To move onward and forward – there’s some fun things in store.  I just visited one of the first car shows of the season here in western NY and have general observations and some highlights to share.  Beyond that – there’s updates to the stable, and the usual musing and ramblings on automotive events.

(<see? it worked :)

First thing’s first – housekeeping.  Since I haven’t even logged on to RR, there have been some updates to WordPress.  This means that I need to update the site… let’s see if it breaks.

Otherwise – look forward to more stuff coming down the pike.

Interesting way to pull this off... with both it's positives and negatives.

I know it’s been a while since we last posted, it’s been a busy time in both mine and Refined’s lives. Either way, look for the updates to start trickling back in, starting with this easy, but intriguing article push from Autoblog.

I read this article from the NAIAS on Autoblog the other day at work, and immediately started contemplating the application of a rim disc and caliper.  Both from the engineering perspective and practical perspective.

Engineering wise, as Mr. Abulsamid points out, this makes quite a bit of sense.  The lever arm for the braking action is much longer, and since torque= force* distance, thus making the force applied by the caliper that much more effective.  On a normal road going car this can mean lower unsprung – and overall -  weight for the same braking capability, whereas a vehicle that pushes the envelope a bit more could have much more braking power for similar weight.  This weight/performance gain is especially useful in what is slowly, or quickly depening on who you talk to, becoming a fuel economy driven world.

The big engineering negative that comes to mind is that even though the unsprung weight is being reduced, putting the weight further out increases the wheels rotational inertia. This makes the wheels harder to slow down or accelerate.  I haven’t looked at the equations in quite a while, nor am I going to look them up quite this second, so I’m not sure how much this trade off will affect driving dynamics.

On the more practical side of things, for someone who does his own work on cars, there seems to be a bigger issue than finding replacement rims – I’ve already acquiesced to that becoming a big expenditure if I buy any modern automotive conveyance *shakes fist and wishes for the return of steelies*.  If I have a flat out on the highway, and don’t want to or can’t call AAA, how many extra tools am I going to need to put on the spare tire.   Beyond that, will I lose braking performance or adversely affect my handling dynamics if the rim brake on the spare is smaller, or worse yet: non-existent?

I grant though, that this problem would probably be handled, and mitigated, by use of runflat tires, especially if they are going through the expense and trouble of designing such a braking system.

Chevrolet’s Current Lineup

So… where to start…. I guess cars are a good place. The Cobalt is a decent small car, and is neither offending nor enchanting. It fills it’s slot nicely.

Every experience I’ve had with the Aveo has left me feeling that it is a tin can of a car that should not be allowed on our roads as a Yugo replacement, let alone as an attempt at a competent sub-compact by a “modern” auto-maker. GM should bring in one of it’s more upscale Opels from Europe. If they want a bargain basement auto, offer it through a dedicated bargain basement brand – like what Saturn used to be.

I have no direct experience with the Malibu, but everything I hear calls it out as a decent mid-size with good features and comfort. It seems to slot right in with the Camrys (Camries?) and Accords of this world. The lack of an optional V6 seems to be bad decision on the General’s part though – granted the General’s website seems to be the only resource stating this, so I’m not sure what the truth of the matter is.

The Impala, though only slightly larger than the Malibu, seems to be Chevy’s full size option. It’s base engine is the tried-and-true OHV 3500 engine, but can be optioned up to the other stalwart of the GM stable the 5.3L OHV V8. Considering the antiquated platform, and name heritage of the Impala, isn’t it time the car got redesigned and given RWD at the same time?

The Corvette… it’s a halo car. ‘Nuff said.

Much of what Redneck said I agree with. I think the Cobalt, Malibu and the Corvette are doing fine as they are.

I’ve never been a fan of the Aveo but I’ve also never been in one like Redneck has so I can’t based my intense dislike of it on much of anything. The Impala is the one that I really think is a big disappointment. It’s dated in my opinion, and worse it’s FWD. The Impala is supposed to be RWD, always has been. It’s marginally bigger externally than the Malibu and totes around some bigger engines, but I’m not sure what it’s for other than almost being a big sedan.

