Recent Comments:
Suzuki bows out of 2009 Detroit Auto Show {Autoblog}
Jun 26th 2008 1:49PM Well, hot off the question regarding a Cobo expansion:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080626/METRO/806260455
I wonder how many of Kwame's friends will get contracts for construction? He has probably already sent text messages notifying them of the deal :)
California regulators shooting for 40 mpg by 2020 {Autoblog}
Feb 27th 2008 12:03PM If we're going to start mandating items to save energy and stop global warming, then why stop at 35 or 40mpg over the next 12 years?
We should also mandate that each American can only buy X number of square feet of home per family member. We should also require no single-family homes as they are less efficient than multi-unit dwellings. We should outlaw cutting grass. We should also set a limit on population boundaries so that nobody can move outside that area to keep commuting to a minimum. We should limit families to two children per couple. Everyone is limited to 5 airplane flights per year.
Yeah, they're extreme, and stupid, and I'm not saying the CAFE numbers are well-intentioned and may/may not save fuel. But what I am saying is attacking a national energy issue by focusing almost entirely on vehicles is straight up dumb. As long as we have big houses, big families, commute long distances, fly places, buy stuff, etc, we're going to use energy. Add to it expected population increases and it looks even worse. If we really want to change things, we're going to have to come up with a comprehensive energy plan that covers every aspect of American lives. Not just pick automobiles to be the whipping boy. We gotta tell the automakers to build this and that while Joe Blow gets to commute 100 miles per day and live in his giant, energy wasting home? Should we be heavily taxing the guy who drives his F350 5 miles each way to and from work everyday while Bob and Jane get to skip the taxes because they bought a hybrid, despite them driving 100 miles a day and sitting in parking-lot traffic getting 0mpg while doing it? I got no problem with the free will and freedom to do such things. But if we get those freedoms, we should get the freedom to buy vehicles based on the same free markets as those who buy anything else get to enjoy. Same reason I don't blast oil companies like others enjoy doing. Its a business. Its based on a free market. The system works. Yeah it can sometimes suck short term (or be great short term like housing industry or current oil profits), but in the long run, everything balances out. If they charge me $4/gallon to fill up, eventually I'm going to change my habits and they'll get less of it. Which will result in lower prices, or smaller profits. I don't care. Just be smart with your money, leave some breathing room for life's ups and downs, and everything works out in the end.
BTW, lived in CA for 8 years. Nice state weather wise. Other than that, I wasn't too happy there. They really are detached from the world. The idea about selling only small cars in CA while others get the good stuff is a good idea. Problem is CA buys so many freakin cars its too much of a money factory to ignore. First car company to crack it would make zillions. If we were talking Idaho, then maybe it would work. And should CA really have room to be critical? This is the car mecca. Everyone drives in CA. And a huge proportion of them drive big, expensive, guzzling cars. Now they want to be the ones to say we're going to get 40 mpg? They got a huge shock coming to their comfort levels if they think they're gonna get 40mpg and keep driving the cars they buy today.
Long post. Sorry.
Pics Aplenty: 2009 Hyundai Genesis Sedan {Autoblog}
Jan 8th 2008 1:19PM Someone above brought up the point of this failing just because it is a Hyndai. I knew I was getting the same feeling I had had before, and that post reminded me of what it was.
Mazda Millenia.
This was (and still is, used) an excellent car. When it came out, it was arguably more luxurious, more powerful (advanced Miller cycle S), just as reliable, and less expensive than the similar Acuras and Lexus' (Infiniti at that time had one foot in the grave). This car TANKED. People just weren't interested in a Mazda as a luxury car, they bought Acuras and Lexus' by the droves. The Millenia was plagued with low sales, and the resale was one of the worst in the industry (down there with the Lincoln Continental). Made a great used buy though :)
But I'm wondering if my lack of excitement is because I see this as another Millenia. Everything on paper looks just as good or even better than the competition, for less money. But it has a Hyundai badge on it, associated with 3rd string cheap Korean cars, even worse than Mazda's image in the mid-late 90's.
