TrueDelta

Though fuel prices have moderated, as long as the economy remains soft car buyers will be focusing on fuel economy, not horsepower. In response, manufacturers are rushing to offer at least the alternative of a less powerful, more efficient engine.

The Mazda CX-7, a compact SUV, is a case in point. When the CX-7 was introduced three years ago, only one engine was offered: a 244-horsepower turbocharged 2.3-liter four. A good fit for Mazda’s driver-oriented image, but fuel economy has been a weak spot.

For 2010 Mazda has refreshed the CX-7, and the turbo has been joined by a 161-horsepower non-turbo 2.5-liter four. The new engine is good for EPA ratings of 20 city and 28 highway, compared to 17 and 23 for the 2009 turbo. (For 2010 the turbo improves to 18/25.) The new base model weighs 300 pounds less, so acceleration should be similar to that of the non-turbo fours in the Honda CR-V (20/27) and Toyota RAV4 (22/28).

The third day contained little in the way of presentations.

First, I visited the Eco drive event in the basement. In past years, they stuck suppliers and the Chinese down here. This year, with Nissan and Porsche absent and others asking for less space, those got space on the main floor. So what to do in the basement? How about a lavishly landscaped road course on which to sample hybrids and such?

The public will only be able to ride along–it’s been deemed too risky to let them drive. The press gets to drive, but only up to 10 MPH and with a guide in the passenger seat. One talked my ear off–you’d think I’d never driven a car before–but the others were okay. And the cars? Well, up to 10 MPH they feel just like any other car. Just with especially lifeless steering–nothing but electric-assist systems here. To their credit, the brakes all felt natural, not something that could be said for older hybrids. I did sample one more exotic machine, a Chevrolet Equinox powered by a hydrogen fuel cell. Yep, felt just like a regular Equinox, at least at these speeds.

Next I attended the presentation of the “Eyes on Design” awards. These are meaningful, since dozens of designers vote to decide the best designs at the show. Four awards are given, two for concepts and two for production cars. Unlike in past years, nothing distinguished the two winners in each category. Not even first and second place.

The winners in the concept category were no surprise. The Cadillac Converj, based on the Chevy Volt, easily had the strongest reaction of any concept during the show. And the Audi Sportback was chock full of interesting details The only other concepts that deserved a shot were Chrysler’s 200C EV (photo in earlier post) and Volvo’s S60 precursor (photo below). Other concepts were either weird (Lincoln’s) or uninteresting (the precursor for Subaru’s next Legacy). There weren’t many concepts this year. Not much money to spend on them, and all that.

The winners in the production category were a surprise, at least to me. First they announced the Audi R8 5.2. Sure the V10 is new, and I believe the body was lengthened a bit to include it, but the design isn’t new. A lame selection.

The other winner: the BMW Z4. Which is good mainly to the extent that it isn’t bad–i.e. Bangled like the first-gen Z4. There’s nothing especially new or exciting about it.

So if an already familiar Audi and a cleaned-up BMW managed to win, what does this say about the designs Detroit is counting on to save it? I’m not a huge fan of the exteriors of the Buick LaCrosse, Cadillac SRX, Chevrolet Equinox, Ford Taurus, or Lincoln MKT, but some of them do more for me than the BMW. And as far as I’m concerned the Audi shouldn’t have been eligible. Also, the interiors of the Buick and Lincoln are the best yet from their manufacturers. Still, it seems that designers weren’t enthusiastic about Detroit’s 2010s. Not a good sign.

Also absent from the winners: both of Fisker’s Karmas. Apparently designers aren’t impressed when one of their own starts his own company from scratch.

Finally, Tesla presented. How did they end up as the only manufacturer presenting on this sparsely attended third day? Clearly someone didn’t do their job. Or is it cheaper to present on the third day?

The focus of CEO Elon Musk’s presentation: Daimler just gave them permission to announce that Tesla will be supplying batteries and chargers for the upcoming Smart EV. Which will enable Tesla to reap greater economies of scale, and advance the day when electric propulsion is cheap enough for the masses.