As far as crossovers and “wagons” go, the offerings through Chevy are slim at best. Near and dear to me are wagons, of which Chevy really doesn’t have any of. Instead they have the HHR, which I like as a retro basket to compete with the PT Cruiser, especially as a panel wagon for commercial use – but a wagon it is not.

Crossover wise they have the Equinox and Traverse, which compliment each other nicely, and work for what they are intended to be: wagons for people who don’t want to admit they need a wagon, but can’t justify a SUV.

In the truck arena Chevy continues to bring out heavy hitters in the truck market, keeping up with Ford in the work-a-day half ton trucks. Though not as consumer oriented as the most recent Dodge Rams, these trucks hold their own in the light duty commercial and consumer world. Realistically, though many will not agree with me, all of the body-on-frame trucks and SUV’s should go to GMC with only a unibody Colorado and El Camino – which doesn’t currently exist but should – being part of the Chevrolet lineup. This would end a lot of the overlap between the brands and give GMC something back to have as it’s own. More on the structure of this when GMC’s turn comes up.

The only thing that might survive that shift would be the Avalanche, but realistically that body-on frame beast should be moved also, and a Ridgeline type “pickup” being given to Chevy if they want something to fill that niche.

Included in the shift to GMC would be the full size vans, so those don’t even bother mentioning here.

I agree with Rednecks overall restructuring of these remaining categories of Chevy’s lineup. I don’t think Chevy should be competing with GMC on heavier duty trucks, vans or SUVs.

GMC’s Current Lineup

Now for something I pretend to know about: trucks and SUV’s. Going off of what I said earlier GMC should only have body-on-frame vehicles, and should be the only GM subsidiary to have them – this is excepting Hummer of course.

This means everything stays but the Acadia, and the Avalanche moves in. DONE! Well, at least for the restructuring of the current lineup. They would probably do good coming up with something to compete directly with the new Ram 1500 considering its more consumer oriented leanings in the coil sprung rear and and toughbox bed storage.

Probably not surprisingly, I have little to say about GMC’s lineup. I think moving all body-on-frame vehicles to GMC (aside from Hummer) makes sense. GMC should be all business.

I think that may be a bit generous.  When you make as many things as GM does you’re bound to get a few things right once in a while.  My biggest problem with GM has long been that they are one of the worst abusers of badge engineering.  In some respects I thought that was improving, but now I’m not sure anymore.  Pontiac, in particular, is like my gauge for how stupid GM is being.  Pontiac G3?  No way.

Before he has an aneurysm… on with the show!!!

Buick’s Current Lineup

First off, I have to say what happened to the great Buick names of the past; though Refined is slowly convincing me that the names fit in with the Buick naming style… paradigm?… of the past. Beyond that, I am having a hard time telling the difference between the Lucernce and LaCrosse. The LaCrosse is overall a cheaper car but can be had with a larger more powerful engine while the Lucernce seems to have more technically advanced gadgets and a higher price tag. One of these two needs to be dropped, though that would leave a big gap in Buick’s lineup that I really don’t know how to fill.

The Enclave, though having a name that seems to fit in even less than the other two, is a crossover…. ’nuff said.

I agree: the names, although having no historical significance, are still Buicky.

I also agree that the LaCrosse and Lucerne don’t make terribly much sense to me. What differentiates them? The LaCrosse is meant to appeal to old fuddy-duddies and I don’t think it needs to change, but the Lucerne is not making sense. It seems like the Lucerne is being aimed at a younger, more technologically savvy crowd. I think that’s a fine idea, although the name does more to remind me that I need to call my Grandmother than make me think of a modern technologically advanced mid-luxury car. Additionally, it needs more power and it needs to be RWD. Somehow, although marginally larger and 200 pounds heavier than the LaCrosse, the Lucerne has less power in both the V6 and V8 variants. I also think a better transmission is needed. The 4speed might be OK for the LaCrosse but the younger crowd would rather have a 5 or 6 speed auto.

