Thanks for the excellent site (I have been reading since the late ’90s).

I appreciate your analysis of how global warming affects the automotive industry. Because I am from the US, I was wondering how you view Bush’s strong focus on ethanol as an alternative fuel. It seems that most public research dollars are being spent here, so hybrid “plug-in” technology (and, by extension, solar and wind power) are left out.

Realistically, I think that ethanol is better than gasoline because it does not involve the creation of new C02. (In my understanding, the CO2 released from burning ethanol is reabsorbed by the plants used to produce the ethanol in the first place. I heat my house with wood for similar reasons.) However, I recently came across an article stating that ethanol burning results in air pollution (excluding CO2) that is just as bad, if not worse, as pollution from burning gasoline.

Also, the major crop used to produce ethanol today is corn, so as ethanol production has increased, corn prices have risen. This may not matter much for rich Americans, but might be a problem for poorer countries.

What are your thoughts on Bush’s policy of promoting ethanol as the answer to car-based greenhouse gases?

However, it misses some points. First, the car’s share of total CO2 emission has fallen dramatically since 10-15 years, at least in Western Europe. If other industries would follow it, our problems were by far not as serious. And cars and fuel are already heavily taxed. Has anybody studied wheter how much would the CO2 reduction of other industries cost compared that of the car industry? Seems a reasonable question when China opens a coal plant every week without any environmental measures. And that is where we might ask how environmantal friendly are those fuel cell and plug-in cars. Splitting H2O costs energy. Plug-in cars get energy from CO2 emitting plants as well (if not from a nuclear or water plant).

Even purchasing a car means a big deal of CO2, manufacturing plants emit as much CO2 per car as the car itself during the half of its lifetime. So you are more eco friendly buying a used v8 petrol car, than with any so-called eco car as brand new!

Anyway, let me agree with the other comment how good this site is. Working in the automotive industry i also find it highly useful and entertaining. For getting into this industry i can even say it was “invaluable”. By the way, AutoZine is 10 years old, any special article to celebrate the anniversary?

You really got the points and I believe most car enthusiasts understand nowadays’ car industry situation and agree what you say. More importantly, in fact, all car makers knows who made the problem and how to fix too. But the question is, if governments don’t put the visible hand in, they really don’t care.

I would say today’s SUV phenomenon is the resurrection of 60’s American muscle car: Big (thus heavy), thirsty, low technology, questionably reliability, and definite poor drivability (Everyone knows BMW X-series and Mercedes ML-class don’t have offroad ability. Yet no one see the need of Porsche Cayenne’s real offroad power for daily commuting).

However, why and what makes car makers dig out this “rest-in-peace” idea from the tomb and eventually become the hottest car segment in the world?

After the energy crisis, Japan car makers once became the biggest winners because their low fuel consumption belief, plus low production cost and low maintenance cost, prove people are sick of American dinosaur and European poor reliability characteristic. However, this game plan doesn’t last long. Japanese cars couldn’t do much for the then-biggest car market United States due to the cheap US$30/barrel oil. “Fuel-Saving” marketing strategy was just a joke. “Reliability” just did kick some European players out but the Big Three was still protected by patriotism. At least the Big Three didn’t feel the market eaten by foreigners was a big deal.

On the other hand, truck (the father of SUV) market is really a big market in States for a real need. Many farmers and construction workers use truck to transport their products and commute, especially there’s some roads are not real road in rural area. Eventually, their kids grew up and lived in cities but their childhood memory made them to buy a truck to cure the homesick. When they made more money, they still want a truck, but this time they want trucks with luxury stuffs. That detonated the big band of SUV market.

Of course, during the good old days (I mean 80’s and 90’s), it seemed that every kid can afford a car at the time. Gas’s cheap, car’s (up to BMW 3-Series) is not a big deal, more importantly, car insurance’s nothing. It’s not hard to see teenagers drive Mustang to work in McDonald’s, 325i to colleges. Yes, 300ZX, NSX, RX-7 Supra were expensive, but you still could do a lot of “fast and furious” things to a Civic in you own garage.

However, good old days was good old days, it’s gone with the wind. The gas price rises like crazy, so does car price. But the salary didn’t even match the inflation. The worst is car insurance, it becomes sky high after uncountable claims by youngster car accidents.

Today, most university graduates just can ask, “Mom, can I borrow the car (Actually, it’s a minivan) tonight?” or “Dad, can you drop me school tomorrow?” It becomes a cool thing if one of their friends buy a conservative Corolla. Why not a “more aggressive” Civic? “Aggressive” in car insurance means risk!! Muscle cars becomes baby boomer’s toy. Even Volkswagen becomes premium brand, BMW 3-Series is an absolute dream car. However, when these young people promote to young professionals, their toy car dream’s gone. They want mature identity. They don’t want to jump out a car that others think they’re still a kid. They want something make them feel they’re on top of people, SUV become the second to none choice. I guess it’s the reason why Honda claimed “due to the market shift” and declare the death of Integra/RSX. The fact is Silvia, Celica, Prelude, MX-6, MR-2/MR-S passed away before her. The death of Integra/RSX just annouce the end of “giant killer” age in North America. Civic Si? I found a lot of Civic but only tiny pieces of those wearing Si batch, comparing just one decade ago.

