Ford Agrees To Preliminary Terms with Canada’s CAW Union

By Chris Haak

04.29.2008

In an interesting development, considering the difficulty of negotations in late 2007 between the Detroit 3 and the UAW, plus the increasingly belligerent statements from the CAW’s leadership (particularly its president, Buzz Hargrove, pictured) about how it would <em>never</em> accept some of the concessions that the UAW agreed to in its historic negotiations, Ford and the CAW have agreed to a framework for a new long-term labor deal nearly five months before the current pact is set to expire.  The current agreement is set to expire at midnight on September 16, 2008.

While the agreement is not the final version, the parties have hammered out the major financial issues, including wages, benefits, and pensions.  Once local agreements are bargained (expected to occur in the next week), the agreement will be presented to rank-and-file membership for a ratification vote.  The local agreements cover items such as skilled trades and health and safety issues.<span class=”fullpost”>

Although Ford has not yet released specific terms of the framework, the CAW said Monday that base wages are frozen and temporary lower starting wages (similar to those in the UAW agreements for new hires) are established for the first time.  However, in a break with the pattern set by the UAW, the CAW did not concede a two-tier wage structure.  Mr. Hargrove vehemently has said over the past several months that the CAW would never, ever accept a two-tier structure.  As an outside observer, I thought that he’d have no choice, but apparently, he got his way on that issue.  Finally, the endangered St. Thomas plant, which builds the body-on-frame Crown Victoria, Grand Marquis, and Town Car will remain open at least until the end of the agreement, which will expire in 2011.

The deal is important for Ford, which is depending on CAW workers to assemble some of its important, high-profile launches later this year, including the Ford Flex crossover.  The UAW’s concessionary contracts late last year, coupled with the weak US dollar relative to the Canadian dollar also increased pressure on the CAW, because it was becoming much more expensive to build a vehicle in Canada than in the US.  (See related article <a href=”http://www.autosavant.net/2008/04/us-is-suddenly-low-cost-manufacturing.html”>HERE</a>).  Although at the current exchange rate, CAW employees will still receive about $7 per hour more in pay and benefits than their UAW counterparts under their new contracts (about $67 per hour for the CAW versus about $60 per hour for the UAW, according to the CAW), the CAW justifies this disparity by stating that their workers are more productive than UAW workers.  However,

Ford will give each worker a $2,200 signing bonus (called a “productivity and quality bonus”) upon contract ratification, plus another $3,500 cash payment in January 2009 in return for giving up one week of paid vacation going forward.  It also includes improved buy-out offers for employees who would like to take the cash and run.

It will be interesting to see if talks with GM and Chrysler, each of whom are bringing their own wish lists to the table, and neither of whom have immediate high-profile launches scheduled of Canadian-built vehicles in the next few months, progress as quickly or follow the pattern set by Ford and the CAW.  Did Ford hurt itself or help itself by settling unexpectedly quickly?  On one hand, they averted a labor stoppage that could torpedo the Flex’s launch, but on the other hand, they may have been able to wring more concessions from the CAW had they spent more time bargaining or at least driven a harder bargain.

2008 Lincoln MKZ AWD Review

By Chris Haak04.02.2008Last week, Lincoln provided a loaded pearl white MKZ AWD for me to evaluate. I was eager to check out the MKZ, since it’s a good looking car and seems to have a lot of great features on paper. Not only that, but I was dying to finally get a chance to try Ford’s SYNC system, which of course was developed in partnership with Microsoft.

The MKZ that I drove had every option available, including chrome 17″ wheels, DVD navigation, HID headlamps, the interior satin/aluminum package, THX II Audiophile Sound, heated and cooled seats, and a power moonroof. Overall, the car had about $6,000 in options added to its $33,165 base price.

Exterior
The MKZ is a handsome car, particularly in the front end. Of course, those in the know are aware that it’s basically an upgraded and rebadged Ford Fusion. The two cars share no visible interior parts, and the MKZ’s exterior is unique except for the area between the A-pillar and C-pillar (the doors and greenhouse). The problem with the MKZ’s shape is, however, that for a car that was introduced in the 2006 model year (as the Lincoln Zephyr, a name which only lasted one model year until the goofy MK_ names began), the styling is starting to look a little dated already. The center section of the car is very bland, with a shape as forgettable as nearly any other midsize sedan, such as a Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, or a Ford Fusion, but with a windshield whose base is pushed forward very far so that it’s less upright than it would be in a traditional sedan. The front clip is not only attractive, but unique-looking. The large chrome grille is its prominent feature, and it has a style that doesn’t look anything like an Asian or European vehicle. In the back, a very large Lincoln crosshair logo is one of the car’s most prominent features, but aside from that, it’s difficult to tell what kind of car it is. The taillights are arranged horizontally, but aren’t very interesting to look at.Interior
Although the MKZ isn’t an unattractive car, its best side is probably the inside. My tester was equipped with a two-tone tan interior that looked downright opulent. The seats were a light hue, nearly a creamy white shade (called “sand”) and the fronts were perforated leather. Neither my wife nor I were crazy about the aluminum-looking plastic covering the entire center stack, including radio and HVAC buttons, but Lincoln has been consistently using it for a few years in most of its models. Finally, the steering wheel was about 25% too large for my liking. I’m not sure if Lincoln shares the MKZ’s steering wheel with the Navigator, but it certainly felt like they did. The dashboard was a little too angular for my liking, but at least the entire thing was covered in a padded material. I actually enjoyed poking around at a soft dashboard, because it’s not a feature one sees very often in the new car market in 2008.However, that dashboard whose shape I disliked and whose texture I liked also was far too high for my taste. At 6’4″, it’s unusual for me to feel small when sitting in any vehicle, but I constantly had that feeling in the MKZ. The cowl is too high and the bottoms of the side windows are too high. While it helps the car’s exterior styling to look more modern, it struck me as a “function following form” choice from Ford’s designers. The high cowl reminded me of my grandpa’s old 1983 Chevy Impala’s, and the high window opening made patronizing drive-up windows a difficult feat. More than once, my hand hit the top of the door panel rather than making its way through the window to transact business. I unscientifically compared the dashboard height of the MKZ against my 2004 Accord, and the MKZ’s dashboard was aligned with my chin, while the Accord’s was aligned with my rib cage. That’s a difference of several inches, and made it difficult for me to find a driving position that combined clear sightlines with appropriate legroom, while preventing my hair from scraping the ceiling.

