End of Days: GM Denies Saab's an Orphan, Chrysler Talks Up "Lifestyle" Pickup
GM has responded to yesterday’s story “revealing” that no one wants to buy the Saab brand. The fact that the denial is off the record [via AFP] tells you that either A) The General is involved in delicate, top-secret negotiation to transfer ownership of the Swedish near-luxury brand to a third party or B) they’re lying. The off-the-record comment from “one GM official familiar with the proceedings” smacks of B: “It’s still early in the process. It’s going to take some time.” Which is the one thing– well one of many things– that GM doesn’t have. Meanwhile, Chrysler is also involved in a smoke and mirrors campaign as part of its ongoing and increasingly incredible effort to convince the world that it’s an ongoing and credible commercial enterprise. Ahead of the don’t call it the Detroit Auto Show, Chrysler product development chief Frank Klegon is talking-up the possibility of building a car-based lifestyle truck. It’s a fiction so boneheaded that even The Detroit News was impolite enough to mention that GM had just abandoned said genre (G8 ST RIP), and that Honda’s Ridgeline is a flop. In fact, scribe Alisa Priddle does a yeoman’s job proving that Klegon is lost in space. “This is a segment where many automakers have recognized there isn’t enough volume for all of the players to invest in their own platform, and there is a lot of sharing going on.” And that’s as good as it gets…
New Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards argue against any such venture.
“Among the proposals for calculating fleet fuel-efficiency in the future is the idea of measuring a vehicle’s ‘footprint’ by multiplying its wheelbase (length of the vehicle as measured between the center of the front and rear wheels) by its track (width as measured between two front or two rear wheels).
“This would force a higher-percentage improvement on small vehicles, [auto analyst Jim] Hall said. If the new standard allows for lower fuel economy for large vehicles, there’s no incentive to do a small one, Hall said.
“‘If footprint stays in there the small trucks are dead,’ Hall said.
“Automakers would have to equip a smaller pickup with such a small engine to meet CAFE that it would lack the power to function as a working truck, Hall said.”
You’d kind of hope ChryCo’s Klegon knows all this. Wouldn’t you?
More by Robert Farago
Latest Car Reviews
Read moreLatest Product Reviews
Read moreRecent Comments
- Clive Most 400 series highways in Canada were designed for 70 MPH using 70 year old cars. The modern cars brake, handle, ride better, and have much better tyres. If people would leave a 2-3 second gap and move to the right when cruising leaving the passing lanes open there would be much better traffic flow. The 401 was designed for a certain amount of traffic units; somewhere in the 300,000 range (1 car = 1 unit 1 semi+trailer =4 units) and was over the limit a few minutes after the 1964 official opening. What most places really need is better transit systems and better city designs to reduce the need for vehicle travel.
- Kira Interesting article but you guys obviously are in desperate need of an editor and I’d be happy to do the job. Keep in mind that automotive companies continually patent new technologies they’ve researched yet have no intention of developing at the time. Part of it is to defend against competitors, some is a “just in case” measure, and some is to pad resumes of the engineers.
- Jalop1991 Eh?
- EBFlex Wow Canada actually doing something decent for a change. What a concept.
- 3-On-The-Tree To Khory, I was a firefighter as well and the worst thing about car fires was the fumes from all the plastics and rubber, tires etc.
Comments
Join the conversation