Cadillac’s Current Lineup

One thing that I like about Cadillac is that all their cars share a similar design language and a three letter naming system. It all gives it a nice sense of family without any weird standouts with odd wordy names.

Similar to Buick I’m a bit confused about that’s going on with the STS and the DTS. These two cars don’t seem a whole lot different. The best I can figure is that the STS is again trying to cater to a younger crowd than the DTS. Neither are trying to be RWD performance machines like the CTS. For the most part it seems Cadillac has tried to kick grandpa aside for a more youthful and stylish approach, but when you look closer it gets to be hard to tell.

The SRX is fine with me. I’m relatively indifferent about it, but it has the right look and name to fit in. Cadillac even made a point of its performance when it was announced so I suppose it’s meant to be reasonably quick which also fits with the new overall Cadillac image.

Unfortunately, there’s an elephant in the room. What’s worse, it’s elephant sized and has all the grace of an elephant with explosive diarrhea. The Escalade just doesn’t belong, and only obnoxious people buy them. This model needs to be eliminated, if GM really wants to keep it around, it needs to be migrated to one of their other brands.

Sad to say that elephant already exists in another brand: better known as the Chevy suburban, it’s umpteen-million derivatives.

Car wise, I do like the CTS for what it tries to be: the American 5-series/E-class fighter. It has the ragged edge that an American car needs, but it still keeps up with them – especially in the straights when that V8 is allowed to open up. The other two don’t even really fall on my radar, but I’m under 50 so I guess it makes sense.

Realistically, they should downsize the STS so they have a 3-series competitor, and modernize the DTS so they can have a 7-series competitor. This would bring them in line with what they are trying to compete with, and maybe make them more attractive to the American buyers.

Their crossover is a good upsize to the sedans, and as Refined pointed out, seems to fit in well with the family and performance ideals Cadillac is trying to espouse at this point.

Their trucks, like all luxo barge trucks, need to die. That is all.

I think that spreading the STS, CTS and DTS further apart to reproduce the 3/5/7 series BMW style lineup would be a good direction for Cadillac to go. They don’t need two big FWD sedans and I don’t think Cadillac should bother selling to the AARP crowd anymore. Like the CTS, they should all be RWD and perhaps offer AWD as well.

Since the Chevrolet lineup is such a screwed up mess, we’ll tackle that in the next post…. until next time!!!

Let’s put on our imagination caps and think of a world where the impatient Cerberus group wasn’t desperately trying to regurgitate the remains of Chrysler on to anyone willing to spare a few pieces of pocket lint and pennies.  In this imaginary wonderland Cerberus wasn’t going to dissolve the remains of Chrysler, but instead invest the time and money in a long term plan to save the irrelevant Chrysler brand, strengthen Jeep, and trim Dodge to a lean and competent brand.

I have always been a fan of the upstart underdog that Chrysler has been through the years.  Always small enough that they were willing to take risks, but not quite enough money to keep up with the bigger bullies from across town – Ford and GM.  Now they have been sucked dry by Mercedes, and left to rot with Cerberus.  This analysis will be in same vein as our earlier Ford break-down, just this time we have to suspend disbelief for a little bit and assume Chrysler will stick around long enough to be fixed.

Now to start the roast of the Chrysler lineup.

Chrysler’s Current Lineup

I must say, to me, Chrysler has always been the “engineer’s” luxury car. They were understated, powerful, had a touch of refinement, and great features that made the left brained among us go ooohhh, that’s a good idea. I would love to see the whole lineup work its way back to that. They don’t have the prestige of heritage to compete directly with other luxury brands, or pretend luxury brands (I’m looking at you Lincoln), but definitely should be able to revive this old cachet.