Other than my gripes above, the interior overall was excellent. The seats were comfortable during several hourlong commutes, the automatic climate control worked flawlessly, and the THX II stereo sounded great. SYNC also worked as advertised. I was able to connect my 5G iPod using its USB cable in about five seconds (the SYNC connections are inside the console as pictured to the left), and also successfully tested the standard 1/8″ line-in jack with my portable XM radio. SYNC had trouble connecting with my LG cell phone, but although I initially blamed the problem on SYNC, the phone was unable to re-connect to our van’s Bluetooth hookup either, and my wife’s Nokia cell phone connected to SYNC in less than a minute. I only had two problems with SYNC. The first was that the voice recognition could get tedious. If I wanted to play a specific U2 song such as “Vertigo” from my iPod, I’d have to push the voice button on the steering wheel, wait for a chime, say, “Audio System,” wait for another chime, say “User Device”, wait for another chime, then say, “Play song “Vertigo.”" It’s a shame that the system makes you navigate to the “User Device” each time you want to do something with it; I would have preferred that it just assume I wanted that selection after choosing it once. The other problem I had with SYNC is that after turning off the car, it always forgot what I had asked it to do previously. So, if I had asked it to “Play artist Coldplay,” it would do that perfectly, and show which track it was playing out of 30-some Coldplay tracks in my library. However, once I got back into the car after work, it would resume the previous Coldplay song but would not move onto the next or previous selections. Hitting the “next track” button on the radio or on the steering wheel would just begin that track again. If the system can remember what song it had been playing, I wish it had been able to remember the rest of my earlier request when turning off the car. Otherwise, SYNC worked exactly as advertised and did a great job of voice recognition. Not only that, but it repeated trickier names like album titles without sounding too robotic or phony.

The trunk in the MKZ was cavernous. Although I didn’t have the opportunity to use it, the combination of a long load floor and a high decklid made a nicely-shaped trunk with plenty of space for nearly anything an owner would reasonably expect to need to carry in it. The trunklid also had gas struts rather than gooseneck hinges, so the cargo area was not compromised by large hinges that tend to crush the contents of some cars’ trunks.

We have both an infant carrier and convertible car seat in use in our family. Although both fit into the MKZ, it was impossible for me to find a comfortable seating position in front of the infant carrier that did not put the front seatback tight against the infant carrier. Generally, it is advisable to have a few inches of clearance between the two, but this was not possible in the Lincoln (although, ironically it is in my Accord). This issue was what forced us to trade in our SUV for a minivan last December; remember, my wife and I are both very tall, so more normally-sized drivers and front seat passengers may not encounter this problem at all. Note that the photo to the right of this paragraph shows the infant carrier base without the carrier itself in the vehicle.

Driving Experience
The MKZ’s 263-horsepower 3.5 liter V6 and six-speed automatic transmission proved to be a well-matched pair. I never felt wanting for power and never felt like I was in the wrong gear. Even on wet roads, flooring the accelerator from a stop did not cause any wheelspin. Part of that is due, of course, to the car’s all wheel drive, but part is because of the engine’s aggressive torque management program. Several manufacturers do this to help with drivetrain durability, but basically, engine power is limited in first gear at low speeds to avoid sending shocks through the AWD hardware and the transmission. In my opinion, Lincoln should either beef up their components or otherwise figure out a way to eliminate TM, because it felt like it was severely hampering the car’s off-the-line performance. Once TM stopped intervening, the engine noticeably perked up, and the combination of six transmission ratios and 263 horsepower led to quick swings of the tachometer needle within each of the lower gears when accelerating rapidly. Other than torque management, my only drivetrain gripe is the lack of any sort of manual shift option. In terms of forward gears, the choices are only “D” and “L” (also, there is a switch to turn off overdrive). It’s a shame to have six ratios but no way to select most of them manually.

The suspension tuning on the MKZ was a little too floaty for my liking, but at least it doesn’t feel like the last Lincoln I spent a lot of time driving – a Town Car – which gave the sensation of driving a body on frame SUV that happened to look like a sedan. Although it wallowed a bit over uneven road surfaces, it still handled decently, and the 17″ wheels and tires helped keep the car planted on the road.

