GM to Debut HCCI Sparkless Technology on Opel Insignia

By Chris Haak

05.29.2008

According to Motor Authority, GM’s new Opel Insignia (which is its replacement for the Vectra, and will also become the next Saturn Aura in the US) will be the first GM vehicle to feature HCCI sparkless ignition technology. It is not clear if the next Saturn Aura will also feature the HCCI technology at its launch.

HCCI, which stands for homogenous charge compression ignition, gives gasoline engines a 15% efficiency boost compared to a conventional engine with spark plug ignition. Due to the technology’s infancy and some limitations that have not been overcome, the HCCI ignition will only work from idle speeds up to about 55 miles per hour; beyond 55 or under increased load/power situations, conventional spark ignition would be employed to power the vehicle.

HCCI is basically a combination of gasoline and diesel engine technology; diesel engines also combust their fuel via compression ignition and not a spark plug. However, HCCI has the advantage of using gasoline instead of diesel fuel, and also the ability to combine the best traits of both gasoline engines (higher-RPM power, smoother and quieter operation, cleaner emissions) and diesel engines (low-end torque, fuel economy).

GM isn’t the only manufacturer developing HCCI technology; Mercedes-Benz has shown its so-called DiesOtto technology (which is basically the same idea) at some auto shows. In demonstrations, a DiesOtto-powered S-class sedan achieved 39 miles per gallon. Volvo and Volkswagen are also investigating HCCI technology.

To get an idea of how compression ignition works, think back a few decades before sophisticated electronic fuel system controls were widespread in automobiles. Have you ever heard a car engine that had just been turned off “dieseling” – basically, continuing to run, albeit roughly, on its own? That’s compression ignition.

The challenges for engineers include developing sophisticated engine control computers to effectively harness the process, as well as improving upon its refinement.

Personally, I’m excited to see developments such as HCCI on the immediate horizon. When combined with other fuel-saving technologies (forced induction, direct injection, six-speed transmission, and more), perhaps there is hope that we won’t all have to drive subcompact cars to either meet increasingly strict fuel economy standards, and might still be able to afford to fill our gas tanks ten years from now.

Read more!

Fiat Considering Selling the 500 in the US

By Chris Haak

05.29.2008

According to Automotive News, at the Automotive News Europe Congress in Turin last week, Fiat Group Sergio Marchionne said that his company is considering selling its iconic and wildly popular 500 minicar in the US. Further, the company wouldn't do so unless it actually built the car in the US, as importing a small, premium car from Europe would be extremely cost-prohibitive with the current weak dollar situation.

When Alfa Romeo, which is also owned by Fiat Group, finds a plant to build its vehicles to springboard its US relaunch in late 2009, that same facility could also produce the 500. By the company's own admission, they are speaking with anyone and everyone in North America about a potential production agreement; obviously, there is a lot of unused production capacity in the US right now, but some of the most flexible plants are the newer ones that haven't been mothballed. It sure would be neat to see an old Big Three facility get a new lease on life building Italian cars, though.

Fiat has seemingly mimicked key parts of the brand extension strategy of BMW's Mini brand with the 500; the three-door hatchback arrived first, in 2007. It will be followed by a convertible in 2009, then a long-wheelbase version in 2010 (that sounds very much the equivalent to the Mini Clubman from reading a description of it). Lastly, and again from the Mini playbook, Fiat is considering an SUV-like derivative that might include all wheel drive.

Assuming that the 500 can make the trans-Atlantic journey relatively unscathed (without being de-contented or diluted), it would be an instantly credible premium small car entry for a country that suddenly has found an appetite for them. Interestingly, Marchionne said that if Fiat does sell the 500 in the US (which at this point sounds pretty likely if the CEO is chatting about it with reporters), it would not mean that the Fiat brand will return to the United States. Mr. Marchionne, probably correctly, considers the 500 to be a brand by itself. With an expanded lineup of 500s, it would have the same number of models that Mini is likely to have.

An unanswered - and possibly un-asked - question is where the 500 will be sold. There are not US Fiat dealers; the company is going to re-launch Alfa Romeo with a six-figure flagship at select Maserati outlets (Maserati is also under the Fiat umbrella), and eventually there will be Alfa Romeo dealerships when the more pedestrian models are produced and sold in the US. I suppose that the 500 could be sold at the Alfa Romeo stores when they come online.

Read more!

2008 Toyota Sequoia SR5 4x4 Review

By Chris Haak

05.28.2008

Although full-size, body-on-frame SUVs are a rapidly declining segment of the new vehicle market, thanks to the reality of gas prices that have more than doubled since 2005 and are showing no signs of falling, they are still members of a very large segment. There are many people who need the utility, towing capability, and passenger capacity of the Suburban/Yukon/Tahoe/Escalade, Expedition/Navigator, Armada, and Sequoia, although their segment of the market will never sell as many vehicles in future years as it did in the past 5-10 years until Katrina started the gas price march to $4.00 per gallon and beyond.

This brings me to my most recent test vehicle, a Toyota Sequoia SR5 4x4. Although I don't have a large family, or any current towing needs, I feel that I am uniquely qualified to comment on the vehicle, as I have driven versions of three-fourths of its closest competitors (missing only the Ford products), including thousands of miles of seat time in a 2007 Chevy Suburban and a test drive in a 2008 Infiniti QX56. I've also spent time in several crossovers - a growing segment that is gobbling up market share from their larger, heavier, thirstier brothers - including the Buick Enclave - as well as several minivans. Finally, my family and I own Toyota's own Sienna minivan. More on that comparison to come later.

The Sequoia is in its second generation and is based on the Tundra pickup (which is also in its second generation). As the Tundra grew from a 7/8ths-scale version of a domestic pickup into a full-scale version, the Sequoia did as well, which substantially improved interior space and performance, with no fuel economy penalty compared to the previous generation. The thing is huge, and can be intimidating in smaller garages (or public parking garages) where tight maneuvering and acute awareness of your vehicle's width and height are critical.

Exterior
The outside of the Sequoia basically looks like the SUV version of the Tundra pickup that it effectively is. The grille and front bumper are different between the Sequoia and Tundra (with the Sequoia having a fully body-colored bumper, while some trim levels of the Tundra favor a chrome treatment on the bumper's lower half), and the Sequoia lacking the Tundra's phony vent at the top of the grille's arch. I prefer the Sequoia's cleaner look, but they're so similar that I had to compare photos to tell the difference, other than noticing that the fake vent was missing in the top of the Sequoia's grille.

My test vehicle was an SR5 4x4 model, which is below the Limited and Platinum models in the trim line hierarchy. Externally, there aren't many improvements in the higher-end models aside from larger wheels, but my test vehicle's dark blue exterior, with no adornments such as moldings or chrome strips, and 18 inch wheels (when the Platinum trim, as well as many competitors, has 20 inch wheels) seemed a little ho-hum. I'm all for good taste and a certain amount of restraint when it comes to vehicle styling, but the Sequoia's flanks are showing almost too much restraint. At least the Sequoia has deep-cut character lines on the lower portions of the doors, and the swept-back headlights and taillights lend a fairly modern look. Like the Tundra pickup, the Sequoia isn't quite as conservatively styled as its competition, although I'd argue that the Suburban's clean lines are more handsome.

Interior
The new 2008 Sequoia grew in nearly every dimension compared to the previous model. Although it's a very large vehicle and Toyota's engineers could have easily been tempted to "waste" interior space because there was so much to go around, they wisely applied many of the clever space maximization techniques that would have been applied to a smaller vehicle. For instance, thanks to independent rear suspension, the third row seats fold flat into the floor as their competitors (except for the GM trucks) do. Multiple clever storage cubbies abound, including dual glove boxes, a gigantic center console that has the ability to hold hanging files, and - if my count is correct - 17 cupholders for 8 seating positions. Further enhancing interior flexibility is the fact that the second row seats each slide forward or backward individually on tracks, so for owners who plan to use all of the seating positions (or at least all of the rows), the vehicle's available legroom can be allocated according to the needs of occupants in each row. For example, if the front seats are all the way back, the second row might have to be adjusted rearward a bit more than normal for occupants there. I appreciated that the Sequoia gave that flexibility.

It was also very easy to get into the third row; I remember growing up in the 1980s, my parents owned several Suburbans of the 1973-1991 era; to get into the third row (which didn't even have any footwell), your choices were to climb over the second row without folding it (OK for kids, but parents didn't like it), or fold the seat forward and the seatback flat. The Sequoia (as well as its contemporaries) have a much simpler method - just pull one lever on the side of the second row seat, and the bottom portion of the seat slides forward and the seatback leans forward, leaving a large opening which, combined with long rear doors, makes it pretty easy to enter the third row gracefully. Exiting gracefully, however, is more difficult. Your two choices are to face forward and limbo under the top of the door opening, or face backward and blindly hoping that your foot will hit something solid like a running board before your knee or shin hits the bottom of the door opening.

