And We Hurtle Towards An Obvious Conclusion To This Mess

http://www.wheels.ca/newsFeatures/article/31753

But a $2 billion (Canadian) class-action lawsuit launched yesterday alleges collusion between the Canadian and American head offices of some automakers to allegedly inflate the prices of cars in Canada while inhibiting cross-border shopping.

Hallelujah! The Canadian consumer isn't as stupid as they look!

So Honda- why is it that the built in Canada has that price discrepancy? Hey Toyota- fess up about the RX. GM- what about all those Oshawa cars?And I didn't forget about you Ford- what's up with the Edge and MKX?

Inquiring minds REALLY want to hear what the auto manufacturers have to say about this.

Jaguar Pulls A Prince

http://www.wheels.ca/newsFeatures/article/31797

The Jaguar name will be dropped from the marque's cars in a few years, says design chief Ian Callum.

Let us now run down the multitude of idiocies that are in the process of being carried out at Jaguar, and by extension Ford.

• An ongoing onslaught of shitty cars that can't compete in their respective segments either because they're just outright horrible, or even worse for a Jaguar, boring.
• An 'all new' design direction that looks like it has cribbed various elements from Lexus, Infiniti and BMW.
• Floundering public perception and a complete lack of direction.
• Being sold to a 3rd rate 3rd world manufacturer named Tata (admittedly not the fault of Jaguar)
  
• And our latest 3 Stooges move- removing the Jaguar name from the vehicle.

Now the question I'm sure some are asking is- why is it a dumb move?

Well, first of all, you have to understand the place of Jaguar in the current marketplace. It HAS no place. It's a lost child. A wandering soul with no home. It prices cars above the established big dogs in the luxury segment based on past performance and recognition that no longer registers with buyers. It designs cars to look like Mini Me Aston Martins (not bad for any other maker, but it's a JAGUAR damn it). Basically, Jaguar is up Shit River without a paddle. Or a functioning toilet. And now, their brilliant move is to erase their name off of vehicles that are supposed to give them a new place in the market- vehicles that are supposed to remove the stale taste of crap they've been offering over the last 20 years.

Unfortunately, no one will know what just passed them now.

Kudos Jaguar.

Get Your Excessive Speeding In Before Midnight Tonight

http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/261778

The new street-racing law goes into effect tomorrow, and OPP Sgt. Cam Woolley predicts "shock and awe" over the tough new provincial legislation.

If a driver is caught going 50 kilometres over the speed limit, police will impound the vehicle for seven days, issue a minimum $2,000 fine and suspend the driver's licence for seven days.

Ahem.

I think I especially like that this law not only presumes guilt without a court case (something you are entitled to under the law- even for a speeding ticket), but that it also is static in terms of the 'amount of the the limit'. Meaning, if you're doing 100 in a 50, you probably need to be given a smack upside the head- but if you're doing 150 in a 100, maybe a big ticket is a better and more fit punishment.

My favorite part of the article is this-

"If a motorist is coming off the 400-series highway at 100 kilometres an hour and hits an 80 zone and then goes through a small town with a 50 zone, they will be 50 over the limit and will get their car impounded," Woolley said.

I like that the OPP is essentially giving a heads up that otherwise innocent drivers can have their cars seized because of idiotic speed changes- which aren't all that uncommon especially on minor highways outside of the Toronto region.

Chalk another one up for the Black Helicopters gang.

GM Signs $800 million Export Deal With China

GM announced today that it has signed an agreement with Shanghai General Motors, one of its joint venture partners, to sell at least $800 million worth of sport utility vehicles and related parts and accessories in China under its successful Buick brand there. Of course, the only sport utility vehicle that Buick builds in the US is the new Enclave Crossover, and the deal calls for GM to export up to 25,000 Enclaves over four years, beginning in 2008. Also, the Enclave is arguably the only US-based Buick that does not already have a superior counterpart sold in China (the LaCrosse in China is a much more upscale, modern vehicle than the US version, and the Park Avenue in China is more luxurious, powerful, and modern-looking - not to mention rear wheel drive instead of front wheel drive than the US Lucerne.)

This deal comes on the heels of a deal that GM signed in May to export more than $700 million worth of Cadillacs from the US to China, bringing the total dollar value of GM's US exports to China to over $1.5 billion.

Moves like this aren't going to reduce the enormous trade deficit that the US has with China in any significant way, but it's nice to see some "Made in America" products being sent to China, rather than the usual direction. Now, my only complaint is that China literally gets the "best of the best" in terms of the global Buick offerings. They have better cars than the US Buick lineup has, and now will also receive the US market's superior crossover.

There has been some speculation that the timing of the announcement was intended to "throw a bone" to GM's striking UAW workforce, showing that the company is doing what it can to find work for their assembly plants - and job security for their workers. Whatever the timing or motivation behind it, it's nice to see GM talking more about sending vehicles to China rather than sourcing them from there, as Chrysler LLC has confirmed and Ford is rumored to be considering with its upcoming Fiesta.

It's Starting To Hit The Fan

Almost a month ago, I wrote an article commenting on the growing disparity between Canadian and American car pricing as the Canadian dollar continued its climb to near parity with the US buck.

What's funny to me in reading that article was this part-

Even more amazing is that no one is doing or saying anything in Canada right now. No consumer groups have made a peep and no one is writing into their local newspaper griping about it.

Well, one month later, and the Canadian dollar is no longer at 95 cents US, it's now at par. The day I never thought I'd see has arrived, and over the last couple of days, the Canadian dollar has been more or less trading 1 for 1 with the greenback. Incredible.

And now, finally, major media in Canada is starting to take notice.

The lease deals seem even more unbelievable: Boston's Kelly Nissan offers a new Altima for $139 per month (with $2,723 due at signing) and a Pathfinder 4x4 for $239 monthly.

While priced in American dollars, the gap between the two currencies is closing, making the U.S. stickers especially appealing.

Yet it begs the question: with the loonie's rise against the U.S. currency, why aren't Canadians seeing lower automobile prices here?

