Source: TheCarFanatic

If the Pontiac Aztek came from the Toyota RV2, that must mean the RV2 must have come from my 2nd grade LEGO experiments becuase that’s the last time I saw some ICBM doors on a car that has the front of a Lamborghini and opens into a camper. This is one of the weirdest concept cars I’ve personally ever seen. From the lime green that we expect form a Porsche race car to the boat-like rear end, Toyota was making a foray into Frankencars. It does make you wonder though: If this car some how made it to production, would Toyota still be the powerhouse we see today, or would if have marked the beginning of Japan’s “Carpocolypse”?

A lot of people have been using the above graphic to show the current state of gas taxes and the fact that states are contemplating a tax hike in order to increase governmental revenues in the current economic environment. Though it’s been shown time and time again that people will use less of what they are taxed upon (and in turn, revenues will actually go down, not up), local, state and federal agencies continue to tax the average citizen instead of optimizing their budgets like any private organization. Looking at the above should be a reminder as to whom makes the most amount of money from gasoline. It’s not Exxon or Shell. It’s the state and federal government. Whereas the profit margin (on average) sits between 3-5%, the government makes almost 22% (in the lowest case) of the price of a gallon of gas (and mind you, they have done nothing like exploration, refining or transport to take that oil from the ground and turned it into something that will power your car).

I hope you will all remember this next time Congress starts to complain about windfall profit taxes and the greed of oil executives.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has investigated 5,471 injury crashes that took place between July 3, 2005 and December 31, 2007. Unlike previous studies automatically generated from computerized data found in police reports, researchers in this effort were dispatched to accident scenes before they were cleared. This allowed a first-hand comparison of physical evidence with direct interviews of witnesses and others involved in the incident. NHTSA evaluated the data to determine the factors most responsible for the collision.

Overall, vehicles “traveling too fast for conditions” accounted for only 5% of the critical pre-crash events (page 23). More significant factors included driving off the edge of a road (22%), or people who drifted over the center dividing line (11%)

When driver error was the primary cause of a crash, researchers went further to identify the “critical reason” behind that error. Distraction and not paying attention to the road accounted for 41 percent of the errors. Ten percent of errors were attributed to drivers lacking proper driving skills and either freezing up or overcompensating behind the wheel. Eight percent were asleep, having a heart attack or otherwise incapacitated. A similar eight percent of errors were attributed to driving too fast for conditions and five percent driving too fast for a curve (page 25).

More Information:

You can clearly see the statistics give the story plain and simple. Showing this to a cop isn’t going to save you from a speeding ticket anytime soon, but these statistics, and similar studies from other state sources, can only go to help raise the speed limits on our streets and highways. As someone who travels long distances relatively regularly, this would be a welcome addition to my travels and save some time for sure. So, who’s going to be brave enough to start talking about state Autobahns in America?

Source: http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/2008/us-crashcause.pdf

Another key to Ford’s performance is their European car lines and development of small cars:

Both Ford and GM are unlike Chrysler in that they have robust foreign operations. For Ford, Europe and South America earned $2.5 billion pre-tax in the first nine months this year. Those markets are slowing, yes, but they are strong businesses. Europe is providing the small-car knowledge and engineering that Ford needs in the U.S.

With the possibility of the government giving out money, can you blame them for at least asking for access to lines of credit? They are taking responsibility for anything that might put them in a position where they need more time to trim down operations and paying back anything they get from the government as you or I would with a line of credit as opposed to loans that give government partial control of operations and subject to congresses absurd whims. Ford One FTW.

Source: Forbes

Recently a few other auto blogs have done some testing on the 2010 Ford Fusion Hybrid. As the peak of Ford efficiency technology, the car got almost a combined cycle of 45MPG. A recent CNN Money story has shown that GM has spend almost $750 million developing the new Volt. I have no idea where Chrysler is as there’s almost nothing exciting coming out of there the last few months. Besides that, how, you say, could I be against companies spending so much money and bringing such efficient cars to the road at a time when energy efficiency and research is so important? Because it’s all a sham.