Fuel Economy
The 2008 MKZ AWD is rated at 17 miles per gallon in the city and 24 miles per gallon on the highway. The all wheel drive hardware adds weight and takes away one mile per gallon city and FOUR miles per gallon on the highway cycle compared to the front wheel drive version (which is rated at 18/28), but of course adds foul-weather security for buyers. In my week with the car over about 300 miles of mixed city, expressway, and back road driving, I got 17.8 miles per gallon – pretty close to the city rating. Still, I was disappointed that the far larger Buick Enclave AWD crossover is rated at 16/22, or only about 1 mpg worse than the MKZ. Competitive vehicles such as the Cadillac CTS AWD and Chrysler Sebring AWD actually have similar fuel economy ratings, however. The lesson here is that buyers will pay a fuel economy penalty for the security of all wheel drive long after the payment book is gone.

Pricing
Pricing of the MKZ starts at $31,720 (including destination) for a front-wheel drive model. The AWD model adds another $1,870, bringing the price to $33,590. Options pushed the price of my test vehicle to $39,265 according to Lincoln.com (the window sticker for the car was prepared before prices increased slightly, and shows a final tally of $38,840). Incentives may bring actual transaction prices to a point several thousand below MSRP. The MKZ offers a lot of car and a lot of features, but I’m not sure that I’d personally be willing to pay $39,000 for the car that I spent a week with.

Bottom Line
While I enjoyed my week with the MKZ, I am convinced that Ford has the capability to do better, and in fact, the upcoming MKS (which is a larger, more expensive car that will serve as Lincoln’s flagship) probably is that car. The driving position and fuel economy were definite negatives, but the feature content and comfort level were the best parts of the car. I appreciated all of the technology that Lincoln packed into the MKZ – navigation, SYNC, all wheel drive, etc. – but found myself wanting for more usable interior space if it was going to use so much fuel.

My parents visited last weekend from out of town, and they were completely enamored with the MKZ. I’ve had a few nice cars in my driveway for testing over the past few months, but this was the first one they showed any kind of interest in. By the way, they’re in their late 50s and early 60s – I’m not sure if they’re the demographic that Lincoln is targeting with this car, but it clearly did hit them somewhere they liked.

Click HERE for more photos of the 2008 Lincoln MKZ AWD.

California Again Relaxes Zero-Emission Requirements

By Chris Haak

03.28.2008

Yesterday, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) voted to slash its requirement that the six largest auto manufacturers that sell vehicles in the state sell 25,000 electric- or hydrogen-powered vehicles during the 2012-2014 period by 70%, to 7,500 units. The six manufacturers affected are GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota, Honda, and Nissan.

This is the sixth time since 1990 that CARB has relaxed its original requirement that 10% of all motor vehicles sold in California be zero-emission vehicles by 2004, as technology for zero emission vehicles is either far too expensive for mainstream consumers to accept, or simply unavailable at nearly any price. The last time CARB relaxed its zero-emission requirements was in 2003. In fact, CARB’s admission that the rules were unreasonable – again, not for the first time, but the fifth time – again point to the fact that innovation cannot be legislated. For more evidence of that truth, look at how CAFE standards set in the 1970s increased fuel economy requirements, yet our nation’s thirst for petroleum continued nearly unabated through the 1980s and 1990s – and indeed into the early part of this century.

Other than the 7,500 true zero-emission vehicles, the same manufacturers will also be required to produce and sell about 58,000 plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in the same 2012-2014 timeframe. The previous regulations enacted in 2003 did not have any provision for PHEVs, because at the time, the technology was not thought to be feasible. Several manufacturers have announced plans to sell PHEVs in the US in the next few years, including GM (Saturn Vue and Chevy Volt) and Toyota (Prius).

While many see the news as a victory for the automakers, who lobbied fiercely against the higher standards, they were not exactly gleeful at the news. They were, instead, more reserved. Ford spokeswoman Jennifer Moore said, “We’re going to have to take some time and study it. The question is still what technology is ready and what is going to be commercially viable.

On the other side of the spectrum, Chelsea Saxton, the executive director of Plug In America, an advocacy group, said, “It’s a huge blow. They sent the message to the carmakers that they can always get what they want from the board.”

While automakers may have dodged the worst news for the moment in California, many pitfalls lie ahead. Among these are new CO2 reduction requirements that will effectively increase the fuel economy requirement for some new cars sold in California to over 50 miles per gallon within the next several years, and the threat of requiring that far more strict zero-emission vehicles be sold in 2015 and later. “For 2015 and beyond, we’ll adopt a new program that will probably be even more aggressive than what is currently in effect,” said CARB member Daniel Sperling, without mentioning any specific targets.

With falling sales, additional regulatory requirements, and expensive fuel, 2008 is not an easy time to be an automaker.

Scion Lineup Will Expand – But How Much?

By Chris Haak

03.27.2008

Although Scion’s lineup still has only three models (the xB, xD, and tC), sales have been down fairly significantly in recent months (2007 sales were down 24.8% compared to 2006, and are down 6.7% in the first two months of 2008 compared to the same period in 2007.

Initially, when Scion sales figures were comparing unfavorably to prior years, the brand’s management would attribute the drop to intentionally limiting supply to keep the brand “hip,” or to the new model changeover. The second excuse really never flew with me, knowing how brutally efficient Toyota production is. After all, they don’t let Toyota dealers run out of Camrys when a new model changeover occurs. More recently, however, Toyota executives have admitted that the launch of the two newest models, the second-generation xB and the new xD, was mishandled. In addition to that, I’d submit that those two vehicles are not meeting the requirements or desires of their buyers. The xB has become a larger, heavier, less efficient vehicle, yet has similar interior volume to the old model (albeit better crash test scores). In other words, they’re almost trying too hard. Keep that previous sentence in your mind for a moment.

