- Search Cartoons
- Comic Archive
-
Payne
Store
Henry Payne RSS
Articles Blog
Lexus hunters: Acura MDX vs. Cadillac SRX
Posted by hpayne on February 6, 2014
Another year, another gold star for the Lexus RX, the midsize luxury SUV
sales valedictorian. Solid interior. Solid reliability. Solid performance. Ho hum. Enough about Goody Two-shoes.
Let’s talk about the brash wannabes.
The Cadillac SRX and Acura MDX — Nos. 2 and 3 with 56,000 and 53,000 in sales, respectively — are rungs below the RX’s staggering 100,000-plus sales score. But with their distinct looks, earth-pawing power, and loaded interiors, these two outsiders are turning heads.
The wannabes can be quirky, sure — especially in the navigation screen department — but Lexus has also veered from plain Jane fashion with its polarizing, inverted-trapezoid upper and lower grilles (now that’s a mouthful). It has not dissuaded buyers, but the pinched-cheek look is an opening for the far prettier faces of Caddy and Acura, especially if their performance features rival the teacher’s pet. And often, they do.
Those details can be game-changers. Take the Acura’s third-row, fold-into-the-floor seats, a crucial feature that moves the MDX to the top of my shopping list. It will attract family buyers accustomed to the roominess of bigger SUVs and minivans but who want the cachet and performance of a luxury brand. This is a game-changer for soccer moms like my wife who demand all-wheel-drive performance as she ferries our young hellions and their pals.
Geometry, art, gym. These superb vehicles excel in most subjects. The report card, please:
Interior
If adding a third-row seat pays dividends for the MDX as a sporty family hauler, the addition of a second center console screen does not.
A central 7-inch touch screen controls infotainment while a separate, 8-inch navigation screen hovers at the top of the dash. In theory, the two screens mean the driver can multi-task between navigation and media without having to change screens. In practice, the nav screen is mediocre with no-touch capability and a limited interface, which makes it hard to discern where traffic is snarled or what street you’re on. Acura’s excellent haptic-feedback touch screen should be enough — especially since thumb scrolls on the steering wheel allow drivers to navigate some options without their hands ever leaving the wheel.
Cadillac also pushes the console envelope with its CUE system. The Droid-like screen’s haptic feedback, movable icons and swipe-menu capability mimic today’s smartphones. But CUE, too, can be maddening as its haptic volume controls are inconsistent. Better to integrate them into a bigger touch screen (see the Tesla Model S) or make them redundant rotary controls as in the Acura.
Both the MDX and SRX get an A for effort, but a C in execution.
In terms of comfort and utility, however, both the MDX and SRX are at the head of the class. Both are wrapped in luscious leather. Their interior lines are pleasing with generous portions of wood trim. Lift gates float upward at a touch of the key fob, and control stalks execute turn signals and wiper commands with a crispness that screams luxury car.
Both vehicles feature adaptive cruise control, a self-driving system with real world safety applications. If you’re doing anything distracting — eating, cruising the radio, umpiring a child squabble — then set the cruise control and the vehicles’ radar will monitor traffic in front of you, braking when necessary. It’s remarkable. Acura’s collision avoidance system is also notable for locating its warnings on the A-pillars. They illuminate when a vehicle is in your blind spot (huge in all SUVs), instantly catching your eye since they are at the edge of your vision rather than outside on the mirrors (as in most luxury vehicles, Caddy included).
Exterior
The Acura and Caddy have spent time in front of the mirror and it shows. Acura’s edgy styling has been a freak show in recent years with its sedans alternatively looking like bottle openers or sharp-beaked parrots. The popular MDX’s looks have always been less severe, but the SUV’s pointy corners have been softened to exude more elegance.
Most striking, however, is the Acura’s handsome use of horizontal cues to give the tall SUV a crouching appearance. At the vehicle’s business end, five LED main beams in each headlamp structure combine with symmetrical lower air vents to create a wide, athletic stance. It’s no Audi, but it’s more artful than most.
Not to be outdone, the SRX boasts its own headlight science project with adaptive lamps that turn in the direction of the front wheels. But if you’re looking for sculpted good looks, the SRX is your baby. Whereas most midsize SUVs are immediately identifiable by their height, the SRX’s sloped curves, low shovel grille, and huge headlights make the car’s pose look more cat-like than horse-like. “Seemingly sculpted from a solid block of steel” hypes Caddy’s press materials. But that steel comes with a price — the SRX is 100 pounds heavier than the MDX.
