Archive for January, 2009

Ford Motor Co. announced today it has reduced global warranty costs by $1.2 billion during the past two years — $100 million in 2008 and $1.1 billion in 2007.

If there’s a surprise here, it’s that the savings in 2008 were so much smaller than those one in 2007. Even though the big gains in reliability were made in the 2005 and especially the 2006 model years as better engineered new products were introduced, warranties last for three years.

Sales are down, so my initial thought was that much of the savings followed from having fewer warranties to honor. But Ford also said that the per-vehicle warranty repair rate has dropped by 50 percent for U.S. Ford, Lincoln and Mercury vehicles since 2004.

To view Ford’s performance in TrueDelta’s Car Reliability Survey, go here:

TrueDelta Car Reliability Survey results

Of course, the factory warranty is only three years on Fords, and four on Lincolns. How will these new models hold up after the warranty expires, as has recently been the case for the 2005s? With prompt quarterly updates, TrueDelta will closely track these cars as they age.

I’ve been hearing for some time that the site isn’t the easiest to navigate (to put it mildly). We’ve been making tweaks here and there for some time. But more remained needed.

So I’ve spent much of the past few days making some additional changes:

1. Box near the top of all results pages that includes links to the other results pages for the model
2. Vehicle Reliability Survey results table now has buttons to sort it at the top, rather than below the table
3. Links back to the top of the page inserted periodically through the longer pages
4. Log in on results pages now returns you to that page
5. Same improved format applied to all results pages

Future improvements will focus on the data input pages and the results themselves.

I recently came across an interesting question on a forum for the Mazda6: at which point did your car stop feeling new?

More pointedly: when does a car start feeling old, and what change makes it feel that way?

Repairs are one thing. But what many people really want to avoid is the feeling that they’re driving a piece of junk. What leads to this feeling with a car? How does it vary by age and source for different car models?

If we can nail the answers to these questions down–which won’t be easy–this might be a statistic we can compile and track by car model and model year.

So, anyone have thoughts or suggestions?

When we posted the first set of results for the Vehicle Reliability Survey, only 35 models were included (and only 21 if you weren’t logged in). So it made sense to provide all of the results on a single page, in a single table.

Now, as we prepare the tenth set of Vehicle Reliability Survey results, this format has become impractical. The February results will include nearly 400 models, over ten times as many as that first set. A 400-row table is a bit hard to dig through.

So we’ve created a Vehicle Reliability Comparison page for each model in the results. These new pages display the Vehicle Reliability Survey results for the model, plus the results for up to ten competing models (up to five if not a logged-in member). The table can be sorted by repair rate, model year, and so forth.

A column has been added for the “delta,” the difference in reliability between the focal model and its competitor.

This should make the results much more accessible. Have further suggestions? Shoot us a comment.

My first time on TV, as part of Fox News coverage of the Detroit auto show (NAIAS). And these guys were real pros. A joy to work with them, and very educational.

As it becomes clear that auto sales aren’t going to be picking up any time soon, even Toyota is relying on rebates more than ever before. And, unlike six months ago, small cars are also getting significant cash on the hood. You’ll find a $1,500 rebate on the Corolla, a $1,250 rebate on the Matrix, and even a $500 rebate on the Prius. No, not big money compared to the $5,000+ rebates on some conventional SUVs–that segment remains extra dead despite the collapse in gas prices. But these are the largest rebates I’ve ever seen on these models. I was especially surprised by the $500 on the Prius–Toyota’s signature hybrid has never had a rebate before.

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, displacing 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.