According to Jack Hollis, vice president at Scion, the brand’s lineup size could conceivably double to six models in the coming years. The three existing models will probably remain in the lineup for the foreseeable future, but with expectations of flat sales (Hollis hopes to maintain a combined sales figure of about 130,000 units for those three models, similar to what they sold in 2007, but below the 173,000 sold in 2006). Additional models under consideration officially includes any “youthful” Toyota product sold anywhere in the world that could be federalized to meet US standards and buyer expectations. Models under consideration would need to have the potential to reach either 20,000 to 25,000 units, or 40,000 to 50,000 units – similar to what each model manages currently.

Back to the topic of trying too hard to be different and hip, I prsent the most recent concept car that Scion displayed, the Hako coupe. The Hako could be one of those future products. If it ever reaches production (and let’s cross our fingers that the gods of good taste strike down the idea before that ever happens), and if a production version kept the completely ridiculous vertical windshield and A-pillars, I don’t see Scion setting any sales records. Perhaps I’m too old to understand Scion, but I almost feel as if Toyota is intentionally making the new models hideous just to be “different” and to see what they can get away with. Now, if you put your thumb over the windshield in the above photo and imagine that it has a “normal” one, the Hako goes from being ludicrous to only being unattractive. Aside from the windshield, it would almost make a better xB than the actual xB did, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see Scion’s product planners trying much, much harder to capture the essence of the original xB when they go back to the drawing board for the third generation. Reminding consumers of the original xB was probably part of the reason for the Hako concept.

Another rumored possibility for Scion is that a vehicle similar to the Toyota A-BAT pickup (shown in Detroit this past January in concept form) could be a Scion when it becomes production vehicle. It seems to be a reasonable guess, since it’s small and efficient, as Scions used to be, with some fun, youthful touches. The other possibility for a production A-BAT in my mind is to call it the Prius A-BAT if the rumors of an entire lineup of Priuses ever come to fruition.

Regardless of what models are chosen – a small convertible and a non-pickup hybrid are other possibilities – it will have to be easily customizable by owners, with a wide array of accessories and performance parts available from the start at dealers. Let’s hope that Scion can get their new models to look good, and that they don’t ruin the handsome, yet somewhat dated clean shape of the tC when it’s restyled in the coming years.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

DOJ Approves XM-Sirius Merger

By Chris Haak

03.25.2008

Yesterday, the Department of Justice (DOJ) approved the merger of XM Satellite Radio and Sirius Satellite Radio, Inc. The two companies announced their intention to merge in February 2007 in a deal that many observers considered to be unlikely to be approved. There is still one major regulatory hurdle to clear, however – the FCC also has to approve the merger. Their action is expected in the coming weeks, and it is possible, though unlikely at this point, that the FCC could still scuttle the combination.

In spite of facing long odds initially (including an explicit rule from the FCC at the time the companies’ broadcast licenses were initially granted that stated that they may not combine), XM and Sirius successfully convinced the DOJ that they are not only competing with one another, but with other entertainment media, including regular broadcast radio, HD radio, iPods and other MP3 players.

Interestingly, the Justice Department actually ruled that the two companies did not really compete with one another. Their rationale, according to Thomas Barnett, the assistant attorney general for antitrust investigation, was twofold. First, a large number of customers come directly from car manufacturers, who are mostly locked into long-term contracts with each provider. GM, Honda, and Hyundai are in the XM camp, while BMW, Chrysler, and Ford are in the Sirius camp, so from the standpoint of making a choice when buying a new vehicle, the companies aren’t really competing. Investigators were also unable to determine whether satellite radio buyers at Circuit City and Best Buy were only choosing between the two satellite radio companies, or also considering alternative in-vehicle entertainment choices as noted above.

For its part, the FCC was believed to have been initially opposed to the merger, as was I, but apparently Chairman Kevin Martin has become more inclined to agree to it after the companies agreed to introduce less-comprehensive a la carte channel choices at a lower price than the normal $12.95 per month.

With the FCC’s approval, the companies will have to prove to customers and shareholders that they are actually improving their service offerings – giving them more programming options and better customer service. They also have to give something totheir long-suffering shareholders that has heretofore been elusive in the satellite radio business: profits. The companies face some formidable technical hurdles in getting more than a few of the other service’s channels into their lineups, as Sirius radios are not currently able to receive XM, and vice-versa.

Kia KOUP Concept Hints at Production Car

By Chris Haak

03.23.2008

Thursday at the New York Auto Show, Kia showed its KOUP (pronounced as if it’s spelled ‘coupe,’ of course) concept and strongly hinted that the car would soon see production. In fact, the press release (which you can read in its entirety after the jump) makes several mentions to features of the car being “realistic.” Also, it’s not difficult at all to visualize this car slightly toned down for production.

The Koup (I refuse to capitalize the name throughout this article, the same way I refuse to do so when referring to the names of Saturn vehicles) is certainly an attractive vehicle, with sporty proportions that finally give some weight to Kia’s years-old claims of differentiating itself from its Hyundai cousin through aggressively-styled, sporty vehicles. I do, however, have to call Kia out on the Koup’s overall shape, as it’s more than a little similar to a Honda Civic Si’s. The C-pillar treatment, however, is not the same as the Civic coupe’s. I’ve previously criticized the lack of originality in Hyundai’s and Kia’s design, but at least the Koup looks better than its potential inspiration instead of worse.

