Thursday, October 9, 2008

My Key™

This week, Ford announced that it will be introducing a new feature, My Key™, beginning with the 2010 Ford Focus next year. My Key™ allows parents to program certain safety features on a key-by-key basis. It is done using the vehicle's message center. These new features include:

These first 3 are "standard" when using My Key™:

  • Persistent Ford Beltminder with audio mute - Ford already has the seat belt nanny as standard equipment on all of its vehicles. It sounds a chime every minute for five minutes. This goes that extra step further to Super Nanny. First, the chime doesn't stop after 5 minutes. But the part that will really annoy your teenager is the audio mute, which does exactly what you think. The audio system is muted until the seat belt is buckled. It also displays "Buckle Up to Unmute Audio" in the instrument cluster. Just what every teen wants - their mom programmed into the car!
  • Earlier low-fuel warning - instead of warning you when you have 50 miles to go, My Key™ warns you at 75 miles. Hard to argue with this one. I could use this myself. Actually, what they really need is a low-fuel warning that gets increasingly persistent the closer you get to empty. Maybe throw in some profanity to make sure it is noticed.
  • Park aid (this is the rear backup sonar that beeps when you get too close to something) and Blind Spot Information System with Cross Traffic Alert (I really don't know what this is) cannot be deactivated.

Features that need to be programmed:

  • Limited top speed of 80 mph - I can just hear the arguments now. "What if there's an emergency, and I need to get home or to a hospital right away?" or "What if I'm going to be late for curfew?" Parents, get ready!
  • Traction control system, that limits tire spin, cannot be deactivated. This one will be a bummer at the Woodward Dream Cruise.
  • Limited audio volume to 44 percent of total volume. First, I want to know how Ford came up with 44%. Is that just below the "make your ears bleed" 45%? And if 44% is deemed loud enough, what kind of idiot would ever need to turn it up all the way? I'll do the math for you. "All the way up" would be 127% louder. Wow.
  • A speed alert chime at 45, 55 or 65 mph - just in case your little genius doesn't know how fast he/she is driving. Maybe the sound needs to be limited to 44% so you can hear the speed chime?

Kidding aside (pun intended -Ed.), I think this is a great thing to help parents trust that their kids are being responsible while driving the car without supervision. Ford has research that says that parents would likely let their kids use the car more with My Key™. This will give the kids more time behind the wheel earlier, which should make for some better drivers. Teems also said that they were cool with this technology if they got to drive more. Sounds like a win-win. Everybody is happy.

Concerns

Until I see this in action, though, I have some concerns. What would stop a kid from "unprogramming" it? I assume that Ford has thought of this, but there was nothing in the press release.

Another issue is deactivation. Say you buy a brand new Focus for your angel when she's 17. She keeps it for several years and doesn't like how you've programmed it. She's now an adult and wants the nanny gone. I'd like to be a fly on the wall for that conversation. Parent:"So exactly why do you need to drive more than 80?" or "Why would you want the radio louder than that?"

The deactivation issue also might rear its ugly head if/when you sell the car with the My Key™ still activated. Oops.

There are also potential legal issues. As mentioned above, there might actually be an emergency that involves a need to go to the hospital. I can see the headlines now. Somebody will sue Ford about this. They won't have a case, in my opinion, but this is America! We don't let logic influence our right to blame somebody else for our problems.

Overall, I think this is a great idea. And given Ford's propensity to over-analyze everything, I'm sure that their legal staff (the dreaded "OGC") has considered the issues raised above and they think this is still a good idea. I applaud the innovation. Nice work, guys.

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

2008 Mercury Sable - Not quite a knockout, but pretty close!

As I made my rental reservation a couple weeks ago, I decided to splurge and spend the extra $10 / week to move from a mid-size to a full-size vehicle. This includes vehicles such as the Acura RL, Dodge Charger, Nissan Maxima and the like. As I remembered when I walked to my space in the rental lot, it also includes the Ford Crown Victoria. That's right, I had the opportunity to play police officer for a week!

Throwing my travel bag and computer into the enormous trunk (which, for some insane reason, has a spare tire right in the middle of it taking up a ton of space), I hopped in, slid across the fine plastic front seat, and was thrilled to find that my paperwork was not in the car as it should be.

I returned to the counter and explained my plight - how could I possibly leave the lot without papers? Naturally they had them handy, but I persisted and talked my way out of the Crown Victoria and into a 2008 Mercury Sable.

Now, as some of you may know, the Sable wasn't always a Sable. It started life as the Mercury Montego a few years ago as an all new platform while the "old" Sable was still in production. A reasonably sized sales disaster, along with her sister vehicle the Ford Five Hundred, the Montego was rebadged a Sable after the old Sable bodystyle (and President of Ford!) were discontinued. The new President, Alan Mulally, determined that a) making all of your vehicles start with the same letter as their brand (Ford Fusion, Five Hundred, Focus, Mercury Monterey, Montego, etc) was assinine, and b) so was dropping the car with the most recognized brand name in your lineup. So the Montego because the Sable, and the Five Hundred because the Taurus.

I've driven the "old" Sable and old Taurus, and now that I've driven the new Sable, let me tell you, this is a completely different vehicle that is nicer in every single regard. This particular vehicle (VIN 1MEHM40W08G620299) had a nice interior, was well put together, and best of all, was functional. Although it rode a bit soft for my liking, I could see this as a very workable vehicle for our family if we moved away from our existing vehicle. So let's get at it in more detail:

Exterior: Well put together, broad appeal

As mentioned above, this vehicle is a couple years old, but has seen a couple minor updates and while not striking, it is far from stale. It is more accurately described as "appealing to a broad audience"; it won't knock your socks off, but you'll be hard pressed to find anything repulsive.

The fit and finish of this vehicle was excellent. The body panel gaps were consistent, although a bit wider that need be in some spots - tighter tolerances at sheetmetal intersections would help make this vehicle a bit cleaner looking.

While not technically part of the exterior, I should point out that the moderate sized rear decklid houses an enormous trunk. The used to advertise that this car will hold 10 bags of golf clubs (or some similar number that was significantly more passengers than will ever fit) and I don't doubt it. I'll bet in a pinch you could probably get 6-7 golfers to the course - 5 in the interior and the other one or two in the trunk with all the bags.


Interior: Excellent Fit & Finish

This particular unit had leather seats and a two-tone interior. As a long time Bass and Guinness fan I have a definite affinity for black and tan, so perhaps that explains why I liked this interior. I suppose the wood trim is more accurately called "blonde" as it is very light in color. And yet, unlike other vehicles this wood doesn't appear fake, it just looks nice. Perhaps it is a very good replica, but in any case it at least looks real!

The remainder of the interior materials were equally well chosen, although my standard complaint was again present - lack of padding on the door upper where you rest your elbow. Maybe I've just been spoiled with my previous vehicles (ok, I have, but that's a different story) but since spending significant time in rentals I've got a constantly sore elbow. I've got other things I could whine about as well, but I don't get to write for a blog related to those...

The seats were supportive, but not overly sculpted - hard cornering will leave you sliding around a bit so ensure you have a good grip on the wheel. Or stay off the race track, which is probably a decent idea with this vehicle anyway.

The steering wheel and controls were well placed and easily reached. Volume, station/track change, and cruise controls are within easy reach on the wheel while the center stack houses the radio itself, manual HVAC controls, and the requisite hazard light switch. The instrument panel includes all the usual suspects: a large, easy to read speedometer (unless you need to read your speed in km/hr, in which case you are out of luck), a large tachometer (why? it's an automatic!), temperature and fuel gauges, and an LED readout.

A minor irritant that seems to be present in most automatic vehicles these days are the steering wheel radio and cruise controls are reversed. "What difference does it make?", you may ask, "you have both hands available...". And this would be true, while driving an automatic. But if you look at most manual vehicles, the cruise controls are on the right, underneath the hand that is only the wheel while not shifting. Why is this? Because you can't use the cruise control while shifting, so there is no reason to access it with anything other than your shift hand. You may want to change the radio station, volume, etc, by contrast, and thus those are located underneath your hand that is always on the wheel. Somewhere along the line someone reversed these and thus I find myself jabbing away at the "Accel" button while trying to change the radio station. Well look at that - I found something else to whine about after all :)


Powertrain: Wow! Have you driven this Ford lately?

Powerful. Responsive. Smooooooth. Words you typically don't hear in relation to Ford vehicles, and certainly not from me. And yet this car shifted so smoothly and effortlessly throughout my trip that I found myself wondering, on the Friday trip back to the airport, whether or not I was driving a Continuously Variable Transmission (CVT). As it turns out, the answer was no, but I had to actively pay attention in order to figure out this was a conventional automatic, and I'm still not sure if it was a 5 or a 6 speed. Major kudo's to the engineers who programmed the powertrain in this vehicle for a job well done. Whether upshifting or downshifting, the engine speed matched the driveline speed and nary a jolt was felt.

Acceleration was brisk and dependable. Push on the gas pedal and off you go and yet the the throttle was not all front-loaded; push a bit harder and you get faster acceleration, push a bit harder than that and a clean downshift occurs to move you up into the powerband.