Source- The Toronto Star, Wheels


Think the issue is going to go away? Think again. Most automakers (and representatives from other industries) are either sticking their heads in the sand on the issue, or making absolutely ridiculous statements that will only serve to bite them in the ass as time goes on. Some have gone off the record stating that Canadians were getting great deals back when the dollar was valued at 65 cents, so now it's only right that automakers milk parity for as long as they can. Others have done stupid things like cite the higher cost of operations in Canada. A country I should remind you, that has an open border with the United States, is part of a huge free trade agreement, where the majority of peole live 100 kilometers from the US/Canada border, and whose inhabitants largely speak the same language as the people of the United States outside of one province (well, two if you count Newfoundland). The excuses simply don't make sense. At all. And it's only going to get more infuriating as the Canadian dollar continues to climb. Some analysts are predicting it to rise to $1.10.

What then?

So I'm left to repeat what I said before- the first automaker to bite the bullet and stop skimming profits off of the Canadian consumer will have a homerun on their hands. My pick? Chrysler. Excess inventory, new management, low brand perception at present time- they're the perfect company to do it. Now they (or someone else) has to pull the trigger.

Dealers Still Advertising Higher 2007 Fuel Economy Ratings

A breathless, critical report has been issued by CNW Marketing research stating that Toyota dealers are still claiming that the Prius can achieve 60 miles per gallon.

It has been reasonably well known in the automotive world for years that EPA fuel economy ratings were generally higher than what people could expect to see "in the real world." Sure, it's theoretically possible to drive like a stereotypical septuagenarian and achieve those window sticker numbers, but more likely than not, we're accelerating more quickly, driving faster, and using accessories such as air conditioning and power steering that also require fuel to run. With gas prices near historic highs, consumers are more concerned about fuel economy than they have been in years, and were getting irritated when their own gas mileage didn't match the numbers on the window sticker, in spite of the famous disclaimer, "your actual mileage may vary." In response to this, the EPA has implemented a revised calculation to establish fuel economy for the window sticker for all 2008 and later models to better reflect "real world" experiences. The calculations are complex, but the end result is that most vehicles will see a 2-4 mile per gallon decrease in both city and highway fuel economy. The exception to that is hybrids, which took a disproportionate beating in their ratings. The Toyota Prius, previously rated at 60 miles per gallon in the city and 51 miles per gallon on the highway, dropped to 48 miles per gallon in the city and 45 miles per gallon on the highway. My own theory on the reason for the larger drop is not that Toyota was cheating, but that the Prius' driving characteristics were very well suited to the conditions of the old test methodology (truth be told, I also am skeptical of the 21 miles per gallon highway rating of GM's Tahoe full size SUV, thanks to its active fuel management that shuts down four of its eight cylinders, but in reality, rarely has the chance to do so).

The point is, although there really are people who achieved 60 miles per gallon in the Prius, though you have to "know" how to drive a hybrid like the Prius to maximize its fuel efficiency. (From what I have heard, it's not the same thing as driving a conventional car for maximum economy). Most people achieve mileage in the mid-40s in the Prius, which is exactly what the EPA now says it should do.

Details left out of the report, however are:

• Do dealers of other brands also talk about fuel economy in terms of 2007 numbers?
• Are the Toyota dealers in question referring to 2008 Priuses or leftover 2007 models?
• Is doing this illegal, or even unethical?
• Who paid for this research?

Let's dive into the implications of each of these.

I don't know about other brands' dealers, but I can say for sure that if you go today to http://www.gm.com/shop and click on "30+ MPG highway," the only vehicles that come up in the search are 2007 models. Some of the models listed (Impala, Grand Prix, etc.) will not be over 30 miles per gallon in 2008, but GM is still advertising those models as being over 30 miles per gallon.

As far as whether the Priuses are 2007 or 2008 models (which would each have different economy figures on their window stickers), it's impossible to tell (and I doubt that CNW knows), but wouldn't the natural tendency of a salesperson be to cite the highest fuel economy figure he or she can for a given model? If the window sticker says 60/55 for a car they're selling, then they should feel free to show that to a customer. If the customer asks about real world economy, I'd hope that they'd either be more realistic about it or tell them to check a neutral website like http://www.fueleconomy.gov/.

If the dealers are representing that 2008 models get 60 miles per gallon in the city, then I think they are being unethical and misrepresenting the car's likely fuel economy. Actually, a better solution would have been for ALL new car window stickers on sale after a certain date (say, October 1, 2007) to show the new ratings, regardless of the model year. That way, it wouldn't look like an old model was getting better fuel economy than a new one, when in fact they're likely to be mechanically identical. Really, is it that expensive or difficult to reprint the window sticker for a new vehicle, in the interest of full disclosure and minimizing consumer confusion and angst? After all, the Fueleconomy.gov website has converted all past fuel economy ratings to the current 2008 equivalents to enable more fair comparisons between models and especially between different model years.

CNW's website does not list this report, only its infamous "Dust to Dust" report that grossly exaggerated the energy costs of a Prius versus a Hummer (see excellent rebuttals of the Dust to Dust report on TrueDelta.com here and here). However, the company states that it performs syndicated studies that "protect you from seeing information that is skewed toward a particular point of view or company or product." Yet, they seem to have a serious anti-Prius agenda after the Dust to Dust report and now this. Though it's possible that an anti-Toyota client underwrote this latest research project, it is possible that the company undertook it on its own for publicity reasons.

Furor Grows Over Dealership CSI Scores

Michael Karesh, owner of TrueDelta, an automotive research firm, conducted a survey of his reliability survey participants last spring to gauge whether dealers were pressuring their customers to rate their salesperson and dealership with top scores in all areas on the customer satisfaction surveys that come from the manufacturer. I hadn't seen the survey results until reading the August 27, 2007 issue of industry publication Automotive News last night (I'm a little behind!) and saw an article about Mr. Karesh's research.

I think Mr. Karesh was onto something by conducting a survey about this. Not only did a major auto industry publication pick up on his work, but also today's Autoextremist article was about what a failed system CSI scores have become.

