CHEVRON CEO ON CNN'S LKL 2NITE

Choosing not to stand idly by as oil companies rake in profits vastly exceeding what was deemed possible just ten years ago ($18,670,000,000 net income last year for Chevron), consumers the world over are protesting. One German man lit a BMW on fire to make his point. Truckers... er, lorry drivers, have parked in England in order to manifest their personal difficulties.

What does Larry King do? He brings David O'Reilly to his desk tonight on CNN (9 eastern, 10 atlantic). As the promo says, "Larry goes straight to the top for the answer. The Chairman and CEO of Chevron explains why fuel prices are through the roof and how the coming months could cost you!"

Choosing to stand in ignorance as commodity traders speculate and oil companies run a business, Larry will probably ask questions meant to irritate O'Reilly and discover - poof! - out of thin air; that the so-called "Big Oil" is in partnership with General Motors and Ford and Chrysler and that we're stuck in a vicious circle necessitating great expense on our part at the pumps with "inefficient" vehicles.

Nah, Larry's smarter than that. People will want those questions asked, and Chevron's boss will likely feel defensive on that front. Regardless, it'll be worth watching. 

MOTOR TREND'S MIDSIZE SEDAN SUMMARIES

Surprised that the most expensive and most expensive to fuel sedan won first place in Motor Trend's comparison of the Honda Accord, Hyundai Sonata, Toyota Camry, Ford Fusion, and Volkswagen Passat? $29,333 ought to beat $22,235, shouldn't it? But in a test where fuel econony matters matter, does the $29,333 car with 22.8mpg on premium gas beat the $22,235 with 23.8 on regular? Well, it does if 0-60 flies by in 6.7 seconds. Here are MT's verdicts with a 1-10 rating from The Good Car Guy, with 10 being complete agreement and 1 being complete disagreement: 

1st Place: Volkswagen Passat - 

Despite a high sticker and thirst for premium, wins by a nose due to driving fun. 

GCBC Agreement: 5

2nd Place: Hyundai Sonata - 

Only lacking the VW's verve; our #1 pick if family comes first.

GCBC Agreement: 7

3rd Place: Toyota Camry - 

Efficient, well executed, it's the sound, yet charmless choice.

GCBC Agreement: 7

4th Place: Honda Accord -

Polarizing looks inside and out can't hide a great engine and chassis combination.

GCBC Agreement: 3

5th Place: Ford Fusion -

Surprisingly athletic chassis hampered by wheezy engine and irritating transmission.

GCBC Agreement: 6

6th Place: Kia Optima -

Though due for a refresh, Kia finishes on top of the second tier. Room and economy are fine, it just needs the same refinements the Sonata received.

GCBC Agreement: 8

7th Place: Nissan Altima -

Steepest sticker, yet not the best ride, performance, or value. CVT and light steering create an effortless drive, yet fully loaded, it still seems lacking.

GCBC Agreement: 9

8th Place: Chevrolet Malibu -

Poor finish for arguably the best looker. Shame that sexy skin hides a weight problem the underpowered Ecotec can't handle.

GCBC Agreement: 6

9th Place: Mitsubishi Galant -

Looks old, feels older, and saddled with many of this comparo's worsts, including power-to-weight and EPA and observed fuel economy.

GCBC Agreement: 10

10th Place: Dodge Avenger -

Drum brakes, four-speed trans, cheap plastics, and poor economy make this a frightful drive. Gaps between last and first don't get any wider than this.

GCBC Agreement: 10

Which cars were missing from the test? Former losers and models soon-to-be replaced. The Subaru Legacy could've finished mid-pack. Mazda's upcoming 6 will charge to the top of the field. Pontiac's G6 would compete with the Galant and Avenger (or Chrysler Sebring) for rear guards. The Saturn Aura is commonly regarded as a lesser Malibu. Check back tomorrow for more detail on MT's controversial winner.

Nissan Versa Driven

Despite the fact that you put your complete trust in me, The Good Car Guy, to help develop your car opinions; assist in your vehicular decisions; and keep you up to date with all automotive abominations - you do need to drive cars for yourself.