The vertical lights and sharp creases of Caddy’s “Art & Science” design language have always looked more natural on the taller, heftier SRX with this year’s CTS sedan just catching up to its prettier ute sibling.
Performance
Could you survive a Michigan winter without all-wheel drive? The MDX and SRX both come with snow-churning, road-gripping AWD systems. The MDX adds a base front-wheel-drive option in a bow to the federal mpg gods.
On its third generation, Acura divorced the MDX from its truck brethren and has built the SUV on its own unique, uni-body chassis. With a new multi-link suspension and generous use of lightweight materials like aluminum and magnesium, the result is a fun-to-drive SUV. With a nimbleness belying its high center-of-gravity, this ute tore through Detroit’s snowy landscape, taunting me to turn off the traction control and let the big dog drift through corners.
Acura (and parent Honda) have spent a lot of time on the track and that experience shows. The big ute has run with the sports cars on Germany’s famed Nurburgring, with the new MDX besting the previous generous by a healthy eight seconds. The Caddy makes no such boasts, but it’s hardly a boat. What it lacks in handling, it makes up in typical American style — with brute force. Its 308-horsepower V-6 gulps highway fuel at 18 mpg. Turn you off? The Acura’s smooth 290-horsepower V-6 will get you Lexus-like 21 mpg fuel economy (speaking of Lexus, both of our wannabes leave the 270 horse RX in the dust).
Price
Acura and Caddy buyers might gulp, however, when they see the bill for all this sophistication. My fully-loaded MDX and SRX sticker for $57,400 and $56,465, respectively — nearly 10 grand more than a similarly-equipped Lexus and on par with perennial class beauty queens BMW and Audi.
Are they worth it? Excellence comes in different packages. The jewel-eyed MDX and sculpted SRX are runners up and trying harder.
2014 Cadillac SRX
Vehicle type: Front-engine, AWD, five-passenger, five-door, sport utility vehicle
Price: $37,505 (base), $56,465 (as tested)
Power plant: 3.6-liter V-6 with direct-injection
Power: 308 horsepower, 265 pound-feet of torque
Transmission: 6-speed automatic
Performance: 0-60 mpg, 7.1 seconds (manufacturer), 130 mph top speed (governor limited)
Weight: 4,442 pounds
Fuel economy: EPA 16 city/23 highway (18 mpg combined)
Highs: Doesn’t look like an SUV; adaptive cruise control
Lows: Opaque CUE system controls; no third-row seat
Overall:★★★
Grading scale
Excellent ★★★★
Good ★★★
Fair ★★
Poor ★
2014 Acura MDX
Vehicle type: Front-engine, AWD, seven-passenger, five-door, sport utility vehicle
Price: $42,290 (base), $57,400 (as tested)
Power plant: 3.5-liter V-6 with direct-injection
Power: 290 horsepower, 267 pound-feet of torque
Transmission: 6-speed automatic
Performance: 0-60 mpg, 6.8 seconds (Autoweek), 123 mph top speed
Weight: 4,332 pounds
Fuel economy: EPA 18 city/27 highway (21 mpg combined)
Highs: Top-drawer electronic safety controls; third-row seat
Lows: Two center console screens are too much; pricey
Overall:****
Q & Auto: Simon Taylor on ‘Rush,’ racing, and American muscle
Posted by hpayne on February 1, 2014
Simon Taylor
You know that director Ron Howard’s “Rush” – acclaimed as one of the best racing movies ever made – was nominated for a 2014 Golden Globe Award as Best Motion Picture. You know that it stars heart-throb Chris Hemsworth and Daniel Bruhl as Grand Prix rivals James Hunt and Niki Lauda. But you may not know that one person in the cast was playing himself – indeed, was the only non-actor in the movie.
Simon Taylor is one of the world’s most renowned auto journalists, and was the voice of Formula One in 1976 as BBC Radio commentator. Taylor recreated his role – and served as a film adviser – in “Rush.” Taylor is the former editor of Autosport magazine, author of numerous books, and a competitor on the vintage racing circuit. His latest book is “Motor Sport Greats in Conversation” (Haynes Publishing, 2013). I caught up with Simon on his recent visit to Detroit.
HP: Tell me about “Rush.”