In the past four years, I've bought two new vehicles, and while my buying experience was a positive one in both cases (I bought a Honda and a Nissan), it helps that I didn't have to negotiate price, as a family member had a close business relationship with both dealerships and was able to get a great price for me. But toward the end of the delivery process, both salesmen mentioned the CSI surveys and that they need perfect scores, and that they'd be happy to address any concerns I might have before completing the survey. Needless to say, I gave them top scores.

Apparently, I'm not the only one who has been pressured to do this. Dealerships' allocations of popular models, their employees' compensation, and even factory to dealer incentives are tied to CSI rankings. Even worse, manufacturers have set such ridiculously high standards (anything short of "excellent" is a black mark, when in fact, outside of Lake Wobegon, not everyone is above average, and certainly not excellent.) "Exceeds expectations" might be a difficult rating to achieve if the customer's expectations are too high. And even if that customer's expectations are exceeded once, would they not expect the same treatment when they buy their next car from that dealer, so the same level of service that exceeded expectations earlier might only meet the higher expectations the second time.

If every car buying experience was excellent or very good, then why are there so many horror stories out there? Hmmm...

TrueDelta's research (with admittedly small sample sizes) found that at least 75% of all dealerships at least mentioned the survey would be coming, and many others took further steps such as allowing to preliminarily address problems before the survey (36%), asking for perfect scores without begging (28%), saying they wouldn't get a bonus without perfect scores (9%), begging for perfect scores (9%), offering to watch the customer complete it (2%) or allow the dealer to complete it (2%), or offering a gift in exchange for a positive survey (2%). Note that these do not add to 100% because multiple responses were allowed. It also found that among respondents, Nissan, Hyundai, and BMW dealers pressured customers the most to complete their surveys with only the highest scores.

Further adding to the furor is that GM announced in the past week or two that some dealers had submitted "fraudulent" CSI surveys and those results would be ignored, and the dealer would likely be penalized in some way.

So let's see: customers don't like being pressured, dealers and salespeople don't like having their livelihood tied to the whim of someone completing a survey who marks "very good" instead of "excellent" (or "meets expectations" rather than "exceeds expectations), and the manufacturers are suspicious of the process.

Part of my "real job" is working with employee compensation, and designing incentive plans to motivate employees to perform a desired behavior. I'd say that the current CSI system should be thrown out, because clearly begging, lying, and fudging should not be the behaviors that are encouraged.

Are there any other stories of dealer or salesperson pressure to give perfect scores out there?

Link to TrueDelta's research on this subject: http://www.truedelta.com/pieces/survey_survey.php

How Do You Say Overrated In German? (aka MF Drives The 2007 BMW Z4 Roadster)

Uberschätzt. In case you were wondering. At least that's what the computer spit out.

I had the opportunity to take a Z4 3.0 convertible out for an extended spin a couple of weeks ago, and came away unimpressed. To say the least.

Walking into a BMW dealership always hints at the surreal- at least it always has in my experience. The combination of smugness, holier than thou attitude, and Teutonic coolness has always made it seem like you're not buying a car as much as you're buying a high end piece of electronic equipment. Or furniture. Or checking into an expensive hotel. Which is ironic really, since BMW owners are generally the first people to spout such invective at owners of 'inferior' brands (read: Lexus, MB, etc.) that fall on the luxury side of the sport-luxury equation. Luckily on this particular trip into my local BMW, I encountered a salesperson who seemed to be a tad more civilized than most- genial even. Unfortunately, no M Roadster were available for a drive, so a 3.0 would suffice. A set of keys and a dealer plate later, and I was away in a black 3.0- on my own without the dealer.

The first thing you'll notice about the Z4 is that it looks like the retarded chromosonal combination of a catfish and a tadpole. Yes, Chris Bangle is an oft-imitated designer, and yes, his influence and ideas have made a mark on the world of automotive design, but to these eyes, the Z4 is unpalatable from nearly every angle. The long hood and short rear deck are pleasing to the eye, but the lidded headlights and excessive surfacing, especially on the sides, is not. Inside, things get simpler, but not much prettier. Although the interior doesn't scream 'cheap', it also doesn't seem like BMW spent much more than they had to in order to get the interior up to par. Meaning, it looks sparse, and it feels sparse, even in the fairly loaded configuration I was driving. Fortunately, the driving controls are everything that the rest of the interior is not- that is, substantial and placed in such a way that you now someone spent a lot of time figuring them out. The shifter is readily at hand, the thick steering wheel is grippy, and pedal placement is perfect.

Starting the engine unleashes a subdued growl that actually sounds a tad raspy- something I did not expect from the 3.0. With the top down, I found the stereo (heck, EVERYTHING) was overpowered by engine note- if that's your thing, you might be in heaven, however I found it distracting after 10 minutes of it. Luckily, the noise is backed up by copious amount of power- let it run up to redline through the gear box and you'll quickly reach highly illegal speeds in a highly illegal manner. Unlike the Boxster, which feels planted and balanced no matter what you're doing, punch the throttle in the Z4 and you can feel it hunker down on its haunches and spring forward. There is lots of grip in back end, but if you're not careful with your throttle modulation, this bad boy will oversteer like a true drifter. The gearbox is a pleasure to use- short throws, well defined , and smooth as silk- all amplified by the wonderful placement of the shifter. The clutch is surprisingly light at first, but quickly becomes second nature after 5 minutes.

Handling? As mentioned above, I found the Z4 was quite fond of oversteering. The steering itself was very heavy- especially on center- if you want to turn in the Z4, you're going to have to turn- not just nudge. However, it responded quickly to inputs, and despite the heaviness, felt very good in the twisties. The suspension handled most of the road imperfections with ease around town, but I found it a big wriggly at speed and in sweeping turns- again, it felt as though the back end wanted to swap places with the front end. Overall, the experience was fun, but not as reassuring as a Boxster, or even a Z Roadster- both vehicles that I also tested on the same route.