In terms of interior materials, I was frankly disappointed. There are very few, if any, soft-touch plastics. The entire upper dashboard was made of hard plastic, and the majority of the door panels and other touchpoints were as well. I was also unpleasantly surprised by the deletion of content in the SR5 relative to the Limited and Platinum models. For example, the SR5 had cloth seats, non-lighted visor mirrors, no retractable sun shades, no power liftgate, and a vinyl steering wheel (no leather wrap - which is included on the $18,000 Corolla I'm driving today).

Driving Experience
Obviously, the Sequoia is not a small, light vehicle. Expect to have to forego shorter or narrower parking spots at the mall. Forget about jumping into any small gaps in city traffic. However, once you get used to the size (which only took me a day or two), it really drives almost like a smaller vehicle, which is a complement to Toyota's chassis engineers. Other than the unavoidable step up into the front seat and the Grand Canyon-wide space between the front seats, it's almost possible to forget that you're in a three ton truck. The Sequoia is solid over uneven road surfaces and, thanks to independent rear suspension, felt almost car-like in its highway ride. The big guy doesn't particularly care for traveling quickly on back roads, but didn't feel unsafe or top-heavy at any point, so long as things were kept at a reasonable pace.

I've gushed before about the 5.7 liter V8/six speed automatic combination in my review of a 2007 Tundra CrewMax, and all of that feedback still stands for the Sequoia. Acceleration and braking performance felt remarkably similar, which is not surprising, considering that the Sequoia SR5 4x4's curb weight is only about 5% (or 300 pounds) heavier than the Tundra CrewMax 4x4's. The six speed automatic was always in the right ratio for the situation at hand, and it shifted too slowly when in manual mode. That really didn't matter, though, because 381 horsepower and 401 lb-ft of torque is enough to overcome any situations where the transmission might be a gear or two higher than you'd want it in.

Steering feel was actually fairly accurate for a large truck. Since it's a traditional belt-driven setup instead of the electrically-operated units finding their way into smaller vehicles, it actually managed to feel better to me than several small cars I've driven. Navigating through the multi-story parking garage I use daily wasn't as difficult as I thought it would be - I just had to have confidence in my feel for the Sequoia's size when rounding sharp corners and aim the steering wheel. It (and I as its driver) survived a six-story descent from the top floor to the exit one busy afternoon, which meant twelve sharp right turns that required me to turn the wheel to a point near its lock; the only oddity was when there was a midsize sedan in front of me on a descending ramp, and I literally could not see the roof of the car over the Sequoia's hood, because it was below my level and the hood was so high. Luckily for me (and the driver of that car), I was aware that he was there and of course didn't bump him.

The enormous width of the Sequoia presents its own set of challenges; for instance, aside from having to look for wider parking spaces, putting it into a garage, or even patronizing some drive-through windows, sometimes requires folding the driver's mirror. The SR5 was not equipped with power folding mirrors, so I had to reach out to do that by hand. In spite of the wide mirrors, I managed to avoid whacking any objects with them. I attribute that again to respecting the size of the truck and being vigilantly aware of its width at all times.

As I do not own a boat, car trailer, horse trailer, or travel trailer, I was unable to test the Sequoia's towing capabilities. However, the maximum trailer weight for a Sequoia SR5 4x4 is 9,600 pounds (an even 10,000 for an SR5 4x2), which is a heck of a large trailer. I have no doubt that it would do a great job towing, with the combination of an intelligent transmission (with tow/haul mode), strong engine, and hefty curb weight (for stability).

Fuel Economy
Today's astronomical fuel prices have already winnowed the pretenders from the people who genuinely need a vehicle this large and capable. To that point, nobody buying a Sequoia does so for fuel economy reasons; however, its figures are class-competitive. The 5.7 liter V8/six-speed automatic combination is rated at 13 city/18highway for the 4x4 models and 14/19 for 4x2 models. These figures are slightly worse than the Tahoe's 14/19 for 4x4 models and 14/20 for 4x2 models with the less-powerful 5.3 liter engine, but better than the AWD GMC Yukon Denali's 12/18 with its comparably powerful engine and six speed automatic. The Ford Expedition's fuel economy is also in this neighborhood. The Nissan Armada 4x4 is rated at a class-worst 12 city/17 highway. In about 250 miles of mixed driving, including some heavy traffic, I got 13.5 miles per gallon, which is actually better than I was able to achieve in the Tundra with the same powertrain back in February. Perhaps I was getting more used to the V8's power and was able to keep my right foot out of the accelerator a little more.

Pricing
While I actually didn't mind living with the Sequoia for a week, it certainly wasn't the ideal family vehicle for two adults and two small children. (A friend of a friend in the same situation as us has a new Suburban to haul their two children under age two in, and no, they don't tow anything). I can appreciate the vehicle's capabilities, and it's probably where you'd want to be if you knew you were going to collide with another vehicle, thanks to its considerable mass.

I'm not here to convince people to buy a minivan over a Sequoia, but just look at these specs for a moment. Comparing every interior dimension (leg/hip/shoulder room in all three rows, plus cargo volume behind each row) between the Sienna and Sequoia shows the Sienna winning the comparison in nearly every category. The only "wins" for the Sequoia were the width-dependent categories (hip room and shoulder room) in all three rows. However, the Sienna soundly trounces its cousin in terms of cargo volume: 43.6 versus 18.9 cubic feet behind the third row, 94.5 versus 66.6 cubic feet behind the second row, and 148.9 versus 120.8 cubic feet with both second and third row seats folded or removed. On top of that, the Sienna's curb weight is about 1,500 pounds lighter, so its fuel economy is 16/21 in the AWD and 17/23 in the FWD model. Lastly, According to TrueDelta, a Sienna Limited AWD is over $12,000 cheaper than a Sequoia Platinum 4x4 when equipment differences are taken into account. In fact, you can buy a fully-loaded Sienna with EVERYTHING for the same price as a relatively stripped Sequoia. I'd argue that in today's environmentally-conscious times, the "minivan stigma" is now less powerful than the "eww, you drive a full-size SUV" stigma. I'm not judging those who choose the big SUV over the van, but economically, it doesn't make much sense unless you need its capabilities. I'd like to re-iterate that I am not advocating the elimination of full-size SUVs from the marketplace or saying that people should not be allowed to buy them. I just don't see why people would.

Conclusion
If you need or want the size, safety, and capability of a full-size body on frame SUV, the Sequoia is a very credible effort from Toyota. I feel that the interior materials and design are a bit of a letdown asethetically, but the powertrain was awesome (if a bit thirsty), engine performance was superior, and the interior had a lot of clever storage cubbies. Meanwhile, if anyone would like to loan a large boat to me for a weekend to test the towing capabilities of the next large vehicle in my garage, please let me know.

Read more!

American Axle UAW Workers Approve Contract and End Strike

Bitter strike comes to an end

By Chris Haak

05.23.2008

Late last night, the UAW announced that the striking rank-and-file workers at American Axle voted to approve their concessionary contract by a 78% to 22% margin.

The American Axle strike was an ugly situation for all parties involved. GM lost $800 million as a direct result of the strike during March alone, due to the closure or partial closure of as many as 30 different assembly plants. GM also had to chip in another $218 million to help bridge the gap between the UAW and American Axle. The 3,650 UAW workers who were on strike at five American Axle facilities had to survive on very low strike pay for three months, and now are going back to work in the same jobs they had before, but in some cases at two-thirds of their previous hourly wage. The UAW, although managing to improve the final deal by several dollars per hour over American Axle’s initial offer, appears to have overall “lost” this battle with management, showing that the union’s power has been eroded further.

Related to the strike’s settlement was the dramatic drop in pickup and SUV demand – which we outlined in our previous two articles about trends that Ford’s management also noticed. GM announced a few weeks ago that it would significantly curtail production of trucks this year. The drop in large truck demand meant a drop in the demand for axles underpinning these trucks, which meant that American Axle needed its workers to come back to work even less in May than it did when the strike began in February.

For its part, the UAW’s leadership was well aware that they were putting a contract offer that wasn’t as good as they had hoped in front of the membership for a vote. "Our members have had to make some tough decisions for themselves and their families and have done so with careful deliberation," said UAW President Ron Gettelfinger.

The company will pay workers up to $105,000 over the next three years to make the transition to a lower hourly wage lower. Workers will also be offered between $55,000 and $140,000 incentives to either retire early or leave the company without retiring in an effort to reduce headcount and transition more of the company’s manufacturing capacity to facilities outside the US, including Mexico and Asia. American Axle actually turned a modest profit last year, but saw that their competitors who were more financially distressed had been able to wring lower wages out of their union membership, so were in an uncompetitive position. At least the new deal should help the company remain competitive with other US suppliers going forward.