Reading about cars, trucks, sport-utes, vans, and crossovers has helped me a great deal. As far as the Nissan Versa goes, however, other members of the auto press have let me down. They've laid out their impressions, performed their testing procedures, and offered them up for me to read. But, Nissan's latest small-car is better than what you and I have been led to believe.


Here's another but. The Versa is not better than expected in the way a BMW 335i exceeds expectations. It does not over-perform like a new Hyundai Veracruz. Nope. I was told the Versa was ugly, cheap, and boring. It is ugly. It is boring. But it isn't actually all that cheap. The BMW is even faster and smoother than expected. The Veracruz is even more luxurious and Lexus-like than you could have imagined. The Versa? Well, it's not nearly as chintzy you reckoned.


The Good Car Girl and I were scheduled for two trips to Prince Edward Island with departure dates from our home only eight days apart. The odometer of the Versa showed 748 kilometres upon return to the capital of Nova Scotia. The climate was dreadful - the Versa had little tanning opportunity on PEI beaches. Front and rear screen wipers were well tested. The rear wiper was particularly worthy of celebration.

Another positive which was unable to miss: Abundant space. In the front and rear passenger holds as well as the cargo bay, accessed via the rear hatch. Granted, this car - Nissan's small car in North America - is taller than Nissan's own midsize Altima. Space isn't everything, but do remember, Nissan's 'bigger' Sentra only offers four more cubic feet of interior space.

(In-car pics from northern Nova Scotia. Exterior - PEI.)


The Versa's 122 horsepower is class competitive, in a class that includes the Chevy Aveo, Honda Fit, Toyota Yaris, Hyundai Accent, and Kia Rio. All of which are hundreds of pounds lighter. A typical on-ramp sequence goes like this: hyper throttle tip-in causes me to think we're accelerating quickly; I soon discover the 4-speed automatic transmission is sapping power as second gear slushes in; we are still approaching 80km/h at a decent pace; Christmas will come sooner than 110 km/h.


Put it this way. As compared to Yaris, Fit, et al; the extra torque and horsepower provided by Nissan's 1.8 litre four-cylinder is a nice benefit when accelerating from city stoplights. Once we arrive at a cruising highway clip though, 122 bhp being sent to the front wheels via a power-sapping automatic can't overcome 2700 pounds. So, the + is decent city acceleration. The big minus is pitiful highway passing power. Pitiful.

Back inside the car, most switches and controls impressed for such a low buck automobile. The steering wheel was one of the nicest in a sub $20K car I've ever experienced. Seating material is an initially impressive faux suedeish stuff. Initially impressive? Just. It looks expensive. But then friction causes your denim or khaki to cling to the junk when you simply wish to slightly rearrange your position. Insert *scream* here.

For a 5'2" female, the pedal positioning was apparently 'perfect'. Perfect, she said? Perfect? For a slightly taller-than-average male with size 11 shoes, pedal positioning was abysmal. The go-pedal was so close to the floor that only my toe could thrust the car forward. That's ankle twisting stuff. The brake pedal, in contrast to the throttle, was perched at a decent height. But it is so much closer to the driver than the gas that each switch from go to stop involved a thigh pullback on the ultra-cling seats. Place next *scream* here.

Screaming done. The off-ramp from the Trans-Canada towards the Dieppe Airport in New Brunswick was a wide, sweeping right hander which showed the true dynamic plight of the Versa. Understeer. What small front-driver doesn't understeer? There was some vibration coming through the wheel and pedals, but the flip side was a speck of feel. Feel? I thought I said this car was boring. And GCBC never attaches feel and boredom.

Feel is limited. The boredom stems from ugliness on the outside, the dark palette inside, the inability to quickly pass slow-moving traffic, and expected outside front wheel plowing. The Versa faces two strong competitors. Nissan's own Sentra is not too high up the pricing ladder and offers more 'prestige', if that's what you call that trait at this level. The Honda Fit is another surprisingly spacious small hatchback with stronger on-road dynamics.

The Versa is versatile. No doubt about that. It is also extremely capable in the daily grind of chores, errands, and commutes. Nevertheless, what do young; hip; urban; first-time buyers want? Fun. Nissan locked up the fun inside the 350Z.