Starting with the cars, I have to say I quite like the 300C, it brings big, RWD, land barges back to the American blacktop with a bit of modern flair and aggressiveness. It is quite the keeper it just needs to be freshened up in the next design cycle.

The Crossfire, though quirky isn’t a bad car for Chrysler, its style just needs to be brought into the family fold. Give it a proper V8, take more Mercedes out of it, and kill that horrendous windshield surround, and we might have a winner.

Given that I have past experience with the PT Cruiser, I am biased in that I quite like the car – but it really does not fit in the Chrysler lineup. It made a great addition to the Plymouth line, but sticks out oddly in the Chrysler line.

Finally, the Sebring should be killed. Badge engineering that reigned for so many years has to end, and this dual copy of the Dodge Caliber should be an easy piece to make an example of. The only way I can see to keep the Sebring around is to throw the name tags on a four door version of an updated Crossfire. This way Chrysler has a full size RWD sedan, compact RWD sedan, and RWD slant back coupe.

Now, for the rest. The Town and country, yes I know not two lines ago I said badge engineering has to end, and it does, but the T&C makes a good addition to the Chrysler lineup. They have to differentiate the sheet metal, interior, ride, handling, and overall feel from it’s Dodge brother, but that’s all surface changes that “should” be easy to make. If they aren’t willing or able to do that, then it should be dropped and the upscale options added to the Dodge option sheet.

To replace or stand alongside the minivan is the Pacifica, which holds it’s own as an upscale cute-ute to transition between full-size SUV’s and “pedestrian” minivans and wagons.

Finally the Aspen should be axed along with all other upscale SUV’s, whether or not they sell well to the public, they are vehicles that realistically should not exist.

The biggest thing I would like to see from Chrysler is a better family resemblance between all the cars. Make that start and focus on a few good vehicles and they might be able to make it.

I like the 300c too, although I think it’s due for a bit of a facelift.

The Sebring as it currently exists is a rolling box of bad design and misdirected management. It needs to die and be reincarnated on a new RWD platform sharing the same design language as the 300c. The Crossfire, quirky though it may be, can continue on as the two door/fastback version of this new Sebring; basically blending the current concept with a new style. I’d also like to see a potential AWD variant of the Sebring in the future as well. The current Sebring convertible is such a design disaster that the idea shouldn’t be allowed for a good decade, but the idea of making the Crossfire a folding hardtop is appealing. (Even mentioning a Sebring convertible during this blackout period should be punished by death in a 2008 Sebring road trip.)

The only thing remaining should be the Town and Country. At this point it is so ingrained in the Chrysler lineup that it just can’t be eliminated. It too needs an update and a look that fits with its siblings though. I think the Town and Country could move more towards a big wagon style with four regular doors while still maintaining the stow-and-go interior. Whether it should be renamed the Pacifica or whether the Pacifica name should just die is a decision for another day.

Dodge’s Current Lineup

Aside from the Challenger, all the Dodge cars actually work. Everything has a place and a purpose and follows a unified design language. The Challenger obviously strays on design but that’s OK, it’s playing to its heritage. One thing though: don’t kill the Magnum… pleeeeaaasssseeeee!
Everything in the “SUVs, Minivans and Crossovers” category should be eliminated (Redneck will cover the replacement for the Durangos later) except for one thing. The Caravan minivan line shall continue to thrive as it always has, although would somebody please bang on the sheet metal a bit? The current design is awful.

I have no useful input on trucks except they’re big and noisy.

I basically agree with refined on the car, crossover, and tall wagon categories and just have to reiterate: keep the Magnum, and add: give it a manual and optional AWD. With that said… on to the trucks!!!

Durango, Dakota, and all these midsize, might as well be fullsize, abominations should be killed. They will be replaced later when I go over Jeep. Beyond that, I really can’t fault their fullsize truck lineup. The new 1500 rear suspension and box designs are industry leaders that quite differentiate them from the competition. They have the only manual transmission option in the heavy duty trucks, and the Cummins is a world renowned engine. Keep it and run with it.