Questions concerned Tesla’s reliance on a large number of small cells, the planned S family sedan, and what Elon Musk has learned from the experience. Economies of scale are much greater with small cells, so it’s cheaper to use them for at least the next few years. The S sedan will cost $49,900 after a tax credit of $7,500, and will be introduced two years after they get a hoped-for Dept. of Energy loan. My pricing analysis: this price makes it about half that of the Fisker, so the two won’t directly compete. The Volt will be a direct competitor. And what has he learned after investing $70 million of his own money? That more automotive experience was needed, and as a result nearly the entire executive team has been replaced. Mr. Musk seemed a bit worn out, and less confident than the bunch across the aisle at Fisker. Must say I understand.

Tesla also showed video of an upcoming higher-performance variant of their Elise-based roadster. Acceleration time to 60 will improve from 3.9 to 3.7. No one in the press corps seemed to care about that bit of news.

Look at these photos from the interior of the redesigned-for-2009 BMW 750i. What do you see?

Not seeing anything terribly unusual? Well, that’s my point. The shifter–albeit one sourced from Sega–has returned to the center console, discplacing the iDrive controller to a secondary position. And the seat controls have assumed a conventional layout rather than the complicated knob-and-sector affair and have moved from the sides of the center armrest to the sides of the seats. On the aesthetic front, the nav screen no longer occupies a binnacle that rivals that of the instruments for size and prominence. And, on the exterior, the 2002 car’s odd trunk cutline and headlight “eyebrows” have both been consigned to the past. The resulting 7 is relatively clean and conventional. Which is the way a driver’s car should be.

The first presentation I attended on the second day of NAIAS was for Lincoln (no mention of Mercury). The MKT crossover has a roomy interior that manages to look and feel more upscale than that of the MKS sedan. Stitched upholstery on the center stack and center console are an improvement over silver-painted plastic. As in the MKS and the related Ford Flex, seats in the first two rows are very comfortable. So what’s not to love? That would be the clunky, chunky exterior.

From Lincoln I went to GM, where Rick Wagoner announced that the batteries for the Volt would be manufactured in Michigan. And that GM was going to make battery technology a core competence, with a new 31,000-square foot engineering center for them. And that LG Chemical (of Korea) has been selected as the supplier of the battery cells. One of these statements doesn’t fit with the others.

Then things started to really not add up. BYD, a Chinese battery and vehicle manufacturer, announced that it was going to be offering a five-passenger pure electric vehicle with a 250-mile range. The vehicle in question strongly resembles Honda’s Asian-market Odyssey. (All of BYD’s cars strongly resemble someone else’s car.) The technology that makes this possible? BYD’s breakthrough “ferrous” battery technology. Now, ferrous means iron. Who knew that iron was such a good basis for a battery? Also, batteries usually combine two elements. What’s the unnamed second element?

On the subject of knockoffs, the Chinese aren’t the only ones doing it. The photo above isn’t a BYD knockoff of a second-gen Toyota Prius–it’s a Honda knockoff of a second-generation Toyota Prius. Only even more ungainly. Meanwhile, Toyota introduced the third-generation Prius, which is much better looking than both the current car and Honda’s facsimile. Check out the attractive five-spoke 17-inch alloys. The high point of the roofline has been shifted rearward by four inches. While the official reason for this is more rear seat headroom, it also greatly improves the car’s proportions. Inside, the new Prius has more room and a more nicely finished interior.

Yesterday Lexus introduced its first efficiency-focused hybrid off the Prius platform, the HS250h. Which also happens to be the first U.S.-market Lexus with a four-cylinder engine. I took a look today. Nice interior, but the exterior makes the previous generation Corolla look nicely styled. I’m not seeing a Lexus in this exterior. Or in the powertrain, unless driveability is way up from the second-gen Prius.

Last I attended Fisker’s presentation, where a strikingly attractive (top up or down) hardtop convertible was introduced. It’ll become available in 2012.