PASSAT BEATS ACCORD, CAMRY, & SONATA?

0-60 showed earlier this week that Volkswagen's Passat 2.0L Turbo is much quicker than its 4-cylinder competitors. Motor Trend responded favourably to the VW's speed, handing first place in a 10-car comparison test to the turbocharged Passat. Here's the Passat in motion - check back for more details about the test tomorrow and on Canada Day.

GENERAL MOTORS' LAMBDA CUV OPTIONS

This, my friends, is an unofficial declaration of General Motors' new slogan, in addition to admitting its Barack Obama-derivation: "Crossover Options You Can Believe In". GM certainly believes in Lambda.

Lambda isn't just the 11th letter in the Greek alphabet. GM has taken that letter and applied it to their midsize crossover platform. This platform/architecture/foundation has found its way under four vehicles. GM has options. Believe it.

To keep it brief, The Good Car Guy is going to reign in his wordiness to one sentence per vehicle. Add their manufacturer links and MSRPs from the American market. Although suitably differentiated, these four CUVs are identical under the skin. It's difficult to rank the quartet in terms of anything but personal preference. 

BUICK ENCLAVE: Stunningly beautiful but its heaviness (obviously similar to the other three) leads to a fuel guzzling nature which, when combined with its expense, makes the Enclave an expensive proposition for the latter part of this decade.  $33,995 - $38,190 - Buick.com/Enclave

CHEVROLET TRAVERSE: Its recently revealed price proves to be the value Lambda leader; already possessing the mass-market appeal that Chevrolet produces automatically in addition to more power than its mates. $28,990 - $32,995(GCBC est.) - Chevrolet.com/Traverse

GMC ACADIA: "Professional Grade" advertising seems silly when applied to a vehicle, however tough, that is so truly similar to a Buick and Saturn; though the GMC brand as a whole seems somewhat lacking in an anit-truck buying year. $30,470 - $39,015 - GMC.com/Acadia  

SATURN OUTLOOK: Ask why if you like, but GM is sticking with this import-fighter; leading you to also ask if the other three Lambdas are intended to battle only the Dodge Journey and Ford Edge. $29,360 - $33,370 - Saturn.com/Outlook

- Check out The Good Car Guy's drive of the Buick Enclave @ the Milford Proving Grounds or read about the GMC Acadia's position in the Top 5 Cars Police Should Be Driving and finally learn about GM's expectations for the Chevy Traverse -

CORVETTE ZR1 IS FASTER THAN NISSAN GT-R AFTER ALL?

GoodCarBadCar.net's Good Car Guy was one of many who reported on the approximate laptime of the Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 back in early May. It was known by then that Nissan's remarkable GT-R could loop the Nurburgring in 7:29. Unfortunately for 'Vette engineers, their second digit was a 3. Uh-oh.

(Necessary background reading at this post and in the links found therein)

Hadn't the chief engineer suggested that his baby, the 638bhp ZR1, would outlap any production car on any track? Was this embarrassing; or purely just another underestimator of the Nissan GT-R? 

Neither. Now that the Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 has had a proper lap around the Nurburgring, General Motors can reveal its might. 

7:26.4 sounds niiice. We await the Nissan GT-R Spec V to watch the 7:26.4 time fall by the wayside.

DODGE HEMI GAINS

345 becomes 390. 375 switches to 407. 

Can you guess what those figures are representing? It's not miles per tank nor are the numbers applicable to the growing monthly payments you'll face next time you buy a new car.

Nope. The first jump of 45 belongs in the horsepower column. Obviously, the second 32 bump is strictly torque.

For what? Dodge and Ford are both introducing new trucks soon. Despite stumbling (free-falling?) sales for trucks overall and most famously for Ford, Dodge and Chevrolet and GMC are all succumbing to consumer dread about fuel prices.

It's not as though trucks are inexpensive vehicles these days. For too long marketed as vehicles just as well-equipped and comfortable as cars; and for too long snapped up like iPods on a 50% off sale, trucks rapidly became the profit source at domestic manufacturers. Now that buyers are heading elsewhere just as Dodge and Ford bring new trucks to dealers (Ford is delaying), what does Dodge do with its 5.7L Hemi engine found under the hood of the Ram?