As sad as it is, I can’t even touch the Sprinter vans since they are just a contract holdover and still belong to Mercedes, they might as well not exist in the lineup.

Jeep’s Current Lineup

Jeeps are solid front axle, off road capable, four wheel drive trucks. With that in mind, and to paraphrase Refined: as the categories show Jeeps are Jeeps and the rest are not, thus they should not exist.

So with everything else dead we deal with the Wranglers. The current lineup should be kept and expanded. On the short wheelbase platform there should be the 2-door as it exists. On the long wheelbase platform there should be the current 4-door, a LWB 2-door, and a 2-door pickup a-la the AEV Brute concept/kit not the J8 that is currently being paraded around.

From there they should offer upgraded hardware to bring at least the LWB models up to “1 ton” specification: dana 44 front, dana 60 rear, and leaf springs out back to locate it all. Drivetrain wise they should keep the Rubicon package across the board, and add a real diesel option. None of this euro VM Motori refined mess, but a clattery, loud, and torquey 4-cyl Cummins (okay that last might be a pipe dream).

With that, for the more refined among us who still like to venture off the beaten path, or over the curbs in the mall parking lot as it more often is, they should bring back an updated version of the original Cherokee. Lightweight, all unibody, solid front axle, capable off-roader, that is fairly comfortable for day to day tasks. Then base a Grand Cherokee off a similar platform if they still must have something upscale.

With this lineup, Dodge won’t need failing midsize suv’s and pickups while Chrysler Corp as a whole will still have the niche filled.

*chews on straw* yerp

Special Mention: Plymouth

At this point I would like to touch on reviving the old Plymouth brand. I don’t see it working as a mainstream high volume player, but they could be used as a testbed for experimental technology. Much like the turbine cars or yore, the new Plymouth could bring out anywhere from 50 to 50 thousand copies of a concept to see how it is received by the public. Examples of this technology would be hybrids, fuel cells, turbine range extenders, forced induction, alternative fuels, even fusion if they could ever get that far.

They should also push the envelope of styling, continuing and broadening the tradition of the Prowler and PT Cruiser. Maybe even reviving some of the dead concepts from all of Ma Mopar’s history, such as the ME412 (yeah right), Chrysler Atlantic, Dodge EV, and Dodge Demon to name a few. Obviously these cars would not have a common design style as I have been pushing for all the other brands…. but they’re not supposed to. This marque would be experimenting and having fun, but still getting things to market.

I’m not sure what there is to add to this, he stole my comments and posted them as his own anyway. I definitely like the idea of Plymouth existing under a stable Chrysler parent, but at this time there’s just no way they could pull this off.

Snap Judgment

Chrylser has big problems, Cerberus being among them. When Cerberus took Chrysler over it seems they thought they could make a quick fix and start raking in the money. This shortsighted plan has obviously backfired now their plan seems to have become sell off whatever is left as a bunch of little pieces. Fixing a car company as far gone as Chrysler was (and is), is a multi-year project. The gestation period for a new model is usually at least two or three years, and Chrysler really needs that kind of overhaul to survive.

I wish I could say he just stole that from me…. but there’s too many big words and coherent thoughts, I had issues reading it.

:redneckbig:

To start off the series we’ll look at the one who has gone the longest distance to help themselves already.  In going over all of the companies, and looking at their current lineup, Refined and I felt Ford needed the least amount of restructuring and help.

Somehow Ford seems to be getting some things right.  They’ve acquired Mazda and Volvo and both brands actually have a lineup of products that make sense.  There are a few things that need removing but on the whole Ford seems to be getting a hang of the “brand image” concept and making sure each brand has some sort of cohesive style or vision. The only tricky issue is what to do with Mercury, which seems to be a brand unsure of its purpose.

We’ll look at each of the brands in no particular order.