The Koup concept is based on the Spectra compact car, but has a far more powerful engine. According to Kia, the Koup has a 2.0 liter turbocharged four cylinder engine with gasoline direct injection. It’s rated at a strong 290 horsepower and 289 lb-ft of torque. Since the rear wheel drive Hyundai Genesis coupe will have a four cylinder as a base engine, is it within the realm of possibilities that this engine could find its way under the hood of a Genesis model? 290 horsepower and a flat turbo-fortified torque curve is nothing to sneeze at. In fact, GM is considering adding a 2.0 liter turbocharged direct injection four cylinder to the rear wheel drive Camaro’s engine lineup.

I find the Koup more attractive than nearly any Kia I’ve ever laid eyes on, yet after staring at it for a while, I’m disappointed that in spite of some original styling cues that will hopefully make their way to other members of the Kia lineup, the car’s overall stance and shape are very reminiscent of the Honda Civic Si that it’s trying to knock down to size.

Continue reading for the press release from Kia.

PRESS RELEASE

KIA DEBUTS KOUP CONCEPT AT 2008 NEW YORK INTERNATIONAL AUTO SHOW
Design Cues, Indicative of an Emotional and Powerful Driving Experience,
Reflect Brand Evolution

• Distinctive “check mark” shape furthers the performance-inspired appearance
• Realistic interior design makes KOUP a true driver’s car

NEW YORK, March 20, 2008 – Combining youthful exuberance with a sporty and sleek design, Kia Motors America (KMA) today globally debuted the KOUP concept at the 2008 New York International Auto Show (NYIAS) during a press conference at the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center. Illustrating the shape and evolution of future Kia vehicles, the simple yet bold and aggressive KOUP exterior is complemented by its realistic and sleek interior design. Originating from the Kia Motors America Design Center in Irvine, Calif., the KOUP concept embodies Kia’s philosophy of “Exciting and Enabling” with its balanced proportions and fluid design set to evoke an emotional driving experience.

“The Kia KOUP concept represents the future of the Kia brand and its dynamic vehicles that speak to our core philosophies,” said Tom Kearns, chief designer of KMA. “Kia strives to appeal to the emotional side of car enthusiasts who seek adventure and want to take a leap into the future with style and advanced technology, and the KOUP effectively delivers.”

First Glance

Curb appeal begins with the KOUP’s balanced proportions and fluid design. From the tab-shaped and purposeful upper grille to the high-tech and pragmatic headlamps, the front fascia’s form gives the vehicle a bold and aggressive stance.

The KOUP features an uncomplicated yet dynamic wedge shape along its sides stemming from its glowing, carbon fiber and black chrome enhanced LED lamp lenses.

While the KOUP’s overall form is simple and precise, it makes a design statement with positive tension created by a “swoosh” that swoops from the “C” pillar forward, down to the “A” pillar and flares all the way back around to the rear deck lid. A trailing horizontal lip along the deck lid tapers up toward the outer ends to meet up with the swoosh from the beltline. The rocker sill has a distinctive “check mark” shape and prominent wheel flares that give the KOUP a strong, lowered stance. The short overhangs and wide stance reflect its well-balanced and responsive character.

No element of high-style design is missing in the KOUP concept as illustrated by its greenhouse-integrated, panoramic-view glass with two panels extending from the windshield through the roof to the backlight, appearing as two parallel pieces of glass – similar to a fighter jet cockpit. Segregating the glass panels, an interior mood light runs the full length of the greenhouse. To further the performance-inspired appearance with sporty elegance, carbon fiber enhancements accent the KOUP’s chin spoiler, lamp lenses, cowl panel, side-view mirrors, rear bumper insert and rear diffuser, while flashy twin wheel spokes include carbon fiber inserts paired with an open design to show off the Brembo® calipers and cross-drilled rotors.

Inside the Cockpit

Conceived artfully and with graphic precision, the KOUP’s interior hones in on the desires of auto enthusiasts from the inward lean of the dashboard and Supervision instrument panel, enhancing the performance-inspired driving experience to the custom-designed, race-inspired steering wheel in front of a three-gauge instrument cluster. Carbon fiber accents on the shifter plate and seat tilt-adjust mechanism reinforce sporty performance.

Audiophiles and car enthusiasts alike will take heed of eight speakers, including large rear deck speakers matched to a juke box audio system, further harmonizing the driving experience. A built-in Bluetooth-enabled navigation system with Map On Demand (MOD) is just the beginning of the telematics services, including safe driving, car maintenance and life/assistance offerings.

The KOUP features a realistic interior design that integrates high-style materials, including rich and supple seat fabrics accentuated with concrete- and black-color trims. As a true driver’s car, the front seats contrast the rear seats with opposing colors and patterning and horizontal, padded silicone bars occupy the seat backs for extra comfort. High-tech details are integrated into the interior, including convenient smart key with push button start, and a six-speed automatic transmission with steering column-mounted paddle shifters.

Taking Flight

Powered by a commanding 2.0-liter Theta II turbocharged engine producing 290 horsepower paired with a GDI (Gasoline Direct Injection) twin scroll turbocharger for greater power and efficiency, the KOUP delivers astonishing torque of 289 lb-ft at a low 2,000 rpm sustained to 4,000 rpm. By injecting fuel directly into the cylinder under high pressure using the Kia GDI system, the intake charge is cooled and combustion behavior is improved. Improved combustion assures excellent fuel economy and low emissions. Lower grille openings enable additional air intake for extra power.