If it sounds like US-based suppliers and automobile manufacturers can’t seem to catch a break, that’s probably right. Even before the economy turned south in recent months, decades of poor management in the industry led to huge losses even during a rosy economy. Hopefully in a poor economy, the management decisions made in this industry will be better ones. More likely, however, we’ll see further struggles and labor battles before things turn around again.

Read more!

Ford Announces Production Cuts, Sees Expensive Gas Long-Term

By Chris Haak

05.23.2008

Yesterday, Ford made the business news wires for the types of reasons that companies dread - they had to announce bad news. The news was that they expected to basically break even during 2009, while they had originally expected to begin turning a profit that year. The cause, of course, is twofold: the difficult auto market, combined with Ford's currently truck- and large vehicle-heavy lineup.

Although this is clearly not good news for Ford, it also could be a lot worse. The news would be much worse if Ford had said that they expected to lose money in 2009, instead of basically breaking even. Or worse still, Ford could have said that they were announcing multiple expensive incentive programs to keep the factories humming, in spite of losing money on every vehicle they produce. Instead, the company, under the leadership of CEO Alan Mulally, appears to be under no delusions about its likelihood of sales success without a better selection of small, efficient cars, so is trimming production to appropriate levels.

Overall, Ford is cutting production by 15% for the second quarter 2008 compared to last year, plus a 15-20% reduction in the third quarter, and approximately an 8% reduction in the fourth quarter. The production cuts will also mean job cuts, although the company did not have immediate specifics of how many jobs would be cut, and from where.

According to Mr. Mulally, the "tipping point" (there is an excellent book by Malcolm Gladwell, by the way, with the same name) in the market - where consumers really started to abandon the SUV and pickup markets, came when gas prices reached $3.50 per gallon. According to Automotive News, the market share of SUVs fell from 5.2% in April to 4.4% through the first half of May, and down from 8.4% in 2007. Pickups saw their market share fall from 11% in April to 9% in May (and down from 14.1% in 2007). So basically, as a share of all new vehicles, SUVs have lost almost half of their sales since 2007 (from 8.4% to 4.4%) while pickups have lost almost a quarter of their market share.

There's more decent news for Ford as well. Although truck and SUV production will be curtailed significantly during the remainder of 2008, many of the company's car and crossover models, including the Focus, Fusion, Edge, Escape, Milan, Mariner, MKZ, and MKX, will see their production increase compared to 2007's levels.

Many folks wondered where the tipping point would be that would finally make consumers throw up their hands and give up on gas guzzling V8s as personal use trucks. Ford believes the answer to that question is $3.50, but I believe that each person has a different breaking point, while some - who can afford the extra expense or can't live without cubic inches - may not have any tipping point that changes their behavior, or at least a price so stratospherically high (as in $10+ per gallon) that they will continue to buy pickups and SUVs instead of cars and crossovers.

Although it's definitely a shame to see Ford having to cut back production plans, I applaud the company for taking the appropriate steps to ensure its future survival and taking a pragmatic approach with regard to fuel prices and the economy. According to Automotive News, Ford's projected range of gas prices during 2008 and 2009 range from $3.75 to $4.25 per gallon, and staying there for a while. Unfortunately, they're probably right, unless gas goes past $4.25 per gallon.

The Fiesta can't come to North America soon enough for Ford.

Read more!

2008 Lexus IS350 Review

By Chris Haak

05.20.2008

Even before I started writing about cars and the car business, I'd driven hundreds of different vehicles over the years. Some stood out - 1969 Firebird 400 four speed, any Chevy Corvette for instance - while some did not, such as a 1987 Buick Century on its way to a wholesale auction. Some were enjoyable to drive, and some were numb and disengaged. Some had adequate power, some were underpowered, and a select few had just enough power. The 2008 Lexus IS350 was one that did everything just the way I expected it to, and one of the rare vehicles that I genuinely missed driving the day after the representative from Lexus picked the car up. All that being said, the IS350 wasn't perfect or very practical for any families, and in fact, I probably wouldn't buy one myself.

Exterior
The IS350 is a very well-proportioned vehicle. It has short overhangs both front and rear, and features Lexus' so-called L-Finesse design language. Although I've never seen a written definition of exactly what L-Finesse means, I've noticed that certain parts of Lexus automobiles have sharp points on the outer border with rounded edges on their inner border (for example, look at the shape of the IS350's grille). Styling experts would also tell you that L-Finesse also means a blending of "slashing, angled forms balanced against the curving fluid surfaces." Whatever it means, it looks Asian, yet not derivative of any other manufacturer's vehicles. Lexus took a lot of criticism early in its existence for building a better, cheaper Mercedes-Benz, and while it took the company quite a while to find its styling mojo, I'm pleased with the results.

The car has the high door sills and short window openings that are in vogue today (though they didn't bother me as much as they did in the Lincoln MKZ, a larger car that seemed to swallow me within its high door sills). The doors are almost completely flat except where they curve inward toward the glass at the sills and where they bulge around the wheel openings. The wheels on my test vehicle were 18 inch alloys and had low-profile performance tires mounted to them. Perhaps because the IS350 is rear wheel drive only, or perhaps Lexus just "gets it," but the wheels filled the openings perfectly. They didn't look too large or too small, and didn't have too much distance between the tops of the tires and the center of the wheel opening in the fenders. There is a great-looking line that flows from the base of the windshield, across the hood in a V-shape, past the perimeter of the grille, and into the front bumper. It really works for the car as a unifying element. The headlights are basically a triangular shape prevalent among many Asian vehicles, and the taillights are angled downward toward the center of the car, which makes the back of the car look almost "angry" if one imagines that the lenses are eyebrows. To me, the front end is more successful than the back end, styling-wise, but that may be partially because of my disappointment in the lack of taillight creativity in this second-generation IS. The first generation IS (the IS300) started the "Altezza lights" trend several years ago. (The first-generation IS was sold in Japan as the Toyota Altezza, and was one of the first production vehicles to feature an inside lamp housing finished in chrome with the actual illuminated portion of the lamp the only part in red; subsequently, "Altezza lights" could be found as aftermarket accessories on everything from Chevy Suburbans to Dodge Neons and Honda Civics; in fact, several automobile manufacturers equipped their own new vehicles with Altezza-like lights, such as GM with the Chevy Equinox and Aveo, and Ford with the Fusion). Suffice it to say that the closest the current IS will get to having its taillight design emulated is the similar shape of the Mitsubishi Lancer's lamps.

Interior
Lexus' bread and butter is the design and materials found in their vehicle interiors. Even in their sporty models such as the IS, they take pride in the luxury, comfort, and ambiance that the interior surroundings provide. To that end, the IS350 that I tested featured heated and cooled seats with very soft leather, a navigation system with backup camera, Bluetooth cell phone connectivity, electroluminescent gauges, a power moonroof, wood interior trim, a power rear sunshade, XM Satellite Radio, and a smart key with pushbutton start. The dash was nicely padded and all instruments and controls fell right to hand. Lexus clearly sweated the details in the interior; rather than having a dark abyss between the seats and console, for example, the IS had an upholstery covering to catch things that fell through.

Unfortunately, the interior is also severely lacking in the roominess department, particularly in the back seat. Part of the problem is inherent with rear wheel drive-based vehicles; they require a large driveline tunnel on the floor, and part of the problem is because the front seats are so thick and comfortable that they are occupying some of the real estate that would otherwise probably go toward the rear seat's area. Another problem personally with small-ish vehicles such as the IS is that, at 6'4", I need to have the seat adjusted to a point near the rearmost point in its travel. The end result was that, although I was able to install our child seats (a booster for our older son and a rear-facing convertible seat for our infant son), the front passenger seat had to be adjusted so far forward that it was nearly impossible for my wife (at 5'11") to spend more than 15 minutes in that seat at a time. Also, the trunk would only hold a single Graco stroller, and left very little remaining space for anything else. For example, a golf bag or small suitcase would not fit into the trunk if the stroller was already there.

On the Road
Once I left my family behind and used the Lexus by itself, I came to appreciate - dare I say love - driving the car. Most professional reviewers who have driven both the BMW 3-series and the current IS have concluded that the IS isn't quite sporty enough, and that the 3-series isn't the benchmark. However, since I haven't driven a 3-series for almost a dozen years (and never for a week), I didn't have the benefit of that relative comparison. Instead, my basis for comparison was any number of front wheel drive-based sedans that I'd driven over the years: Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, Lincoln MKZ, Mercury Sable, Pontiac Grand Prix, etc. Compared to any of these vehicles, the IS350 was faster, handled better, looked better, and even sounded better. With the traction control switched on, in fact, it even did fine on wet roads with its summer tires. 306 horsepower is pretty lofty for such a small car, and while the car was extremely quick, I never once felt that it was too much power to effectively put to the pavement.