Ford’s Current Lineup

To be difficult, I’ll start from the bottom with what I know best – the trucks and full size SUV’s. The F-150 is doing well size and power wise, though they may have to do something about the carriage springs out back if Dodge’s new coil-sprung rear takes off.  The biggest thing in this arena will be to fast track some of the newer drive-train technologies such as hybrids, smaller diesels, and especially their new ethanol turbo boosted engine concept.

The Super Duty line is also doing well, though they will be hurting once they drop the manual transmission option from the books.  Their diesel engines issues, and possible seperation from Navistar, may hurt them, but only time will tell on that front.

E-series… kill it, burn it, and feed it to the pigs.  There are much better options in the Ford Europe lineup – such as the Ford Transit.  The only reason I can see to keep it is for the companies like Quigley and other RV and emergency vehicle upfitters who use the chassis as a heavy industrial base to many other vehicles.  It is a  much cheaper option than having job specific chassis like many were pointing to for police cars.

I really like the Ranger as a concept – a truly compact pickup.  Sadly the platform is very outdated and in need of much love.  Ford would do best to drop the current model and look into importing one of the excellent overseas variants – complete with diesel and chassis cab options.

Expedition and Explorer can stay, benefitting from the enhancements made to the F-150 drivetrains.  Sadly these vehicles still do have a use in hauling a full family out to the beach or work crew out to the site while towing a full load (though the work crews might prefer the now defunct Excursion or one of the million E-series variants).

The Escape seems to be a dated model now, trying to fit in between the Explorer/Expedition and the newer models like the Edge.  I’d suggest eliminating this model while keeping the Flex and Edge.

The Focus, Fusion and Taurus all cover a nice range from small to large sedan, but it would be nice to see them following a design and style that ties them together.  I’d suggest the Euro models as a base, as their Focus and Mondeo are not only excellent looking cars, but highly regarded models.  The Mustang is fine to keep on as it is but whatever the Taurus X is supposed to be… it failed.  Kill it with fire.  It seems like Ford just wanted an excuse to rebadge the Escape but I don’t even want to drive one to figure out what it is.

Mercury’s Current Lineup

Kill it all

Yes, there is nothing within the Mercury brand that we see worth keeping.  For too long it has been the redheaded stepchild of the Ford family, and will soon go the way of Oldsmobile and Plymouth if nothing is done about it.  Our reccomendation is take it where Pontiac should be going (more on that in the GM portion of this series) – RWD performance oriented automobiles.  A good start would be to bring back the Maraduer as a reworked Australian market Ford Falcon, keeping the turbocharged I-6 and giving it harder, more sinister styling.  From there see how it goes and expand on the theme.

Yes please.

Failing that… they could just sell it to the Indians… or maybe the Chinese would like it.

Lincoln’s Current Lineup

Lincoln, like Mercury (just not as badly), needs design direction.  With that in mind, lets take them luxury, where they belong – and kill off the SUV’s and truck, they just aren’t necessary.  Keep all the other vehicles and make a full size,RWD, unibody, barge to replace the Town Car.  The Town Car has a small place for the funeral homes and limousine services, but otherwise really has no place in the lineup either.

If Lincoln is to offer a large car like the Town Car, it needs to be a modern unibody design more suited to the refined status I think Lincoln should continue to pursue. The name Town Car is dated in light of the current Lincoln naming system as well, and needs to go.

Mazda’s Current Car Lineup

As Refined said at the top of the post, Ford surprisingly hasn’t screwed up Mazda; in fact they’ve made them better.  The only real changes we can recommend is dropping the Tribute and B-series.  Beyond that they could expand rotary availability, though something tells me that is just a pipe dream.

In all of their bumbling somehow Forlinmermazvol has managed to work with Mazda to improve their brand image and model lineup (with only two exceptions as Redneck mentioned).  Mazda and Ford have shared a lot of the same engine and chassis technology but by leaving Mazda well enough alone they’ve allowed them to develop a style and image that people understand and like.  Can’t say the same for the Ford name although they’re getting better.