Steering was tight with a good on-center feel, but as we already determined in the seating section, you'll again want to stay away from the racetrack as the suspension simply won't put up with being thrown around in the corners. Body roll is abundant, as expected in a vehicle of this size and weight, the tires are already scrabbling for sufficient hold, and the car wallows a bit over dips.

Lastly, in the fuel economy arena, the Sable averaged 22 mpg during my 180 miles using just over 8.5 gallons of gas. Pretty respectable given that my morning commutes average about 30 mph in 20 miles of stop and go traffic and my evening commute is spent testing the vehicles capabilities.


The Verdict:

This car is an excellent highway cruiser and more than capable of hauling a family or group of friends around town while getting pretty good gas mileage to boot. It won't set any land speed records, but you can certainly get yourself some speeding tickets if you aren't careful (although I'd bet that you could outhandle the LEO if he were driving an Impala).

I'm generally pretty hard on vehicles and tolerate few flaws - you know a vehicle did well when the biggest complaint is that the redundant radio controls on the steering wheel are on the wrong side.

For those of you looking for a new family mobile, you need to add this one to your consideration set - you won't be disappointed.

Next week: 2009 Saturn Aura

So Exactly What is a Volt?

By now, you’ve probably heard about the Volt. It’s Chevy’s (hopefully) upcoming “extended range electric vehicle” (EREV). To the average person, this is a hybrid, if you think of a hybrid as a vehicle that runs on battery and “traditional” (gasoline or Diesel) power. SAE (the Society of Automotive Engineers) also classifies it as a hybrid. GM wants you to think of this vehicle otherwise. The difference between the Volt and a hybrid as you know them is largely academic to the average customer. You should think of the Volt as a different kind of hybrid. It still runs on battery and gasoline, like the Escape or Prius, but the Volt will be able to run up to 40 miles on battery alone. Current hybrids can run on battery alone only in low-speed situations and for only a short time (“strong” hybrids from Ford, Toyota and some GM hybrids). Some can’t run on battery alone at all (“mild” hybrids from Honda and the other GM hybrids) – the battery only “helps” the gasoline engine. The strong hybrids improve fuel economy more, but also cost more. Now along comes the Volt, which is even more effective, but will also cost even more. To understand why the Volt is different, you need to understand the others as well.

Mild Hybrids
In a mild hybrid, the battery helps the engine propel the car, thus saving fuel. Regenerative braking charges the battery. This means the car is able to take the car’s kinetic energy, which is usually lost as heat when the car brakes, and use it to charge the battery. Mild hybrids also shut the motor down at a stop, saving more fuel.

Strong Hybrids
Though there are various types, strong hybrids are able to propel the vehicle by battery alone, albeit for short distances and low speeds. The battery also provides extra power when strong acceleration is required. Because the battery is used much more than in the mild hybrid, the strong hybrid improves fuel economy more, but also costs more. Strong hybrids are sometimes known as parallel hybrids, because both propulsion systems work together to propel the vehicle. The battery is charged by regenerative braking, but also by the car’s engine in normal use. Many strong hybrids have the unique trait of higher city fuel economy than highway. How can that be? In stop and go city driving, the battery is doing most of the work, so the improvement in fuel economy is much greater, resulting in better economy in the city. Some strong hybrids are “tuned” for power, rather than fuel economy. In these cases, the battery is used more to provide extra power than to ease the burden of the gas engine. You still get better fuel economy, just not as much.

Plug-in Hybrids
Though none yet exist for sale, a plug-in hybrid is a strong hybrid that you can also charge by plugging it in at home. The advantage is that you don’t need to use fuel to charge the battery; it starts out charged from your home electricity. Several automakers are working on developing plug-in hybrids for sale.

Series Hybrids
Though it is not called a hybrid, the Chevrolet Volt is a series hybrid. This is different from a parallel because instead of the 2 power sources working together, but separately, to propel the vehicle (“in parallel”), they work in-line. Only the battery powers the wheels, and in the Volt, it can do so for 40 miles when fully charged. The gasoline engine serves only to provide additional power to the battery when it runs out of power. It does not provide any propulsion. Because of this major difference from other hybrids, GM wants you (and the EPA) to call the Volt and electric vehicle, because the car really runs on electric only. The gas engine is merely a generator for the battery.

This all brings up a question: how do you measure and rate the fuel economy of a car that might never use any fuel? GM claims that 80% of drivers commute less than the 40-mile electric-only range of the Volt. In theory, they would never need to fill up the tank with gas if they remember to charge the battery every night. GM also claims that the Volt will get up to 50 MPG while the engine is running after the battery is drained. So what’s a poor government agency to do? Is the MPG infinite? 50? Something in between? The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has proposed using an SAE standard from 1999. The worst-case scenario is the battery is dead, so you drive 100% with the gas engine running; the best is fully charged and you never need gas. CARB suggests averaging the 2, so if the worst case were 40 MPG, then the “official” MPG would be 80. This idea has merit, but the 80 MPG in this example is theoretical only. A “real” driver would almost certainly never get the 80 MPG. You could also say that about “regular” cars today, but at least the EPA standard is close in almost all circumstances. You can’t say that about the CARB idea. Have a better idea for GM and the EPA? Send your ideas to The Slandy Report, and we’ll pass them along.

So will the Volt change the auto industry, as some claim? In a word, maybe. If the battery performs as hoped. If it is reliable. If you can really travel 40 miles with no gas. If it isn’t overpriced. If it launches on time. The General has really gone out on a limb with the Volt. I believe it is unprecedented to reveal a car more than 2 years before it is supposed to launch. I believe it is also unprecedented to make such bold, specific claims about a technology that doesn’t even exist yet in a commercially viable form. GM has staked its already shaky reputation on the Volt. If it doesn’t deliver on the claims, it could be a setback from which it cannot recover. Several clichés come to mind, including “You live by the sword, you die by the sword.” For the GM’s sake, I hope the sword is friendly (or really soft material).

Present Hybrids for Sale and Their EPA Fuel Economies (City/Hwy)
Mild Hybrids
Chevrolet Malibu 24/32
Honda Civic 40/45
Saturn Aura 24/32
Saturn Vue 25/32

Strong Hybrids
Cadillac Escalade
Chevrolet Tahoe 21/22 RWD or 20/20 4WD
Chrysler Aspen – TBD
Dodge Durango – TBD
Ford Escape 34/30 FWD or 29/27 AWD
GMC Yukon 21/22 RWD or 20/20 4WD
Mercury Mariner 34/30 FWD or 29/27 AWD
Lexus 600h L 20/22
Lexus RX400h 27/24 FWD or 26/24 AWD
Lexus GS450h 22/25
Mazda Tribute 34/30 FWD or 29/27 AWD
Nissan Altima 35/33
Saturn Vue 2-mode
Toyota Camry 33/34
Toyota Highlander 27/25
Toyota Prius 48/45

Plug-in Hybrids
None

Series Hybrids
None

Future Hybrids
Mild Hybrids
2010 Honda Insight

Strong Hybrids
2009 Saturn Vue “2-mode”
2009 Chevrolet Silverado
2010 Dodge Ram
2009 GMC Sierra
Ford Fusion
Mercury Milan

Plug-in Hybrids
Toyota Prius

Series Hybrids
2011 Chevrolet Volt

Wednesday, October 1, 2008

2008 Chevrolet Impala - This IS your Father's Oldsmobile

Although I've only written up a couple of vehicle reviews, I've had the opportunity to drive over a dozen different vehicles over the past several months. Some cars I couldn't spend enough time in, others I couldn't turn in soon enough. I've had sub-compacts and fully loaded extended Suburbans (know what happens when gas prices skyrocket and everyone wants a small car? You get upgraded from a mid-size to an extended SUV because no one else will take it!).

Of all of those cars, not a single one compares to the 2008 Impala I just turned in. Not the Dodge "I wanna be a hearse" Magnum; not the Toyota "I'll die if I have to accelerate" Camry; not even the stripped down Toyota "I rattle like a tin can" Corolla. No, thankfully I've never had another vehicle quite like this one.

In all fairness I should point out that the vehicle (VIN 2G1WT58N281223020) had 15,500 miles on it (15,722 by the time I was done) and we all know that cars fall apart at 15K miles. Except that they don't. Even in rental service a 15K mile vehicle should still be in pretty good shape and perform almost like new. Which makes this vehicle even more disappointing.

Exterior
A bright spot of this rental experience, I was quite impressed with how well the body panels fit together, the quality of the paint job, etc. Although getting a bit long in the tooth and in need of a re-design, it is not a bad looking car; it just isn't exciting.

Interior Materials, Fit & Finish, and Amenities
The first thing you notice when you get into the front seat of this car is that it is big. Not enormously big, more like "3 seats across the front" big. Remember those cars from when you were little? I don't particularly either, but they are apparently still available.

The second thing you'll notice as you get adjusted and turn on the vehicle is that the materials appear, well, cheap. Faux wood is abundant (at least I sure hope it was faux!) and so is that plasticky substance that everyone always complains about in American cars.