All in all, the Z4 3.0 Roadster is a fine little car. Since looks are subjective, I can't dock too many points for looking the way it does. At 45k Canadian, it would be quite the ride for somebody looking for a sporty convertible that has the flexibility to actually haul some stuff (the trunk space actually isn't that bad). However, it's nowhere near 45k. In fact, it's near 70k Canadian for a Z4 3.0 Roadster. That my friends, is grand larceny. What does that 70k buy you? Well, for one, it will buy you a Porsche Boxster. No, it won't be an S, but the base Boxster walks all over the BMW- it's more balanced, has similar power and speed, and just feels better. It will also buy you a Mercedes SLK with a 3.5 liter engine, much better looks, and a more solid feel. Move downmarket, and you can get a 350Z, which will lack the cachet of the Germans, but costs 55k Canadian, and although not as agile as the BMW, is a worthy contender while being 15k cheaper.

And that's why the Z4 is overrated. It is not worth 70k in any way, shape or form. It's a competent roadster with a nice engine. There are LOTS of those out there nowadays. But very few of them cost as much as this. And it will continue to sell because of badge. But such is life.

Even The Good Moves That Ford Makes Blow Up In Their Faces

Perhaps the salespeople are part of the problem. It seems that nearly twenty percent of Ford’s sales team is trying to sell Ford Five Hundreds to customers instead of the new-for-2008 Taurus. About 60 percent of Ford salespeople are using the correct name some of the time, but still slip in the Five Hundred moniker on occasion.

Source- Winding Road

One can sympathize with the dealers of course, since if you type 'Ford Taurus' into Google image search, you get about 1 picture of the 2008 Taurus for every 23417 pictures of the previous generation Tauri. I think the one major issue with the name change, which all in all I think was a great idea by Ford by the way, was that the refresh of the Taurus nee Five Hundred didn't go nearly far enough to differentiate the models. Yes, there's a slimmed down ass end, and the glitzy chrome front end- but only the legally blind won't look at the new Taurus and not see the Five Hundred with a grille kit. It's probably not helping that every Ford salesperson is probably referencing the Five Hundred in their sales pitch- 'It's just like the Five Hundred but BETTER'. You know, that sort of thing.

Someone needs to punch whoever came up with Five Hundred in the first place right in the balls. Then they need to undertake a more drastic reskinning of the Taurus to send the Five Hundred into the trashbin of history, and make it a rule that it's never to be discussed. Send current Five Hundred owners to Chevy to get their cars serviced.

Mind Not The Bleating Engine Noise At The Stoplight

The October issue of Motor Trend mentions that "GM insiders know they have a minor NVH problem with the new 3.6L DI V6 fitted to the new Cadillac CTS and the revised STS. And, frustratingly, they know it's a problem that can't be fixed; it's a design fault, admits one senior engineer. Wonder if they'll get a rebate from the folks who actually designed the engine for GM - British engineering company Ricardo."

Source- The Car Lounge

Things get even better as the day progresses though. The fanboys at GMI start bleating about the DI 3.6 not being as bad as the Lexus DI engine or the Audi DI engine. And now as the day ends, it's being waved off as essentially 'a characteristic of all DI engines'. Huh? Read the quoted section again- it's a DESIGN fault. The DESIGN in question is the 3.6 DI engine DESIGNED by GM. No other engines are mentioned.

Probably the most troubling part of all of this is that this wasn't caught earlier, and now it's too late to do anything about it. Since it's an issue inherent in the design, they'll just have to stuff more insulation in the CTS and STS and hope no one hears too much.

Frankfurt: Toyota IQ Concept

I've previously complained about Chinese companies making knockoffs of western-designed vehicles and basically stealing intellectual property. (For more on that, click here).

Now, it's Toyota's turn! The Toyota IQ concept that it revealed in Frankfurt not only appears to bear a more than coincidental similarity to the Smart city car, but even the car's NAME ITSELF - IQ - seems to want to imply intelligence (Get it? Smart - IQ...?)

However, other than the unoriginal name and basic shape (and the shape is actually more pleasing to the eyes than the Smart's, in my humble opinion), it's actually a pretty interesting little city car. It seems to have been better-received than the Volkswagen Up! concept, which is intended to fill a similar niche and debuted in concept form around th same time.

The Toyota IQ was designed in France by Toyota's Advanced European Design Studio, and is just a short 2.98 meters in length. For some perspective, it's 770 mm (0.77 meters) shorter than a Yaris, yet according to the press release, has a similarly-sized interior. The seating configuration is advertised as "3+1," meaning that other than the two front seats, there is one adult-sized seat behind the front passenger and one child-sized seat behind the driver, which can also be folded to increase luggage space. The dashboard is designed to sweep away from the front passenger so that when only two people are in the car, the passenger seat can be roughly aligned with the driver's seat, but when a passenger needs to ride in the back seat, the front passenger seat can be moved forward of the driver, still leaving adequate space for both passengers. Toyota calls it the smallest four seat passenger concept car.

Again, the concept is a fine one - it's arguably a more attractive car than the Smart ForTwo, plus it has more seats (as the Smart is only designed "for two" passengers), but couldn't Toyota come up with a more original shape and a better name? What's next - the Honda Intelligent? The Nissan Clever?

A Magazine Time Machine

One of the last times I visited my parents this past summer, they gave me a large plastic bin full of old automotive-related magazines. Titles include Autoweek, Motor Trend, and Car and Driver, and they appear to be mostly of the 1996-1997 vintage. I don't know what possessed me to keep these magazines after reading them - I haven't ever referred to them in the ensuing decade, and after I read my current magazines, they are recycled or thrown away.

Nevertheless, over the past few days, I've been gradually making my way through these old magazines one more time before they hit the garbage can. It's been pretty interesting to have ten more years of automotive history, the seeming dominance of import brands, a horsepower war, high gas prices, and more happen to change my perspective on vehicles that I believed were at the top of their game in 1996 and 1997. Humorously, I wasn't the only one who believed this.