The Genesis (like most Hyundais) will probably be a great used car value as well.
Pics Aplenty: 2009 Hyundai Genesis Sedan {Autoblog}
Jan 8th 2008 1:09PM I don't know what it is, but I just feel pretty much ZERO anything toward this car. All this hype about a RWD V8 Hyundai, how its gonna be a poor-mans Lexus, all the hooplah over this thing.....
and I see this, and my reaction is still the same. Eh.
I just don't really care. can't figure it out. Cheap, nice car with V8 and RWD is exactly my kinda thing.
Just doesn't register even a blip on my radar screen.
Detroit 2008: 2009 Saturn Vue 2 Mode Hybrid {Autoblog}
Jan 6th 2008 1:14AM The 2nd of 3 hybrid variants?
So we got the mild hybrid (1), this new 2-mode hybrid (2), what is the 3rd??
BTW I really like this new VUE. Save the piggy weight and the corresponding decrease in fuel economy, this is probably my favorite in the class.
Detroit 2008: Ford Explorer America Concept says bye-bye to body-on-frame {Autoblog}
Jan 6th 2008 12:54AM I've always liked the Explorer, but can someone please explain to me how this new Explorer will be different from the Edge, the Taurus X, and the Flex? All are unibody CUVs.
Why does Ford need all of these?!
In the Autoblog Garage: 2007 Mazdaspeed3 {Autoblog}
Jan 4th 2008 10:59PM I've been shopping cars in this class. I got a 97 Miata I really enjoy, but my commute distance has been bumped up to 60miles a day in Chicago vs 15 miles a day in Bay Area. Lets just say I don't get the top down as much, the car in nearly as many corners, and 60 Miata miles is a lot harder than 15....
I really like the WRX, but I'd get the MS3 (I also considered the GTI). Heres why: $$$
The WRX (I get supplier pricing for both Subaru and Mazda) is easily $25,000+ w/premium package, and you really almost need the premium package or you get stuck with a real bare bones WRX. But here is the kicker. The insurance. I would pay nearly $1600/year on a WRX. I pay $850 in the Miata and would pay about $1050 for the MS3.
I love the lack of torque steer in the WRX, and the boxer motor really pulls. But then on the flip side, you can't get Xenons, you get crummy MPG, a crummy stereo, the car really leans in the corners, a 5 speed gearbox, and honestly, strange styling too.
Meanwhile you give up the AWD (I'm not so sold on the boxer engines myself...), get a bunch of other stuff on the Mazda, it costs about $2000 less, and about $600 less/year in insurance.
Car to car, yeah, I'd probably take the WRX. Unfortunately, the Subaru is overpriced while the Mazda is a screamin bargain.....
Hillary Clinton calls for 55 MPG fleet average by 2030 {Autoblog}
Nov 5th 2007 10:19PM And if I may get a little political....
Why is it that every candidate seems to have to be on the "extreme" end of things? Why is it that if you're republican you have to be anti-abortion, pro-guns, pro-Iraq, church-going, and hate social programs with a passion, while thinking america is the greatest country on earth and anyone who doesn't agree can go F themselves, pro-torture to save us from terrorists, and anti-gay? Why is it if you're democrat you have to be pro-life, anti guns, pro social programs, anti-war, anti-car, believe in global warming, pro-gay, and think america is the most evil nation on earth?
Is it that they must pander to the "base"? Is it that special interests have beaten in their message so hard that they actually BELIEVE this is what we care about? Is it that they determine what to care about then beat it into the voting public until they think it is important too (kinda like how the last election became the anti-gay-marriage election instead of focusing on important issues)?