At least they included some padding - the dash was a little soft, the door inserts were soft, even the place where you rested your elbow had padding. It has just about enough padding for the design engineer to check the "padded" box, but nowhere near enough to have any effect on comfort. That particular area just smacked of someone following the letter of the law, but not the spirit -- "Really boss, I used padded materials. See here? The spec says it should be padded to 1/100 of an inch..."

And then you start the engine, the instruments light up, and you turn on the radio. Which, as near as I can tell, came out of the 1988 Impala. I'm including a picture here so you can see the 4-character display for yourself. Luckily they included an equalizer so you could control the sound. Except the button labeled EQ isn't really an equalizer - it just toggles between BASS and TREB. If you wait a couple seconds, however, the BASS will disappear and be replaced by a number so you can actually adjust the bass. Steering wheel controls? Not here. Radio Data System display (station call letters, artist, etc)? Yeah right! The only thing they got right on this radio is the inclusion of an aux input.

Powertrain / Driveability

The engine in the base Impala is actually quite strong - it produces a good amount of power from low RPMs and is reasonably strong at highway speeds as well. The transmission shifts nice and smoothly even under moderate to heavy acceleration. And even with the check engine light on, as it was for 4 of the 5 days I had the vehicle, it is happy to rev to full RPMs and do your bidding.

As a quick aside, please make note that Hertz will only bring you a new vehicle if the check engine light is flashing, not just on steady. According to the Roadside Assistance woman I spoke with when I asked to trade the car before any damage was done, a steady light means "the gas cap is loose" (it wasn't), while a flashing light means "it (the engine) is mis-firing". I'm sure all the people that are responsible for determining and assigning OBD2 codes will be pleased to know they really only needed 2, not the several hundred they presently have. But I digress.

The real issue with the vehicle was that while the engine was reasonably powerful at speed, you occasionally need more acceleration that your current gear can provide. Typically, the transmission would downshift to increase RPMs and provide the requested acceleration. And this transmission was no exception, so long as you mailed it a postcard ahead of time requesting a downshift. To say that there was a lag between flooring the accelerator and actual acceleration beginning is like saying there is a little bit of sand in the Sahara. Every car takes some getting used to, but this was outside of the acceptable range and bordering on dangerous. And yes, it was like that before the Check Engine light came on.

And then, as if that weren't bad enough, it turns out that stopping is just as difficult as getting going. The brakes are either ON or off. There is some amount of middle ground, but it'll take you a couple days to find it. And in the meantime you'll be forced to listen to your passengers bitch about how hard you are pushing on the brakes. The best part of this setup is that naturally it didn't occur them to include anti-lock brakes on the vehicle either.

Honestly, I thought every car had ABS. It never crossed my mind (well, before this car) that you could even get a car without ABS any more. Seems like it would be more expensive to design a braking system with and a braking system without ABS than to just put it on every one you build. But, for whatever reason, Chevy chose not to include ABS as standard equipment on the Impala as I found out one wet morning as I attempted to stop for a red light.

Nor, just for the record, did they include traction control. Although certainly more of an option, it was surprising to me to be able to push on the pedal and get engine revving, wheel spin, and no forward acceleration, all with out a peep from the vehicle.

Conclusion
I'm sure this vehicle is right for someone. If you simply like to get on the highway, set the cruise control at 55, and stay in one lane, it might be you. Or if, for some reason, you have an overwhelming urge to let two people call shotgun in your car. Otherwise, next time a police officer tries to pull you over, check out what he is driving. If it is an Impala just head for the nearest windy road - you'll have lost him by the 2nd corner.

Monday, September 29, 2008

Spied! Corvette ZR1

You've seen it here first, faithful readers: the newest, baddest Corvette ever - the ZR1. 2 of The Slandy Report's top reporters spotted the car in a parking lot in Farmington, Michigan tonight. They were overheard exclaiming, "Yellow Corvette!" They are shown here with their prize "catch". When asked what they were going to do with the $105,000 car, they said they would mount it on the wall of their bedroom because they can't field dress a moose (or afford the gas).

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Ford Shows Some Class

Ford showed an incredible amount of class recently. On the eve of the 100th anniversary of their sometimes hated crosstown rival GM, Ford strategically left blinds open and the lights on to spell "Happy 100 GM". It's nice to see that at least some in Ford's management have shown that, evidence to the contrary, they can be mature grown-ups some of the time. I credit this new found maturity to Alan Mulally, the "outsider" who Bill Ford brought in to shake up Ford's bureaucracy. Can you see The Deuce doing this?

Saturday, September 20, 2008

2008 Ford Mustang V6 - Solid, Sporty, but room for Improvement

As a frequent traveler I frequently have the "privilege" of leaving my personal vehicle at Logan airport and picking up a (seemingly) random vehicle at my destination. Since this is the first review, and a review of a "sporty car" at that, I should mention that my personal vehicle is a 2002 BMW M5. Although it has superb handling, driveability, etc, there is always room for improvement so I would give that vehicle a solid 9 out of 10.

When I arrived at the JFK Hertz I had little expectation of receiving the "Pontiac G6 or equivalent" I had reserved. True to history I was not disappointed. After a brief debacle with a broken window actuator on my first vehicle I was behind the wheel of a 2008 Ford Mustang V6.

Luckily I don't tend to have more than 1 colleague with me, because the first observation I'll make is that this is really a 2+2: if you need to sit in the back and your legs will extend beyond the edge of the bottom seat cushion I'd suggest another vehicle. In a pinch I suppose you could carry 4 adults but otherwise they'd all have to be short (as in less than 4' tall). At 6'2" I had at most 4" of room behind my seat. Hopefully this isn't a newsflash to many of you since pony cars have long had back seats bordering on non-existent, but I thought it worth observing.

For this rental period the weather was generally warm (70F+) and sunny. My driving conditions included open road as well as stop and go traffic, highway and city. I covered 240 miles in the course of 5 days.

So with that, let's talk about the key attributes. Before I forget, in case you stumble upon this vehicle at auction it is VIN#1ZVHT80N785207193. It had 9074 miles on it when I returned it Sept 19.

Exterior / Fit & Finish
While certainly not as exciting as some of the higher end V8 Mustangs that sport 4 lights across the front (inc. 2 fogs), the base Mustang does maintain the same relatively aggressive styling. Since this particular vehicle was white I wouldn't say it was intimidating, but it could be if painted black or red.

Fit and finish was excellent. All panels had even gaps that were a consistent 1/8-3/16" all around. Compared to the Ford vehicles of old, this is a significant improvement. The hood closes with a satisfying thump (and hides a reasonably clean V6 in the engine bay).

The trunk, however, was a different story. Oh, it fit nicely, and closed with a thump -- but I couldn't figure out how to open it from outside the car without the key fob. Turns out that you can't. I know it's a small thing, but it can't be that hard to find a location for a lock and a handle. Once you do find your way inside, the trunk is quite spacious and looks like it would hold 4 sets of clubs (this would be helpful assuming you live close to the course or have friends who are midgets) or a complete set of luggage without too much effort.

The wheels were stylish, but surrounded by large amounts of rubber (215/65R16 are standard, but they look like 15's with those huge sidewalls). You'll want to upsize the wheels for looks and handling...

Interior

I've already touched upon the smallish backseat, but as we said, that is the price of entry in a vehicle like this. Requiring 5 years of Yoga training to be flexible enough to reach the driver's seatbelt, however, should not be. Be prepared to turn yourself 90 degrees sideways to reach your seatbelt - it will be hanging about 6-8" behind your left shoulder. Sounds ok, but go ahead and reach 6" behind your left shoulder right now. Let me know how that goes.

Overall the interior is quite roomy. I had no issue getting myself settled in and had plenty of head room, leg room and shoulder room.

The shifter, while very stylish and comfortable to shift, is somewhat lacking in 1 key area of functionality - indicating what gear you are in. After carefully studying the instrument cluster to find the PRNDL markings, I finally concluded they weren't there. A large speedo, tach, and few other key gauges were right where they should be, and proved easy to read, but the gear indicator was nowhere to be found. It is, as it turns out, down next to the shifter itself and is actually quite easy to read -- if you are looking directly down on it. Unless you are sitting with your chest touching the steering wheel it is all but invisible.

Speaking of steering wheel, kudo's to Ford to putting a thicker than average steering wheel on a sporty car - it was comfortable to grip and helped the car say "drive me" in a way that thin little wheels don't. And for putting an Aux input for those of us who have portable mp3 players - minor points off for putting it at the bottom of the armrest storage. Next time let's put the whole package together and also put radio controls on the steering wheel.

Interior Materials / Fit & Finish

I would characterize the interior fit & finish as very good. Like the outside, the gaps were even and minimal with no unnecessary brakes. The gauges were easy to read and appropriately located while the radio, shifter, and HVAC controls were all located in easy reach for the driver.

The materials... well... Look, I know it is rental car. And rental cars take abuse. But there is no excuse for seat material that is completely stretched out and puckering at less than 10K miles. As a consumer I'd say trade the "Mustang" logo'd fabric for a higher quality material. Thankfully it did not give the usually static shock after exiting the vehicle, but it looked bad.