I’ve had a number of questions about their Karma foor-door (hint: don’t call it a sedan):

1. How can Fisker manage to offer a stylish, luxurious, large (124.4-inch wheelbase, 196.3-inch length, 78.1-inch width) four-door car with a powerful hybrid powertrain (260 horsepower turbo four plus a pair of electric motors good for 400 horsepower) and monstrous 22-inch tires for conventional S-Class money? (base price is $87,900)

2. Can GM’s rorty turbo four possibly behave as an engine in a $90,000+ sedan is expected to behave?

3. How can such a car go 50 miles on a charge? A huge battery pack would add weight and cost. See surprisingly low price above.

4. How can a car with such swoopy sheetmetal comfortably accommodate four adults.

Well, after today’s presentation I was able to sit in the Karma four door. And it’s, well, C3 Corvette tight in the front seat, and even tighter in the back seat. (For reference, I’m 5-9 and the front seat was perhaps and inch farther rearward than I’d set it.) There’s considerably more room inside a Mazda RX-8, which has far more compact exterior dimensions. Getting in and out of the Mazda’s rear seat is also easier. Getting in and out of the the Karma is a head-and-knee-bumping chore thanks to a low roof and small door openings. I will grant that they’ve made the seats as comfortable as possible given the low seating position and limited interior volume. Still, a third-gen Prius is a limo in comparison. The trunk was not opened. I asked about cargo volume, and they responded, “Enough for two golf bags.” So perhaps 8 cubic feet. This is what happens when a designer is running the show. The Karma sedan is very much a four-door coupe–a Mercedes CLS taken to the extreme, with all of the compromises that implies.

Well, the first day at the 2009 North American International Auto Show wasn’t such a bust in the end.

I began the day by attending the Intro and North American Car of the Year Awards. During the intro talk the Detroit show sought to demonstrate that it was still relevant by trotting out senior executives from the auto companies that didn’t opt to skip this year’s show. Among the execs from GM, Ford, Toyota, Honda, VW, and so forth was…Henrik Fisker. “Which one of these is not like the others…” started running through my head. Must have felt good to be Henrik Fisker up their with the big boys.

Biggest surprise with the awards was that, looking over the finalists from my place amidst the crowd of journalists, I was wondering what the Infiniti G37 was doing among them. The engine is new for 2009, but the rest of the car is entering it’s third model year. Well, it wasn’t the Infiniti. The car in question was a Hyundai Genesis, which one the award. Apparently when you can only see the top half of the car the resemblance is rather strong.

I then attended the General Motors presentation. A couple years ago when the then-new Cadillac CTS was introduced I commented that it was nice to see the people involved in creating the car up on stage with it. Especially since I knew some of them.

Well, this year GM decided to do something like that, just taken up to the next level. They brought in a crowd of 100+ employees, and had them stand behind the seated press and engage in a pep rally. Holding signs that said things like “here to stay.” The journalist next to me asked who the group of prostesters were. I explained to him that thos weren’t protesters, they were the cheering section.

The presenting GM execs called for a cheer from said cheering section each time a car rolled up on stage–and they paraded about 15 of them. A couple of times the exec called for a louder response. A bit much.

Some of the new GM cars were surprisingly impressive. The interior of the 2010 Equinox compact SUV is the best interior in a Chevrolet so far. It’s much nicer than that in a Toyota RAV4, and I’d also place it ahead of the Honda CR-V. Seat comfort is also excellent, front and rear. Why aren’t the seats in the larger Lambda crossovers nearly this good? I actually found the firmer seats in the Cadillac SRX less comfortable than those in the Chevrolet. There’s also less rear seat and cargo room in the SRX. Overall, while the Cadillac’s interior is nicer than the Chevrolet’s, it will also be much more expensive. I expect the Cadillac will have a much harder time achieving its sales targets.

The new Buick LaCrosse is a mixed bag. The exterior doesn’t quite work for me. The “sweep spear” comes up too high on the overly tall front fender. As a result, your eye is pulled in one direction by the beltline (base of the windows) and in the other by the “sweep spear.” Beyond this, the proportions of the front fender are generally forced and awkward.