Taylor: I only got involved because Ron Howard was doing everything he could to make the motor racing footage as historically accurate as possible. Of the very large cast, there is only one person who actually plays himself – that is me, because in 1976, I was in my first year as the BBC radio motor racing commentator and I was at that famous final race in Japan. It wasn’t covered on television — so the only way that the British audiences could hear what was happening at Mount Fuji was by listening to me. When they were casting the British commentator, somebody said: “Well, I think that old fart Simon Taylor was there all those years ago, so why don’t you ask him?” So I found myself doing four days on set.
HP: You lived that ’76 season. We motor heads are particular about these things. Is the movie authentic?
Taylor: I think it is absolutely brilliant. The point one has to make is that $50 million was being spent. Ron Howard was doing this not just to appeal to a few hundred thousand motor heads, but to a worldwide audience. There was one moment in this little editing suite and I had the temerity to say, “Ron, strictly speaking, I’m not sure that that is quite accurate.” He fixed me with a beady eye and said, “Simon, this movie has to work on a wet Tuesday afternoon in Des Moines, Iowa to an audience of housewives who’ve never heard of Formula One. Do I make myself clear?” I said, “You certainly do.”
HP: Some say the movie downplayed James Hunt’s drug use.
Taylor: No. I knew James pretty well, and to my knowledge, James never took drugs of any sort. He was very, very serious about his motor racing. He had this devil-may-care exterior; he loved pretty girls; he was a very charismatic. But this was a man passionate to win. (He) would be sick before getting into the car before the race.
HP: Did you meet both actors?
Taylor: I met Daniel Bruhl briefly. When Bruhl got the part of Niki Lauda, he rang Lauda up and he said: “I’ve been cast to play you in a movie.” And Niki — you know what Niki’s like — he said: “So?” Bruhl said: “Well, if you don’t mind, I’d like to come and spend some time with you so I can study you.” Niki said: “Well, if you come, you better only bring an overnight bag, because if I don’t like you, I’ll tell you to (expletive) off.” So, Bruhl went and, in fact, Niki liked him and Bruhl spent four nights in Niki’s house in Spain. He caught not only Niki’s voice, but also his very distinctive gestures. Niki is a most unusual man.
HP: Let me switch gears. You’re an Englishman who’s seen the world. What does the American car market look like today?
Taylor: I think that motor cars, all around the world, have become unromantic, sterile, dull. Because now we’re concerned with safety and pollution. The car has become as exciting as a washing machine. Having said that, there are interesting national characteristics. . . I think that American manufacturers have always understood that styling can sell a car, so American cars have always been more extroverted in their styling than perhaps a British or a French or a German car.
HP: In the States you see “statement cars” that you wouldn’t see in other continents?
Taylor: Yes, and I speak as a man who (owns) a 1969 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray. I love American cars. I came to America as a teenager in the early ‘60s, and I looked at Pontiac GTOs and early Mustangs and they were in your face and they made a strong statement. An American car is a guy standing up at the bar buying everybody a drink.
2014 Toyota Tundra, First Team All-American
Posted by hpayne on January 30, 2014
Detroit News auto reviewer Henry Payne spent a week in a 2014 Toyota Tundra CrewMax pickup. Here’s the nicely-redesigned business end of the 2014 Toyota Tundra he test drove. (Henry Payne / The Detroit News)
How big is the Toyota Tundra CrewMax pickup? I’ve been picking Fiat 500s and Ford Fiestas out of its grille for the past week. I added a refrigerator and pool table in the backseat. I have to call a tugboat to help me navigate narrow fast-food drive-thru lanes.
I exaggerate, of course. I’m no stranger to big pickups (I tow my race cars to the track behind a big Dodge RAM 3500). They are the workhorse of American sportsmen, construction workers and landscapers. But as auto companies target pickups — like the upscale Tundra 1794 edition I tested — to urban cowboys (and cowgirls) as well as their traditional, more rural audience, drivers should understand the capabilities of the beast at the other end of their reins.
Like the enormously powerful and essentially street-legal race cars from Porsche, Corvette, SRT, et al, big pickups are a fish out of water in an urban environment. If you aren’t trained to handle the Corvette Z06’s 635 pound-feet of torque, you could wind up wrapped around a telephone pole in the blink of an eye. Fail to appreciate the footprint of a Tundra/Chevy Silverado/Ford F-150, and you’ll squash a Smart car like a watermelon.