The only thing worse than the seats was the general lack of anything soft. Dashboard: hard. Door panels: hard. Door panel inserts: hard. Some places are ok - but those should preferably be places I'm not going to rest a body part for long periods of time. Door panels come to mind.

Handling / Performance

An interesting thing happened on the way to the office (ok, on the way out of the Hertz parking lot): I lit up the rear tires and swung the car sideways in the middle of the road about 50' from the guard shack. No, it wasn't a mid-life crisis moment or the fulfillment of a childhood dream. In fact, I managed to do the same thing again at the first stop light. Convinced that Hertz had labeled the keys wrong and that I had an 8 instead of a 6 cylinder, I made the turn onto the highway and got on the throttle to see what this "bad boy" could do.

This was when I realized that a) Hertz had indeed given me a 6 cylinder and b) Ford had loaded about 230 of the 240 ft-lbs of available torque into the first 1/16" of pedal travel. Luckily the engine guys warned the transmission guys -- the tranny kicks down smoothly and quickly upon request keeping you in the powerband to take advantage of the relatively anemic 210hp. This provides satisfying driveability, gives plenty of passing power (as long as you are in double-digit speeds), and more importantly, gives you the frequent opportunity to listen to an extremely well tuned exhaust that has a nice rumble and a deep tone bordering on throaty.

Once you get used to the throttle sensitivity and realize that the enormous aspect ratio (i.e. tall) tires are also narrow with limited grip, the car is pretty stable and easy to drive in a straight line. Chirping the tires is no big feat, but you will want to make sure you don't do so while next to someone who might interpret it as an opportunity to race. While gutsy, it is also heavy, and I'd guess that a Camry would probably give you a run for your money.

Sadly, the world is not a series of straight lines. Despite the engineers best efforts, the roads do occasionally turn. And while the steering was reasonably precisely it didn't provide a whole lot of road feel. Again, discredit the tires to some extent. The handling was also iffy, and in long standing tradition, bumps in corners can leave the rear end feeling a bit skittish and unsettled. The solution, of course, is to drive only on straight, freshly paved roads. Here's a suggestion for Ford: instead of spending money re-working old suspensions that still result in a compromise, how about an independent rear suspension?

Fuel Economy

Over the course of the week I logged 240 miles and used 10.7 gallons of gasoline for an average of 22.4mpg. Given that my driving style is somewhat, umm, aggressive, and that I spent considerable time in Long Island commuter traffic, I'd say that most people should expect to get somewhat higher results.

Overall

For the ~$20K price tag that one of these cars carries you get quite a bit of car. You won't blow too many people away off the line, but the car looks good and drives ok. It does, however, have several areas that are in dire need of improvement (interior, handling) before it is a real competitor.

Exterior: 7/10 - good, but getting a bit long in the tooth
Interior: 5/10 - better materials would turn this "ho hum" into "let's go!"
Handling: 6/10 - live axles have no place on a sporty vehicle
Performance: 7/10 - good job making a low horsepower engine seem stronger
Fuel Economy: 7/10 - good results given the hard conditions.

Overall: 6/10

See you next week with the next installment: Chevy Impala. This IS your fathers Oldsmobile...

Doug

Friday, September 19, 2008

New BLOG content - Weekly vehicle reviews

As a long time colleague of Slandy, and frequent SLandy Report visitor, I've often wondered how he finds time to research, develop and edit the content. It all seems so transparent and easy - one can only assume that his personal life suffers greatly.

Since parting ways with our esteemed editor a couple years ago and leaving the mid-west to join a non-automotive firm, I've gained some additional perspective into what the "average Joe" goes through with vehicle maintenance, purchase, etc. Since my present position has me traveling around the country nearly every week I also get the opportunity to engage in that ritual that we all endure, and generally hate, every time we go on vacation: driving a rental car.

So with that backdrop, I hope that the upcoming weekly reviews of rental cars will prove interesting and useful. Although mostly centered around car, the occasional upgrade should lead to a good cross-section of vehicles. If you have any specific requests for reviews, please feel free to send them along and I'll see what I can do.

Look for the first installment - the 2008 Ford Mustang V6 - later this weekend...

Doug

Monday, September 15, 2008

Hey How'd You Like a 65 MPG Ford? Psych!


Ford is being lambasted in various news media, including Automotive News and Business Week, for excluding the recently introduced Ford Fiesta ECOnetic from the US market. Ford will begin selling a Mexico-produced Fiesta in the US in 2010, but it will not, apparently, sell the ECOnetic here. What is the ECOnetic? It is a higher economy (65 MPG) version of the already high economy (40-45 MPG) Fiesta. It has a Diesel engine, very few creature comforts, low rolling resistance tires and special aerodynamics. According to Business Week, the cost of producing and shipping would require the price to be higher than the $25,700 at which it will sell in Europe. It would, however, be eligible for a $1300 tax credit, bringing the price to $24,400 – approximately comparable to a Toyota Prius, the current darling of the environmental crowd. Ford sources confirm to The Slandy Report that the ECOnetic is not planned for the US market – yet. If fuel prices keep rising, they will likely revisit that decision.

So is Ford making a mistake? Or are they exercising due prudence in spending what little money they have left? The Slandy Report thinks the answer is C – all of the above. The ECOnetic and its engine are made in the UK, where labor, exchange and shipping rates stack the deck against selling the car profitably in the US. There are mitigating factors, however:

• Because the Fiesta will already be produced in Mexico, why couldn’t Ford ship only the engine from the UK for assembly in the Mexican plant? It sure would cost less than shipping the entire car…
• Ford would realize a tremendous PR boost by beating the Prius’ environmental claims (presently the highest mileage vehicle for sale in the US – 48 mpg city, 45 highway) with a North America-produced product – this would help shed the image of selling only big, bloated SUVs and pickups.
• Ford tends to over-analyze everything (I’m not exaggerating) and has the attitude that “if you can’t prove it, it doesn’t exist.” Most reports say that Toyota is just starting to make money selling hybrids. They were willing to lose money for some time because they saw the long-term benefits (PR, future economies of scale, etc.). Ford needs to do the same. Even if they lose money on every ECOnetic they sell here, the car will have a halo effect over the entire company (see previous point). You can’t buy the positive image that car’s economy would give Ford.

Ford can/should limit the availability of the ECOnetic and advertise the hell out of it. Make sure every man, woman and child in the US and Canada knows that Ford sells “the highest-mileage car you can buy.” By limiting availability, they will be able to charge the $25K without any trouble – and without costly incentives. Reduced availability will also create a perceived shortage, which any first-year marketing or econ student knows is the way to create demand and profits. They should look at any loses they do incur as advertising or PR cost – it will be more effective than anything the “marketing communications” staff could come up with.

Sunday, September 14, 2008

2009 VW Routan


VW has started advertising for its new minivan, the Routan. The ads, which are meant to be amusing, place the tongue squarely in the cheek with some offbeat humor. Brooke Shields stars in the ads, which started to appear this weekend. She implores women to have babies “for love, not the German engineering” in the Routan ads and the mockumentary, which you can see at www.routanboom.org or www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDZSxFLcMVg. It’s actually a clever campaign, which suggests that a steep rise in childbirth is the result of couples wanting to get a Routan and its “German engineering” – not for love. The problem with the ad is that the Routan, though it is a VW, is not engineered by Germans or in Germany. To call it badge-engineered isn’t exactly correct, but this “German-engineered” minivan is actually a Dodge Grand Caravan. The styling difference is significant from the Dodge, but that’s the only difference – styling. The Routan is manufactured in Chrysler’s Windsor, Ontario assembly plant, built alongside the Grand Caravan and the Chrysler Town & Country. The VW’s engines and transmission are from the Chrysler, as is the interior layout. Chrysler kept its Stow n’ Go and Swivel n’ Go seats, as well as its optional table that fits in-between the 2nd and 3rd rows, for itself, however.

So how does VW get away with calling the Routan’s engineering “German”? They apparently revised the Routan’s suspension and steering and improved the driving dynamics to make it feel and handle more like a VW (they also revised the styling, as mentioned above). When they agreed to this arrangement, Chrysler was still part of DaimlerChrysler (a German company), so they might have been able to do nothing and still claim the German connection. Alas, Chrysler is an American company again, so VW had some work to do.

To the casual observer, this child will not look anything like it’s American parents, so many will choose this van simply because it’s not American. How ironic that the leader (and inventor) of minivans since their inception 25 years ago will increase its sales by selling a version whose main selling point is that it is not American.

Tuesday, September 2, 2008

Stop the Presses...Ford introduces a new Mustang Logo!

Ford unveiled a new logo for its iconic sports car, the Mustang, last week. If you look carefully, you might even notice the difference. Ford has essentially made the pony logo look sleeker and faster than the previous logo. It also sports a new "subtly toned tinted-chrome finish".

“We wanted to give the Mustang pony a more realistic feel,” said Douglas Gaffka, chief designer for the 2010 Mustang. “We lifted the head to make the pony more proud, tipped the neck into the wind to give it a feeling of greater speed and better balance.

“It’s more chiseled and more defined and looks more like a wild horse,” Gaffka added. “It’s more realistic in terms of proportion to an actual Mustang.”