Make it more powerful. 345 horsepower no more; the Hemi now pumps out 390 caballos. Always a torquey truck, the Hemi-powered Ram churns away to generate 407 lb-ft of twist for 2009. This all sounds great.... right? But... umm, doesn't power come at some expense?

Indeed, Dodge has negated the foregone conclusion. Fuel economy is actually up - only slightly, though. What was 13mpg in the city and 19mpg on the highway will, by Chrysler's estimate, be bumped up 4%. Thus, don't expect anything greater than 14/20mpg. 

(Check out AutoEnergy to see what the real world fuel differential really is)

However attractive the proposition of a 2-door, 2-wheel drive with a short bed and a Hemi may be, providing 0-60mph times under six seconds, consumers will be expecting to see more than 4% gains in fuel economy on vehicles they're already not buying because of inefficient consumption. 

Do science and engineering lend themselves to such simplified notions as this: that an already powerful truck could have been left as justifiably juicy while making greater gains in the fuel lines? Apparently Chrysler and Dodge don't care to find out.

MITSUBISHI GALANT RECALL

In the midst of Mitsubishi's greatest recent struggles, some Galants were built with shoddy ignitions. Now NHTSA has issued a Recall. From model years 2004-2005, Mitsubishi built 73,000 iterations of the Galant that could potentially suffer from a malady where, as NHTSA says, "the ignition key interlock cable (which is a component of the interlock system) may allow the interlocking cam to fall forward and allow the ignition key to be removed from the ignition switch when the gearshift mechanism is not in the park position." 

Consequences are obvious. Assume the driver does not shift into park before the key is removed and the parking brake isn't on. Car rolls. Into tree. Damage. Frustration. Expense. 

This Mitsu Galant recall begins in August.

HYUNDAI SANTA FE RECALL

Potentially 88,943 of Hyundai's excellent Santa Fe, a vehicle that once captured a Top 5 title here at GoodCarBadCar.net, are facing a recall. The Santa Fe from model years 2007 and 2008, when purchased with the 18" wheels are the vehicles affected. 

NHTSA's statement includes this summary: "The black certification label affixed to the driver's side center pillar, incorrectly lists the gross axle weight ratings (GAWR).

It may sound silly, but the consequences are more serious. "Overloading your vehicle may adversely affect handling and braking and may cause tire damage, resulting in tire failure and a crash without warning." 

Then again, the "fix" is humorous. "Hyundai will mail corrected certification labels along with the instructions to the affected owners. The customer will have the option for dealers to install the label free of charge."

This Hyundai Santa Fe Recall begins in August.

'09 MERCEDES-BENZ A & B CLASS - Retouched

To what degree will luxury automakers strike at the new North American consumer fear of high fuel prices? BMW is attempting to make the case that they understand high fuel prices being European-based. Audi, Mercedes-Benz, and BMW all have diesel plans; much of which surrounds current vehicles or their direct replacements.

As time moves on, will a move toward smaller vehicles be mandatory? The automakers own fear of devaluing their brand image has motivated BMW to introduce a much better sub-3 Series car. Mercedes-Benz's struggles with the previous C-class coupe is keeping it away from this continent. And, from what we hear, the German trio emphasizes new-technology (hydrogen, hybrid, and turbodiesels) far more than downsizing.

Yet downsizing is the natural answer to alleviating the pain customers feel at the pump. Understandably, the German trio could be rightfully scared of Americans historical tendency to pay by the square foot. Only the small-but-premium Mini Cooper and, to a certain extent, the smart fortwo have challenged that practice. Thus, the advent of the Mercedes-Benz A-class quite a few years ago and the Mercedes-Benz B-class (already on sale in Canada) don't strike the automakers as obvious candidates for the American marketplace. 

Luxurious? Sure. But how luxurious can a small 4-cylinder car really be? These are questions Americans have always responded with when faced by the thought of a tiny luxury car. Will that story begin to change as fuel heads towards $5.00/gallon? Do Americans want a sub-200bhp, roomy Mercedes when a 268-bhp Honda is in the same financial realm? Will we ever know? Will The Good Car Guy stop asking questions?