The routine when starting the IS350 with the smart key is identical to the steps taken in either the Prius or Camry Hybrid (with the key fob in your pocket, open the door, press the brake pedal, and push the Power button). The difference is, pressing the Power button in the IS gives a rumble and a growl, while it was greeted by some beeps and whirs - but no internal combustion engine - in the hybrids. Both the speedometer and tach needles swing to their full travel point for a second, then return to 0 mph and 600 RPMs, respectively. The steering wheel was thick, perfectly finished in satin-finish charcoal leather, and had a delightfully small diameter. I don't heap praise lightly on steering wheels, because I can't stand them when they are shiny, have protruding stitching (or even worse, aren't covered in leather), or are too large. But the IS350's tiller was the perfect size to handle, while remaining sufficiently large to perfectly encircle the gauge cluster for easy visibility of the pertinent information. Behind the steering wheel are paddle shifters, with the upshift paddle on the right (labeled '+') and the downshift paddle on the left (labeled '-'). I'm not sure if they were magnesium or another metal, but they were definitely not plastic, and felt great with their matte finish.

As the car idled, a subtle "tick-tick" sound was barely audible under the hood. This is a trait inherent with all gasoline direct injection engines. It wasn't annoying to me, but I could hear it. Perhaps less trained ears wouldn't even notice it (in spite of having far better hearing overall, my wife couldn't notice it, and she also can't hear valvetrain noise in our Sienna when the engine isn't warmed up). I knew to listen for it, so that might be why I was able to notice it. The sound disappears as the engine revs higher, but is still audible at very slow parking lot-like speeds as well.

Beyond the parking lot or driveway, however, the IS350 is very nearly a beast, albeit a tame one. Flooring the throttle brought an instant multi-gear kickdown of the six-speed automatic and a rush of acceleration. On curvy roads, if I was feeling playful, I could engage the manual shift mode of the transmission and the paddles would hold their gear up to the rev limiter. I'm personally far more used to either driving a conventional manual or automatic transmission, so I actually preferred switching the throttle/transmission algorithm from Normal to Sport (the other choice is Snow, which severely dulls throttle response but might save your RWD Lexus on a slippery day). Sport mode with the transmission allowed to shift itself caused the transmission to hold its gear for several seconds, even after lifting the throttle. It's obviously not great for fuel economy, but great if you have to lift briefly for a curve and want to get right back into the engine's powerband without waiting for the transmission to get back into the proper gear.

On those curvy roads, the electric power steering was probably the car's only weak point; while it felt better than any other Toyota product's steering, it felt a little artificial. Effort was slightly higher than expected at speed, and it seemed to lack a little bit of on-center precision. However, given a choice between a higher than expected effort and a lower than expected effort, I'd take the higher effort any day, as I can't stand overboosted power steering.

The IS was comfortable even over rough road surfaces; it managed to recover quickly from large bumps with no floatiness. I never understood why some luxury cars, all in the name of "comfort" forced occupants to endure the same bump multiple times as the car continued to rebound. The IS, as it's focused more on the sport side of the spectrum, doesn't have that issue. Braking was excellent; since I obviously did not race the car or take it to a track, I cannot comment on whether it fades under repeated heavy use, but the large four wheel discs and large, grippy summer tires combined forces to stop the car quickly and drama-free. The brake pedal's feel might be an adjustment for some; the top of its travel begins applying braking force, and full ABS engagement at the end of its travel is only seemingly about two inches from the beginning of travel. Therefore, drivers will have to re-calibrate their right foot for different braking engagement than they may be used to, although I didn't have any problem adjusting to or from the IS350's pedal.

Fuel Economy
The only problem with driving a fast, desirable car is that it's extremely tempting to dip into its ample power reserves more often than someone like your mother would appreciate you doing. Passing on a two-lane? Sure, just floor it! Annoyed by someone on the highway? They're now in your rearview mirror. But this fun has a price, and that's an observed 17 miles per gallon. I also blame more annoying stop-and-go traffic than usual on my daily commute last week. By the way, it requires premium unleaded, too. The EPA rates the IS350 at 18 city/25 highway, and I find both of those ratings to be reasonable; during some highway jaunts, mid-20s are very do-able if you can move on, say, 75 of those 306 horsepower. Start summoning them, however, and the mpgs drop rapidly. The RWD automatic IS250 sedan is rated at a better 21 city/29 highway, but is also about 100 horsepower down from the IS350, and therefore loses most of the reason to buy a new IS. Finally, the new IS-F, with a 400+ horsepower 5.0 liter V8, is rated at 16 city/23 highway.

Pricing
The base price of the IS350 I tested started at $35,905. My test vehicle had a lot of options, though not all of them. Options on my tester included the luxury package with 18" wheels ($4,325), navigation system ($2,550), intuitive parking assist with front and rear sensors ($500), and XM satellite radio ($486). With destination and a few other minor options, the final MSRP came to $44,828. Two major options that weren't included on my test vehicle included laser dynamic cruise control with a pre-collision system ($2,850), and a 14-speaker Mark Levinson audio system ($1,440 on top of the $2,550 navigation system, which is required). It's a lot of money, but it's also a premium (albeit small) product. Even though the car is similar in size to a Civic, it also packs a lot more expensive technology and content under its skin than a Civic does. Is it worth $45,000? I'd seriously consider it (after testing a G35s, 335i, and CTS DI) if it weren't for the lack of interior space. The 335i would probably give similar space problems, while the G35 is a bit bigger, and the CTS is much bigger.

Bottom Line
The IS was a heck of a car. Anyone in the market for a quick, comfortable, attractive entry luxury/sport sedan should absolutely give the IS350 strong consideration. If a potential customer is 5'8" instead of 6'4", it might just be the perfect vehicle for him.

Read more!

Finally, Some News of Labor Peace

Four important accords were struck during the past several days

By Chris Haak

05.18.2008

While none of these events should come as a huge surprise to regular readers of this site, the past few days have seen a tentative deal between American Axle and the UAW that is likely to soon bring an end one of the longest strikes in the UAW's history as well as Ford and Chrysler agreeing to tentative agreements with the CAW in Canada on new collective bargaining agreements. Finally, GM has reached a local operating agreement with the UAW local at its Lansing Delta Township crossover plant.

The American Axle strike, in which the UAW has been on strike for over 11 weeks, was probably the most critical to end for all parties; GM is far and away American Axle's largest customer, and the strike virtually shut down GM's truck production for several weeks until additional parts "could be found" (which many analysts and observers believe meant that AA was able to supply the needed parts from plants outside of the US. Even though GM's bloated truck inventories (which, in terms of days' supply, barely changed for the past several months in spite of tens of thousands of units in lost production), the idled plants still cost money even when not producing vehicles, and in fact are not earning any money. As a result, GM has lost close to $1 billion as a result of the American Axle strike. Within the past few weeks, GM has offered $200 million to American Axle to fund employee buyouts and one-time payments to employees to help entice them to accept lower wages going forward. The company had initially offered a very steep wage reduction to the UAW, but it's believed that the final proposal agreed to by the bargaining team is still calling for wage reductions, but not as dramatic as the original request, and accompanied by "buy-downs" of over $100,000 in some cases to help employees adjust to earning a lower wage.

As we've reported previously, Ford and the CAW came to a new collective bargaining agreement a few weeks ago months before the previous contract had even expired. Many (including me) wondered aloud if Ford had possibly left too much on the table for the sake of labor peace and a smooth launch of the Flex crossover in the coming months. I also questioned whether Chrysler and GM would find Ford's terms agreeable (though, to be fair to Ford, it was more of a concessionary contract than one where Ford really gave anything up in terms of wages or benefits). Then, on Thursday (just 11 days after the union's membership ratified the Ford agreement), the CAW announced that it had come to a tentative agreement, subject to ratification, with Chrysler LLC and GM. As has been the practice for decades, the Chrysler and GM agreements closely mirror the Ford agreement; certain plants that had been expected to close will stay open for longer periods, there will be no two-tier wage structure for new hires in Canada as there will be in the US, and buyout offers of up to $125,000 (Canadian) to each CAW worker at the GM Windsor transmission plant, which produces four-speed automatic transmissions and is slated to close.

Lastly, UAW Local 602, which represents 3,300 workers at GM's new Lansing Delta Township assembly plant that builds the Buick Enclave, GMC Acadia, and Saturn Outlook crossovers, has come to a local agreement at the facility. Following the national contract, which was agreed upon in the fall, management has to reach a local operating agreement with each local union concerning issues such as work rules and job classifications. There had been speculation among some in the industry that the UAW was using the local strikes as leverage to get GM involved in the American Axle strike (which GM eventually did, to the tune of $200 million), since the American Axle strike affected production of vehicles that GM had ample supply of. Also, as the AA strike wore on, their non-US facilities ratcheted up production and actually allowed GM to re-start production at some of its truck plants in spite of the ongoing Axle strike that had previously stopped production. It also seemed suspicious that the two plants affected by local strikes built two of GM's hottest, must-win products (the aforementioned crossovers, and the Fairfax, Kansas plant that builds the new 2008 Chevy Malibu). However, analysts are now speculating that the local strikes are just a coincidence, and instead may be caused by member dissatisfaction with the landmark labor deal reached last fall.

