Cadillac CTS Coupe Concept

The Detroit Auto Show will display the CTS and the CTS-V Coupes in May, and I’ll bet they will sell. They need to sell, as Cadillac is hurting. The cars establish the look of the Converj, Cadillac’s upscale Volt coupe, which has drawn praise, even from me. There are good photos of the 2008 concept car here, and the production version should not be much different.

Herr Lutz, GM marketing chief, promised that the Sport Wagon (right), also using the 556 hp Corvette ZR-1 engine that will power the CTS-V Coupe, will be available somewhat later on. These could be exciting cars for GM boosters, most of whom have been starving for a little zing from the company. What the new cars need to do is focus on what consumers want and produce real quality for a change. GM has been negligent for years in this regard, despite its claims to the contrary.

It’s really difficult for the company to claim quality superiority (or even parity) when a publication as widely-read as Consumer Reports is showing so many black marks (literally) on many GM products, [including] the Cadillac CTS and STS… .

The new GM board seems to have made a long-overdue commitment to quality and reliability, and there is evidence that the new Caddys are improving in this regard. That improvement would seem a prerequisite to the success of the new coupes.

The Volt team has also been stressing quality in a recent media update. Some of the highlights of Chief Engineer Andrew Farah’s presentation:

• The Volt is meeting energy power requirements and is now balancing issues such as safety, regulations and customer satisfaction with other issues such as performance, durability, packaging and vehicle design.
• The team has completed the pre-production build process and is in the process of testing the vehicles. Some are being tested around the clock 24/7.
• The team has built all 300 packs for the Volt and the results have been excellent.
• There have been more than 250,000 miles of testing on the pre-production and mule vehicles. Some of the highlights of this testing include hot weather testing in Death Valley, mountain testing at Pikes Peak and a 65% calibration drive.

There, don’t you feel better about buying one? Now if we could all learn to grow flowers on top of our battery packs.

Tell us about your recent good or bad experience with GM quality. Are they on the right track?

—jgoods

Thinking about this decade and its cars, it’s easy to look back and say what could have been done to avoid the collapse of the auto industry. Take GM, for instance. In the months after 9/11/01, Americans were in a patriotic frenzy. Imagine if GM had stood up and said something to the effect of, ”We want to lead American automakers in reducing our need for foreign oil.”

GM could have placed itself in a position of leadership to create smaller cars and drive America toward sustainability. What it did, of course, is ramp up production and marketing of the Hummer brand.

That essentially sums up the decade, as American love for SUVs kept growing along with our vehicles’ size. Even sedans kept growing. The Honda Accord grew from a compact sedan to a large sedan. The Toyota Camry did the same. The Honda Civic became as large as older Accords.

American excess was in prime form, all the way until the summer of 2008, when $4-per-gallon gasoline and $5-per-gallon diesel sucker-punched us in the wallets. Suddenly $125 fill ups sent us whining to the automakers, demanding small cars with great fuel economy. Of course, those didn’t exist here yet, save for the suddenly popular Toyota Prius hybrid.

High fuel prices were followed immediately by the near collapse of the world’s financial system, which sent GM and Chrysler into bankruptcy. Other automakers have survived free-falling sales numbers as they scramble to introduce more fuel-efficient vehicles.

In short, the 2000s have seen transformation like never before in the auto industry. I’m betting these 10 years will go down in history as the years that changed the auto industry forever, from gas-guzzling excess to world-saving efficiency.

What are your favorite cars from the 2000s? As much of a symbol of excess as it is, I still love the 2002 Chevy Suburban 2500!

-tgriffith

1992 Dodge Viper: a bright spot in cars of the '90s

Blah. Even researching cars of the 1990s is boring.

While the 1980s gave us everything we could ever want in cars, the ’90s took it all away and replaced it with the Chevy Impala, the generic brown bag of cars.

If the ’90s are known for one thing, though, it’s the beginning of excess. The Ford Explorer, Expedition, Excursion, and Lincoln Navigator were introduced, along with the Dodge Durango. There’s no denying the Explorer’s significance, as it is the SUV that popularized SUVs and led to many years of ever-growing road behemoths.

Want more examples of boring cars of the 1990s? Yeah, I really don’t, either, but I’m proving a point. I submit as evidence the Dodge Neon, Pontiac Trans Sport, Chevy Lumina, anything with an Oldsmobile logo (R.I.P.), as well as the Chrysler Sebring, Chrysler Concorde, and Dodge Intrepid. I could keep going, but I’ll spare you.