The new logo will make its debut on the 2010 Mustang, which will go on sale next year. The 2010 Mustang will be redesigned along with the logo.

An interesting aside: the original Mustang pony was facing to the right (because that made it look like the pony was running forward), not the left as it is today. When presented to Ford management for approval, the team was told that the pony should be facing the other direction. Why? Because left is usually associated with "west", and a wild Mustang is associated with the old west. That's just a little insight into the decision-making at Ford.

Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Quick Trip with the…2009 Ford Flex Limited



The 2009 Ford Flex, just introduced this summer, is not subtle. It is a large, boxy vehicle that doesn’t go unnoticed as it cruises suburbia. Ford calls the Flex the next-generation people mover. They better hope so, because they cancelled their minivans, the Ford Freestar and Mercury Monterey. What? Never heard of them? You’re not alone. Ford discontinued the twins in 2006, after only 2+ years on the market. In a decision that seemed, at the time, to be foolhardy, Ford pulled the plug rather than improve the products to compete better. Ford seemed to be saying, “If you can’t beat ‘em, quit.” With a bit of hindsight, they were actually saying, “Go where they ain’t.” This brings us to the Flex.

The Flex is a crossover that ostensibly replaces the Freestar in Ford’s lineup (see related article on crossovers). It is a large vehicle (202” long) that looks like a Mini Cooper or a Scion xB all grown up. It is a simple, two-box shape, which reminds us of an old station wagon more than a minivan – neither description Ford likes. Since it was introduced to the world as the Fairlane concept at the North American International Auto Show in 2005, the look has really grown on me. I now find it stylish and modern, with a clean, uncluttered look. The interior is similarly handsome and comfortable.

Driving the Flex

As a person who prefers, and is used to, smaller cars, the 202” Flex was an adjustment. It seemed giant, hard to maneuver and park. As I got used to the size, however, I realized that this is a (somewhat) agile cruiser. Its 3.5L V6 makes 262 horsies and 248 lb.-ft. of torque, which are more than reasonable for this class. We averaged a very good 26 MPG in all highway miles for our weekend with the Flex. This is more than the EPA says it gets on the highway – 24. The ride is very smooth and comfortable. You won’t mistake it for a sports car, but it really doesn’t try either.

The Flex seats either 6 or 7, depending upon whether you choose the 2nd row captain’s chairs ($870 option on the Limited package that we tested). The seats were leather and very comfortable – no fatigue issues on our long weekend trip from suburban Detroit to Dayton, OH.

The Flex starts at $28,995 for a front-wheel drive Flex SE. For that price, you get the 3.5L engine with a 6-speed auto tranny, leather-wrapped steering wheel with auxiliary audio controls, Ford’s Advance Trac system with roll stability control, battery saver, airbags all around, Safety Canopy™ - 1st, 2nd & 3rd Row w/Rollover Sensor, SecuriLock Pass Anti Theft and tire Pressure Monitor System. Also included are 4-Wheel Disc Brakes w/ABS, Easy Fuel™ Capless Filler, 4 power points, a Reverse Sensing System that alerts you to any obstacles behind you when you back up, privacy glass and Ford’s exclusive Securicode keyless entry system. The mid-level SEL is $33,165 and adds heated leather seats, power passenger seat, dual-zone electronic temperature control, Sony 6-CD audio with 12 speakers, fake wood trim, universal garage door opener and a cargo net in the rear. The top of the line Limited also includes memory feature for driver's seat, exterior mirrors and power-adjustable pedals, Ford SYNC™, ambient lighting, wood-trimmed steering wheel, 2nd row footrests, power liftgate, 110V inverter and security approach lamps, high-intensity discharge headlamps, 19” aluminum wheels, LED taillamps and Satin-aluminum appliqué on the power liftgate. All this for $35,800. All-wheel drive is available on the SEL and Limited for $1850.

Cool Features include Ford SYNC™ (optional on SE and SEL), a refrigerated 2nd row console (optional on SEL & Limited), the multi-panel Vista Roof™ (optional on SEL & Limited) and the Easy Fuel™ capless filler (standard).

SYNC™ is a Ford and Microsoft-developed system that allows voice command of various audio, navigation and climate-control functions. The coolest is voice control of your iPod. You simply tell the system what track, genre, playlist or artist you’d like to hear, and it plays it. Way cool.

The Easy Fuel™ capless fuel-filler system has an integrated spring-loaded flapper door that allows you to simply insert the fuel nozzle into the tank to fill up – no screw cap is required. Easy Fuel automatically seals after the fuel nozzle is removed – no need to re-secure the cap – emitting fewer evaporative emissions into the environment. Easy Fuel™ was introduced on the 2008 Ford Explorer and Mercury Mountaineer, and will be offered as standard equipment on the Ford, Lincoln and Mercury passenger vehicle lineups during the next five years.

The look of the Flex isn’t for everybody, and that’s a good thing. It certainly stands out in a crowd. As I said above, I’ve grown to like it. If you don’t like it, there are plenty of other choices out there, including from Ford.

Overall rating: 7 out of 10.

Sunday, July 27, 2008

Crossovers – What The Heck are They?

By now, you’ve probably heard the term, “crossover.” You might even think you have a pretty good idea what a crossover is. Generally, a crossover is considered to be an SUV built like a car. George Pipas, Ford’s chief sales analyst, says that Ford defines a crossover as “a light truck built on a car platform (except for minivans)”. A “platform” is the under-body or structure upon which a vehicle is built. Most people neither know nor care anything about the platform of their vehicle. What does it mean to be a “car platform” vs. a “truck platform”? Generally, it means a unibody vs. a body-on-frame design. Wikipedia defines a unibody as a, “construction technique for automobiles in which the body is integrated into a single unit with the chassis rather than having a separate body-on-frame.” A Body-on-Frame mounts, “…a separate body to a rigid frame.” So crossovers are unibody and SUVs are body-on-frame, right? Not so fast. There are exceptions. The Jeep Grand Cherokee would never be considered a crossover, but it is, and always has been, built on a unibody platform. The Mercedes-Benz M-Class, perhaps the original luxury crossover, was originally a body-on-frame design (it’s now a unibody).

Why have crossovers suddenly become so popular? Well, certainly gas prices have been a big part, especially in the last 6 months, as fuel prices have skyrocketed. Crossovers tend to achieve better fuel economy that their SUV brothers because they are lighter so need smaller engines. SUVs get poor fuel economy, but crossovers get better. True, but they are playing the perception game. The OEMs are like a heard of buffalo scrambling to avoid the use of the term SUV – they all want to call their products crossovers instead – to give their products the image of a fuel-efficient product when it isn’t. The Ford Escape used to have a slogan that said, “100% SUV” because it really isn’t a traditional SUV, but wanted to be thought of as one. Now, it’s just the opposite. George Pipas told me that the Escape is a crossover.

The trend started several years ago, though, so there has to be more to it than fuel economy. SUVs became popular starting in the early 1980s, but really took off in the early 1990s with the popularity of the Ford Explorer and Jeep Grand Cherokee. Baby boomers are credited with driving SUV sales, much as they have with many other products. So are baby boomers now to “blame” for SUV sales falling? It’s a reasonable assumption, as one of the main advantages of a crossover is that it’s easier to get in and out vs. an SUV. We’ve all read ad nauseam about the “graying of America” as baby boomers get older. They are simply finding that they can’t get in and out of their giant SUVs any longer.

The other reason for the switch to crossovers is handling. A crossover, because of its unibody design, handles more like a car, because it is, well, a car. The whole Ford Explorer – Firestone debacle of 2000 increased awareness that SUVs are not cars, and cannot be driven like one. They are taller and heavier with a higher center of gravity (CG). What this means is that they have to be driven slower around corners and that, in extreme conditions, are more likely to roll over. Crossovers, on the other hand, are lower than SUVs, so have less chance to roll over (or fetch).

So for all these reasons, crossovers are a different kind of vehicle than an SUV, right? Maybe, but we here at The Slandy Report disagree. Most crossovers, to us, are the natural progression of the SUV segment. They can do just about anything an SUV can do (obvious exceptions are heavy towing and serious off-roading), but they do it better for most people because of the points made above (fuel economy, handling and ingress/egress). Just because a “crossover” is built differently doesn’t make it a different kind of vehicle. Case in point: when cars began to use unibody designs instead of frames, or when they began to use front-wheel drive, they weren’t deemed to be a new kind of vehicle. They were just different cars.

The same is true for some other ”crossovers”, which we believe are just the new way of designing station wagons. The Ford Taurus X (nee Freestyle), Chrysler Pacifica and the new Ford Flex and Dodge Journey are just new-fangled station wagons. I don’t think I need to prove this – just look at them. They don’t look like your grandfather’s station wagon, but neither does a 2009 F-150 look like your grandfather’s F-100. The automakers are just afraid of the term station wagon. When Ford was launching the Freestyle a few years ago and I suggested to the Freestyle marketing manager that it was a station wagon, she quickly corrected me.

So are the automakers going to see the light and deep-six the name crossover? Don’t bet on it. They have come across a new type of vehicle (even if it isn’t), and they are going to milk it as long as they can. My only hope is to shine the light on this, so you know what you’re getting. I remain your faithful servant.