Behold the '09 Mercedes-Benz A-Class Coupe and B-Class galleries.

ODD LOGIC - Hummer, Jeep, Mazda, smart

Jeep and Hummer versus Mazda and smart. That kind of comparison sounds complicated, complex, convoluted even. Get this - we're not talking about the rumoured (in history) of the smart formore, nor are we discussing Jeep's baby Compass.

Nope. Not in the least. The purpose of the post is to see how great the contrast is between a Jeep Grand Cherokee, a Hummer H3, Mazda's 3 and the smart fortwo. Granted, we will talk about the Grand Cherokee diesel, the smart fortwo diesel, and the gasoline-powered editions of both the Mazda and Hummer.

Environmentalists would lead you to believe that SUV's are bringing down the planet. (They happen to be ignoring the airplanes they use to fly around the country so that they can tell you about the bad SUV's, but that's another story.) Meanwhile, there is no dearth of justifiers for sport-utes on the planet. Farmers, boat-towers, horse owners and many others will tell you that all the smart's and Prius' and hi-po Lexus limo hybrids will never save the world from its fever.

Isn't there some room in between the extremists? What about applying some bare-bones mathematics in order to answer the questions that arise. There are a number of issues that come to my mind; long after viewing the Energuide statistics or the EuroUnion CO2 figures. Here's a few of them:

• People mpg, or people litres/100km in the case of this post
• Combined effect on humanity. Ya can't blame one Hummer owner for creating the poor air quality my part of the world will suffer through today
• Quantifiable life-long usage facts

Driven in typical circumstances by an average driver in a normal climate, the Hummer H3 will use about 13.6 litres of fuel every time it drives 100 kilometers. Jeep's Grand Cherokee, when equipped with a diesel engine, will drink 10.5 litres of diesel fuel every time the vehicle travels 100 kilometres. A Mazda3? 7.3L/100km. smart's fortwo diesel will sip just 4.2L/100km.

Put another way, it would take about three smarts to use as much fuel as the Hummer. You could almost afford to fuel two Mazda3's for the cost of fueling your Hummer. Beyond that, diesel fuel is about 11 cents cheaper than regular gasoline in my city. The 600 km round trip I recently took to Prince Edward Island would have cost $64.89 CDN in the Grand Cherokee CRD. The Hummer H3 would have cost $92.20. Oh, my Mastercard would have been charged with a total of $25.96 in the smart fortwo. Ouch.

But there's more to it than that. If you think of peoplelitres/100km and filled the smart with two people, you're sipping at just 2.1PL/100km. The Hummer would fare much better if considered as a passenger-filled sport utility - per passenger the Hummer would use just 2.72 litres each. The Jeep would be the smart's equivalent and the Mazda would be even better, at just 1.46 litres each.

Does this mean the Sierra Group and the Green Party should love Hummers ? Maybe no. But full Hummer H3's are actually an efficient means of traveling. There's no denying that five people in a Hummer arrive at any destination in a more efficient manner than one person in his smart fortwo.

However, a Hummer which has never met its owners wife and kids is an awfully ineffective means of transportation.

Skew the debate to the smart's side, and things get ugly. Take five smart fortwo owners who love carpooling. They drive their buddies to work every day. The five Mazda 3 owners across the street can't stand the thought of someone else drinking coffee in their zoom-zoom machine, hence they travel alone. The roundtrip commute is 30 kilometres. All the smart's combined use just 6.3 litres to make the journey. The five Mazda's suck up 10.95 litres. The smart, remember, was being used as a carpooling machine, and therefore each person uses just .63 litres per day. Each single-passenger Mazda uses 2.19 litres each day.

This has little to do with real life, but it does show how quickly efficiency/economy/effectiveness can be altered by extra passengers. It also proves the depth of difference thousands of tiny cars can make when purchased instead of a regular small car.

That's enlightening. Now go check my math.