What I will do is mention the few bright spots of the 1990s:

1997 Plymouth Prowler

In 1992, the Dodge Viper was introduced, giving Chrysler a V10-powered challenger to the Chevy Corvette. Chrysler also went out on a limb and introduced the Plymouth Prowler before permanently shutting down the Plymouth brand. While I didn’t like the Prowler, I did like that Chrysler stepped out of the norm to build it.

The ’90s also saw the birth of the Mazda MX-5 Miata. The little roadster was priced right and became an immediate hit for people who loved to drive.

GM introduced a radical new brand called Saturn in 1990. Promising a no-pressure sales environment, Saturn quickly grew and enjoyed a cult following before the General let the division wither on the vine in 2009.

Finally, in another example of forward thinking from GM, it introduced the EV1 in 1996. This could have been the groundbreaker for electric vehicles, but instead GM pulled the plug and focused on producing big, high-profit SUVs. And we all know how that turned out.

Do you have any favorite cars of the 1990s?

-tgriffith

2010 Ford Fusion SE Sport and Hybrid

In the world of automotive publishing, Motor Trend magazine seems to have been around forever. It’s consistently influential, particularly in giving out its Car of the Year Awards, which it has done for 60 years. Ford won this year with the 2010 Fusion (both gas and hybrid versions), and that seems like a good choice.

Also competing were 22 other cars, including the Prius, Hyundai Genesis, various BMWs, and the MAZDA3. The Fusion won not because it was the “best car,” but because it was “the car that gets it right for its intended audience.” So said Jil McIntosh, and so said The Car Connection, which noted the car’s strong

appeal among the buying public. Over the past year, the Fusion has boosted sales and helped expand Ford’s U.S. market share by almost a full percentage point: the company now holds 15.8% of the American market.

Motor Trend’s editor-in-chief said he was impressed by the car’s attention to detail, its new (for 2010) engineering, and the fact that it could compete so well with benchmark cars like the Camry and Accord. Available in a variety of trim and performance options, the Fusion seems to have pulled off the considerable trick of pleasing just about everybody. The hybrid version is good (see video above), and the 3.5-liter Duratec V6 in the Sport version’s even better. Most all-things-to-all-people cars can’t begin to garner such praise. Even tough folks like Suzanne Denbow got on board with the selection.

Ford stock went up (to $8.98, its highest in over two years) earlier in the week as investor George Soros’s fund announced it had bought some 7.3 million shares over the past three months. And the company got another big and well-deserved boost with the COTY Award yesterday.

Why would you buy a Fusion over an Accord or a Camry? Or would you?

—jgoods

1. The ML 450 Hybrid (shown here) is announced for sale in the U.S. with a 275-hp V6 and two electric motors. When both motors are needed, the system can generate some 335 hp and 381 lb-ft of torque, which ought to get you up to speed nicely. “During braking and coasting, one motor acts as a generator, slowing the SUV and recovering kinetic energy.” So says GlobalMotors. Mileage is reported to be 21 mpg city and 24 mpg highway.

M-B has decided to make the car available only for lease, not purchase—an interesting gambit, perhaps related to its battery technology (nickel-metal-hydride, not lithium-ion). Run down to your Benz dealer and fork over $659 a month for 36 months or $549 a month for 60 months if you want this baby.

2. Rent-a-smart: Daimler AG CEO Dieter Zetsche has announced a pilot program called cars2go for renting smart cars in Austin, Texas. (smart is a separate brand owned by Mercedes-Benz.) Rent ‘em for a few hours or a day and return them whole to a designated location. When the company tried this in Ulm, Germany, users paid “19 euro cents per minute including taxes, insurance, mileage and fuel.” If it works in Austin, other cities may get the program.

Smart sales have been way down in the U.S. after an explosion in 2008 when the cars were first offered. Down 70.4 percent last month (compared to a year earlier), sales of 661 cars in October just ain’t going to cut it. Too bad, because the car is selling elsewhere; I’ve even seen a few here in Oaxaca, Mexico. Maybe the rental program will take off, and Autoweek says Daimler is considering a four-seat smart, to be built with Renault.