Let’s look at the Chevy Volt. $750 million dollars and what does GM have to show for it? A test mule. In terms of car development, that’s a huge amount of money. GM has stated most of that money went towards battery technology. So, that mean GM is going to be a battery maker? If their supplier Cobasys (currently in financial trouble) fails, they will.  So, why hasn’t GM decided to work with companies like GE, EnerDel (Tesla, Mercedes) or even Toyota for that matter in acquiring proven battery technology created by people who have been at this a lot longer than them. Why are they trying to re-invent the wheel? I understand that the vertical nature of the car business works in many cases. However, can you possibly say that you can make a better battery for hybrids than someone who has been doing so for 10 years already? Additionally, why would GM buy a failing company?

Let’s check out this Ford Fusion Hybrid now. 45MPG combined cycle for city and highway driving. To the average American, that sounds pretty good. However, what about the average European? The Ford Mondeo (Fusion equivalent) with a 2.0L diesel engines gets almost 57MPG. The 2.2L petrol engines gets around the same 45MPG as the Hybrid Fusion but without all the time and effort and money spent in developing a new, COMPLEX hybrid drivetrain. Look to some other brands that are selling full sized sedans like BMWs 320d and you’ll see a ~$30,000USD car that gets 59.1MPG and still does 0-60 7.9 seconds. The point is, why is Ford spending all this money when they already have a product that surpasses all US safety and economy standards for sale in Europe and the rest of the world?

Chrysler still has nothing new in any sort of hybrid that stands out or they have tried to make a huge deal about. Maybe this is a good thing. Though I can’t see the point of cars like the Aspen Hybrid that still only gets 19 / 22 MPG in the city and highway, respectively. UPDATE: Ah, here’s what happens when you’re that boring… Detroit Free Press

The point of all this is to show that even in a time of changing requirements (fuel efficiency) and dramatic economic upheaval that would end in bankruptcy if nothing is done, Detroit has done nothing truely dramatic to change their destiny. Whereas Tesla and Fisker are coming out with amazing plug-in electric cars liks the Roadster and Karma, whats sporty or fun about the Chevrolet Volt (most unoriginal electric car name ever, besides the Chevy Ohm, Ford Ampere and Chrysler Impedance). Have they shifted their brand (or attempted to) like BMW has with the EfficientDynamics or Mercedes with their “Blue” (BlueTec, BlueZero) brand? They all could just as easily gone the complete opposite way and say, we’re just going to be super cool fuel efficient cars like the Toyota iQ that doesn’t need hybrid technology and slow down production of our trucks to create more of a “halo” arond the large vehicles with a more limited brand.

There are a thousand reasons why Detroit needs new leadership but only one of them matters. They are all about to go bankrupt without huge amounts of car purchasing today or large scale loans (from either banks or the US Government). Considering even banks realize how bad an idea loaning them money is, shouldn’t that mean that tax payers money is an even worse idea? Let’s clean house in the Motor City and turn these car giants into lean, mean machines that can compete with their Japanese (and French in the case of Nissan/Renault), German and Korean counter parts. Either let them fail for their lack of foresight. Bankruptcy isn’t the worse thing in the world. Neither is failure. Experience is what you get when you didn’t get what you wanted and this is exactly what America will be getting. Experience. “Saving” these companies now will only hurt the American car makers in the future. If you though the credit crunch was bad Detriot, wait until you feel the wrath of the American consumer. You will have stole their hard earned money via taxes so you could continue to waste cash and live off the fat of the land like some sort of corporate welfare recipient. Do like millions of Americans and earn your money by being the best. That’s how we got to be the most wealthy and prosperous nation in the world and it works. There is no “easy” way out and in the end, taking the bailout money will hurt you. It may not seem like it when you get that first check from Uncle Sam, but in 3, 5 maybe 10 years from now when your market share has eroded to almost nothing, you can look back and know exactly when it all went wrong.

UPDATE: Well, the entire process has stopped again with the death of a bill in the Senate this evening. It seems GM, Ford and Chrysler have been given another chance to fail. I applaud the Senate for not approving a plan of action that they were not 100% sure would work. Throwing money you don’t have at a problem that might not be fixed by it is a waste and the American people should applaud this.