In short, don’t assume that driver’s license you got at 16 prepares you for a 2 ½ ton, two-story tank with 380 horsepower under the hood. Respect it. Bond with it. Or it might bite you. Witness my neighborhood Popeye’s drive-thru where I nearly took off the side of the building with the Tundra’s supersized tail.
That said, the Tundra and its rivals are wonderfully capable animals. Pickups breed fierce loyalty among brands even as there is little to choose between them. The F-150, Silverado, RAM 1500 and Tundra all are about 140 inches in wheelbase, offer 10,000-pound towing capability and a variety of cab configurations.
Not surprisingly, Japanese trucks have labored in this most All-American of segments. While Ford, GM, and RAM dominate full-size pickup sales, the Tundra is a distant fourth.
Even as American brands have struggled against dependable Asian imports in the sedan segment (see Chrysler’s self-conscious “Imported from Detroit” ad line), Toyota has the opposite challenge with trucks. American pickups are as rock solid as Mount Rushmore, as dependable as Lassie, and as American as apple pie. So Toyota’s every move is a self-conscious attempt to fit in with the home boys.
For example? Toyota chose Texas to build its Tundra. Everything’s bigger in the Longhorn State (Texas joke: What did the Texan say upon visiting Niagara Falls? “We could fix that leak in five minutes.”). Everyone’s more patriotic and everything is done in a pickup. Even the Tundra’s 1794 badge on my high-end Tundra is a claim to American authenticity.
“The new 1794 Edition is a tribute to the ranch, founded in the year 1794, on which the Tundra plant is located in San Antonio,” reads Toyota’s press release. Yeah, these guys are obsessed.
But Toyota competing against Big Three trucks is like a Northwestern vs. Michigan State football game. Sure, Northwestern’s got a Big Ten team, but have you seen the depth of that State squad? Similarly, the Tundra’s quite competent five-model Tundra line must compete against the likes of Ford, which offers 10 variations of the F-150, and 15 variations of its F-250, F-350, and F-450 Super Duty line.
And it ain’t getting’ any easier as the F-150 is investing in more fuel-efficient aluminum trucks and GM is coming after Toyota’s midsize Tacoma with the Chevy Colorado and GM Canyon.
One-on-one in the open field, however, the Tundra 1794 is a match for any truck in class.
My white 1794 features the Tundra’s tougher 2014 look with a bigger, squared-off grille using more chrome than a 1959 Cadillac Eldorado with the Biarritz trim package. The truck’s layout makes it a rolling Swiss Army knife. The roomy CrewMax interior offers leather luxury for the family with a back seat big enough to hold three Big Ten linemen (my 5-foot 5-inch wife needed the running board and side door handle and a painter’s ladder to get in). Yet the vehicle is still rugged as a mule on the outside with terrain-gobbling 20-inch tires and a 5’6” x 5’6” rear short box that has plenty of room for the dogs or a load of mulch. Hook it up and the 5,860-pound Tundra will tow the Space Shuttle. Really. Google it.
On the road, the 1794 rides surprisingly stiff. I could feel the concrete joints along the Lodge, for example. Rivals like the RAM 1500 have added air springs which help smooth out the ride, though as a veteran of stiffly-sprung sport sedans, I found the haptic ride reassuring in a vehicle two-stories off the ground.
If not for the ride, the $50,000 1794 edition’s (the base Tundra starts at $27K) stuffed-with-every-electronic-googaw cab feels like a luxury sedan with twice the acreage. Urban cowboys will appreciate the more fuel-efficient two-wheel drive option in addition to the truck staples of 4WD and 4WD off-road. But in Michigan’s Winter from Hell, I usually traveled in 4WD despite its thirsty 13 mpg.
After a few days of cramped commutes trying to navigate too-small parking places and crowded suburban shopping strips (what was that noise? Dang, I squashed another Smart!), the Tundra pined for tundra and so I took it out to the dirt roads of West Bloomfield’s lake country. I usually tip-toe through these rutted wagon trials in second gear in my compact family sedans, but the Tundra attacks them with relish.
Potholes covered with three inches of fresh snow? No problem. With tires out of the Brobdingnagian shopping catalog, the Tundra manhandled these roads. Turn a 90-degree corner with throttle and the 4WD drive-with-traction control bit hard, catching a power slide then leaping forward. Did I forget to mention that big, 381 horsepower V-8? Bury your right foot out of a stoplight and it sounds like a cattle stampede through a Texas gorge. Glorious.