3. Daimler also debuted its “third-generation Mercedes-Benz Citaro fuel-cell-hybrid bus at the site in Hamburg, Germany, where 10 of the buses enter service next year.” While we don’t ordinarily review buses in this column, this big boy was said to “perform outstandingly” and represents a tremendous push forward in fuel-cell technology and infrastructure. The Citaro has been tested in the European Union since 2003 and uses some 50 percent less hydrogen than its predecessor. “Practically maintenance free,” the Citaro has a long operating life. Get on the bus.

The Nissan Leaf EV, which we have reported on, made its U.S. debut Friday at Dodger Stadium in L.A. Said the whimsical Carlos Ghosn, Nissan’s Chief, “This is not a golf cart—it’s a real car.” We should hope so: At $25-33,000 per industry estimates, it should do more than carry two of you, your clubs, and liquid refreshment. We think the Leaf sounds like a winner, and it will get to 60 mph in less than 10 seconds (says Nissan), with a wide network of charging stations planned in the U.S.

GM, naturally, is going a different route. Bob Lutz, the company’s marketing chief, told The Car Connection that a big ‘ol front-drive Chevy Impala will be coming to compete with the Ford Taurus. “Lutz also hinted at a hybrid option for the new Impala, stating that the car will be compatible with GM’s hybrid technology.” You can all stand up and cheer, hybrid fans.

And finally, a Washington group of heavy-hitters called the Electrification Coalition has announced plans to raise more than $120 billon in federal funds over eight years to get 120 million EVs on the road and on the grid by 2030. Details are here. The idea is to combat the nation’s dependence on oil and bring serious leadership to bear.

The initial investment would be targeted at a handful of cities, or “electrification ecosystems,” designed to show the viability of both the plug-ins and the electric grid they would interact with. The first phase would last four years and invest in six to eight cities that would essentially serve as large-scale demonstration programs. The second phase would then extend to an additional 20 to 25 cities.

What do you think, folks? Can the Electrification Coalition succeed?

—jgoods

There are two reasons for this—the country’s short-term and long-term needs. First is the necessity for federal highway funding. The system has been short-changed for a long time, and the condition of the country’s roads, bridges, and tunnels is scandalous. The present 18.4-cents-per-gallon gas tax is inadequate to fund even present maintenance levels. Sen. Richard Durbin (D, Ill.) has put the handwriting on the wall. A new highway bill will be adopted, possibly by spring of next year. Somebody has to pay for it.

States like West Virginia are considering imposing their own gas taxes, as their infrastructure crumbles. With the economy stumbling and people driving less, gas tax revenues have declined everywhere. Plus, revenues get reduced as more fuel-efficient vehicles take to the road.

Which leads to the other, equally powerful, long-term exigency: The government must support in some fashion the electrification of the car industry and the infrastructure to serve it—or that brave new world simply won’t happen. There has been much written on how federal government should or should not fund industrial policy, but without it you can kiss oil independence and a clean environment goodbye.

A lengthy, interesting, and mostly convincing article in Inc. explains how the Chevy Volt (unskinned, above) and other EVs represent “connected vehicles,” cars built on a principle of networked systems requiring a new way of conceiving and building automobiles. Vertical integration, the industry’s traditional pyramid approach, is fast disappearing.

Today, however, car companies look less like pyramids and more like hubs and spokes connecting product teams: teams networked across the globe to one another and to myriad suppliers, a little like open-source software designers.

Makers of EVs will not only require new components, both hardware and software, but will need to face the enormous challenges of developing energy distribution and the grid. At the same time, there is and will be an explosion of great business opportunities. The future belongs to those who can network these new opportunities.

The auto industry will never again be a land of giants like GM but a landscape of small-business innovators. And it will be the government’s business to encourage and support these efforts at the outset. Funds will come from your pocket, once again, and higher gas taxes (in some form) are surely in your future.

Are you ready to pay higher gas taxes next year? Why or why not?

—jgoods

Luxury buyers will thus be asked to kick in to help GM defray the cost of the lithium-ion battery packs (which may run $10-12,000 for the Volt). My bet is that they will because the Converj—if it looks like the concept (as Vice Chairman Bob Lutz said it would)—will become the first dramatically styled car that GM has produced in a very long time. And the performance, one assumes, will be more than adequate.