Sunday, July 13, 2008

Driving School

Follow the link for the video of the driving school I just attended. No, just kidding. This is a youtube video of some crazy, but very talented driving. The drivers really know what they're doing. It goes to show you that the scariest drivers are not really the ones who drive fast - it's the ones who drive worst. Speed doesn't kill - it's variance of speed that kills. What does that mean? It means that if every driver is driving 80 MPH (128 kph), there is less likelihood of a problem than if one driver is driving 70 MPH (112 kph) and another is driving 45 MPH (72 kph).

Pay special attention to learning to change your tire while the car is still moving!

Kids, don't try this at home (or anywhere else):

http://youtube.com/watch?v=kv5d2mXy7dY

Thursday, July 10, 2008

A Chink in the Armor?

Today, Toyota announced 2 (temporary) plant closures and some reshuffling of their vehicle manufacturing locations - all as a result of the shifting demand away from trucks. The hot-selling Prius, the best selling hybrid in the US and the world, will now be made in the new plant being built near Tupelo, Mississippi. The Highlander, presently built only in Japan, and scheduled to be added to the Tupelo plant, will now be added to the Princeton, IN plant, which presently builds Sequoia SUVs and Tundra full-size pickups. The Tundra, built in Princeton and San Antonio, will now be consolidated in San Antonio. While this giant game of checkers is being implemented, both Princeton and San Antonio will shut down, from early August to early November, due to...ahem..."the declining overall market for full size trucks and SUVs". Got all that?
OK, I have 2 points to make of all this. First, when Toyota announced plans to sell a "real" truck, many (including a certain former boss of mine) assumed they would be able to sell as many as they could build (which was assumed to be ~225,000/year). 225,000 would have given them 10% of the full-size market in 2006. In 2005, their actual share was 5.0%, rising to 5.5% in 2006 and 8.9% in 2007 (the first full year of the redesigned new model). While the Tundra has done well in an extremely loyal segment, they haven't exactly set the world on fire. To get the sales, they have had to put incentives on the Tundra, just like (gasp!) GM, Ford and Chrysler. They had as much as $3000 of incentives less than 3 months after launch in 2007. I call that mixed results. Sales have done well, but not as well as some predicted, and they have had to use incentives to do it, when many thought that Toyota would never need or use rebates to "move the metal."
Second, Toyota has shown why they are about to become the largest vehicle manufacturer in the world (sorry, GM). They have identified a fundamental and maybe permanent shift in the market, and they have taken bold steps to adjust on the fly. These shifts in production will be costly, both to Toyota and their suppliers. But instead of arrogantly thinking, "The customers will come back; they always come back", Toyota has acted in the best long-term interest of the dealers, suppliers and, of course, themselves. The Detroit 3 can and should take a lesson in corporate responsibility from Toyota. Then again, they should have 25 years ago, but didn't. When will they learn?

Tuesday, July 8, 2008

Brother, Can You Spare a Gallon of Gas?

Gas is over $4!! The sky is falling, the sky is falling!! People are hurting, they can't afford the gas to get to work. We all know that gas prices have increased about 40% in the last year, according to AAA. Oil is at a record, too. Why? Is it the evil "speculators" that I keep hearing about? Nope. Evidence and logic suggest that this is not an issue. Is is global warming? Nope. The answer, as it is for most pricing questions, is supply and demand. Despite the sluggish US economy, the world economy has been doing quite well, thank you. Several years ago, nobody really invested in production capacity for the raw materials required to sustain a booming China and India. The resulting shortage is why many raw material prices have increased so much in the last few years - including oil.

Now, for a little perspective. As mentioned above, the average gallon of regular unleaded in the US has increased from $2.96 to $4.11 in the last year, or about 40%. Not to minimize the terrible strain this has placed on most of us, but please take a look at the chart below. It shows 26 European countries' prices vs. the US. If you're having trouble reading the names, just look for the lowest bars - that's the US. These prices are from May (before they hit $4 average), but the graph would look the same today. $4 is expensive, but every one of these countries were over $6, and 12 of 26 were at $8 or more - more than double the US price! It's not much better for our friends north of the border (south of the border if you live in Detroit). According to ontariogasprices.com, the price of regular unleaded in Ontario ranges from about $4.88 - $5.61 per gallon after adjusting for exchange and metric.
I know none of this make it any easier to fork over the $60 - $80 to fill up your tank, but just be happy you don't live in Europe or Canada!

Monday, July 7, 2008

Tire Safety



Tires. Most of us never think much about them, unless something goes wrong. We know that we should check the air pressure, making sure they are properly inflated and we know that tires without much tread ("bald") are dangerous and should be replaced. Some of us even know the trick of putting a penny in the tread with Lincoln's head down to check how much tread we really have.

But, did you know that tires can go bad sitting on the tire store shelf? A "new" tire that has never been used can go bad like last week's milk. This is very likely nothing to worry about for the vast majority of tires, especially on a new car or truck. However, it doesn't hurt to make yourself aware. And it might hurt to not be.

Watch the clip from ABC News for the full story. Probably over sensationalized, but worth watching:

http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4826897


Tuesday, June 24, 2008

2008 Saab 9-3 Long-Term Test


I picked up the Saab 9-3 Aero Convertible filled with anticipation. I had never had a convertible, and this one looked great on paper. 2.8L Turbo V6, HP - 250, Torque - 258 ft-lbs, 6-speed tranny, 3POTF-AGI*, fully-automatic ragtop, XM satellite radio, an auxiliary input jack for the iPod, 2-tone leather seats, and enough room in the back for the munchkins.

Full disclosure: I had just resigned from Ford, where I had been for almost 15 years. They required me to turn in my management "lease car" on or before my last day. Why not buy a Ford product with my still-intact company discount ("A-Plan")? My wife works for the General, that's why. For her to keep
her company car when I no longer had a company car of my own requires us to buy or lease a new GM car or truck at least every 4 years. The requirement used to be every 2 years, so I guess we can be thankful for the less onerous requirement.

Saab had a lease deal for 27 months that made the payments very reasonable, so did I pocket the savings like a smart boy? Nope. I moved up to the Aero from the 2.0T, which has a 4-cylinder turbo with "only" 210hp. The Aero came with a package that allows the driver to lower the windows and the top by pressing and holding the unlock button on the key fob. Way cool. How could I turn that down? Answer: I couldn't.

The car is fast and cool and great-looking. I quickly found out, though, that it has...ahem...masculinity issues. As in people questioning mine because I drive it. Not usually one to care much what others think, I decided that those who would question my orientation for driving this car must be insecure of their own - you know who you are.


The honeymoon wore off fairly quickly, though. I started to see why Saabs have always been considered quirky. First is the incessant beeping that accompanies starting the car, followed by more beeps when reverse is chosen. I suppose some people require a warning that they are in reverse, but I chose the gear,
didn't I?

Next is the key (see picture). It's a stubby "key" that is also the fob fo
r unlocking, etc. The problem is that it is an electronic item. If you leave the key in the ignition, it draws on the battery until the battery dies. If that weren't bad enough, it is impossible to remove the key if the battery is dead. So you're stuck until you can get a jump - you can't even lock the door.

No surprise here - the cupholders are pathetic. One folds out from the console (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xasj1SbCiTA). Very cool, until you try to put an actual cup in it. Better be a small one. The other cupholder is in the center between the seats - it has basically no sides, so it has less than zero value.

I'm not going to go into a lot of detail on the other issues, but here is a list of other bothersome details - the trip computer won't stay on the setting I choose, the headlight switch doesn't seem to do anything different no matter which setting I choose, the radio doesn't stay on when you remove the key, as other cars do, no power to the powerpoint when the car is off, you have to turn off the a/c (and it never remembers that I turned it off, so I have to do it each time), the radio display is invisible in sunlight (you would think this would be an obvious one in a convertible!), and you can't lock the doors with the lock button on the door - you have to use the key fob (see above). The dealer told me this is a safety feature, so you don't lock yourself out. Just another electronic nanny.

All that said, the car certainly has its charm, like I said up top. It's great-looking, fast, the seats are very comfortable, has a reasonable back seat and gets decent fuel economy for a fast luxury convertible. The sticker price was high, but it's the payment, stupid. The payment benefited from some hefty incentives, so it hasn't broken the Slandy Bank - yet.

Overall rating: 6 out of 10

*
3POTF-AGI = 3 pedals on the floor - as God intended

Thursday, June 19, 2008

Chrysler raises '08 prices 2%

Automotive News published the following on 13 June:
DETROIT -- Chrysler LLC told dealers today that it will raise prices 2 percent for most remaining 2008 models. The increase will carry over to the 2009 model year. The price rise, which will be reflected in invoices starting June 16, was announced in a Webcast to dealers by Jim Press, Chrysler co-president, and Steven Landry, executive vice president of North America sales. The executives said increasing commodity prices, including steel, pushed the company to raise prices. Chrysler spokesman Stuart Schorr said: "The average 2 percent increase brings total model year price increases in line with key competitors. It does not affect vehicles already in dealer inventory. Incentives would not be changed. "The increase will affect the remaining 2008 vehicles Chrysler will make during its summer buildout. Press told dealers at the end of May Chrysler would build 127,000 units from July to mid-August. Schorr said that since the beginning of this model year Chrysler put in an average increase of $1,200 in content per vehicle without increasing prices. Automotive News has reported that steel prices for automakers have risen $500 a vehicle since January.