Incidentally, their decision really match car makers’ worry. After sedan, coupe, convertible, hatch, and even minivan… what did they need to do to explore “new market”? Especially European players, their high development and labor cost stop them exporting skinny-profit small cars to States. (I never understand why they don’t build factory in North America to make small cars to save labor and freight like Japanese do.) Japanese plays it so well. While head-scratching, eventually Mercedes invented American built ML-Class which opened a “new” car segment. Obviously, other car makers never thought Jeep, GM and Land Rover are innovators.

The game was playing very well. Other manufacturers follow leader’s path happily. BMW and Porsche rolled out the fake and real offroaders. Toyota and Mitsubishi transform their utilities to SUV with sedan interior. Nissan and Honda wants a piece of cake of course. And it even attracted new kids Korean Hyundai and Kia. Who still remember the taste of bread and butter?

However, when everyone feels ridiculously hot one day, they point the finger to cars’, specifically SUV’s, exhaust pipe, Who mess the profitable market? The oil companies? The car makers? The governments? The customers? Or the unfriendliest environmentalists? Whatever, the old game’s done and new rule comes. I think Japanese are so ready for the new battle. While American still struggles the internal problem, do they really have money and energy to deal with the upcoming global warming tide? I wish the Chevrolet Volt can save GM. How about Ford? Mazda2 and Escape Hybrid are definitely not the ultimate solution. I would skip Chrysler for its unknown future.

How about European? I would put it two ways: on engine wise, they are a bit rush but they still have diesel technology to support for a while. Hydrogen and other fuel cell technologies are not going to be mature in near future. And other auxiliary technologies mainly helping gas and diesel engine which definitely not the perfect solution.

On the other hand, how about reducing weight? I think it’s European car makers’ biggest headache. Throughout so many years being chased by Japanese (and now Korean, and soon Chinese), they make cars with “value” to keep themselves on top of the industry. More solid (thicker metal), more comfortable material (extra weight), better design (Thank god. It might not come with weight penalty but really sells). I had driven many Japanese (Honda/Acura, Toyota/Lexus, Nissan/Infinite, Mazda, Subaru) and German (VW/Audi, MB, Bimmer/Mini) cars. I really found German makers seriously put effort to make you love their cars. Every manufacturer has their own driving character and their models have similar characteristics but you still can differentiate which is which. Other than driving, they also work so hard to keep you in the driver seat and never want to turn off the engine. They always give you “value”. If you love these subjective values, you would also make excuse for their “minor” reliability (it’s much improved now) problems. However, for Japanese cars, I can’t really differentiate on daily driving basis. Yes, I can, but just limited. I can tell if I am driving an Integra/RSX or an Impreza RS, a Camry or an Accord. But it seems that all steering wheel is same light if not same size. Japanese cars are good, but definitely not something car nuts wants to die for.

I go too far… What I really mean is, if European cars really need to work on light weight, they really have a lot of pounds to cut. But is it what they wants? Does newly replaced material can maintain the luxury atmosphere? Can thinner body shell give such good sound when door close? Can new thinner and lighter cloth be a more comfortable seat cover at same or cheaper cost but give more expensive feel? Does there really cheaper and lighter materials which still give the better value exist? I really worry if one day European makers build cars in Japanese way.

Personally, I am favourable with European cars. I believe they will find ways to solve all the problem we wonder. But on the other hand, I still hope GM and Ford can fight for the next golden era. American have the ability and flexibility to learn, restructure, and thrive again. I believe 20 to 30 years down the road, Shanghai car show would be as important as Frankfurt and Geneva’s. Half century later, people would feel vomiting when they hear the name “internal combustion engine” since all they can remember were just “disgusting smell”.

Mark, I don’t know you personally. But I strongly feel your heart in car industry. From your technical school, I learn more than when I was in real engineering school. I’m buying a car soon and your review MUST influence my buying decision. I have no idea where you can find time and effort to maintain AutoZine after real job and family, in addition of tons of car magazine reading and digesting. If you have 25 hours a day, please let me know how.

Please keep up, I feel fortunate to enjoy some material like this, for free… or should I say “invaluable” be more appropriate?

Best regards,
Kit

By the way, I’m not sure if you realize this but it sure sounds exciting. BMW 2.0L four cylinder turbo diesel engine:

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/03/24/four-cylinders-400-nm-bmws-new-turbo-diesel/

Driving constitutes an important part of life quality for me and I’m not giving it up no matter what. I am all for eco-friendly vehicles but let’s just keep things in a healthy perspective…even if I dumped my Volvo and switched to a bicycle(unlikely) my efforts to save the planet would be washed away within a single shift of an average U.S. or Chinese factory.

BTW - the President of the European Commission himself owns a VW Touareg. Questioned by the journalists, he said it was his wife’s choice lol…

In regards to the Audi A2, it’s failure was a way to tell Audi how not to market an eco car. Audi should have tried again, but this time adding more mass market appeal by increasing the interior space, keeping the shape and replace the expensive aluminum with steel hence,solving the biggest problem of high price.Audi instead chose to stop and changed the philosophy of the next A2. If Toyota did not move forward with a second generation Prius, hybrids would not be as popular as they are today. The 1st generation Prius was also a financial failure, but perseverance made the second one a success.

Next time, the Jag designers should really think of molding some pipes and big chunky elements to represent the cylinders.

It is too bad that makers don’t lay bare the engines now-a-days, not even on many cheap models. However, I understand it. The average consumer now thinks that engine covers ARE the engines. Too bad no one knows anything about engineering, but can get a driver’s permit…