Regardless of the motivations of the parties who settled, I'm glad that at least some of the headwinds facing the domestic auto industry have been eliminated. There are still many challenges facing each company, but further improved products, better marketing, and now some labor peace (with more competitive agreements) may help pull these companies out of their decades-long doldrums.

Read more!

2008 Chrysler Town & Country Limited Review

By Chris Haak
05.14.2008

Last week, Chrysler dropped off the keys to a fully-loaded Town & Country Limited minivan for my evaluation. As the father of two boys under age three, in the past six months, not only have I managed to shed my aversion to minivan ownership, but in fact to embrace it. At the end of 2007, my wife and I decided to trade in our Nissan Pathfinder SUV for a larger family hauler; the Pathfinder simply didn’t have enough room inside for our needs. As she approached the due date of our second son, she wasn’t able to test drive vehicles with me, so I evaluated and chose our new family hauler on my own, only showing her brochures and prices. This process was well-documented on this site via a series of Family Hauler reviews. Unfortunately, once we decided that all wheel drive was a must-have feature on at least one of our vehicles, that eliminated the Chrysler Town & Country from our own purchase considerations. However, I was still curious to see how the T&C stacked up against its closest competitors, the Honda Odyssey and Toyota Sienna. Full disclosure: the family hauler occupying the right-hand spot in our garage is a 2008 Toyota Sienna Limited AWD.

Exterior
When I first saw photos of the new-for-2008 Town & Country and Dodge Grand Caravan, I didn’t quite know what to think. The vans are boxier-looking than their jellybean-shaped predecessors. The prominent external features are a more squared off D-pillar and a more square “jaw” in the front end. The styling at the front of the van is reminiscent of several Chrysler cars, but thankfully, comes without the hood strakes featured on so many of Chrysler’s other models. From the first photos I saw of the Town & Country in 2007, I had nearly convinced myself that nearly all styling flair had actually been removed from the vans during development of the current model. However, having spent a week with the Town & Country, I can now appreciate its appearance as conservative, yet handsome. There are prominent bulges around the wheel openings, and a chrome molding runs along the length of the van and really helped brighten its appearance, while providing a nice contrast to the black metallic paint on my tester. Polished alloy wheels, along with HID headlamps completed the brightening effects on the exterior. During my time with the T&C, I grew to believe that it was a more attractive van than the Sienna in my garage, but less attractive than the Odyssey. People don’t buy minivans for their exterior looks, and as long as you are comfortable conceptually with driving a minivan (and I finally am, at age 33), you won’t have to wear dark sunglasses when driving the Town & Country.

Interior
Chrysler’s engineers clearly spent a lot of time designing interior features for their new-generation minivans. After all, the company that created the minivan segment in the US – and has owned it for decades – has seen its sales supremacy seriously challenged by the Sienna and Odyssey, both of which provided useful, comfortable interiors. In pattern with Chrysler’s treatment of their “franchise players,” the interior theme over the years has been one of continual improvements, all in the name of making it easier for parents to transport their children from place to place as needed. Some of the features I found most useful were the Swivel-n-Go seats (which are thicker and more comfortable than the standard Stow-n-Go seats available in these vans, but don’t fold into the floor), dual flip-down LCD rear seat displays, Sirius Backseat TV (though, because you are at the mercy of programming schedules, a DVD may still be a better alternative), a power folding third row seat, and ample storage compartments and cubbies. Although my test vehicle had second seats that did not fold flat into the floor, it still had a “basement” in the floor behind the front seats where the table is stored when not in use and where you could also store a good deal of other stuff, such as duffel bags, toys, beach equipment, and more – completely underfoot and out of sight.

The interior design, while focused more heavily on functionality than appearances, did have some nice touches. I’m a sucker for light-stained “wood,” and this particular van had light-colored faux wood on the dash and door panels. The headliner was also of the woven variety, which I tend to perceive as being of a higher quality (although I am forced to deduct some “points” for the hard plastic imitation of the headliner’s texture on the inside A-pillar covers). Another interior disappointment was the hard plastic covering the entire dashboard; although it had a low-gloss surface at least, it still was rather unpleasant to the touch.
A highlight of the interior, other than the light “wood” and ample storage cubbies, was its high-tech lighting. All of the van’s interior lighting was LEDs, which emit a more pure white light than do standard incandescent bulbs found in most vehicle interiors. There is also optional light blue indirect “halo lighting” along the length of the overhead console between it and the ceiling. The indirect blue lighting does not distract the driver at night and does not reflect on the windows, but makes it a little easier to see what’s happening inside the van. I also believe that it provides a bit of comfort in the dark for young children, as a sort of in-vehicle night light.

My test vehicle was equipped with navigation, Sirius satellite radio, and Sirius Backseat TV. I’ve been a happy satellite radio user for nearly five years, and Sirius worked well in the T&C. In my review of the Chrysler 300C, I already discussed my hesitation to recommend the Sirius Backseat TV product over a standard DVD player for young children, because even though all of the programming (Disney, Nickelodeon, and Cartoon Network) is ostensibly child-friendly, it’s more geared toward older children, and might contain material that some parents find inappropriate for toddlers. Now, if you have both older and younger children, you could park the tweens in the third row with satellite TV and the toddlers in the second row with a DVD playing; the dual screens do allow that flexibility. The tweens could also play their Playstation or Xbox games on their overhead screen using wireless headphones while their siblings watch benign children’s programming in front of them.

Were I buying a new Chrysler van, I’d probably opt for the Swivel-n-Go seats over the Stow-n-Go kind, only because the swiveling ones are thicker and more comfortable than the fold-into-the-floor variety. That being said, I sort of find the swiveling feature to be more of a gimmick than anything else; the second row seats have to be adjusted rearward to allow room to clear the front seatbacks, and legroom when the second and third rows face one another is minimal and could result in many bruised legs among rivaling siblings. Further, the power folding (and reclining) third row, while convenient, suffers from a “jackknifed” lower seat cushion, where seat below the passenger’s knees is more than six inches higher than the seat below his rear end.

On the Road
The Town & Country Limited that I drove was equipped with a 4.0 liter V6 and a six-speed automatic transmission. The V6 is rated at 251 horsepower and 259 lb-ft of torque, and can pull the van pretty smartly. However, the engine was not as smooth or quiet as competitive as the 3.5 liter V6s in the Sienna and Odyssey. The Chrysler’s 4.0 liter does, however, out-power the Odyssey’s 241-244 horsepower V6. The Sienna’s 266-horsepower V6 does have a horsepower advantage, though. From the seat of my pants, I felt no perceptible difference in acceleration between my Sienna and the Town & Country. Most likely, that might be partially attributed to the Toyota carrying the extra weight of all wheel drive hardware, plus the Chrysler having a six-speed automatic instead of jus t a five-speed as the Toyota and Honda have.

Speaking of that six-speed automatic, its shifts weren’t particularly refined (sometimes in light-load conditions such as traffic, there would be a perceptible thunk as it had trouble deciding which gear to be in). However, under acceleration, the transmission kept itself in the right gear at the right time almost always. It was actually pretty amazing to watch the tachometer needle under full throttle; once it ramped up near the redline in first gear, it would drop only about 1,000 RPMs with each subsequent gear change. That kept the engine in the sweet part of its powerband, and definitely helped close the acceleration gap with the Toyota. The gearshift also had a manual shift feature, but it felt very odd to be banging off rapid up- and downshifts in a minivan, no matter how nice and luxurious it is. Thankfully, steering wheel paddle shifters are not available in the Town & Country.
When accelerating from a stop, the combination of the 4.0 liter’s torque, having two driving wheels, and a low first gear led to multiple tire chirps until I reminded myself that I was in a minivan and didn’t need so much throttle. I mean, half-throttle starts would squeal the tires. I even “smoked” them (however briefly) inside a parking garage, again inadvertently. It’s really a shame that Chrysler is no longer offering all wheel drive in its minivans, because that would eliminate the problem, just as the 300C AWD doesn’t have an inch of wheel slippage from a start on a dry road.

Steering feel was good – better than the Toyota, but not quite as connected as the Honda’s. The wheel was also thick and comfortable in my hands. Braking was adequate; to be honest, I didn’t try any panic stops in any of the minivans I’ve driven or owned – first, I don’t want to scare my family; second, I don’t want to send everything in the interior flying forward toward the back of my head. I never felt as if the T&C’s brakes were a shortcoming, however.