This is just the latest example of the automakers formerly known as The Big 3 showing their ignorance of basic supply and demand. Countless times over the last several years, they have increased their prices at the beginning and during their model years. They justify these increases to themselves and the press by saying 1. it's only $75 or 2. it's only 2% or 3. we added equipment valued at more than the price increase or 4. blah, blah, blah. They've done this so many times that they can actually say this with a straight face. Chrysler's sales are down 19.3% this year (more than any other manufacturer). They've lost over 1.5 points of share, or 179,000 units. And that's just through May! You might think, well, everybody know that truck sales are down, it's just the trucks...wrong. Chrysler's car sales are down too - more than any other manufacturer's as well.

In what other reality would a rational company say, "Hmmm, sales are down - we should raise our prices!" Customers don't give a damn about your costs. They want a great product at a price that represents value. Period. Don't bore me with the details.

As always, I welcome your feedback. Well, maybe not welcome, but I don't mind it too much.

Tuesday, June 3, 2008

Who Hates the Ice Caps?

CAFE (the federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy law) should be repealed. Let me repeat that: CAFE should be repealed. You might think this means that I don't believe in global warming or that I'm a conservative who doesn't believe in regulation, or maybe that I'm just stupid. I'll let you judge the 3rd point, but I assure you that neither of the 1st 2 are correct.

I believe in global warming, and I also believe we should do something about it. And while I am against this particular piece of regulation, I believe a tax is the better answer.

I don't hate the ice caps! I'm all for lowering CO2 emissions everywhere we can. My argument is with CAFE. It does not work, and never has, and never will. It is flawed legislation written by morons who wouldn't know a supply & demand curve if it slapped them in the face. The way to lower emissions is to give an incentive to people to buy a higher mileage car and to promote conservation. The way to do that is to increase the damn gas tax! Simply telling the manufacturers to increase economy doesn't work. Billions are spent and the customer never sees it directly. Toyota, GM, Ford, etc. can't price for this, because all of the cars will have to meet the higher standards, so you have no competitive advantage to justify the higher price. Because the consumers don't see the cost of the economy, they have no incentive to drive smaller cars and/or drive less. A higher tax, though, would give the consumers an incentive to go buy the more fuel efficient vehicles (and would be willing to pay more for them) and drive less. American consumers and politicians are who they are, however. They want everything and don't want to pay for it. This is a way to "stick it to big business" while the consumer gets this "free" gift. We need to grow up as a society and understand that there is no such thing as a free lunch!

Want proof? Cars average 36 mpg in Europe and 31 mpg in Japan vs. only 21 mpg in the United States. Why? Because gas taxes are about 10 times as high in Europe and about 8 times as high in Japan. Faced with such expense, consumers make the rational decision to avoid paying so much for fuel by conserving it. It's classic economics. You reduce the demand for a product by raising its price, and raise the demand by reducing the price.

I also propose that this increase be channeled directly to improving highways and funding the research & development necessary to increase fuel economy. This funding should be apportioned amongst the automakers in direct proportion to the number of employees they have in the United States. For a change, let's have a government that actually wants to preserve jobs here in the USA. This isn't protectionist, it's simply smart business. Other countries do it and it puts our jobs, our business and our national and economic security at risk.

That's my opinion; what's yours?

Thursday, May 29, 2008

More Ford Layoffs

Ford says that they will be laying off another 10%-12% of their salaried workforce with the goal of them being off the payroll by August 1. No fancy buyouts this time - there will be a (not so) lovely parting gift for those leaving, along with a swift kick in the butt (thanks for playing). As Ford has already cut about 1/3 of the salaried people, it makes you wonder either:
  1. Ford had WAY too many people a few years ago
  2. Ford is going to have trouble doing all of the work it needs to do to design, manufacture and sell its products, or
  3. Ford is going to eliminate all of the non-value-added work that its hard-working, smart employees are forced to to do daily (don't hold your breath on this one)

Wednesday, May 28, 2008

Hyundai Genesis

Hyundai has announced the pricing for their new "luxury" sedan, the Genesis. This is a rear wheel drive sedan (coupe will follow later). 2 engines will be offerred, a V6 and a V8. The V6 will start at $33,000 and the V8 will start at $38,000. No word yet on the drugs that will be made available to dealership personnel and customers to revive them when they find out that Hyundai wants $40K for a car. Maybe this will work, like Lexus in the late 80s to undercut the competition with a great car. The track record recently has been good, but the name Phaeton keeps coming to mind. Is Hyundai reaching too far?

Monday, May 26, 2008

Welcome to The Slandy Report

I just set up The Slandy Report blog! Whoo-hoo! I hope you find it informative and amusing. I amuse myself, so I'm sure you will be too. Come back often, and please feel free to write comments. Remember, positive comments are just as welcome as "constructive" ones.

Saturday, January 19, 2008

2008 NAIAS

The Slandy Report® 2008
The new Slandy Report is here!! The new Slandy Report is here!! Boy, I wish I could get that excited about nothing. Nothing? Are you kidding? Page 73 - Johnson, Navin R.! I'm somebody now! Welcome to the 6th annual Slandy Report, a look at the North American International Auto Show, held each January in Detroit, Michigan. The total economic impact for Detroit is estimated at $500 million, so y’all come on down and spend your money, ya hear? If you can’t make it to Detroit for the show, you can watch it on NBC January 20 at 3pm Eastern.

2008 NAIAS Must-See Cars and Trucks
Take a walk around this year’s show and the most obvious trend is green. Not paint, but “being” green. I lost count of the number of alternately fueled vehicles and concepts. There are electrics, plug-in hybrids, Diesel hybrids, fuel-cell hybrids, ethanol, etc. from every manufacturer (well, almost).

Ford Motor Company
Ford
==> 2009 Flex – besides the bad name and the awkward looks, I think this new crossover has potential. Looks like a giant Mini Cooper. Now it looks goofy, but you’re gonna love it in 2013!
==> Explorer America Concept – styling exercise showing what a future Explorer might look like. Unlike all Explorers you’ve ever seen, this one is based on a car (not a truck) platform.
==> Verve Concept – yet another subcompact teaser from Ford, this one a DDG (Drop-Dead Gorgeous). Maybe if they ever actually make something like this, sales will improve.
==> Sync Focus – as reported last year, Ford has exclusive rights to the Microsoft Sync system, which is a hands-free iPod and phone interface. Sync will also read text messages to you (including profanity), and has a list of standard responses to a text message that you can scroll through for a quick response. This year, you can sit in a Focus and get a complete demonstration from a knowledgeable Sync-person.
==> 2009 F-150 – Ford and others are saying that this is a significant makeover. Maybe from an engineering view, but not from a customer/visual view. They’ve changed many details, but to the casual observer, it’s the same. The new version, Platinum, is ultra-luxury and coincides with the rumored demise of the Mark LT. Coincidence?
Lincoln
==> MKS – shown as a concept in prior shows, this is the read deal. Due out this summer, this is a really nice car. The silhouette reminds me of the previous Chrysler 300M (not the gangsta-mobile that is sold today). It will have an adequate, 270hp, 3.7L V6 engine at launch, but my sources tell me that the Eco-Boost engine will show up a year later sporting 350-360hp!
==> MKT Concept – this is an all-wheel drive crossover that rides on the same platform as the Ford Flex. This is not just a rebadged Flex, however, it has completely different profile and sheetmetal. It really pushes the concept of a crossover. The question is, “Will it grow on us, or will we think it’s just goofy?” Due out sometime next year.
Volvo
==> Recharge Concept - this is a Swedish Volt. Runs on a Diesel as its “range-extending power source”.
==> C70 – hard-top convertible based on the very attractive S40. Very nice.
Land Rover
==> LRX Concept – sporty SUV from Land Rover? Yep. It’s a 3-door a little smaller than the new LR2. Might be a hint of a future production model.
Jaguar
==> XF – this was last year’s C-XF Concept (hey, maybe that’s what the “C” stood for – but don’t tell Cookie Monster). This is a beautiful car, which might just turn around Jaguar’s fortunes – just in time for Ford to sell it off.