Good job!

Source: YouTube

The UAW is likely to seek a seat on General Motors Corp.’s board and expects the automaker to offer another round of hourly buyout and retirement incentives next year in the event the union grants concessions to help the automaker win federal loans.

Maybe someone forgot to tell the UAW what a seat on a Board of Directors does. A member of a board is appointed and these appointed persons jointly oversee the activities of a company, most notably accounting to the stakeholders for the organization’s performance. It is the job of the board to make sure the officers and various managers are running the company in such a manner as to maximize efficiency. That doesn’t mean offering huge sums of money to labor unions when it’s been shown time and time again that unions do nothing to improve the quality of work, size of the paycheck or conditions of the workers. They are a relic of a time when workers were easily exploited. A Detroit Free Press article in 2007 even explains in real number how well non-unionized workers do:

Toyota Motor Corp. gave workers at its largest U.S. plant bonuses of $6,000 to $8,000, boosting the average pay at the Georgetown, KY, plant to the equivalent of $30 an hour. That compares with a $27 hourly average for UAW workers, most of whom did not receive profit-sharing checks last year.

Make a great product and you’ll be rewarded. Sounds like a great system as opposed to the UAWs entitlement system. Are we supposed to believe that the UAW is going to give into some small hourly buyouts and retirement incentives for a seat on a Board that will not be able to do anything because he’ll be working against every other member? I’m 100% for paying workers whatever they are worth, but adding the union middleman will only cause liabilities to stay high and wages to continue to plummet, if not implode with the rest of the “big 3.”

Source: Detroit Free Press

Lock up your GMs! Seem as if criminals have it out for you this year. Between Cadillacs and Hummers, GM hold 4 of the top 8 spots on this list. In fact, if you have any large American car, you might want to think about building a small shed to house it.

Car: Claims Per 1,000/Average Loss Payment Per Claim

10. Honda S2000 Convertible: 8.1/$13,624
9. 2005-2007 Dodge Durango: 8.1/$9,682
8. 2005-2007 Hummer H2: 8.7/$18,791
7. 2005-2007 Dodge Magnum: 9.9/$8,926
6. 2005-2007 Hummer H2 SUT: 10.0/$23,771
5. 2005-2007 Ford F-350 SuperCrew: 10.7/$20,138
4. 2006-2007 Dodge Charger: 11/$7,047
3. 2007 Cadillac Escalade: 11.3/$14,657
2. 2005-2007 Ford F-250 SuperCrew: 13.1/$19,250
1. 2007 Cadillac Escalade ESV: 15.0/$13,060

For the same reason American car makers love to sell large SUVs and truck, thieves are seeking these behemoths out. They are large, cheap ways to get a nice car that will allow you to put expensive stereos, large rims and other accessories on that are easy to steal and resell without too much worry. Dropping 24s on your Hummer may say, “You’re ballin’” to your friends, but it says, “Come steal me” to every car criminal out there.

On the other hand, should be you be looking for the most inconspicuous (boring) cars on the road to protect your insurance premiums and pimped car stereos, you might want to check out the list below. To be honest, not all of them are boring or lame. Some of them just have excellent security systems and car-jackers know that it’s not worth the time to steal the car or there will be no way to re-sell the expensive parts off the car. As you can see, most of the cars are people carriers though with a preponderance of SUVs. The interesting thing is that whereas some of the cars are rather popular (Ford Focus, VW Beetle, Toyota Prius) some of the cars are the most obscure models available (Buick Terraza, Saturn Relay).

10. 2005-2007 Ford Freestyle
9. 2005-2007 Saturn Relay
8. 2005-2007 Toyota Prius
7. 2005-2007 Volvo V70
6. 2005-2007 Ford Focus
5. 2005-2007 Volkswagen (New) Beetle
4. 2005-2007 Buick Terraza
3. 2005-2007 Subaru Forrester
2. 2005-2007 Buick Rainier
1. 2005-2007 Mercedes-Benz E-Class

Source: Highway Safety and Highway Loss Data Institute