Pricing
The 2008 Chrysler Town & Country LX starts at just $23,595 including destination, but has a $2,500 rebate, bringing the price down to just $21,095. For that price, you get three rows of cloth seats (including a second row bench that does NOT fold into the floor), a 3.3 liter flex fuel-capable V6 with a four-speed automatic, electronic stability control, and side curtain airbags. The mid-level model is called Touring, and takes the price to $28,980 before rebate ($26,480 after). The Touring adds halo lighting, the 3.8 liter V6 and six-speed transmission, Stow ‘n Go seats, and Sirius satellite radio. The $32,500 ($30,000 after rebate) Touring Signature Series Value Package model adds leather, the MyGIG radio with hard disc, dual screen entertainment system, and remote start. Finally, the top of the line Limited model that I tested starts at $36,755 with destination ($34,255 after rebate) includes the larger 4.0 liter V6 . My tester had Sirius Backseat TV, UConnect Bluetooth communication system, a power folding third row seat, and satellite navigation. I believe the only option my tester was lacking was the power moonroof. The final MSRP for my test vehicle was $40.810. The MSRP of my family’s 2008 Sienna was at around the same level (a little more), but the equipment comparisons aren’t exact; the Sienna included AWD, a sunroof and laser dynamic cruise control while the T&C included MyGIG, Sirius satellite radio and Backseat TV, and dual DVD screens. The Sienna did not have a $2,500 rebate when we bought it, although I was able to buy it for close to invoice and got a good finance rate. Currently, the Sienna has a $1,500 rebate.

Fuel Economy
The fuel economy figures for the Town & Country are nearly identical no matter which engine is chosen; the base 3.3 liter V6/four-speed automatic combination is rated at 17 city/24 highway (19 combined). Both the 3.8 liter and 4.0 liter V6s (both with six-speed automatics) are rated at 16 city/23 highway (18 combined). These are both slightly below the Odyssey with VCM (17/25; 20 combined) and Sienna 2WD (17/23; 19 combined). In my testing, which included a mix of highway driving, back roads, and city traffic, I got about 17 mpg. That is in line with our Sienna’s fuel economy. On the highway at a steady speed, the Town & Country returned over 20 miles per gallon, which is very good for such a large, capable vehicle.

Bottom Line
I said last week that the 300C was probably the best vehicle currently made by Chrysler LLC; I still believe that the 300C is a better-engineered vehicle than the new Chrysler/Dodge minivans, but the family-friendly features, pricing (if rebates are factored into the cost), and the appeal of supporting the fortunes of a domestic automaker make it a vehicle worthy of purchasers’ consideration. Personally, I still prefer the Sienna Limited to the Town & Country, but the Sienna isn’t a perfect vehicle either, with its lifeless steering and anonymous styling. Chrysler’s minivan sales have not done well in the past few months, with Town & Country sales down 14.2% year to date and Grand Caravan sales down 36.9% over the same period (part of the Grand Caravan’s problem is that the regular short wheelbase Caravan was discontinued for 2008, harming 2008 vs. 2007 comparisons). Meanwhile, the Sienna is down just 4.6% year to date and the Odyssey is down 5.8%. The large drops of the Chrysler vans’ sales mean that year to date sales figures for all four vans are just 2,832 units apart, but the Grand Caravan is the best-selling minivan so far. The sales drops, however, mean that dealers are probably interested in cutting attractive deals with customers. Plus, with a lifetime limited powertrain warranty, there's a lot of peace of mind for the first owners (the lifetime warranty is non-transferrable).

Read more!

Toyota Will Open Its Mississippi Plant Later Than Planned

By Chris Haak

05.13.2008

Toyota announced yesterday that it will open its newest North American factory, which is under construction in Tupelo, Mississippi, about five months later than originally planned. The plant had been expected to go on-line in either late 2009 or early 2010, but now the target launch is May 2010.

The plant was expected to build 150,000 Highlander crossovers per year, and its initial production capacity will also take a haircut, down to 120,000 vehicles. It's an interesting development because Highlander sales are actually UP 5.2% year to date during 2008, and fell only 1.5% during 2007 (and all of that decrease was attributed to the Hybrid model, which lost 30% of its sales during 2007). However, it's also not entirely surprising, because Toyota has some spare truck production capacity in the US at the moment, with its Princeton, Indiana and San Antonio, Texas plants churning out Tundras far below their capacities.

Toyota is actually fortunate that it is able to not open a new unneeded plant rather than being forced to shutter an existing facility, as all three of the domestic automakers have been forced to do several times over the past few years. Although automobile manufacturing efficiency depends in large part upon operating a plant at or near capacity (and sometimes slightly over it) for the facility to be profitable, Toyota has typically been able to manage this better than most. However, they did drop the ball in predicting demand for the new-for-2007 Tundra, against the backdrop of all of its major competitors being all-new within two years, plus record-setting fuel prices. It's still possible, of course, that Toyota will be able to eventually use some of its extra Tundra manufacturing capacity if the US economy, and more importantly the full-size pickup market, rebound in the coming year.

Back to the incomplete Mississippi facility, though: Automotive News reported today that other than the soft US auto market, Toyota also had other obstacles in the way of an earlier opening of its Mississippi plant: the company was having trouble recruiting skilled manufacturing workers, and the plant's original opening schedule would have forced it to build the current Highlander very briefly before switching over to the mid-cycle updated version.

Toyota's recruiting troubles are nothing new; they had similar problems at the aforementioned San Antonio facility that now builds the Tundra, but they did not delay the truck's launch. However, it may be a larger problem this time, because Toyota has decided that in order to keep its costs down, it will no longer pay workers close to the UAW pay scale, but more in line with local manufacturing wages instead. Instead of offering a new assembly worker $30 per hour plus benefits, they get $15-17 per hour with benefits. While that's still a half-decent starting wage, it's also not $30 per hour. On top of the obvious pay difference, Toyota is also running the risk of irritating its workers to the point that they feel they could do better financially with UAW representation; when Toyota was paying roughly the same as GM, Ford, and Chrysler, the UAW couldn't really offer a compelling reason for the workers to organize. It would certainly be an ironic twist if Toyota's attempt at labor cost savings resulted in higher labor costs because some of their lower-paid workers decided to vote for UAW representation.

Toyota already has a lot of production capacity in the US, and with the falling dollar, I'd actually be fairly surprised if the company didn't eventually shift more vehicle production from Japan to the US as the dollar continues to remain weak against other currencies. Many other manufacturers are bulking up (or initiating) plans to build cars and trucks in the US, mostly for cost reasons, so surely a company with Toyota's fiscal intelligence is aware of the cost advantages and will find a way in the next year or two to get its plants up to capacity, including the new one.

Read more!

Why Trading In Your Gas Guzzler May Not Make Sense

By Chris Haak

05.12.2008

Every time high gas prices are in the news, reporters inevitably find stories of people who are aghast at the prospect of paying $75 or $100+ to fill up the tank of their SUV or pickup every few days and want to trade their expensive, comfortable SUV in on a compact fuel miser that's half the size with double the fuel economy. My favorite, however, was the guy with the Dodge Ram SRT-10 (which has a 500-horsepower V10 right out of a Dodge Viper) complaining about fuel costs. While trading down to reduce fuel costs like this may make economic sense when you run the numbers in some situations, many of the anecdotes cited in the popular media are not financially prudent at all. My service to you is to point out one obvious truth: you can buy a heck of a lot of gas for $5,000, even at $4.00 per gallon.

Of course, high fuel prices pinch everyone, but folks who bought large, thirsty vehicles for image or convenience reasons rather than out of necessity for their family or business needs are mainly the ones who complain the loudest about how they want to trade in their Armada on something smaller. Of course, there is much more to the cost of owning and operating a vehicle than just fuel costs. Monthly payments, sales tax (in some states) maintenance, repairs, registration, and depreciation are other big-ticket items that car owners have to contend with. Paying attention to only fuel costs is doing yourself a disservice.

Let's take a few hypothetical examples of when it would and would not be cost-effective to trade down to a smaller vehicle. For the sake of simplicity, I'll even ignore registration, sales tax, maintenance, and repairs and focus solely on the purchase price, depreciation, and fuel costs for 15,000 miles at $4.00 per gallon based on the EPA-estimated combined fuel economy using the downward-adjusted 2008-equivalent figures.

For example, let's assume that someone bought a 2007 Chevy Trailblazer LS 4x4 a year ago for $28,000. According to Edmunds, this truck is worth about $16,000 today, one year into a five year loan. Assuming that the buyer put 20% down ($5,600), the original loan balance was $22,400 and the current loan balance is $18,347 (assuming 60 months @ 4.9%). Assuming that the Trailblazer got the EPA-estimated combined mileage of 16 mpg, at $4.00 per gallon and 15,000 miles per year, the annual fuel cost would be $3,750. Over five years, fuel would cost $18,750.