General Motors
Chevrolet
==> Corvette ZR1 – so you bought that Corvette Z06, thinking that you have the baddest boy on the block? Not so fast my friend (literally): here come the ZR1. It looks pretty close to any other Corvette, but it has a supercharged, 6.2L V8 making over 620hp. It will cost $100,000, but meets or exceeds the performance of cars costing 3-4 times as much. Like all other Corvettes, it’s expensive, but a great bargain by any objective measure against its competitors.
==> Tahoe Hybrid – 1st full-size hybrid, almost on sale. Achieves the same fuel economy as a 4-cylinder Toyota Camry (21 MPG city). Chevrolet would be wise to shout this fact to the world when they start advertising this big boy. They are already shouting the hybrid thing – “hybrid” is on it in 9 places.
Pontiac
==> Solstice GXP – 260hp LNF engine and still gets 19 city, 28 highway per gallon. Fun, fun, fun!
==> G8 – Pontiac says this is the “most powerful car under $30,000”. The V6 is around $27K, while the V8 starts at just under $30K. Very aggressive, alpha-male styling, this is a legit sports sedan.
Buick
==> Riviera concept – styled in China (and even sports a badge in Chinese characters), this may indicate the styling of future Buicks. Buick is very successful in China, where Buick sells more that in the US.
Saturn
==> Astra – new 3 or 5-door compact imported from Europe, where it is known as an Opel. This is an attractive, sporty car that will start at $16K.
==> Flextreme Concept – another plug-in hybrid that has a “range-entending power source”. In this case, it’s a turbo Diesel engine that GM uses in Europe. This car also hints at future Saturn styling.
Cadillac
==> CTS Coupe “Concept” – this is officially a concept, but look for it soon. This is a really great car. The scuttlebutt is that it will be followed by a CTS wagon also.
==> CTS-V – a 550hp sedan? Yes sir, that’s my baby!
Hummer
==> HX Concept – this seems to be a hint at the long-rumored Hummer H4. HX tries to out-Jeep Jeep. It has removable doors and a reconfigurable rear roof panel that can dramatically change the look and personality in the blink of an eye. Has the 300hp V6 engine also used in the CTS.
Saab
==> 9-4X Concept – ethanol-powered turbo I4 engine that makes 300hp! Check out the looks, as Saab will have a production model that looks like this in the next couple of years.

Chrysler
Chrysler
==> ecoVoyager Concept – futuristic minivan-like styling. Powered by a fuel cell and lithium-ion batteries. Says it has a “range-extending advanced hydrogen fuel cell”.
Dodge
==> 2009 Dodge Ram – not much visual change at first glance, but many of the details are different. Sports a new interior, but the inside looks cheap to me. 1 cool new feature is the Ram box – a pair of lockable, watertight storage bins on the rear fenders.
==> 2009 Journey – new crossover that looks nice, but the interior is flimsy and cheap, especially the center console and glove compartment (a bad pattern is developing here). Has a 3.5L V6 engine or a 2.4L 4-banger. Starts at $20K. Most obvious competitor is the Ford Taurus X. Which Journey song do you think they will use in the ads? I think “Any Way You Want It”.
==> Zeo Concept – great-looking rear-drive electric powered sports coupe. Pure fantasy at this point.
Jeep
==> Renegade - another electric with range-extender. This one is a Diesel.

Toyota
Toyota must be feeling “eco-pressure” from the other manufacturers. No longer the only one with hybrids, and now getting some heat from the extreme left environmentalists for their new big truck and for opposing CAFE increases, Toyota felt the need to label just about everything in its display with environmental signs. The carpets, benches, turntables all have signs telling us how much was recycled, etc. I felt like I was in kindergarten again (where the chairs are labeled “chair”).

Toyota
==> Venza – I didn’t get a great look at this one, as some Toyota big shot just had to look at it with his posse, just as I got there. Toyota calls this a crossover sedan, which makes no sense. To my eye, it is a Ford Edge/Mazda CX-7 competitor. Based on the Camry guts, it will be built at their Kentucky plant later this year.
==> A-BAT Concept – imagine, if you will, a Honda Ridgeline and a Toyota Prius engage in extra-curricular activities one night. Several months later, the A-BAT is born. It has its father’s (Ridgeline) looks, only smaller. It has its mother’s (Pruis) frugality – the hybrid powertrain. That’s pretty much it.
==> Prius plug-in Hybrid - after publicly bashing GM about the Volt last year, Toyota comes out with this, using GM’s exact words to describe the power of this new idea for Prius: “range-extending power source” & “advanced batteries”. A few months ago, Toyota said such batteries were still a long way off and that they were dangerous and prone to overheating/fires. Toyota should have egg on its face for this, but only The Slandy Report calls them out.
Lexus
==> LF-A Roadster – has the looks of an old Celica or Supra, only this delinquent has a 500+ horsepower V10. Could do without the boy-racer uber-wing.

Nissan
Nissan
==> GT-R – high-performance sports coupe. On sale this summer, the GT-R is powered by a 480hp 3.8L twin-turbo V6. Goes from 0-60 in 3.3 seconds. Expected price is $70,000. A new version of a car already sold in other markets as the Skyline GT-R.
==> Forum Concept – at least I hope it’s a concept. Future styling of a minivan? Maybe, but it’s fugly.
Infiniti
==> EX35 – this is the FX SUV’s little bro.

Honda
Honda
==> Accord – already out, but when Honda introduces an all-new Accord, it’s worth a look.
==> Pilot Concept – though a concept, this is supposed to look just like the “real” on to be on sale later this year. Though the details are all different, the Pilot retains the same basic look. It’s bigger and seats 8. Nice, but not very exciting.
==> FCX Clarity – the first real fuel cell car for lease (this summer), if you live in Southern California. It runs on hydrogen. You might ask, “Where do I get hydrogen?” Honda has also developed an in-home energy station that uses the natural gas from your home to make hydrogen for the FCX, which can also provide heat to your home and act as a generator.
==> CR-Z Concept – a hybrid that reminds me of the old CRX. No announced plans to sell this.

Volkswagen
VW
==> Passat CC – Phaeton was a big mistake (see prior Slandy Reports) and has been cancelled. The idea wasn’t bad to try to move the VW brand upscale, but they went (way) too far, as predicted here. This is an attempt to do what the Phaeton should have been – go a little upscale. Don’t let the name fool you, though. This ain’t a Passat. Look at it next to a real Passat and you’ll see.
Audi
==> R8 V12 Turbodiesel – the mid-engined supercar adds a 500hp, 738 pound-feet torque. 0-62 mph in 4.2 seconds from a Diesel! Same technology that Audi has used in its Diesel racecars.
==> TTS – the TT isn’t a chick car anymore (at least, not much).
==> A4, A5 and S5 – beautiful new cars. The A5 & S5 are coupes based on the A4, which will be out with new versions later this year.

BMW
BMW
==> X6 – this one is hard to describe. Think of the child of a BMW M3 (300hp and 400hp engines) and a Mazda CX-7 (aggressive SUV/crossover body shape). BMW calls it a sport activity coupe. Go figure.
==> 1-Series – the smallest “regular” BMW introduces a convertible starting at $33K. Coupe is $28K.
MINI
==> Cooper Clubman – this is a slightly bigger Mini, with a rear-hinged “Clubdoor” on the passenger side to give better access to the rear. Where the regular Mini has a hatch in the back, the Clubman has barn doors that swing out to the sides. All in all, a clever extension of the popular, cute Mini brand.

Mercedes-Benz
==> Vision GLK Concept – a production version of this small, off-road capable SUV will be out next year. This is one I don’t get. Budweiser used to ask, “Why ask why?” Here’s why – maybe you won’t get stupid products like this if you ask, “Why should we build this?” This is the answer to the question nobody was asking, except maybe, “What would a Subaru Forrester look like with a Mercedes-Benz badge?”
==> SLK, CLS, SLR – on the other hand, these M-B products are amazing.
smart
==> fortwo – as the name implies, this is a 2-seater that smart has been teasing us about for a few years. If you’re not familiar with this, it’s the smallest car you’ve ever seen. It’s 98” (250cm) long, and can part straight into a parallel parking space. On sale now!

Hyundai Group
Kia
==> Borrego – new mid-size SUV that seats 7 in 3 rows. This is a true truck-based SUV with a V8.
Hyundai
==> Genesis – a rear drive Hyundai sedan with a V8 and 289 hp? On sale this summer. Nice looking, but as noted in the report in prior years, the Koreans like to “borrow” styling from others. In this case, it’s the Lexus LS.

Others
==> Suzuki X-Head concept thing – I only include this because I have no idea what it is. If you know, please let me know at slandyreport@yahoo.com.
==> Fisker Karma – to imagine what this looks like, think of a 4-door BMW Corvette. It’s a plug-in hybrid slated to go on sale in late 2009. Expected price is $80,000.
==> You know that environmentalism is the big thing when Ferrari (Ferrari!!) shows a 599 GTB Fiorano with a big, bold “Bio Fuel” decal across the hood!
==> Mitsubishi Concept R-A – an aggressively styled sports coupe with a Diesel engine.

And finally, The Slandy Awards® 2008
Slandy Best in Show Fisker Karma
Honorable Mention Corvette ZR-1, Jaguar XF, Cadillac CTS Coupe
WATT? Award Mercedes-Benz Vision GLK
Ho-Hum Award Honda Pilot
Bet the Farm Award Jaguar XF
Uh-oh! Award Hyundai Genesis
Most Annoying New Trend Everybody is copying last year’s Slandy Best in Show, the Chevrolet Volt. The vehicles the used the exact same wording as Chevrolet used last year to describe the Volt’s system (“a range-extending power source”) are noted in the write-up with ““.

 
Web Site Optimization Services