RAMPENFEST

Does advertising like this work on you? BMW's use of "guerilla marketing" is the talk of the town... well, at least it's the talk of CNN's American Morning. The 1-series is already being marketed in the mainstream on the basis of its fuel efficiency and 2002tii heritage. Does it matter whether BMW's Rampenfest campaign works or not? After all, production costs were a fraction of the typical cost for a 30-second TV spot. Not only that, but the Rampenfest clip spreads like wildfire - at no charge to BMW. As evidence, I submit its presence right here on GoodCarBadCar.net. 

VOLKSWAGEN MEMORIES FROM THE GOOD CAR GIRL

When I was about 9 or 10, I remember standing on our front lawn watching the family car being towed away. I felt like shouting, "No, you can't take that! The Jetta is part of our family!".

It's the only car I remembered our family owning and it had so many memories attached to it. The first eight years of my life were spent to-ing and fro-ing in the little diesel Volkswagen Jetta. We traveled to Charlottetown from Souris at least twice a week. It took us down bumpy red dirt roads to our own private beaches. It carried us to my relatives and friends in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick and beyond!

My mother knew how to pack the trunk to its greatest capacity, and my siblings and I knew how to fill the back seat area to its greatest (or overflowing) capacity. Sometimes there would be my sister, my brother in a car seat, me, our golden retriever, and even her puppies in the back seat! The Jetta had chugged along superbly despite the squabbles that sometime took place in its backseat.

The diesel engine had an amazing ability to lull me to sleep. I loved leaning against the window watching the fields full of lupins fly by and listening to the hum of the engine... and then the next thing I knew, we would be at our next destination.

I felt safe in the little old Jetta - even when it started seeing it's doctor more frequently. It felt solid and secure.

That's why when the tow truck started hauling the old Jetta away, I felt like it was taking a part of my happy life a way - just to be replaced by a boring new Nissan Stanza. I never grew to love that car. I'd still go back to that old diesel Jetta any day.

WHO BUILDS THEM TOUGH? SMALL, THIRSTY, SUVs

Simply put, "truck-based" SUVs are generally perceived to be less economical at the fuel pumps. These days, the worse the vehicle's efficiency; the more likely it is that sales numbers for that vehicle are dwindling. Phrases like "truck-based" or "body-on-frame" or simply "real SUV" stand in stark contrast to increasingly common terms like "crossover" CUV" or "crossover utes". 

Does the perception match reality if applied to the smallest examples of tall-bodied, lofty-drive driving position, usually all-wheel drive vehicles? In a word..... yes. While not necessarily the most fuel efficient or least fuel efficient drivetrain combinations for each vehicle are applied here (many transmission choices make little or no difference these days; sometimes the engine doesn't either), this sampling of vehicles are relatively well known and position themselves as tough or carlike. 

(Check out AutoEnergy to see the real life difference between the Nissan Xterra and Nissan Rogue)

Except for one, that is. Suzuki wants you to think that its Grand Vitara is in between; merging the best of tough with the best of car.  Guess what - the fuel efficiency story agrees with Suzuki, dropping the Grand Vitara in between the tough SUVs and the more car-like CUVs.

-----

Hummer H3 V8 - 14mpg

Jeep Wrangler 6-spd man - 16mpg 

Toyota FJ Cruiser man -16mpg

Nissan Xterra man - 17mpg

Dodge Nitro 4.0L - 17mpg

Suzuki Grand Vitara man - 18mpg

Ford Escape - 19mpg

Hyundai Santa Fe - 19mpg

Kia Sportage - 19mpg

Toyota RAV4 - 21mpg

Honda CR-V - 22mpg

JOE ABUTEL'S WEIRD PRIUS PURCHASE

CNN's Deb Feyerick is covering the story of decreasing 'green' car availability. Joe Abutel is a Manhattan dude that downsized from a Hummer to a Toyota Prius. (No options in between?) Clearly Joe was pretty serious about the environmental impact of the car (something that has been placed in doubt before, remember) and not just the savings at the pump. 

How do ya figure that? Well, Abutel spent nearly $24,000 on the used and slightly damaged hybrid Toyota after spending some $2,400 on fuel last month in his Hummer. The Ford dealer where the Prius had been accepted on trade - indicating somebody wanted something better - had started eBay bidding at $15,000. Not only that, but Joe Abutel was contacted by three other bidders who figured he'd continue the sales chain at slightly above $24,000.