The September 16, 1996 Autoweek has an article about the then-new Chevy Venture, Pontiac Trans Sport, and Oldsmobile (remember them?) Silhouette. Even GM fans can't stand these vans in their current, completely uncompetitive iteration, but eleven years ago, Autoweek said things like, "despite the four-door configuration, the body-structure has tremendous integrity. There is a solidness that will be benchmarked by other minivan makers" and "these vehicles' handling is best among minivans, bar none." But my favorite line was, "a rear overhead console, with headphone jacks for the rearmost passengers, and separate climate controls, are other nice touches, though a tug on the headphone cord brought the whole thing down. A Chevy engineer promised that a fix has been made using metal fasteners."

The same issue has this story on the last page about Bob Lutz, current GM Vice Chairman, Global Product Development:

Erick Nacke, of the Great Lakes Road Racing Association, tells of a group of Chrysler execs, engineers, and suppliers riding Ninjas at a recent superbike racing school. Who won most improved? Bob Lutz, of course. "We didn't know who he was--some silver-haired guy who was ripping it up. He was the only one who followed instructions to a tee. If we'd said, 'ride with one hand on your helmet and both feet up in the air,' he'd have done it. And by the end, he was the only one who dragged his knee through a turn."

That's a funny visual, and in the photo of Mr. Lutz accompanying that snippet, he looks very much the same as he does today, eleven years later. The accompanying photo here is just an artist's conception of what Mr. Lutz would look like atop a Ninja.

The February 17, 1997 Autoweek has a first test of the Oldsmobile Intrigue, which to me was always the best-looking, most-capable of the GM W-body midsize cars built from 1988 to present. Again, the article's perspective was interesting: "The Intrigue is destined to be the division's volume leader and the true test of whether Olds has succeeded in recasting itself" and "GM expects to sell hundreds of thousands of Intrigues against the toughest competition going - imports." Well, it wasn't, and unfortunately it didn't. I don't have access to 1997 and 1998 calendar year sales results, but in 1999 and 2000, the Intrigue was not Oldsmobile's volume leader - that title fell to the smaller and less expensive Alero, which nearly doubled the Intrigue's sales figures in 2000 (122,722 versus 64,109). Intrigue sales only made up about 30% of Oldsmobile sales in 1999 and 2000, while Alero sales made up between 42% and 57%. While the division may have sold hundreds of thousands of Intrigues cumulatively (likely just barely; Olds sold only 209,365 Intrigues from 1999 through 2004; the car was sold for about 18 months that aren't included in that figure from summer 1997 through December 1998), it's safe to say that it didn't help to stem Oldsmobile's slide into oblivion, with the last Oldsmobile rolling off the line in 2004. Also, the plan to "make cars with an international flair to draw import intenders into Oldsmobile dealerships" sounds eerily similar to GM's current plan for Saturn.

The next issue of Autoweek, dated February 24, 1997, introduces BMW's "new navigation system," available as a $2,990 option in the 528 models and $2,800 option in V8 5-Series and all 7-Series models. The article basically introduces readers to the concept of the now-familiar in-dash navigation system (this was before BMWs had the iDrive interface for navigation; instead, a small rotary knob next to the screen is used to enter inputs. The worst part of this early navigation system is that the map data is stored on nine CD-ROMs rather than a single DVD, or even a hard disk, as modern systems use. BMW's system in 1997 could automatically dial 911 or BMW roadside assistance in the event of emergency; it's a shame such functionality seems to be available in few cars today except those equipped with OnStar.

The March 24, 1997 Autoweek said that the Jeep Dakar concept vehicle, which was a hardtop four-door Wrangler, was approved for production, according to supplier sources. It was intended as an upscale partner for the Wrangler in the Jeep lineup. As it turned out, of course, it took until 2007 for Jeep to actually introduce a four door Wrangler, and it's Chrysler's hottest product. Some of the Dakar concept's styling cues did make it to the production Jeep liberty a few years later, but given the success of the four door Wrangler today, imagine how well the Dakar might have sold even in the SUV-crazed late 1990s.

Speaking of Jeep-like vehicles, the November 4, 1996 Autoweek had two notable Toyota SUVs profiled. Most Jeep-like of these was a 1958 Toyota FJ25 Land Cruiser, which looks strikingly similar to a 1940s-vintage US military Jeep. Compared to a 1997 Land Cruiser, the 1958 FJ25 was 40 inches shorter and 8 inches narrower! Toyota only imported 61 vehicles to the US in 1958, but a California man (of course!) bought the one featured in Autoweek new to use for duck hunting trips, and traded it in decades later for a new Land Cruiser with 93,000 miles on the odometer. Toyota later acquired it, restored it, and kept it in its permanent collection.

The other Toyota off roader featured was a Japanese military vehicle called the Mega Cruiser, which bore a striking resemblance to the AM General Hummer favored by the US military. The Mega Cruiser was built to order; Toyota only sold 47 of them through the first seven months of 1996, for example. The truck had all the equipment needed for a credible (but large) off roader, except that its 6,283 pounds were moved solely by a 4.1 liter intercooled turbodiesel, rated for 155 horsepower and 282 lb-ft of torque. The seating arrangements were certainly peculiar; two front buckets separated by an enormous transmission tunnel (as in the Hummer H1), two outboard bucket seats in the second row, with a two person bench between them (meaning it had a seating capacity of six). The price in late 1996 was $87,454.

Several issues, including the March 17, 1997 Autoweek, mentioned Nissan's Z-car factory restoration program. During the Z's hiatus (Nissan stopped importing new 300ZXs to the US in the mid-1990s), Nissan contracted with Pierre'Z Service Center in Hawthorne, California to completely disassemble and refurbish 1970-1972 240Zs back to factory specifications. Literally every nut and bolt was removed, yet pricing was supposed to only start "above $20,000." That doesn't sound bad to me for a "new" classic car. If I was in the market for a collector car like an original Z-car a decade ago, it would have been really neat to get a Nissan-certified one like these, although I believe that the program was ended after only a few dozen cars were restored.

