HETEROGENEOUS MUSINGS

Another game-changer has come to fruition. Doesn't it seem that every concept or production vehicle which a manufacturer debuts is the next great changer of the game?

Rrrrreally. Urban utility vehicles. Sport activity vehicles. Kite surfing vehicles. Personal transportation vehicles. It's a CAR, ok? Just a car, truck, van, or SUV, maybe even a crossover. But stop telling me that your vehicle is a game-changer.

There's good chance that you want it to be a game-changer because it's not so great at the current game being played. And this goes for everyone, not just the makers of the Flex nee Fairlane.

The Flex may just do well, but it does seem somehow disappointing after the Fairlane. Which is weird, considering everything is so similar. Something is missing, and it may be the Fairlane's urban look. The Flex has gone all country-avec-chrome. We'll wait and see.

------
General Motors American sales went down 4% in March. Ford dropped 9%, which actually wasn't as bad as expected. Chrysler Group's sales were not as bad as expected, in fact, showing some improvement from February. Honda and Toyota both produced over 10% higher sales, March-on-March. Nissan, Hyundai and Kia also posted gains.

-----
BMW's new M3 is as hot as ever.... LX570 is the new name for the largest Lexus. 570 reflects an engine with an extra litre of displacement when compared with the previous generation. The Lexus LX570 is a large veeehikul.... The cool Kia Soul will be produced.... As Bush and the EPA taper off hybrid rebates, Toyota is picking up some of the slack on behalf of Prius sales.... The Chrysler Group is now "officially" for sale. Check MLS and AutoTrader for all the details. Or not.

VOTE YOUR FAVOURITE CONCEPT INTO PRODUCTION

Talk about a new ways to create a great image... Chevrolet is allowing people to vote for their favourite concept (Beat, Groove or Trax) as a way to aid GM product planners in their quest to bring a small car to the people.

The Beat, at the least, appears to be fun to drive. Zippy little turbocharged thing.

The Groove looks terrific. They call it retro-inspired, but they had me fooled. Looks like funk/modern to me.

The Trax is an all-wheel drive runabout. Looks decent, but is likely the most unnecessary.

Click the link here -> gmsurveys.com to get to the website where you are totally entitled to vote; regardless of age, gender, or country of origin.

DON'T JUST TAKE MY WORD FOR IT..

Believe this guy, Stephan Winkelmann. He says, "The future is less about adding horsepower and more about improving the power-to-weight ratio. We need to get the weight down, use different materials, and improve performance and drivability."

Perhaps you trust The Good Car Guy enough to believe him automatically. But if you must have a second opinion, there it is. Mr. Winkelmann, President and CEO of Automobili Lamborghini. 'Nuff said.

If you, by any chance, become or are the Prez of a supercar maker - especially one as wild and aggressive as Lamborghini - then feel free to make the case for increasing horsepower. Otherwise, take what Mr. Winkelmann has said and run with it.

Here's the case: Almost every new car is heavier than the one it replaces. It is a rare treat to discover a new vehicle that weighs similarly to its predecessor, and a special delicacy when a vehicle weighs less than its forefather. For auto manufacturers to cover up their weight increases, they add power and torque. If they didn't, cars would be getting progressively slower with each successive generation.

Looking around at the cars of my family members, it's an easy thing to spot. My mother's car is a 170-horsepower Pontiac, since replaced by a vehicle with 200. My father's Subaru was replaced by a vehicle with 79 more horsepower available. My brother's car has 40 more horses than its progenitor.

The technology and research automakers possess in 2007 makes 10 or 20 or 30 more horses a somewhat easy thing to come by. Nevertheless, horsepower does cost money. And if the only investment into engine tech was to increase the internal combustion engine's efficiency, the lightweight materials divisions would receive an infusion of cash.

That's not just what I'm saying, the CEO of Lamborghini agrees. Take your car, however slow or fast, and strip 100kg away. Your car will be faster. Lamborghini has made good on their CEO's statement. The Gallardo Superleggera will save 22 pounds over the regular Gallardo in Europe. It will have better handling, more speed, and nicer steering. Can't complain.

EBAY PHENOMENON

As I type, there are 112 Ferraris for sale. On eBay. Right now. At this moment. As I type.

That's amazing. No, I'm not old-tech-old-fashioned-old-hat. I love eBay and its methodology.

One-hundred and twelve. 47 Lamborghinis. 46 Maseratis. 49 Rolls-Royces. 40 Aston Martins. Wouldn't eBay's demographic analysis be an interesting thing to see? Who is spending their time scouring an auction site looking for exoticar deals? Are they the same people who would otherwise go to the Beverly Hills dealerships?

What percentage of the vehicles, those which are basically new, sell for more than their MSRP? All four '06 Ferraris available at this moment are F430 Spiders. The oldest Ferrari available is a 1970 Dino. But of the 2.5 pages or so that show, approximately two pages are new or recent models.

Why aren't people satisfied with their Ferraris? It is interesting that there are only 56 Hyundais for auction now and only 153 Buicks.

eBay is an impressive tool. It tells you a lot about the modern day market price for just about anything known to man. eBay tells me that there is a new Shelby GT500 near my home with bids starting at $50,000 USD and a buy it now price of 60K. No bids have been placed but there are 53 hours to go. The seller has 100% positive feedback but only one buyer has left a comment. All the rest were sellers.