Then let's say the person wants to buy a new Chevy Malibu LS four cylinder for $20,000 and puts 20% ($4,000) down and finance the $12,000 balance. With the same fuel price and miles-per-year assumptions, and at its EPA-estimated combined mileage of 25 mpg, the Malibu's annual fuel cost is $2,400. Over five years, fuel would cost $12,000.

So, forgetting the purchase prices for a moment, the fuel cost difference is $6,750 over five years and $1,350 annually. That is $112.50 per month.

Now, we can't forget that to make up for the Trailblazer's $2,400 in negative equity (trading in the Trailblazer just one year into a five year loan) plus the 20% ($4,000) down for the Malibu means that you'll be shelling out about $6,400 in cash to get out of the 2007 Trailblazer and into the 2008 Malibu, and that's assuming that you move into a lightly-optioned Malibu. If you want more comfort/luxury features, you'll have to step up to a Malibu LT, and that means more cash out. In fact, over five years, the cash difference is negligible. You're also sacrificing the additional space and power that the Trailblazer could provide over the Malibu, not to mention the Trailblazer's superior all-weather capabilities.

Of course, after the five years have passed, the more efficient Malibu will have broken even cost-wise, but until the five year point, the Trailblazer's additional gasoline expenditures would roughly equal the cost to purchase the new Malibu.

There are other caveats associated the above example. Buying a used 2007 Malibu to replace the 2007 Trailblazer instead of a new 2008 model would make the cash outflow to purchase the more efficient vehicle much less. Also, replacing a guzzler with a more efficient car later in the guzzler's loan (not after just one year) would eliminate the negative equity. Of course, if gas prices go beyond $4.00 per gallon, the more efficient vehicle gets more attractive financially. Lastly, replacing a paid-off inefficient vehicle that was about to be replaced anyway with a more efficient one is a prudent financial choice, as well as a more earth- and resource-friendly one.

The bottom line is that buyers are doing themselves a disservice if they do not do some simple arithmetic before spending thousands of dollars to "save" money that may - or may not - actually result in money savings. Even if buyers do the economic analysis, there will still probably be many folks who decide that gas prices are going nowhere but up, and who are tired of the steady drip-drip of money for fuel coming from their wallets, so they take a financial hit to get out of the guzzler and into something more "politically correct."

Read more!

Different Tactics Used to Sell Full-Size Pickups in a Collapsing Market

By Chris Haak

05.07.2008

Sales of full-size pickups (the Ford F-series, Chevrolet Silverado, GMC Sierra, Dodge Ram, Toyota Tundra, and Nissan Titan) dropped 22.1% in April and are down 16.6% through the first third of 2008. This segment has suffered even worse than the overall US light vehicle market so far in 2008, which is down 7.7% through April 30.

Part of the problem is, of course, gas prices. As people who bought trucks as "lifestyle" vehicles or fashion statements in recent years because they "always get stuff from Home Depot" or "like the space" of a crew cab pickup begin to reconsider whether they actually need to commute to work in a 13 mile-per-gallon behemoth when a 25 mile per gallon sedan might do the trick 99% of the time, many of these folks are not replacing their old pickups with new ones. Instead, they are replacing them with much smaller cars. Chrysler is trying to address fuel price concerns by agreeing to lock in gas prices at $2.99 per gallon for the first three years, but that is only one of the creative ways that Detroit and Japan are fighting market currents in this segment that are rushing against them.

In addition to the collapsing market for large pickups, there are other factors at play. Both Ford and Dodge are introducing all-new 2009 models of their flagship pickups later this year, so they are forced to heavily incent their old-style 2008 models in the meantime to clear out the lots, until the 2009s arrive. Also, Toyota has a lot more plant capacity to build Tundras in its Princeton, Indiana and San Antonio, Texas plants than it is currently utilizing. Toyota can build over 300,000 Tundras per year, but was hoping to sell 200,000 this year. They're behind even the 200,000 pace so far this year and have more units in inventory than they'd like to see.

Against this backdrop - nearly a perfect storm, if you will, of bad news for the truck segment - dealers and manufacturers have resorted to some creative (and expensive, in some cases) ways to move the metal.

According to Automotive News, some Dodge dealers in California are advertising Ram 1500 Quad Cab SLT 4x2 for $19,995, or $12,800 below its MSRP of $32,795. A competing dealer also in Sacramento is offering an even $13,000 off the same truck. Throw in three years of subsidized gasoline, and that's a pretty decent deal on a solid truck, even if it's about to become an obsolete model. Imagine for a moment what cutting 40% off the asking price of a new truck does for the resale values of Rams already on the road.

Toyota is also undertaking a grassroots-type effort to sell Tundras. Rather than using a national advertising push for the Tundra, the company's dealers are trying creative sponsorships and product demonstrations to impress upon potential customers that they are selling a credible, capable truck. Some dealers sponsor high school football games, offer free lunches and tours of the Tundra at Home Depot, or give a free lawn tractor with the purchase of a new pickup. Automotive News reported also that one dealer in Raleigh, North Carolina allows contractors to borrow a modified Tundra DoubleCab with "invisible" doors (really just decals that show what's underneath) to show what lies beneath the Tundra's sheetmetal. Some of that sheetmetal, by the way, is also covered in see-through decals. It's an interesting look, and certainly surprising to see it actually driven on public roads instead of just a cutaway static display in a dealer's showroom.

Toyota's regional offices give dealers co-op marketing money to be used for local promotions, and often provide them with additional ideas along with the money to allow for even more creative marketing ideas.

GM finds itself in a bit of a different situation; its pickups are relatively new (as is the Tundra), but is forced to compete on price and with cut-rate financing (everyone offers rates as low as 0%) when other manufacturers have different needs such as reducing excess inventory or ramping up production of the next-generation models. The American Axle strike has put a crimp on GM's large truck production, but handily enough for GM, the company still has thousands of trucks in inventory, even as the strike has gone past the two month mark.

For contrarian consumers - those who would rather pay more money for fuel and less money upfront for their vehicle purchase - or those who actually do need a large pickup truck for work or family reasons (and "looks tough" does not count under the "needs" category), this is turning out to be a great time to shop for a new truck. The deals are great, and may just get better by the end of the year as Ford and Chrysler have their new 2009s on dealer lots, and there is barely any room for them amidst a sea of unsold 2008s.

Read more!

2008 Chrysler 300C AWD Review

By Chris Haak

05.04.2008

When a representative from Chrysler picked up the 300C AWD that I'd driven since last weekend, it was the first vehicle I've tested this year that I really think I'll miss not driving every day. It was finally a vehicle that had substantially more luxury, comfort, and horsepower than the vehicles that my family owns personally. Not only did the car have nearly every convenience imaginable, but also had the well-known 5.7 liter Hemi V8 underhood.

Exterior
The styling of the Chrysler 300C is instantly recognizable, and also polarizing. The designer of the 300C, Ralph Gilles, saw his stock at Chrysler rise so much as a result of the model's initial success in the marketplace that he was promoted to Vice President - Jeep/Truck and Component Design, Chrysler Group. Although the 300C's styling is polarizing, there are plenty of people who love the car's shape, which can't necessarily be said for some of Chrysler's more recent products. The overhangs are fashionably short, and the fender bulges are a modern touch. The most apparent traits are the very high door sills and short windows, which give the car's greenhouse almost the appearance of the turret of a tank. When I told friends who aren't auto enthusiasts that I was driving a Chrysler 300C, they usually had no idea what I was talking about until I mentioned the squat windows and how it looked something like a 1930s gangster car. "Oh yeah, that one! Does it have a Hemi?"

The 300C has aged pretty well as it's been on the market for several years; my belief is that the larger the wheels installed on this large car, the better-proportioned it looks. So, the 300C SRT8 with the 6.1 liter 425 horsepower/420 lb-ft monster with standard 20 inch wheels looks best, and the 300C's standard 18-inch wheels look decent (particularly when chromed as my test car's were), and the base 300's 17 inch wheels don't quite seem big enough for the car. If you want a 300C with the big 20 inch wheels without the insurance and fuel economy penalty of the SRT8 model, you can buy those wheels as part of the $2,673 SRT Design package, although it's not available with the all wheel drive model.

Interior
My first impression of the 300C's interior was extremely favorable. The word on the street for years has been that Chrysler built solid vehicles with sub-par interior materials and design. In fact, the 300C's interior was attractive and seemed to have good material quality. After spending an afternoon riding in a Magnum R/T last summer, I suspected that the interior materials in the Chrysler LX vehicles were better than expected, and the 300C's interior confirmed my suspicion. The dash was nicely padded, and the door panels - although harder than the dash - felt OK to the touch. The steering wheel had a section of fake wood at the top, which was actually decent (I've driven several Lexus automobiles with "wood" steering wheels, and they felt no more or less like real wood than this one did). However, the steering wheel was larger than I would have preferred. I prefer a smaller diameter wheel with a thick rim; the 300C's was large diameter with a thin rim. Perhaps the wheel was just another throwback to a bygone era, as rear wheel drive (as most 300Cs are) V8-powered American cars are.