My question: Despite the increasingly hard-to-find car that the Prius is, how does Abutel justify paying more for a used Prius than the upper-level Touring model is when new? Moreover, if downsizing from a Hummer to a more fuel efficient car is necessary - which it probably is - why spend an inordinate amount of cash on the car side of the equation? Put another way - wouldn't 10,000 fewer dollars spent on the vehicle be a handy gas cash pouch? Ya know, the Good 12-winning Honda Fit, for example. 

If efficiency is the genuine objective, a $24,000 Prius isn't the answer to your Hummer problem. Check out the CNN.com video here.

BMW M3 CONVERTIBLE - en mouvement

BMW's righteous M3 is a known quantity. Walk into your nearest BMW dealer and they'll present you with an M3 trifecta: coupe, sedan, and convertible. Word spreads with each new-gen M3 that BMW's iconic sporting machine is getting too heavy and softening too severely. Yet... the M3 is a constant sales success.

Though it's an obvious criticism to paint any convertible version of a sportscar with poseur terminology, the new M3 droptop has a greater claim to fame than ever. With a metal roof and power retraction, its ability to suck in buyers from Miami to Mission Viejo will be surely enhanced. Soft or not, the BMW M3 convertible is desirable. Check it out in motion for further proof.

REAGAN DIARIES - AUTO PROBLEMS

Long before the term "blog" was invented and the internet had sprung up as the automotive enthusiast's favourite tool, the domestic automobile sector was known to struggle. What's new? With your current daily dose of auto news, test drives, and opinion; the American automakers (General Motors, Ford Motor Company, Chrysler LLC) are yet again suffering from o'erwhelming maladies. 

Fuel prices are rising, just one factor that's driving consumers away from SUVs and trucks. SUVs and trucks are the vehicles by which the American manufacturers made hay over the last 15-20 years. The mortgage crisis possesses long-lasting effects; another reason that the auto market, as a whole, is dwindling. Besides the theorizing, statistics show that, at least in the month of May, the four best-selling vehicles in America wore the badges of Japanese car companies. Alarm. Bells. Ringing.

Is the story new? Yes, it's brand new. Does it reek of 1981? For sure. Not that I would know, being, shall we say.... nonexistent.

However, the recent publishing of Ronald Reagan's diaries (The Reagan Diaries - Edited by Douglas Brinkley - HarperCollins) reveals the former president's feelings about the struggles of America's own automobile companies in the early 80's. From Thursday, March 19/1981:

"The auto task force met with Cabinet - still some disagreement about any quotas on Japanese imports. Some even with regard to a Japanese voluntary cutback. The V.P. summed it up nicely. He said we're all for free enterprise but would any of us find fault if Japan announced without any request from us that they were going to reduce their export of autos to America?

There was no dissent. I told them I'd heard enough I would make a decision. Privately I told Al Haig (Secretary of State) to call Amb. Mike Mansfield (Japan) and have Mike advise "Ito" before his visit that we were threatened by a bill in Cong. to set a quota. An announcement by Japan of a voluntary cutback could head that off. We'll see what happens.

Al then told me he felt he was being undercut by other agencies etc. I worry that he has something of a complex about this. Anyway I've arranged that he & I meet privately 3x a week."

From Friday, December 18th/1981:

"Most important meeting with heads of Auto Co's. That industry is facing total disaster. I'm recommending that we tell Japan we are going to impose same restrictions on their exports as they do on import of Am. cars in Japan. Auto makers need passage of Clean Air Act changes which can reduce price of Am. cars."

From Tuesday, August 10/1982: 

"Met with Chryslers Lee Iacocca. He's all for our program and wants to help. He has reduced Chryslers cost of production 50%. No wonder they show a profit." 

From Sunday, January 16/1983:

"Spent most of the day at desk, then at 6:30 guests arrived for a stag-bull session dinner. Geo. Shultz, Geo. Bush, Bryce Harlow, Lee Iacocca, Geo. Will and Irving Kristol. Most of the conversation centered around the auto industry. Lee discussed the Japanese problem & their restrictive trade practices, including under valuing the Yen. It was most informative & useful since we'll be dealing with P.M. Nakasone Tues."