On the other hand, the interior of the new LaCrosse is outstanding, the best yet from GM–better even than that in the Cadillac CTS. Real stitching on the instrument panel and door panels has been achieved at a Buick price by molding this stitching into the polymer panels. The panels aren’t actually upholstered as they are in newer Cadillacs–but they look upholstered. The center stack is very nicely executed, with a definite upscale appearance. The curvy door panels are exceedingly well done. They combine a nicely padded armrest with a comfortable door pull, and flow organically into the instrument panel.

Is an outstanding interior enough to get people under 70 to consider a Buick sedan? Probably not.

Looking back across the GM area, I wondered what a previous generation Audi A4 was doing there–except it was actually Chevrolet’s next compact car, the Cruze. I haven’t been impressed by the Cruze in photos. In the metal, it looks great, at least when fitted with 19-inch five-spoke alloy rims. Inside, the instrument panel in the Cruze is trimmed in a woven fabric. This might not be to everyone’s taste, but it’s a huge step up from most compact car interiors.

Ford has thoroughly revised the Taurus. The new car looks much more upscale, inside and out. Though the new grille is a bit too Subaru nondescript, the rear fenders have strong Bentley overtones. Viewed from the side the car has more presence than a Taurus has any right to.

The interior of the 2010 Ford Taurus is nice, not far off that in the related Lincoln MKS, but not up to the level of the Buick LaCrosse. The panel fits aren’t as tight or as precise, and the materials seem a bit cheaper. I was surprised to hear that features such as adaptive cruise control and massaging seats–things usually only available on expensive luxury cars–will be available on the Taurus. On the downside, the interior is much less roomy than that of the current Taurus. Inside, it does not feel like a full-size car.

I skipped the Chrysler presentation, figuring the company had nothing in the pipeline to reveal. I later learned that they’d shown a possible next-generation 300, billed as the 200C EV with an alt fuel powertrain. This concept, much more curvy than the current 300, is very attractive, a huge advance over recent Chrysler efforts like the Sebring. But is there enough trunk space inside the sportily bobbed tail?

That’s it for today. More tomorrow.

Well, I braved snow-covered highways to get to attend the first media day at the Detroit auto show (NAIAS). But I’m not sure why I’m here. Many manufacturers–including Buick, Ford (2010 Taurus pictured), Jaguar, and Mercedes–opted to introduce their new vehicles at special events in the days leading up to the show. In other cases (the Chevrolet Spark comes to mind) the press embargo was broken, so photos are already all over the web.

Still, there should still be some surprises. I’ll provide a complete account when I return home each evening for the next three days.

Hyundai has released pricing for it’s Lexus LS 460 competitor (some might say knock-off–but then the same could be said of the first LS), and I rushed the figures into TrueDelta’s pricing database. I believe this makes TrueDelta the first site where you can configure–much less compare–pricing for the Genesis.

A few results:

Compared to a similarly loaded BMW 550i, the Genesis is $24,630 less before adjusting for feature differences, and about $25,900 less afterwards. And this is before an upcoming price increase at BMW.

Doing the same with a Lexus LS 460, we get differences of $28,200 (before adjusting for feature differences) and $28,600 (after).

Running the same comparison with an Infiniti M45, probably the least expensive direct competitor, we get differences of $11,400 (before adjusting for feature differences) and $14,100 (after).

I am not sure I have a complete list of Genesis features, as I only have the list Hyundai has released. If someone notices an omission, please contact me. For example, I’m assuming that the wood in the Genesis is not real.

Perform your own comparisons here.

And if you want to discuss the car, head over to partner forum GenesisOwners.com

So, what else did I see at this year’s less than inspiring Detroit auto show?

The general impression was that every company sought to portray itself as green. And there were various hybrid, fuel cell, diesel, and so forth concepts on display. But with few exceptions they were just that, concepts. I’ll get more excited when they’re available to buy–at a reasonable price.