In the April 7, 1997 issue of Autoweek, the then-new (two generations ago as of today) 1997 Camry CE was featured in an Autofile. Thinking of current criticisms of the Camry - that it's too soft, too much of an appliance, that it is favored by an older demographic - made me chuckle at a few quotes: "The Camry is so smooth and seamless that it could be the ultimate automotive appliance" and "The five-speed [manual], now available with the optional V6, is Toyota's first step toward cultivating a crop of more youthful Camry buyers. There were also several mentions of Toyota's cost control efforts in that generation Camry; the Yen's relative strength to the dollar at the time made things very tricky for Japanese automakers in the US. It seems that, other than the Camry SE (and the SE, the sportiest Camry, is not available with a manual transmission), Toyota still hasn't really made much of an effort to cultivate a performance image around the Camry. That hasn't really slowed sales, though, as the car continues to shatter sales records even a decade later.

I hope you enjoyed this stroll through a slice of the automotive world as it was ten years ago. The lesson I've taken from reading these old magazines is that what was once considered good, might now considered bad if it's not regularly updated. Expectations are constantly being elevated, and automakers cannot rest on their laurels.

There are still more magazines in the bottom of my closet, so if others find this as interesting/amusing as me, I may do another article of this type.

Memo To Porsche From Nissan- "Here's Your Daddy"

Source: Autoblog

The GT-R will be impressive when it debuts in just a couple of months, and from the numbers, it looks like it'll give a Porsche 911 Turbo quite a run for its (big pile of) money. The horsepower figure for both cars is 480ps, and while the GT-R gives up some torque to the Porsche, the GT-R rips off equally quick dashes to 100 km/h (3.9 seconds) and has been designed with vehicular balance as an overarching theme.

Okay, so it's all still rumour at this point. And at a rumoured weight of 3800 pounds, it's probably not going to eat the world for lunch as was rumoured a few years ago. But still, the rumours are continuing to point at the upcoming GT-R as essentially an AWD Japanese Z06 equivalent. And that's not bad at all.

Porsche Appears To Be The First To Do The Right Thing

A few weeks ago I mentioned the pricing discrepancies between vehicles in the US and Canada- in some cases, manufacturers have piggy backed on the appreciation of the Canadian dollar (or depreciation of the US dollar, depending on your point of view), and have been making bundles of money on the backs of Canadians.

Well, one auto manufacturer appears to have confronted the issue thus far, and the answer might surprise you- Porsche.

In what appears to be a first for the Canadian market, Porsche has dropped prices across their lineup from 5-8%. Curiously, instead of touting it and bringing it to the attention of their buyers, they're calling it a 'market adjustment' instead. What does this mean in hard numbers? Basically, the Boxster drops from a base price of $63,000 CDN to a base price of $58,000 CDN. A 911 will cost you at a minimum about $94,000 instead of the cool $100,000 it did before.

So in response to this, what do I propose? A complete boycott of all automakers in Canada except for Porsche. 911 Turbos for everybody!

2008 Infinti QX56 Road Test

Over the summer, I paid off my 2004 Honda Accord, and being an auto enthusiast, I was ready to trade in and trade up to something different. The Honda had been great for me, but I was very interested in the new 2007 Infiniti G35 sedan, so I requested a brochure from Infiniti's website.

Well, I decided to keep the Honda for the time being, and hopefully continue driving it for a few more years, and use the savings to buy a "fun" third car.

I hadn't given much thought, then, to Infiniti since then until I received a mailing from them offering me a test drive in the revised 2008 QX56 luxury sport utility vehicle. I'm always up for driving a new car (or truck), and especially when Infiniti offers me a $100 American Express gift card just for doing so. Today, over my lunch break, I drove to the Infiniti dealer and checked it out.

The sales staff was very courteous, and the salesman pulled around with a brand new black QX56 that just arrived off the truck overnight. It still had plastic wrap everywhere on the interior, but it really looked pretty good in black.

Exterior
The QX56 shares all of its body panels except for the front end with the more pedestrian Nissan Armada. I've never been a big fan of the QX56's style, especially the front end. The tops of the doors have an interesting arch, but the result is that they appear to have been designed for a different vehicle and shoehorned into the QX's profile. It's a HUGE truck, but seems to sit relatively low to the ground; it's almost as if it's too big for its wheels.

Interior
Infiniti has done a nice job packing its flagship SUV with all the techno goodies that luxury buyers expect: XM Satellite Radio, navigation with integrated NavTraffic, Bluetooth connectivity, intelligent key, power liftgate, power folding third row seats, and more. The center stack has been updated in the QX56 for 2008, and the changes are very welcome, as the old version was clearly one of the weakest points in the interior.

The smart key start is nice, but – same as with the 2008 Cadillac CTS, I always wish that vehicles with smart keys would then have the accompanying push button start instead of a “fake key” – in the spot where the key had been in earlier models, there is a plastic piece shaped almost like a key that must be twisted to start or stop the engine. Meanwhile, much lesser Nissan models that have clean-sheet interiors (such as the 2007 Altima) have true push button start.

Interior materials seem to be pretty good overall – the dash was mostly made of soft plastics and the door panels have stitched vinyl armrests and attractive real wood trim on all four of them. The leather on the seats was buttery soft and definitely a higher grade than Nissan products receive. Storage spaces abound - there is even a small shelf between the front seats and the center console. The third row folds flat into the floor, which is a nice feature the GM vehicles don't have, thanks to Infiniti's independent rear suspension. The QX that I drove did not have the optional DVD entertainment system, but did have an overhead console that stretched all the way to the third row. Although the extra storage is nice, it felt like extremely hollow, cheap plastic and was out of place in a $56,000 vehicle.

On the Road
The 5.6 liter, 320 horsepower engine has a nice purr at idle. Once dropped into gear, the cabin is relatively quiet. I haven’t driven a 2007 Escalade to compare the cabin noise levels between these two, but relative to our own 2005 Nissan Pathfinder, there is less wind noise and less engine noise. The engine does have a nice growl when it's given some throttle. I stomped on the gas pedal on an on-ramp, and it felt pretty good, but not quick. From a seat-of-the-pants perspective, it felt about the same as our smaller and lighter Pathfinder does with its 4.0 liter V6. The Pathfinder has less horsepower and torque, but also less weight to lug around.