The interior of my light blue metallic test vehicle was trimmed in two-tone grey, with darker grey on the upper half of the dash and door panels, steering wheel, and console lid. The lower half of the dash and door panels and the seats were trimmed in the lighter grey. Overall, the look worked pretty well. Speaking of the seats, they were reasonably comfortable for several trips over one hour, but didn't offer much lateral support. The back seat wasn't as large as I would have expected; as you can see in the photo gallery linked at the end of this review, a rear facing convertible child seat is a tight fit, even when the seat in front of it is fairly far forward. Also, I couldn't get ether of the rear seat safety belts to lock by pulling them all the way out, although the owner's manual said doing that should do the trick.Sizable portions of the seats also appeared to be made of vinyl rather than leather. I found the rectangular shape of the center stack to be in line with the interior styling theme of most Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep vehicles I've seen, but at least it more or less works with the squared-off, broad shouldered exterior shape. Also, its silvery fake metallic finish was smooth, which I preferred to the flat silver metallic in the Lincoln MKZ AWD that I reviewed a few weeks ago.

The 300C that I spent time with included a navigation system, which was relatively easy to use in spite of not taking time to read the owner's manual. It also featured both Sirius satellite radio (with Boston Acoustics speakers and a subwoofer) and Sirius Backseat TV. The backseat TV is a impressive idea technologically (the LCD display is hidden inside the center console lid), but only offers three channels, all of which are child-oriented: Nickelodeon, Disney, and the Cartoon Network. However, I'm not sure that it's any better to have live TV broadcasts than to just play a DVD in the back seat (which the 300C can do). The reason is, most people today - and especially most young children - are not accustomed to waiting for a particular show to be on TV. Instead, their DVR records it and they watch it at their leisure, or they get it from their cable company's On Demand feature. So, while I loved the idea of Sirius Backseat TV, every time I turned it on to see what was playing, it happened to not be one of the shows that we find appropriate for our two year old. Just bringing along a DVD or three of his favorite shows would have worked better, had we been inclined to allow him to watch videos in the car. (Our rule of thumb is that it has to be a two hour car ride before the screen is flipped open). This 300C was also equipped with Chrysler's MyGIG hard disc system for storing media files. I didn't have an opportunity to test MyGIG with a USB thumb drive or an audio CD (I will this week in the Chrysler Town & Country Limited I'm testing), but I can report that it unfortunately does not include an iPod interface like Ford's SYNC system does. I plugged my iPod (3G video) into the USB port on the radio faceplate, and it knew that a USB device was connected, but could not find any music (there are over 2,500 songs on it) or photos (there are over 3,000 photos on it), but at least it could charge the iPod. There is a plain aux in jack below the USB connector on the front of the faceplate to connect an iPod, but forget about controlling it on the navigation screen or the steering wheel's controls as you can in Ford products or any others with true iPod connectivity.

Ergonomically, the 300C was fine. All controls fell easily to hand and the instruments were easy to read. I only had two ergonimic complaints; one was that the dual-zone climate control's temperature knobs showed temperature numbers around the dial, but did not have a readout anywhere indicating the set temperature for each zone. The other was that the trip computer (displayed between the speedometer and tachometer) was diffcult to navigate using the steering wheel buttons (and they are the only way to use the trip computer).

Driving Experience
As expected, it's a lot of fun to have a large, powerful V8 underfoot. The Hemi (rated at 340 horsepower and 390 lb-ft of torque) and its German-sourced five speed automatic transmission make a good team, with the latter willing to hold onto low gears even in automatic mode for a few seconds until it's sure that you didn't want to play any longer. Of course, it's almost addicting to have that much power and torque underfoot, and if you're like me, you'll find yourself stabbing the go-fast pedal just for grins and giggles and to enjoy the sounds and thrust of the Hemi. I didn't feel like the car was extraordinarily quick off the line (although it is something of a surreal experience to stomp on the gas pedal of a car that you know would obliterate its rear tires if it weren't all wheel drive and you were trying the same trick; instead it just hops forward with zero wheelspin), but the transmission was willing to drop a few gears and the 300C felt like it had great midrange passing power.

The big kid wasn't always excited to play on curvy roads. Hampered somewhat by the large steering wheel, not a lot of steering feedback, and a suspension tuned more for comfort than for sport, the 300C sometimes felt as if it were a bit floaty and insecure on quick back road jaunts. It doesn't embarrass itself, but I don't think it's a car that is so capable that it can make a good driver great or an average driver good; the engine and even the brakes inspire a reasonable amount of confidence, but the steering and softer suspension remind you that you're not driving a Lotus Elise. Oh, and by the way, it tips the scales at somewhere around two tons, so you're really not driving an Elise.

Not surprisingly, the tiny greenhouse (at least relative to the size of the rest of the car) is more driven by form than function. As the driver, I never had much of an issue with visibility - and actually felt less of the "sitting in a bathtub" sensation than I felt with the MKZ a few weeks ago - but my wife was really bothered by the short windows when riding as a passenger. Also, our two year old in his booster seat had a lot of trouble seeing outside the car, even though he's taller than most three year olds. Still, they are the car's styling signature, and a 300C without a squat roof and high door sills would be like hacking the tail fins off of a 1959 Cadillac Eldorado.

The 5.7 liter Hemi in the 300C and Dodge Charger includes Chrysler's MDS cylinder deactivation. I was skeptical about its real-world value, as a 2007 Suburban I've spent a lot of seat time in seems to only engage V4 mode in downhill situations with the driver's foot off the gas, but in the 300C, it engaged pretty frequently, and with impressive results. The system could easily stay in four cylinder mode for all flat surface and downhill cruising, even at highway speeds. I could not feel any sensation when the system cycled between V8 and V4 modes, although the engine's exhaust note sounded a little odd with only half of the cylinders firing. Still, it's a small price for a solid economy improvement.

Fuel Economy
The previous paragraph about the MDS system was a perfect segue into a discussion about fuel economy in the 300C. People do not buy these cars if they are concerned about fuel economy. That being said, I found it much easier to exceed 20 miles per gallon in a V8 powered sedan that weighs two tons that I have in my experiences with a V8 powered SUV that weighs two and a half tons. Driving around 100 miles on a weekend trip with my family, without any stop and go traffic, the car returned about 21 miles per gallon, since it spent a good deal of time in four cylinder mode. I could have done even better, but it's pretty tempting to have 390 lb-ft of torque at my disposal. Driving it during the subsequent several days in stop and go traffic, and therefore not in V4 mode, the economy sank to about 17 miles per gallon.

The EPA rates the 300C AWD at 15 city/22 highway, which seemed about right. The RWD model has the same city rating, but is rated at 23 mpg on the highway. Comparatively speaking, the MKZ AWD is rated at 17/24, although real world economy for the MKZ AWD in my experience was pretty much on par with the 300C AWD. Although the MKZ had an impressive interior, and was about $5,000 cheaper, I know which one I'd rather drive daily if I were doomed to get 17 mpg anyway - and it would be the one with a Hemi under the hood.

Pricing
The base Chrysler 300 RWD starts at $25,325 and currently has a $2,000 rebate. Stepping up to the 300C RWD, the base price is $36,415 before a $3,000 rebate. The AWD model adds another $2,100, for a base price of $38,515. The major options include navigation with MyGIG for $1,240, upgraded Boston Acoustics sound system with subwoofer for $485, Protection Group (extra airbags, etc.) for $1,080, HID headlamps for $695, adaptive cruise control for $595, and power sunroof for $950. Excluding rebates, the 300C AWD tops out around $46,000. Although it is a good car with a ton of equipment, that price puts it in the neighborhood of some pretty stiff competition, such as entry level BMW 5-series and almost a Jaguar XF. Most people could probably live without HID lamps, adaptive cruise, Sirius Backseat TV, and MyGIG, which would chop the price to a more reasonable range.

Bottom Line
I was impressed by the 300C. As alluded to earlier in this review, my high standards have so far prevented me from deciding that a vehicle I've tested for a week at a time is one I'd be willing to pony up my own money to buy, but the 300C was actually the closest I've yet come to really liking a vehicle that I have tested enough to almost miss it after it was picked up. The car packs a lot of technology and equipment under its skin; in spite of its relatively simple (yet, of course, very effective) overhead valve V8, gadgets such as an integrated hard disc for storing music, satellite TV, and adaptive cruise control almost make the 300C a car that has some internal conflicts. Is it an old-fashioned throwback to what American cars used to be, or is it a high-tech flagship for the Chrysler brand, combining raw American muscle with many modern amenities? Possibly it's a combination of the two, but whatever it is, the 300C is probably the best vehicle sold by Chrysler right now, so that should be worth something.

Click HERE for more photos of the 2008 Chrysler 300C AWD.

Read more!