I add that last bit because GM did show “two-mode hybrid” and “plug-in hybrid” variants of its Saturn VUE compact SUV, and these will be available in the next year or two. The big question: how much will they cost? As I wrote earlier in this blog, the “two-mode” version of the Chevrolet Tahoe costs about $10,000 more than its non-hybrid counterpart when features are adjusted for. If the “two-mode” VUE checks in at $35,000+, I suspect the market for it will be quite limited.

From a sales standpoint, the most important introductions were undoubtedly those of the revised Ford F-150 and Dodge Ram pickups. In neither case is the revised styling a home run, and the Dodge’s new Tundra-like nose is especially disappointment. Both trucks also benefit from upgraded interiors, with Chrysler’s Jim Press suggesting that the new Ram interior indicates how much higher in quality future Chrysler interiors will be. Well, while the improvement in the Ford interior is somewhat impressive, the revised Dodge Ram interior remains clearly inferior to both that in the Ford and that in GM’s pickups. Sure, they’ve upholstered the top of the instrument panel, but even this manages to look cheap. And the rest remains hard plastic that looks like hard plastic.

Most impressive about the pickups: all of the new features Ford and Dodge have added. Both manufacturers appear to have decided that the best way to counter increasing competition in the segment is to meet previously unmet needs. So we have additional storage compartments, track systems in the beds, trick integrated bed extenders, and so forth. Most interesting on the Ford: steps on the sides and rear to ease access over the tall sides of the bed. On the Dodge: a four-cubic-foot storage compartment in each side of the new “Ram Box” bed. Together they offer as much storage volume as a small trunk. And you can get to them when the bed is loaded. Take that, Honda!

The car I’m most looking forward to test-driving: the 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart. With a 235-horsepower 2.0-liter turbo four, all-wheel-drive, sport buckets, and a price likely in the mid-twenties, it’ll hit a sweet spot that was owned by the Subaru WRX–until the botched 2008 redesign.

The car most essential to the survival of its brand: the 2009 Lincoln MKS. The upcoming large Lincoln sedan checks off all of the boxes. Like the Taurus on which it is based, the MKS will be a good car for those who buy a car for rational reasons. It’s reasonably powerful, very roomy, comfortable, and pleasantly styled. But it also shares the Taurus’ weakness: it won’t stand out in the crowd, and no one’s going to lust after it.

No one’s going to lust after the redesigned 2009 Honda Pilot, either. Luckily for Honda, people are more likely to buy an SUV for rational reasons than they are to buy a luxury sedan for rational reasons. Especially when it’s a Honda. How else to explain the success of the even more boring first-generation Pilot over the last five years?

I was able to take a close look at the redesigned 2009 Nissan Murano, which should be reaching dealers soon if it hasn’t already. The styling of the first-generation Murano really grew on me. The new styling is more forced and cluttered, and I don’t care for it nearly as much. However, the revised interior is significantly nicer, and the seats are excellent in both rows. From a comfort standpoint, they were about the best I sat in at the whole show.

First, the bad news about this years North American International (Detroit) Auto Show: everyone I’ve talked to was at least mildly disppointed in this years show. There are no major introductions, and (by my count) only one introduction that wasn’t largely leaked in advance of the show.

That one introduction: the Cadillac CTS coupe. I assumed this car was going to be at the show, but then when GM released information about the high-performance CTS-V in advance of the show, and made no mention of a coupe, I assumed they had decided to show the coupe at another show later in the year.

Instead, they had decided to withhold the coupe from the pre-show release, in order to have a surprise. It worked.

The coupe’s styling is certainly dramatic, with a bobbed tail and steep C-pillar that runs all the way to the rear of the car. I didn’t initially warm to it as I did to the sedan. There a sport hatch flavor, in the vein of the VW Scirocco and Mercedes C-Class coupe, even though the Cadillac is not a hatch. Does this look like $40,000, and a Cadillac? Most people I’ve talked to love it, and responses on online forums have mostly been positive. And I must admit that the more I look at it, the more I like it. One thing is certain: the car’s styling is distinctive, and ellicits strong opinions.