Built on a front-wheel-drive unibody frame, coil springs and stabilizer bars complement an independent front suspension featuring MacPherson struts and an independent dual link rear suspension to provide the optimal balance of ride comfort and engine responsiveness. An engine-speed-sensitive, power-assisted rack-and-pinion steering system adds the finishing touch for precise handling. In keeping with the KOUP’s sporty essence, Continuous Damping Control (CDC) for quick movements and sharp turns paired with a sport-tuned, four-wheel independent suspension and strut tower bar offer a tighter grip for more spirited driving.

Safety

The KOUP concept features all of the standard safety features offered in Kia’s regular production vehicle lineup including six standard airbags and a Tire Pressure Monitoring System (TPMS). Electronic Stability Control (ESC) paired with CDC stabilizes the KOUP for maximum contact with the pavement. The large 245/40ZR19 tires complete the KOUP’s impressive package. Also included is adaptive front lighting and cruise control, adding to the KOUP’s advanced safety technology.

The KOUP concept features all of the standard safety features offered in Kia’s regular production vehicle lineup including six standard airbags and a Tire Pressure Monitoring System (TPMS). Electronic Stability Control (ESC) paired with CDC stabilizes the KOUP for maximum contact with the pavement. The large 245/40ZR19 tires complete the KOUP’s impressive package. Also included is adaptive front lighting and cruise control, adding to the KOUP’s advanced safety technology.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

Pontiac Will Reveal G8 GXP Sedan in New York

By Chris Haak

03.17.2008

Over the weekend, the first official photos and information on the Pontiac G8 GXP performance sedan were released. Rather than the 362 horsepower 6.0 liter engine in the G8 GT (and available only with a six speed automatic transmission), the GXP has a slightly detuned version of the Corvette’s new-for-2008 LS3 6.2 liter V8 and an available six-speed manual transmission. The LS3, rated at either 430 or 436 horsepower in the Corvette, will produce approximately 402 horsepower and 402 lb-ft of torque in the G8 GXP application. (GTO and/or LS2 fans will note that these numbers are remarkably similar to the much-loved LS2′s (400 hp/400 lb-ft) as previously installed in the GTO and 2005-2007 Corvette). Aside from the powertrain enhancmeents, the only other significant mechanical alterations to the G8 GT to become a GXP are the addition of Brembo brakes and upgraded suspension.

Visually, the GXP is differentiated by only subtle changes; the front fascia is unique to the GXP model and a rear fascia diffuser is also exclusive to the GXP. Still, the look is far more tame than some of the HSV variants of basically the same car that are sold in Australia. I would have expected more differentiation between the GXP and GT (the GXP model will probably be several thousand dollars more expensive than the $29,995 G8 GT).

The powertrain enhancements are going to be nice additions to the G8 lineup; GM projects that 0-60 will arrive in 4.7 seconds and the quarter mile will happen in 13.0 at 108 miles per hour. Not only that, but the LS3 has proven to be a relatively fuel efficient engine in the [far lighter] C6 Corvette, so perhaps the only additional cost of choosing a GXP over a GT will be in the initial purchase price and not weekly at the gas pump.

The full press release from GM can be found below after the jump.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
PRESS RELEASE:
PONTIAC ANNOUNCES THE 2009 G8 GXP

High-Performance Flagship Combines Progressive Design and Powerful Performance

NEW YORK – Today Pontiac announced the flagship of its GXP performance series, the G8 GXP high-performance sedan, at the New York Auto Show. This 2009 model will join the Solstice, G6 and Torrent GXP models in Pontiac dealerships in late 2008. The G8 GXP takes the G8′s responsive driving experience, refined passenger environment and aggressive good looks to a new level. It also delivers an enjoyable driving experience, thanks to a 6.2L V-8 that produces in excess of 400 horsepower.

“More than just raw power, the GXP delivers the sophisticated yet exciting driving experience that enthusiasts expect in a car costing far more than the GXP,” said Jim Bunnell, Buick-Pontiac-GMC general manager

Engine performance

The heart of the G8 GXP is the 6.2L LS3 small-block V-8, currently rated at 402 horsepower (300 kW)* and 402 lb.-ft. of torque (546 Nm)* pending final SAE certification. This engine is the newest member of GM’s small-block V-8 family. It features a revised, larger-bore cylinder block, high-flow, L92-style cylinder heads; larger-diameter pistons; unique camshaft and camshaft timing; revised valvetrain with offset intake rocker arms; high-flow intake manifold; and high-flow fuel injectors.

The LS3 engine has an aluminum cylinder block with cast-in-place iron cylinder liners. Larger bores help create a 376-cubic-inch displacement. The block casting also features revisions and machining in the bulkheads to enhance its strength and improve bay-to-bay breathing. New pistons were designed for high-rpm performance.

New, high-flow cylinder heads aid engine breathing and are based on the large port and valve design found on the LS7 engine and other GM L76 engines. The larger-capacity, straighter intake port-design optimizes intake flow to the combustion chamber, an effect augmented by large valves, measuring 2.16 inches (55.0 mm) on the intake side and 1.59 inches (40.4 mm) on the exhaust side.

Pending final testing, the G8 GXP is expected to deliver 0-to-60 mph performance of about 4.7 seconds, and a quarter-mile time of 13.0 seconds at 108 mph.