Volvo’s Current Lineup

Once again Forlinmermazvol has done good work.  All of Volvo’s models and their naming make sense and fit in the brand and Volvo still retains that Volvoiness.  Redneck and I debated whether the XC models really fit in, but I feel (and think I convinced him) that they are more like overgrown wagons than SUVs which makes them seem like acceptable models for Volvo to keep.  Also, I really like that Volvo C30 hatch.

I agree with the C30, that is one quirky, but good looking little hatch.  I am also very impressed that their naming scheme both makes sense and does not contradict itself, bravo.  Though I take issue with their sideways I-6s and I-5s, it is a personal thing and I won’t hold it against them… the narrow angle Yamaha developed V-8 in the XC90 makes up for it though :)

Snap Judgment

Forlinmermazvol has done some good work but their domestic brands could still use some help.  They should talk to whoever they’ve got running Mazda and Volvo.  I think Ford is the only one of the Big Three that could get themselves on track and sorted out in the least amount of time (in spite of Mercury’s transition requiring a bit of work) and with the overall least amount of pain. That’s why we chose to tackle them first, the next two won’t be so easy.

I wholeheartedly agree, though all of the Big Three need help, Ford is seemingly the one in the least dire of straights.  They have an ever improving lineup with little to no overlap that just needs some direction and love.

:redneckbig:

SELL THEM ALL TO INDIA!!!!

Just kidding… Over the next couple weeks we’ll be putting up our ideas on what each brand should do in company specific posts outlining these thoughts.

Hope you enjoy :)

This delightfully quirky little car is called the Wildfire.

Hailing from China, these contraptions come with a two cylinder motorcycle engine, and can achieve greater than 60mpg.  For around $7000 out the door you can have this four door, three wheeled wonder and it really might be worth thinking about.

It will turn on a dime, and of course that Star Trek space shuttle look, incredibly light weight and the large amount of room on the inside (seriously, rear leg room is insane) make this look like a pretty killer city car.  Put on some studded tires -maybe a front ski- and it could make for a sweet winter wonder-mobile considering the driver sits on the engine.  It apparently can hit highway speeds but I wouldn’t want to be caught dead in one of these on the highway, which is probably exactly what would happen should you need to make any emergency avoidance maneuvers.

Redneck and I found out about this after chasing down one we saw going the other way down the street.  The owners told us about the local dealer and we fully expect to check it out and go take one for a test drive.  Mr. Redneck has some more on the technical details on this thing I’m sure so hopefully those will come out soon.

The only thing it’s missing is a retro flower power paint job, and maybe some bubbles coming out of the exhaust.

Honda and Nissan are joining Toray Industries to develop more cost effective ways of building auto bodies out of carbon-fiber rather than steel.  They say this should be possible by the middle of next decade and could shave 40% of the weight off a standard steel bodied car.

For Refined and myself, this is one of many things we have been discussing and I’m very glad to see it may be happening!

HONG KONG (MarketWatch) — Japanese auto giants Honda Motor Co. and Nissan Motor Co. have joined with Toray Industries Inc. to develop a new carbon-fiber material for use in auto bodies, aiming to mass produce cars that are lighter by as much as 40% than steel-built vehicles, according to a report Thursday.

The group aims to establish mass production technology for the new material by the middle of the next decade, the Nikkei business daily reported, without citing a source.

The joint efforts come during steep increases in iron ore prices recently, which have in turn inflated steel prices and raw material costs for automakers across the world.

Although carbon fiber now is several times more expensive than steel or aluminum, the price gap is expected to narrow because there is significant room for increasing production of the new material, according to the report.

If successful, the efforts will help produce lighter vehicles than can also improve fuel efficiency and reduce emissions.

Successful mass production would also be a big leap in the evolution of the automotive industry, as although it is tough and light, carbon fiber’s high costs currently limit its usage to concept cars and a select few high-end sports vehicles.

Article source