Performance is the name of BMW’s game with the 2010 ActiveHybrid X6. According to John Voelcker of Green Car Reports, the world’s most powerful hybrid doesn’t drive at all like a hybrid. The technical details are kind of amazing, and the car performs, achieving 62 mph in 5.6 seconds (equivalent to the xDrive 50i). Freeway driving produces around 21 mpg, and the ride and handling, says John, are “smooth” and “tenaciously gripping.”

The downside of the vehicle is clearly its dog-eat-dog looks and the fact that it will set you back about $90 large or more. Oh well, that’s what it costs to buy nearly three tons of high-performance hybrid.

As tgriffith told you, SEMA produced a bunch of weird cars, as it always does. This 3-wheeler is called the eVaro, in development by Future Vehicle Technologies since 2006. Plug it in for up to 90 miles of travel, and do 0-60 in under 5 seconds (probably not both at the same time). The rated mpg is anywhere from 92 to 275. Your mileage may vary. They want to sell 10,000 of these things, which seems a mite ambitious, but it is truly an advanced concept.

Finally, it seems that hybrid sales really stepped out in October, beating the car market as a whole substantially. Details are on Edmunds’ Green Car Advisor:

Sales of Ford, General Motors, Honda, Nissan and Toyota hybrids were up 12.1 percent, while sales of conventionally powered cars and trucks were flat. The one-month picture was even rosier, as October hybrid sales jumped 22.5 percent from September’s, versus a 12.1 percent hike in sales of conventional models.

Autoblog Green carried an interesting piece covering “The Business of Plugging In” conference in Detroit. Despite persistent high battery cost and infrastructure problems, the future looks bright, especially for hybrids.

[J.D.] Power’s good-news predictions: the number of hybrid models available in the U.S. will increase from 22 today to more than 100 by 2015, and the number of “pure” (battery only) EV models will swell from one (the Tesla roadster) to at least 13 by 2012. Bad news for pure EV fans: Power says just 0.5 percent of sales (fewer than 100K units) will be pure EVs by 2015.

This doesn’t account, however, for any breakthrough in battery technology which, I’m betting, will happen within two years.

Anyone want to challenge that two-year prediction? Battery technology will improve markedly and relatively soon: Do you agree?

—jgoods

What makes the ActiveHybrid 7 strange is BMW’s boast that it is the quickest hybrid sedan on the market. If speed is the objective, we’re not sure why a hybrid is the answer. Likewise, if fuel economy is the end goal, tuning the twin-turbo V-8 gas engine for an additional 40 hp and 30 lb-ft of torque seems silly. However, if a 7-series customer believes he needs a car more powerful than the 750i but doesn’t want to step up to the 12-cylinder 760Li—which we think he should—and also wants 15 percent or so better fuel economy, BMW has just the model.

Looking at the many entrants in the rarefied-price stratum of hybrids, the question we finally ask is “Why?” Particularly since the BMW goes head to head with the Lexus LS600h L, available now for at least two years. Why would one spend all that money to get a car that offers minimal performance and fuel economy advantages? To be hybrid hip, I guess.

Fisker has a different idea. They don’t want to build $110,000 BMW or Lexus-type hybrids but “affordable” plug-ins. We wrote last week that they were in negotiation for the old GM factory in Wilmington, Delaware, where they will reportedly build in three years a “family-oriented plug-in hybrid sedan that will come in at around $40K” after federal tax credits. The Karma S sedan (right) will start at $87,000. CEO Henrik Fisker isn’t all that concerned about engines. He told Autoweek that he “envisions a future where hybrids will get their own niche powerplants, specially tuned to the need of alternative technologies. A hybrid for example, probably doesn’t need to rev to 8,000 rpm.”

Fisker got a very good deal from a Department of Energy grant to buy and refurbish this plant, and that surely will give the company a leg up on the competition. Tesla just received a $29 million tax break from the state of California, which makes that state the likely home for the company’s future production.

Another stimulus, this one for electric car production, has come to Seattle to build a network of more than 2,000 car charging stations. “By December 2010, drivers in Seattle should be able to buy mass-produced, plug-in electrics that create no emissions and run for pennies a mile.” And the state has aggressively pursued not only federal money, which will fund this effort, but also the efforts of many hi-tech businesses that are greening up.