Six on the floor

A new six-speed Tremec TR6060 manual transmission is optional on the G8 GXP. This next-generation manual smoothly transfers the engine’s power and torque to the rear wheels with a reduction in shift throw. The transmission features a host of refinements including premium gear synchronizers; stronger gears, housing, and bell housing; a single-piece counter shaft; and machined gear teeth.

The standard Hydra-Matic six-speed 6L80 automatic transmission is technologically advanced and robust. It uses a clutch-to-clutch operation and an integrated 32-bit transmission controller to deliver smooth and precise shifts. The six-speed has a generous 6.04:1 overall ratio that enables a “steep” first-gear. The result is strong launch acceleration along with “tall” overdrive ratios that lower engine rpms for better fuel economy and reduced noise.

A 3.27 final drive ratio comes with automatic-equipped GXPs, and a 3.70 gear is matched with the manual transmission. A limited-slip differential is standard.

High-performance suspension

The G8 GXP rides on the G8′s 114.8-inch (2915 mm) wheelbase with wide front ( 62.7 inches / 1,592 mm) and rear ( 63.3 inches / 1,608 mm) tracks. The four-wheel independent suspension is fully adjustable and is tuned for the highest performance in the G8 family. The GXP’s ride and handling was developed and validated on racetracks and highways around the world, including the famed Nürburgring racing circuit. It rewards the driver with sharp, immediate responses, as well as a well-balanced road feel during spirited driving.

The suspension employs a MacPherson strut design in the front and a four-link, coil-over-shock design in the rear. A direct-acting front stabilizer bar, decoupled rear stabilizer bar and lateral ball joints on the rear suspension deliver increased lateral stiffness for more responsive handling. The front suspension features fully adjustable caster, camber and toe; the rear suspension has fully adjustable camber and toe, for more precise tuning.

Steering and brakes

The steering rate for the GXP is tuned to provide immediate response with definitive driver feedback. Like the G8 sedan and GT, the GXP’s steering box is located ahead of the front axle line for a quicker, more direct feel.

The Brembo braking system matches the GXP’s boost in performance with an equivalent increase in stopping power. The system includes 14-inch (355 mm) vented front and 12.76-inch (324 mm) rear disc rotors, with special quad-piston alloy calipers in front. The alloy calipers on the rear brakes have single-piston actuation. The four-wheel disc brake system includes standard anti-lock brakes and traction control.

Wheels and tires

The GXP rides on 19-inch polished aluminum wheels with a special machined face. Performance-oriented summer P245/40R19 tires are standard, and a comparable all-season tire is available. Combined with the suspension and steering enhancements, this setup gives the GXP exceptional cornering grip.

Exterior styling

The G8 GXP exhibits strong Pontiac design cues. A unique front fascia with a lower splitter and a distinctive rear fascia diffuser contribute to its sporty look. The dual-port grille, fog lamps, bold wheels and confident, wheels-at-the-corners stance are all unmistakably Pontiac traits.

Interior amenities and comfort

The G8 GXP’s interior is driver-oriented with aesthetic and tactile details like instruments with a sporty appearance that match the car’s performance. Interior materials consist of satin and chrome trim and high-quality textured materials throughout. The instrument cluster glows with crisp, white light on the primary instruments. Pontiac’s signature red lighting illuminates the rest of the instrument panel cluster.

Standard comfort and convenience amenities include:

* Highly bolstered two-tone sport seats with color-coordinated gauge cluster and GXP embroidery
* Leather-trimmed steering wheel and gear shifter
* Power-adjustable front seats
* Fog lamps
* Alloy sport pedals
* A 230-watt Blaupunkt audio system
* XM Satellite Radio

The seats offer firm support to hold occupants in place during aggressive cornering. The standard heated leather seats were designed to deliver excellent comfort during long drives. They are available in Ebony or an Ebony/Red two-tone.

Safety

Maintaining the G8′s tradition of a full suite of standard safety features, the G8 GXP includes:

* Four-wheel disc brakes with ABS and traction control
* Electronic stability control
* Seat-mounted thorax air bags and dual-stage frontal air bags for front passengers, with automatic passenger sensing system
* Roof rail side-impact air bags for both seating rows
* OnStar
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Dieter Zetsche Confirms No New Maybach Products – Is the End Near?

By Chris Haak

03.14.2008

Daimler AG CEO Dieter Zetsche told The Car Connection in an interview that he has not, as of now, approved any plans to replace Maybach’s line of current models, which includes the 57, 62, and their special edition derivatives. The only recent news on the Maybach product front is the introduction of the ridiculous and tacky $1.35 million Maybach 62 Landaulet (which has a convertible top over the rear seat, and that Zetsche himself conceded is unlikely to move the needle in terms of sales for 2008). In 2007, Maybach sold 6.8% more units in the US than in 2006, but that was an increase of just 10 units, from 146 to 156. Since there are about 41 dealers in the US, it means that for their approximate $500,000 initial investment, each one is moving an average of just 3.8 cars per franchise per year. Since that’s an average, it seems likely that some are selling just one or two, or even none.

To me, the Maybach is not even a very attractive vehicle. As I said in my last editorial about Maybach about six months ago, the Mercedes-Benz S63 AMG offers a more attractive package for less than half the price. On top of that, the Mercedes has more modern mechanicals (the Maybach models are based on the previous-generation S-class Mercedes-Benz cars).