The provision for information is a sign of major progress. Dealers use the eBay. Teenagers use eBay. Old people use eBay. We buy, we sell, we search. We want. Long live the phenomenon.

SENSIBLE NAMING

Here is what a large chunk of the car-buying public thinks of Impala and Malibu: The Impala SS was semi-cool in the 90's and the Malibu hasn't even touched the c in cool yet.

However, at one time, the Chevrolet Impala and Chevrolet Malibu were hot cars.... when I was -20 years old. So the questions I ask must be valid. Is it sensible to draw on names which possessed greatness 30 or more years ago? Is it smart to assume that your sales will increase if you stop calling cars the Lumina, stop creating new model titles, and simply use the name of a good car from the 60's, 70's, or 80's?

And if that name is so great, why did you ever stop using it? Aha, because it began to lose value. And you, GM and others, are hoping with all your hearts that people will forget the bad days of the model and only remember the good days. So with some of us, you neither gain or lose nothing.

We don't remember the good ol' days and we can't actually remember the bad ol' days. Except in one instance. The Ford Five Hundred, certainly a pleasant car, does not lend itself to being loved by today's youthful car buyers. "Hey, I've got a great idea," somebody said, "Call it the Taurus."

Oh no. Don't do it. This move sends out shock waves of desperation from every corner of the Ford epicentre. Firstly, the Five Hundred wasn't good enough to sell as good product, so hopefully we will trick people into thinking it is a completely different car. Well, ya didn't trick me, Mulally.

Secondly, the Taurus was somewhat revolutionary when it arrived on the scene, lest we forget. Titled the best-selling car in the mid 90's. "But," someone must have asked, "if we banished the name once because it had lost its merit, how did it regain its status in the Ford pantheon?"

Whoever that hypothetical person who hopefully asked that question was received no answer. Apparently, the Ford Five Hundred will become the Ford Taurus because the Taurus has better name recognition. The most unfortunate shock wave of all is the simple fact that nobody recognizes that switching the name of a car midway through its lifespan is just so dirty. Unclean, yucky. It makes the Five Hundred look so pitiful and it forces the Taurus name to flaunt itself as an EMT that won't be able to resuscitate the patient.


Other offenses include the banishing of a good name, but in most cases that has not been a tremendously painful experience for the carmaker involved. But Integra, must we have lost Integra?

"THAT'LL BE 9 BILLION...THANKS AND HAVE A GOOD DAY"

Reports indicate that DaimlerChrysler has received offers of up to $9 billion with a b for their Chrysler arm. Any cheque with 9 zeros on the end of it sounds good enough for me, whether its from Magna or General Motors.

But oh must it sting. When Jurgen Schrempp orchestrated the 'merger of equals', the cost for acquiring the Chrysler Group was approximately $40 billion in 1998. With inflation, that works out to about $48,000,000,000. I'm not a mortgage specialist, but if that's your house aren't you really, really, really upset?

Let's take a look.

Purchase price - $40,000,000,000
Profits made (9 years) - don't laugh
Selling price - $9,000,000,000

It seemeth to me that what we have here is a loss of billions of dollars. $31 billion. Put that in perspective: If Mercedes-Benz had gained $31B and handed out freebies to every individual in the world, we'd all get a few bucks.

BIT PLAYER OR MAINSTREAM WANNABE? DISCUSS

Subaru is just one of a number of companies which treads a fine line between existing as a lovable sidebar or a successful mass-production carmaker. To make money, one must sell cars.

But what if the people who bought your cars previously purchased the vehicles for the simple reason of individualism? Subaru is a growing automaker, and its success in my neck of the woods is easy to see. They have infiltrated a market where people want practical vehicles - especially the kind that look tougher than they really are.

Saab attempts to walk this line as well, and does so less successfully. Jaguar hasn't been much of a moneymaker in years. It is interesting, however, that we hear all about it now that they try and sell more vehicles by way of more product lines.
Bentley is in another stratosphere, but consider this: three extra models-within-a-model, all priced significantly lower than their previous mainstays. Financial success followed for Bentley.

Even Jeep is part of this debate. Sure, Jeep has held up a lofty image over the years. It is a company whose image is enhanced when we see 25-year old editions covered in mud. Nevertheless, Jeep wants to sell more vehicles and more of those vehicles are supposed to sell to young women. What have we? The Compass and Patriot. Neither have completely impressed the media and neither really shout JEEP.

So, back to the Subaru question. The recent debut of the 2008 Impreza makes you wonder how strong of a Subaru it really is. Factor in the common assumption that it will be a more appealing car to the masses. It doesn't look as quirky, so perhaps the Scooby faithful won't pine for it as they may have in 2002. It doesn't look as quirky, so perhaps the Corolla-buyer (are there Corolla faithful?) will pine for it, as they did not in 2002. It will likely be a better drive, with improved handling and spunkier power delivery. But it's not odd. My thinking is that Subaru has already come firmly in touch with the mainstream, having already developed their faithful following.

This car is not apt to force the inveterate away, because that buyer has long since become addicted to Subaru qualities. Qualities which, hopefully, will not disappear with the frog-eyed headlights.

Which I kinda liked.