and most recent is GM's serious consideration of micro or city cars.
These are quite a bit smaller than some of the smaller cars available already on the US market - but would be recognized immediately in Europe or Asia. GM is preparing to have 4-seat cars that would have 1.0 litre gas or diesel engines, perhaps with hybrid technology as well and seating for 4 adults. At the New York Auto Show, they showed 3 different flavors of this class of car, a micro crossover called the Trax, a 4-door shrunken version of the Chevy HHR (or PT Cruiser, if you prefer) called the Groove, and then a tiny 3-door with a sporty vibe that looks like a shrunken version of Honda's Fit.
So, as you can see, while our cars might get smaller with smaller engines (or no engines whatsoever) - regulations that might force lower CO2 emissions won't put consumers into quite the bind that you might expect. Some manufacturers are already set to provide what the market will need and others will follow suit. And, once consumers realize the fun and functionality that can be had in these packages - we will all be able to breath a bit easier.
Dispute the causes all you want, but the truth is that our climate is changing and we can either sit on our hands or we can do everything in our power to try to stabilize the climate (using the things we agree we can control) and protect the lives we've all become accustomed to (whether that means having to run your A/C a certain number of days a year or keeping your beach house above the ocean - though the whole in-house aquarium thing might become a selling point down the road).
There are countless little things that we can do as individuals to try to help. They all center around using less energy (either directly or in the things we buy).
Since this is a blog about cars...I'm not here to talk to you about switching to florescent light-bulbs (though that would be a cheap and easy start, if you are interested).
Ultimately, there are decisions that need to be made with regard to what we choose to drive. Evaluations need to be made about what we really need in a car and what the environmental impact of said choice will be. Since CO2 is a direct by-product of the amount of fuel you burn, the flip-side of this coin is that you can not believe in global warming as a human caused phenomenon and still justify a low CO2 emitting choice on the basis of fuel savings or reducing our national consumption of oil.
Of course, the decisions may get made for us in light of the US Environmental Protection Agency's new mandate (via the US Supreme Court) to regulate CO2 emissions as an official pollutant. This may force our and automakers' hands with regard to vehicle choice.
I, for one, would much rather make conservation choices now and send a message to automakers - giving them a head start - then to live through another 1980's fiasco where awful cars get built to meet a deadline from the government.
As consumers and/or government shift their thinking and make environmental factors part of the buying decision/production requirements, automakers will add offerings (or alter current offerings) in response.
...and what companies are best positioned to take advantage of this shift most quickly? A couple names might not surprise you, but I'm sure one will. You can also check out the latest report from the Union of Concerned Scientists rating relative pollution (including CO2) from the major automakers - even though they disagree with one of my choices below.
Honda, already an established producer of economical cars has made an enviable position for itself with its hybrid models, but also its new Fit hatchback. The Fit is a roomy, versatile, economical product - all while being quite a little go kart that keeps you from feeling like you sacrificed driving fun for your lower carbon footprint. Combined with Honda's IMA hybrid technology that can easily be retrofitted to just about any product they make and they could quickly put a hybrid of just about any product on the road.Toyota, the 800lb gorilla of the current eco-car movement (even though they sell plenty of guzzlers as well) has their green poster child Prius (as well as the related hybrid versions of several Toyota and Lexus products). Less expensive are the eco friendly cars in the Scion line (xD and xB) as well as the Toyota branded Yaris sedan and hatch. Toyota certainly has a nice niche carved out for itself with products in several categories that would make nice alternatives to its competition all while providing higher economy (and subsequently lower CO2 emissions).Now for the unexpected player in this 3-way eco race...GM.
'What?!' I hear you saying. 'Isn't GM a long-in-the-tooth sign of everything that is wrong in the auto industry? Aren't they a company that has made their name selling low-mileage, CO2-spewing, low-tech junk for decades.' - not anymore (not to mention that their reputation of selling low-economy is way overblown) . Witness the following:
GM developed arguably the most sophisticated electric vehicle ever to see production, the EV1, in the 1990's. Lack of customer acceptance killed that electric car - GM was well within their rights to pull them all back in - given the legal requirements to keep parts on the shelf for years after they went out of production. The only reason you've heard that they 'killed the electric car' is because some very influential and money-ed individuals in Hollywood had their feathers ruffled when GM wouldn't give them exactly what they wanted.
GM is a global company with incredible reach with regards to technology that they can bring to bear. They have subsidiaries with incredible expertise in technologies as diverse as electric powertrains, biofuels, diesel, fuel cells, and efficiency increasing technologies for the workhorse gasoline engines.
One example of this is the 'skateboard' chassis that they have had in development for years. It would allow a wide range of hydrogen fuel-cell products to be brought to market quickly and cheaply (of course, first we would have to see significant efficiency gains for the fuel cells and a hydrogen infrastructure for refueling).A second example is the recent Volt concept from Chevrolet - using a technology GM calls 'E-Flex' the architecture shown by this concept is much closer to reality than the 'skateboard' in that it uses existing electric powertrain elements from hybrid cars and allows for a supplementary power unit that could be a conventional gas engine, a diesel, a small fuel cell, or any of a wide range of biofuel options. The E-Flex concept would allow for high effective fuel efficiency products that could also leverage recharging via a conventional wall-outlet (and therefore drawing power from what could be a more eco-friendly point source of pollution).A third example is GM's broad investment in ethanol fuels. Millions of GM vehicles already on the road could be fueled by an E85 blend of gasoline and ethanol - and, once ethanol production is shifted away from a corn-only system, would be close to carbon neutral. Saab is the GM subsidiary that is taking the lead in ethanol vehicles and has recently shown a Saab 9-5 wagon that is optimized to run on E100 (100% ethanol).