Zetsche also told TCC that although Maybach will likely turn out to have had a “negative return on investment,” it still has proven that Daimler can compete in the ultra-luxury arena with the likes of Rolls-Royce. I’d argue that when monthly sales in the US are scraping the edge of single digit territory, it’s not really proving any kind of success.

The same way Zetsche dropped hints about the sale of Chrysler before announcing that “all options are on the table” last year, it seems likely that he didn’t accidentally let the cat out of the bag about Maybach. I believe that he is intentionaly prepping the public for the dismantling of Maybach. Although the cars are extremely luxurious and expensive, they’re selling at a fraction of their projected sales volumes. Daimler AG already has several potential flagship vehicles – the Mercedes-Benz S-class, SL-class, etc. – and does not need the diversion of resources for little return that Maybach has become.

Fisker Karma PHEV to Feature Synthetic Engine Sounds

By Chris Haak

03.14.2008

The Fisker Karma plug-in hybrid-electric sedan that is expected to sell for about $80,000 starting in late 2009 will have an interesting solution to the potential pedestrian safety hazard that silent electric vehicle operation introduces. Company founder Henrik Fisker told Forbes Autos in an interview that the Karma will have several strategically-placed speakers both inside and outside the vehicle to simulate the sound of a “regular” vehicle. Actually, Mr. Fisker said one option the driver will have is to have a sound that is “like something between a Formula One car and a jet plane,” so that’s not quite a “regular” vehicle.

This is an interesting approach to the problem, and one that I’ve seen discussed before. Active noise canceling systems can already be found in many mainstream vehicles (such as, for example, some Honda V6 engines with variable cylinder management) that detect and cancel undesirable noises. In the Honda case, it’s particularly important when the Odyssey, for example, is operating in 3- or 4-cylinder mode rather than V6 mode. This begs the question, then, of whether drivers in other vehicles will someday be able to choose not only the soundtrack for background music, but also the soundtrack of their powertrain. This could get particularly important in coming years if V8s become more scarce; it is already possible to have a V6 as powerful as many V8s, and someday soon it may be possible for that V6 to make the same sounds as a V8 as well. The inevitable downsizing of the engine lineups for sale in the US over the next 10-15 years may make the idea of artificially enhancing the auditory experience an important piece of consumers accepting smaller – and sometimes less smooth and less pleasant-sounding – engines in their vehicles.

Fisker hasn’t revealed a lot of details about how the system will work in the Karma (which couples a powerful electric motor with a four cylinder internal combustion engine, and is said to be capable of a 0-60 sprint in less than six seconds), but in a premium car like the Karma, I’d hope that more than one “soundtrack” is provided. A few of my favorites, which I’d choose different days depending on my mood and other circumstances, might be:

• completely silent operation
• a 1967 Corvette with the 427/435 horsepower V8 and side exhaust
• Honda J30 3.0 liter V6 (I love the sound of this engine, though I may be partial)
• jet powered dragster

The other issue is, the experience of driving a conventional car is not all about the acceleration and the sounds; vibrations (both internally generated from the drivetrain and externally sourced from the road surface) play a large part in how the driver connects to the car. To that end, I’d suggest that Fisker also consider some sort of vibration system. I know it’s possible, since I just drove a 2008 BMW 535xi with a lane departure warning system that vibrates the steering wheel to warn the driver of a “lane violation.” Adding that dimension to the Karma, if done well, could cause owners to forget that they’re driving something with such an unconventional drivetrain, at least until they get 50 miles per gallon from a stylish, fast car.

I might be interested in driving a vehicle with a “synthetic” V8 if it had something else under the hood and similar performance to a “real” V8 with better fuel economy. I’m not sure what other sounds I’d want to have added to my car’s soundtrack, as long as they were realistic. Manufacturers might even sell downloadable sounds, similar to the way cell phone companies sell ring tones.

XM and Sirius Still Think Their Merger Will Be Approved

By Chris Haak

03.13.2008

Yesterday at the Bear Sterns Media Conference, Sirius CEO Mel Karmazin told the audience that he still believed the merger would pass regulatory scrutiny (both the Department of Justice and the FCC have to approve the merger before the companies can proceed with it).

Although I was initially opposed to this merger, figuring that having a single satellite radio company in the US would give it too much pricing power and no motivation to compete on either content or service. Although I still have concerns about the competitive issues surrounding this merger, over time, I have become less concerned about it. Maybe it’s just the extremely long amount of time between when the merger was announced (in early 2007), and maybe it’s the fact that the companies have revealed proposals for their post-merger service offerings. At least initially, the monthly price will remain the same ($12.95) for each service, but some Sirius content will be added to the XM lineup, and some XM content will be added to the Sirius lineup. There is also likely to be a premium service level that gives listeners all Sirius and all XM channels for a higher price (though less than the cost of a double subscription today).

I’m hopeful that if the merger is allowed to proceed, that customer service will not be affected. After my experience this past week trying to activate an additional radio (a Pioneer Inno), which involved three failed website attempts and three phone calls to customer service before I was fortunate to get a representative who knew what she was talking about, and she was able to resolve my issues, I really hope for XM’s sake that customer service doesn’t degrade further from its current level.

While it’s impossible to tell whether Mr. Karmazin is just trying to ratchet up pressure on regulators to complete their review of the merger (which was originally supposed to close by the end of 2007) or he actually knows something about the status of their application, it stands to reason that a decision probably will come down soon (after all, the government can’t just leave two large companies hanging in uncertainty forever).