From Wednesday, April 11/1984:

"Off to Kansas City to visit a Ford plant & speak to 2000 workers. I was warmly received inspite of the best efforts of the Auto workers union. To see I wouldn't be. They are doing a remarkable job of making a worker management team at that plant which probably drives the Union leaders up the wall. "

CAR DESIGN & PERSONAL PREFERENCES

"Everything in moderation", my big brother said to me a couple weeks back. He was talking about Coca-Cola, butter, and french fries in relation to his marathoner's body. By contextual realignment, let me apply his statement thus: there are some habits - design, styling, accessorizing - in the automotive world that are 'good in their own way', but when taken to an extreme..... not so much.

They are the expression of personal preference. They are used by manufacturers to spice up their model ranges. Extra aggression, added luxury, image enhancing. But automakers forget the lesson, "Everything in moderation." And it appears that automakers as a whole, simply represented here by Jaguar; Subaru; Ford; and Hyundai - are losing the plot. When reading about car design and car designers the last number of years, words like minamilism, clean, untouched keep popping up. Phrases like, let the lines carry the design.

Put another way: there's no need for extras on every part of the body to convince people the car looks good. Here's a few examples of the trend. Remember, these cars are simply representative of a growing theme. They happen to be cars I am somewhat fond of.

Jaguar's 'gorgeous' new XK coupe and convertible are indeed handsome cats. Interestingly enough, upon the debut of the new XK, chief designer Ian Callum said that the XK really shouldn't be chosen with the wood interior finish. The aluminum was a far better choice. Wood may have its place. Aston Martin makes good use of it inside the DB9. The Chevrolet Corvette actually balsa wood in the floor where you can't see. However, you're stretching the idea when you consider that competing cars include ultra-modern cars like the Porsche 911, BMW 6-series, and Maserati GranTurismo. If the public already thinks you're stuck in the past, Jag.... offer aluminum only.

(Click the pictures for a larger view)

Subaru has long traded in the rally-car-for-the-road feel of the Subaru Impreza. Over the last short number of years the Impreza has gone through numerous styling changes. There has been one constant: the large rear wing. Most every STi features some appendage you could lay out and sunbathe on. Rarely would you see a WRX without a similarly broad, but much more discreet wing. To pull off the WRC look, one needs an F15 landing deck. Understandable. But when people ask the VW dealer to equip their Jetta likewise - please. The latest Civic sedan has such clean and eye-catching lines. Please resist. Some do not.

Go-faster stripes don't work. There is an unproved theory that go-faster stripes are actually go-slower stripes. That heavy extra coat of paint or hefty layer of stickers can't assist acceleration times, can it? I dare say it may not. Stripes and all other such extra paint applications do a fair job at making a modern F1 car look like a modern F1 car. Ugly, that is. (I'm trying to continue with the 'moderation' theme, but I'm struggling to discover the proper application of the dreaded stripes.) Regardless, somewhere out there - on Ford GT's and Shelby Mustangs for two - stripes belong. On the performance version of Ford's own Fiesta? No thanks.

A car does not possess big wheels without also ascertaining big tires. A larger diameter in your wheel/tire combo will have the effect of maximizing your contact patch with the road. A tire of the same width will have greater contact with the road if the diameter of the tire grows. Typically, though, as diameter goes so goes width. Added width increases this effect. As diameters increase, so must the profile of the tire decrease. The profile of the tire is the width of the actual band you see between wheel and fender. As the profile decreases, so your contact patch increases. Increasing contact patch increases the grip your tire has on the road, thereby aiding handling.

This simple science has given rappers; tuners; Hummer drivers who never go off-road; and even the typical consumer the impression that big wheels are a must. Plus they look good. Problem #1 is added weight vs. acceleration. Upsizing two inches on a Civic-sized car will inevitably deteriorate your drag strip times. Problem #2 is added weight vs. handling. The weight you're adding happens to be added right where you don't want extra mass. Your dubs are as unsprung as your sixteen's, and therefore producing exaggerated impacts and dull turn-in. However, they do look good. They draw the eye. And big wheels can be done tastefully, even on a tiny car like this Hyundai Accent.