Hyundai introduced its Genesis large luxury sedan. The specs are impressive, the interior materials are somewhere between Honda and Acura, and the price will be relatively low. But nearly every styling element has been borrowed, making the Genesis a pastiche of the cars it aims to steal sales from. It’s not cohesive, and lacks a distinctive character.

At the launch of the Genesis, Hyundai announced that while other auto companies serve people who “have more,” Hyundai will be serving those who “deserve more.” I feel sorry for those people who want to buy a Genesis, and have the money to do so, but fail what it bound to be a strict test of how much car they truly deserve.

Speaking of stealing, a number of Chinese automakers are present at this years show. One, BYD, claims to stand for “Build Your Dreams.” But one reporter quipped to me that it should stand for “Borrow Your Designs.” The models hired to stand next to the cars looked at best bored, at worst embarrassed. But when they saw my camera, they managed some quick smiles.

On the subject of bored, Jaguar is displaying not one but two of the new XF sedan in “bore me blue.” A third XF, with silver paint and more dramatic alloy wheels, is tucked away upstairs where a much smaller number of people will see it. Are they trying not to sell cars?

I found Jaguar’s choice of color all the more surprising, as luxury automakers are clearly trying to use paint to bolster their premium images. Increasingly, the metallic finishes on premium European sedans appear a step or two above those on more pedestrian cars. (Cadillac needs to step up its game here.) The most interesting paint at the show: an experimental finish on two Mercedes that has the appearance of liquid metal. I spoke with the Mercedes rep. He said they want to get this paint into production, but that this is very challenging.

I’ll post some additional impressions in the next day or two.

It’s auto show season again, so we’re being teased with a slew of new racy “concepts.” Time to wonder what these might indicate about future production cars, and wonder what the point is to the things in the first place.

Over at the Autos Blog for the Detroit News, reporter Neil Winton laments that the Worthy New Jaguar XF Rejects Concept’s Pizzazz. He notes that the C-XF concept was much more appealing, and was created after the production design had been finalized, and concludes (emphasis mine):

Jaguar design chief Ian Callum, presenting the car to journalists this week in England, said that the design of the new XF had already been finalised when the C-XF was unveiled. So all that excitement and anticipation was for nothing. Callum said that Jaguar wanted to signal to the world that its design language was changing.

I’m not sure if raising buyers’ hopes to fever-pitch with a concept car like the C-XF, then deflating them with the real thing, is the best way to sell new cars. What is undoubtedly a terrific replacement for the slow selling and dated looking S Type, will start its life in this potential buyer’s eyes as a disappointment, when the C-XF might have persuaded me to buy a Jaguar for the first time.

I’ve long wondered the same thing–why raise expectations with concepts if these aren’t going to be fulfilled? There are actually three kinds of concepts: totally off-the-wall exercises that at best demonstrate far-future possibilities, potentially producible concepts that are truly testing the waters to see if the public will buy, and concepts that are based on already finalized production designs, to provide a preview of a vehicle that is already on the way.

The third type is probably the most common and is at any rate far more common than many people realize. I’ve read many times that GM ruined the Pontiac Aztek in converting the concept into a production vehicle. Guess what? The conversion went the other way: the production sheetmetal had been finalized before the concept was shown. Just like with the C-XF.

The C-XF is only among the more extreme examples, since all of the sheetmetal appears to differ from the less swoopy and less aggressive production XF. (Though I’m sure some people, glancing at these smallish photos, will think they look much the same.) More often, the production sheetmetal is used, but dressed up with larger wheels and a more aggressive body kit than will be available on the production car. GM did this with the AURA a few years ago. When the production car was revealed, more than a few people were disappointed, myself included. This even though the sheetmetal of the concept was the production car’s.

In the end, the far-out concepts do little for me, and the third sort frequently lead to disappointment like that expressed by Mr. Winton. So what I’d prefer to see is a much higher proportion of the second sort, that show what might happen, before a decision has been made to make it happen.