The ride was comfortable and the truck felt relatively responsive, mostly thanks to the standard-for-2008 20 inch wheels. The steering had just the right amount of feedback for such a large vehicle, and didn't feel overboosted the way a 2007 Suburban LTZ does. I didn't do any panic stops, but the brakes felt fine.

Final Thoughts
During the ride, the salesman made some somewhat disparaging comments about the Escalade (most of which were incorrect):
- The body hasn't changed in 15 years (wrong - it was all new in early 2006)
- People are really flocking to the QX56 instead of the Escalade (the extended length Escalade ESV alone outsells the QX56 by 39% through August 31, and combining Escalade and Escalade ESV sales, the Cadillac has outsold the Infiniti by 175% through August 31.)

In looking at pricing of these two vehicles, the QX56 seems to be too expensive for what it is. True, the Escalade is a dressed-up Tahoe, just like the QX56 is a dressed-up Armada. But the Escalade has brand cachet, a more luxurious interior, and 83 more horsepower (403 versus 320 in the Infiniti), all for about $5,000 more (when comparing the Escalade ESV with the QX56). In the Infiniti's favor, the navigation system is more modern with a more attractive display, and the Cadillac lacks Bluetooth or a smart key.

If I was in the market for a $56,000 gas-guzzling SUV, I'd go with an Escalade. However, I'm not in that market, so I won't be going with either. Pricing out a revised 2008 V8 Pathfinder might be a different story, however!

Jim Press Leaves Toyota for Chrysler LLC

In an absolutely stunning development, longtime Toyota executive Jim Press, who had been with the company for 37 years and was the first American ever elected to Toyota Motor Corporation's Board of Directors, resigned from the company to become Vice Chairman and President of Chrysler LLC. He now has the same job title as former Chrysler CEO Tom LaSorda, except that Mr. Press will be responsible for Sales and Marketing, and Mr. LaSorda will be responsible for manufacturing, labor relations, procurement, supply, and global business development and alliances.

With Toyota, which Mr. Press joined in 1970 when annual sales were about 100,000 units, his job titles were Toyota Motor America president and a Toyota Motor Corporation (TMC) senior managing director. Toyota is now the largest automaker in the world and the #2 automaker in the US (depending on the month), with 2,542,545 light vehicles sold in 2006.

Frankly, I'm surprised to see someone like Jim Press leave a comfortable, successful environment like he had at Toyota for the uncertainty of Chrysler. I would have expected Tom LaSorda to be out the door (since he was basically demoted from CEO to a COO role), but I guess money talks. Also, while Toyota sold more vehicles in the US than Chrysler did, the Chrysler job might be larger in scope than Mr. Press's job with Toyota was.

Jim Press has a proven track record of success in the industry - he was one of the executives who pushed for the latest Tundra to be larger, faster, and more capable than previous 7/8ths scale half-baked versions, and its sales success so far has proven that strategy to be a good one. Also, I needn't remind you that the Toyota Camry has been the best selling car in the US for nearly a decade. The guy knows how to sell cars, and Chrysler needs it. I believe that Chrysler, having already undergone several painful restructurings, needs someone who knows what consumers want and how to sell cars (and alter/shape perceptions of those products). Mr. LaSorda is good at his more operations-based behind-the-scenes role, and as long as Mr. Press can encourage the development of more appealing vehicles, and more importantly get consumers to buy them, Chrysler will be fine. Chrysler's dealer body is near mutiny, and Mr. Press has already promised to make repairing that relationship a high priority in his tenure.

I wish Mr. Press the best of luck in his new job. It won't be easy, but he is probably the right guy for the role. Also, congratulations are in order to Chrysler for the recruiting coup d'état, with a seemingly struggling company snagging Toyota's top US executive. Also, Toyota has lost its Lexus division vice president of marketing Debra Wahl Meyer at the end of August, who joined Chrysler as the company's chief marketing officer.

Super Corvette Gets a Name?

The future "super Corvette," often referred to as the Blue Devil, Corvette SS, or Z07, has been named the ZR1, according to Todd Lassa's blog on MotorTrend.com.

If this is true (and I say "if" because Motor Trend has had "scoops" before that turned out to be completely wrong), it's a good move for GM in my opinion. For those of us who reached driving age around the time the Corvette ZR-1 made its debut in 1990, the name conjures up images of the ultimate in Corvette performance at the time.

I still think the ultimate Corvette will be called the Corvette SS, but the ZR1 name (not hyphenated) is a better name choice than SS. Yes, apparently there was an SS variant of an old Corvette somewhere in the past, but only the biggest Corvette history buff/die hard will be able to make that connection. There's no such problem with Corvette ZR1.

Motor Trend also stated matter of factly that this specific model will have 650 horsepower. I was actually hoping for a little more, for bragging rights and all, but that's still an awful lot, more than I could imagine needing (or even being able to control safely). Now, 505 horsepower, that's a different story!

Absent public confirmation from GM on this car's name, I guess we won't know for sure until it debuts in concept form at the 2008 North American International Auto Show in Detroit next January. I'll be there in person to cover it!

I Know What You're Thinking

Where the heck are the updates from Mags?

Hold yer horses. Real life stuff has gotten a hold of me. Until then, Mr. Firebird will do what he can to sate the 10's of you who read daily.

2009 Dodge Journey Crossover Revealed

Dodge's new midsize crossover, named Journey, was revealed this past weekend. Although the Journey shares its platform with the Sebring and Avenger, it has a much longer wheelbase to accommodate the all-important third row seat. It will reach US dealerships in the first quarter of 2008, and will be sold in Europe (where Chrysler is working to establish the Dodge brand) starting in the middle of 2008.

Before even getting into the vehicle itself, I find it interesting that so many family haulers carry names that invoke adventures/travels. Other than the 2009 Dodge Journey, Chevrolet will come to market around 2009 with its Traverse crossover. Ford already sells the Expedition (and used to sell the Excursion). Chrysler/Plymouth used to sell a Voyager minivan. Actually, of the nine synonyms for 'journey' in the Microsoft Word thesaurus, 33% of them are, or were, recently-sold vehicle names (Voyage[r], Expedition, and Excursion). Incidentally, Word lists six synonyms for 'traverse,' of which one - 'navigat[e/or]' is the name of a vehicle.