I don't really know. Guess I'm just sick of it. It is going on a 3rd election (at least) where it seems like candidates represent only the extreme views. It leaves most of us out in the cold. Those of us who want a good life, raise our families in a good environment where they can succeed, where we are respected for doing the right thing, where people don't die on the streets, where kids have things to do after school, where we can travel and see America and the world all seem to be left in the cold. I know I feel this way. I tend to lean Democrat, but this enviro-fanaticism (because the most vocal liberal Dems are heard) and the fact EVERY candidate blabs the same lame-assed know-nothing banter really bugs me. Meanwhile on the other end I feel like a lot of Republicans are entrenched in continuing to support the war at any cost. I don't agree with a blank check we all have to cash, meanwhile burning all our credibility to the point where the entire world hates us, when not too long ago we were the good guys.
Most of us just want to live good, reasonable lives. We don't want fanatics, extreme politics, and bickering and fighting. There are a lot of big names out there, and I pretty much don't like any of them. I had hopes for Mr. Obama, I love him when I voted for him as an IL resident. He had a message of hope, vision, that we could all make America great. It was Kennedy-esque to me. Instead, he now blends right in with everyone else, saying whatever needs to be said to ensure whatever audience watching nods in agreement. Its quite sad actually. I expected it. I thought he'd be different. He isn't.
Its a shame. I suspect I'm not the only one in America who finds themselves somewhere in the middle and having to choose between two extreme opposites. Sometimes you wanna be pro-choice, anti-gun control, pro-lower taxes, pro-social programs, and anti-environmental extremism. Why can't these kinds of people run for office? Sad sad days.
Hillary Clinton calls for 55 MPG fleet average by 2030 {Autoblog}
Nov 5th 2007 9:50PM It isn't that it CAN'T be done. It is that people act like it would be done if it weren't for those evil automakers. They act like if the evil automakers weren't in bed with the oil industry that they'd be able to go out and continue buying midsize sedans or SUVs with all the same space, performance, safety, capability, AND FOR THE SAME PRICE.
That's what people don't realize. Yeah we could do 55mpg. If we all drove tiny little boxes (think Ford Fiesta or VW Polos), powered by minute engines that don't have enough power to get out of their own way, AND cost a zillion dollars. Put it that way and see how many people are interested.
Problem is everyone wants higher fuel economy and they think they can get it without something else having to give.
You don't get something for nothin. And CAFE is the worst way. Raise the damn fuel tax. You pay you can still play. You don't want to, there's more money for public transit. Take that instead.
I have zero respect for any of these ideas when they don't ask/require the consumer to do anything and they do absolutely nothing in regards to all the other emissions and fossil fuel consumption out there. What about people with giant houses? What about people with long commutes? Power plants? Industries? I want to see a comprehensive plan covering all the bases to get us to reduce our consumption. Only then do I have any interest in it. And how are we going to solve the fact that even if we did get 55mpg, people still keep living further and further from work, driving more and more miles each year, with population increases and increases in the number of cars on the road? Sure each car gets better, but the overall consumption just keeps getting worse.
Give incentives or make it too expensive to drive long distances, live in large homes, etc if you want to make a real difference.
Of course that hurts all of us. Who wants to pay $20/day to get to work? Who wants to pay $1000 to fly from Chicago to San Francisco? Guess you gotta pick your priorities. Lower consumption or more freedom?
You can't have it all without any of the costs.
AND STOP MAKING EMISSIONS AND OIL CONSUMPTION THE FAULT OF ONLY THE AUTOMOBILE!!
German Chancellor says NO to more autobahn speed limits {Autoblog}
Oct 29th 2007 10:05PM Amen!
There is one place every car nut on earth dreams of driving, and that is Germany. I have been fortunate enough to experience it, and I'm dying to go back. But I couldn't help but think that the one time I did might be my last, as the CO2, global warming, environmental-wacko, Al Gore-lovefest hippies (especially in Europe) would soon take it away from us.
We all love you Germany. Keep the roads free for yourselves, but please know that what you do or don't do affects the dreams of millions all around the globe.
Keep up the good fight, for all of us!