Forth and most recent is GM's serious consideration of micro or city cars.
These are quite a bit smaller than some of the smaller cars available already on the US market - but would be recognized immediately in Europe or Asia. GM is preparing to have 4-seat cars that would have 1.0 litre gas or diesel engines, perhaps with hybrid technology as well and seating for 4 adults. At the New York Auto Show, they showed 3 different flavors of this class of car, a micro crossover called the Trax, a 4-door shrunken version of the Chevy HHR (or PT Cruiser, if you prefer) called the Groove, and then a tiny 3-door with a sporty vibe that looks like a shrunken version of Honda's Fit.So, as you can see, while our cars might get smaller with smaller engines (or no engines whatsoever) - regulations that might force lower CO2 emissions won't put consumers into quite the bind that you might expect. Some manufacturers are already set to provide what the market will need and others will follow suit. And, once consumers realize the fun and functionality that can be had in these packages - we will all be able to breath a bit easier.
New Toyota Tundra not all its cracked up to be?
Toyota is working hard to push their new Tundra as the best thing for truck-buyers since the invention of the leaf-spring...but they are running into some snags.
First is the realization that the Tundra is the only full-sized pickup to _not_ get a 5-star front crash rating from the US government. (ouch).
Now, courtesy of Jalopnik - we have the contents of a letter from GM to their dealers that pokes some holes in the recent Tundra ad where the truck pulls a trailer up a steep incline of a see-saw device and then comes to a screeching halt at the end (once it all tips over and becomes a steep down-hill...
This is an interesting read and shows how you have to read that fine print...
First is the realization that the Tundra is the only full-sized pickup to _not_ get a 5-star front crash rating from the US government. (ouch).
Now, courtesy of Jalopnik - we have the contents of a letter from GM to their dealers that pokes some holes in the recent Tundra ad where the truck pulls a trailer up a steep incline of a see-saw device and then comes to a screeching halt at the end (once it all tips over and becomes a steep down-hill...
This is an interesting read and shows how you have to read that fine print...
Thought you might want to know this. Pass it along to your sales staff. It might help them to sell more vehicles. BTW.....attended the Minneapolis Auto Show kick off breakfast on March 8. Two of our Sandy trainers did a nice job explaining the Tundra ads. I would guess all of you have seen the stupid ad where the Tundra pulls a trailer up a steep grade (a 'see-saw'), and then barrels down hill and locks the brakes up just before the end of the ramp. Seen it? Yeah you have.Couple things to keep in mind. The V.O. at the beginning of the spot says...."It's tough pushing 10,000 lbs up a steep grade". Myth: Toyota would like the audience to believe the trailer is 10,000 lbs. Fact: It's a 5,000 lb truck pulling a 5,000 lb trailer. A little slight of hand? You bet.
Then, on the way down the grade, the camera zooms in on the brakes as the vehicles comes to a screeching halt just prior to the end of ramp. Next time you see the ad....look for the 'mice type'. It indicates the trailer is equipped with electric brakes. Fact....the electric brakes stop the trailer -- not the truck. A little slight of hand? You bet.
And why does Toyota have bigger brake pads? They need them....their truck is heavier. Stopping distance between our truck and theirs is virtually identical. And why does Toyota have a 6 speed transmission? To improve their fuel economy....which is still 2 mpg less than ours.
And don't forget....their big V8 has one axle ratio -- a 4.3. Suck fuel much? Our trucks offer several axle options to optimize towing and fuel economy. Bottom line: OUR TRUCK IS BETTER! Spread the word.......we can all make a difference.
Geez...Pontiac replacing the Vibe
Just when you thought GM's product planners had a good idea for Pontiac...
It appears that the Vibe will return for a second generation. Expect sportier handling, more refined interior, etc. in this twin to the Toyota Matrix (rumored to be called Blade in its second generation).
What happened to the RWD plan for Pontiac? Like the G5 coupe (twin to the Cobalt coupe from Chevrolet), it appears the GM is simply unable to tell their dealers 'no.'
Expect the Vibe replacement to continue Pontiac's move to a G'x' naming scheme.
See a larger version of this spy shot over at:
The Car Connection: Spies catch the next Pontiac Vibe
It appears that the Vibe will return for a second generation. Expect sportier handling, more refined interior, etc. in this twin to the Toyota Matrix (rumored to be called Blade in its second generation).What happened to the RWD plan for Pontiac? Like the G5 coupe (twin to the Cobalt coupe from Chevrolet), it appears the GM is simply unable to tell their dealers 'no.'
Expect the Vibe replacement to continue Pontiac's move to a G'x' naming scheme.
See a larger version of this spy shot over at:
The Car Connection: Spies catch the next Pontiac Vibe
New Lexus LX to debut in New York
...and the Japanese luxury vehicle announcements just keep a-comin'
Today, Toyota announced that they will be showing the new LX sport utility at the New York Auto Show in April.
Replacing the LX470, the LX570 appears to be equipped with a version of the new 5.7l V-8 that Toyota recently debuted in the new Tundra pickup.
Horsepower numbers should be well into the 300's with ample torque. Unfortunately, if the current LX is any indicator, the new LX will be one heavy beast - so it needs that kind of power.
More details and pictures once the debut happens next month.
Today, Toyota announced that they will be showing the new LX sport utility at the New York Auto Show in April.
Replacing the LX470, the LX570 appears to be equipped with a version of the new 5.7l V-8 that Toyota recently debuted in the new Tundra pickup.
Horsepower numbers should be well into the 300's with ample torque. Unfortunately, if the current LX is any indicator, the new LX will be one heavy beast - so it needs that kind of power.
More details and pictures once the debut happens next month.