The Journey is a nice looking vehicle. Certainly, it has much more attractive proportions than its platform mates, the Avenger and Sebring. The front is reminiscent of the Dodge Grand Caravan and at least looks like other Dodge products, and the profile reminds me of a Mazda CX-9 (certainly not a bad looking vehicle to emulate). The rear view is reminiscent of a Volkswagen Touareg, with horizontal taillights placed in the middle of the sides. Both front and rear overhangs appear to be fashionably short, especially considering its front wheel drive-based underpinnings.

Inside, although interior space won't be as voluminous or useful as a Caravan's, there are some nice family-friendly features either standard or optional, depending on the trim level chosen. The second row seats slide forward or backward to improve either second or third row passenger room, there are numerous "hidden" storage compartments under seats or in the floor, YES Essentials stain- and smell-resistant upholstery is available in all cloth seat-equipped versions (leather in standard in the top R/T model), and integrated child booster seats. From the press release photos, the interior detailing doesn't look as impressive as some of its competitors will. Until I actually see one in person, I'll reserve judgment on the quality of interior materials. After spending a few hours in a 2006 Dodge Magnum last weekend, I can attest that although the Magnum's interior design is somewhat bland, most of the dash is soft-touch, and not as bad as it looks. Chrysler said early in 2007 that they were going to have a renewed commitment to interior design and materials. This vehicle may have been too far along in the development curve to receive the full benefit of that, but it's nicer looking inside than other recent Chrysler efforts.

In terms of safety equipment, the Journey is coming to bat with everything that's expected in an all-new family hauler: multi-stage driver and front passenger airbags, front seat-mounted airbags, three-row side curtain airbags, standard ABS, stability control, roll mitigation, an available back-up camera, and optional all-wheel drive.

Powertrain options are numerous. Since the Journey will be sold in Europe, a small 2.0 liter turbo diesel is available there only with a 6-speed Getrag DSG gearbox. US engine choices include a 173 horsepower 2.4 liter four cylinder, a 186 horsepower 2.7 liter V6, and a 235 horsepower 3.5 liter V6. The 3.5 liter comes with a six-speed automatic, while the other engines get four-speeds. Chrysler has not given an estimated curb weight, but only people who care more about fuel economy than safely merging onto the highway would select the four cylinder, because I'm guessing it will be overwhelmed by a three-row crossover's mass. The 3.5 liter V6 is about 30-40 horsepower down on the class norm of 265-275, and that baseline might continue to increase by early 2008, but it should still have enough power to move the Journey briskly when needed.

The crossover field certainly is getting crowded. Chrysler was caught for the past few years without any viable crossovers in its Dodge lineup; hopefully they can catch onto the crossover wave and sell a few of these. They seem like a reasonably attractive, compelling package for families.

Canadians Are Getting The Shaft

Have you looked at car prices lately?

If you're an American, probably not too closely since all of your media and information is fairly insular and will always report the US pricing alone. Subcompact cars will run from 12k to 16k, compacts will nudge up to 21k, midsizers will range from 20k to 30k, and so forth. There are identifiable pricing segments, and there are identifiable ranges. Yes, inflation has moved pricing upwards, but at a fairly average pace.

If you're a Canadian however, and you've looked at car prices lately, you're probably slamming your head against your computer monitor as you read this. The reason? Car prices in Canada are ridiculously out of whack. Due to pricing differences predicated on a 60 to 70 cent Canadian dollar from 3-5 years ago, Canadian car prices have absolutely soared compared to their American counterparts- without moving up beyond usual inflation increases- all this is because if you haven't heard about it recently- the Canadian dollar is floating near 95 cents US...and climbing.

Parity between the bucks appears likely to happen, and every car maker is sitting back quietly raking in the profits.

Some examples?

Take the Honda S2000. In Canada, the pricing starts at approximately $51,000. A 70 cent dollar would give you an American price of about $35,000. However, with the dollar at the level it is, the American price should be closer to $49,000. Want to know the actual price of an S2000 in the US? $34,000. So for every S2000 sold near sticker in Canada right now, Honda is making an extra $15,000 Canadian. Without doing anything. Think about that for a second. If you adjust for the current dollar, the S2000 shouldn't be anywhere near $51,000 in Canada right now- it should be closer to $36,000.

Want another example? Let's go mainstream.

How about the Camry? The XLE V6 trim with navigation will cost a Canadian buyer a tad over $40,000. So you would expect that the same American car would cost about $37,000 US right? Wrong. A Camry XLE V6 with navigation in the US will cost at MOST $31,520. In essence, just by sitting pat and letting the markets move, Toyota is making an extra $6,000 per Camry sold in Canada. Think they don't want to increase their market share at these prices?

A final example? Let's play with a truck.

An extended cab Chevrolet Silverado LTZ 4WD with a regular box with cost a Canadian buyer a shade over $45,000 with no other options ticked off. The American version at current dollar levels should cost almost $43,000 US. Instead, US buyers can get the exact same vehicle in the US for about $34,500- a difference of $7,500 US. When you're selling as many Silverados as GM does, this is big money.

And it's not just the 3 examples above. Every single model of vehicle out there has this discrepancy built into it. Now, I'm not advocating that car manufacturers change their pricing structures on a month to month basis depending on the level of the dollar- but we're talking a more than 20 cent swing in the last 5 years, and not a single one has done anything to rectify the situation. Would a yearly evaluation help? Every 2 years? Even more amazing is that no one is doing or saying anything in Canada right now. No consumer groups have made a peep and no one is writing into their local newspaper griping about it. And yet it's plastered in front of us regularly if we read any information from an American source. Yes, there are some border dealers who specialize in importing American cars over, but really, this is a quiet 'epidemic' that is getting no play.

I guess the only question is- who will be the first to sacrifice some profit in order to make an artificial price play in the Canadian market? Or even more out there- who will be the first automaker in the US to RAISE prices to reflect the weakness of the greenback?