Another reason is that lots of “Generation Y” folks live in the Northwest, and they are partial not only to hybrid powertrains, but also to considering the purchase of Chinese or Indian brands of hybrids. This according to a study by AutoPacific reported in egmCarTech. If they are really hot for hybrids, they would do well to use the Hybrid Payback Calculator, which you can download here. It helps you determine whether the cost of a hybrid is really worth it. You enter in the car’s cost, miles per gallon, price per gallon of gas, and the estimated miles you drive in a month. Clever, eh? Maybe a prospective BMW ActiveHybrid 7 purchaser could use one.

What’s your opinion on high-priced hybrids? Are they worth it—and to whom?

—jgoods

Other details from Auto Express:

The engine line-up will mirror that of the Panamera, so a 4.8-litre V8, with or without a turbocharger, producing 500bhp or 400bhp, will be available. The naturally aspirated variant is set to come with four or rear-wheel drive, while the range-topping turbo model will be 4WD only.

At this stage, much of what we hear is speculative, but the car does seem likely to be built, and the renderings look good. The 928 would basically fit into the Volkswagen-Porsche development plan tgriffith outlined recently. For a rear view, click on “Pictures” here.

1995 Porsche 928 GTS

For those of you too young to remember, the original 928 broke the rear-engine mold for Porsche and became (after the horrible 924) its first front-engine, water-cooled grand touring car. Built from 1977-1995, the car had lots of interesting tech features, including a rear-mounted transaxle, and I desperately wanted but could not afford one.

I still can’t afford one, but Porsche could be making a very smart move in bringing back the iconic 928. Until you get into the rarefied Ferrari-Aston Martin territory, the grand touring market is wide open.

Porsche’s development plans seem to make sense, at least so far. Do you foresee any roadblocks ahead as VW absorbs the company?

—jgoods

Now we have a far-out proposal from industrial designer Alberto Villareal for a fuel-cell-powered, drive-by-wire, solar-paneled (on the roof) taxi called MX-Libris (above), which may be just radical enough to do the job. The car won the Red Dot Design Award in 2008, and two Mexican firms have shown interest. Funding would come from the Centro de Transporte Sustentable, which promotes green transport. Go, Alberto!

Toyota FT-EV-II

Why do most electric cars look so ugly and commonplace? Do their designers deliberately turn out plug-ugly plug-ins because of some kind of group-think? These and other questions are delightfully addressed by Alice Rawsthorn in a New York Times piece. They are boring and ugly, she says, because of the problems inherent in new-car design, the reluctance of the industry to experiment and take chances, and the fears engendered by the huge investments required. As ever, however, there can be no reward without risk. Tesla has done it. Why can’t others?

New (U.S.?) Mazda 2

The Japanese want to take the lead in green car technology and production, and they are making noises as if they can and will do it. In particular, Mazda is working on the feasibility of diesels for the U.S. and, not surprisingly, they are looking at VW’s ability to market the diesel here with some success. The Mazda2 might be a diesel candidate, and there has been much speculation on what the 2008 World Car of the Year will look like, what will power it, etc., when it comes here. The car will get to the U.S. most likely in late 2010.

Honda CEO Takanobu Ito spoke out last week to a group of journalists (we mentioned it here) on Honda’s commitment to hybrids, EVs, fuel cells, and a really green, i.e., hydrogen-powered, sports car, “not like the Lexus” (the V10-powered, $375,000 Lexus LFA supercar). Plans include hybrids for the larger Honda models (Accord, etc.), but all this will take time. In any case, the CR-Z is coming soon, and that is good news.

Proof that green technology is catching on comes with the increasing competition for manufacturing facilities. Reva, the Indian carmaker, announced it was opening a plant in upstate New York; the Nissan Leaf will be made in Tennessee as well as Japan; and Fisker is redeveloping a GM plant near Wilmington, which event will naturally be announced by Delaware arch-booster Vice President Joe Biden.

Finally, we were caught up last week by a Wall Street Journal piece on “Five Technologies That Could Change Everything.” One of these is truly pie in the sky (space-based solar power panels), and another would trap and bury CO2 underground. The rest are: advanced car batteries, utility storage, and next-gen biofuels. Each clearly involves the concept of storage, which, as all car gurus know, is what finally, instrumentally, enables our vehicles to move. The costs and engineering challenges will be enormous, but in the end what choice do we really have but to move ahead? Just where to put the bets down will be the first problem.

How about letting us know what kinds of energy topics you would like to see covered in future Green Updates? Please leave us a comment.

—jgoods