You can take the pickup out of the country, but you can’t take the country out of the pickup.
2014 Hyundai Equus: A horse to watch
Posted by hpayne on January 23, 2014
Hyundai redesigned their Equus luxury sedan for 2014 with enhancements to exterior and interior design, vehicle dynamics, material selection, driver technology displays and advanced safety features. (Hyundai)
My neighborhood loses power. A lot.
So when our post-New Year’s Storm from Hell dropped a foot of snow and sub-zero temps on us, my wife and I checked out the back seat of the Hyundai Equus I was testing as a possible refuge if the lights went out. Yes, it’s that comfortable.
Introduced to the U.S. market in 2010, the Equus’ posh proportions had already established it as a popular, chauffeur-driven car for Korean businessmen. This is old-school luxury, complete with ashtrays. Airplane-like video screens installed in the back of the front seats provide in-flight — er, in-car — infotainment. A full control console folds down in the backseat allowing passengers to take over the car’s audio and navigation controls. There are fold-down, illuminated vanity mirrors for grooming, and a motorized rear window shade adds privacy.
This car got more appealing to my wife by the second. “Henry! Time to drive me to my meeting!” She was disappointed to learn, however, that the massaging rear-seats, standard on the first imports to the U.S., have been discontinued for the 2014 year model.
The price for this Carnival cruise liner with 5-liter V-8? Just $68,000.
That’s 25 grand less than a similarly equipped BMW 750 or Mercedes S-Class, and $10,000 less than a Lexus LS460 (though the old-school Cadillac XTS hangs right with the Hyundai on price). A luxury bargain? Yes, if it was a $68,000 BMW Equus, or Mercedes Equus, or Caddy Equus. But it’s a $68K Hyundai, and therein lies the rub.
The badge matters in a segment in which brand is paramount. Luxury is image, and the German, Japanese and American brands speak volumes about their owners when they roll up to a five-star restaurant. Hyundai is not unaware of the image game. The Equus is for “the millionaire next door who wants to make the smart choice for a lot of car,” says Miles Johnson, product public relations manager. That’ll get you 3,500 sales a year in the U.S. — just 30 percent the number of its rivals.
Hyundai wants more and the Equus’ smaller sibling — the stunning 2015 Genesis introduced at this year’s Detroit auto show — promises the Korean automaker is poised for greater success. It’s all about the details.
Introduce yourself to the Equus and she looks a bit homely. A Hyundai Sonata has more sex appeal. The Equus’ front fascia is plain, devoid of BMW’s signature twin-kidneys or the sculpted grilles of the Audi and Caddy. The car is an echo of early Lexus cars, which themselves were echoes of Mercedes. Hyundai intends to address that in the next-generation model with its fresh “Fluidic Sculpture 2.0” design language. You can see it in the new Genesis’s inspired grille, slit headlights, and creased hips.
Sumptuous interior
Back to the Equus.
Sensing the key in my pocket, Equus unlocks the doors and opens the side mirrors like sunflowers opening to the sun. A chime greets you as you enter the cabin. The interior is sumptuous with heated, ivory leather seats and real wood trim around the doors and dash. The digital instrument panel is reminiscent of Cadillac — its many options easily negotiated with a clever, right-thumb-operated dial on the steering wheel. A heads-up display hovers — hologram-like — above the hood, allowing you to monitor your speed without looking down at the dash. You reach for the 9.2-inch center-console screen, but it disappoints. Operated by a rotary dial, it’s not a touch screen as is standard in the class.
Details, details.
Equus is Latin for “horse” and this car has 429 of them. With that kind of power on tap, I found myself groping for steering wheel paddles to gain full control of the herd under the hood — but only the automatic shifter is offered. Never mind. Like a rhino pulling a stagecoach, the big Tau V-8 is more than enough power to motivate the two-ton Equus, though that smart, budget-conscious Equus buyer may blanch at the car’s 18 mpg (I managed just 14.7 on daily commutes). Still, put your boot in it and this big hoss can really stretch her legs … until you encounter some twisty bits.
More details.
The big sedan feels more land yacht when cornering, its body less taut, its steering less precise compared to its German and Japanese competition. The rear-wheel-drive Hyundai is conspicuously missing an all-wheel-drive option in this option-loaded segment. I can see your arms crossing across your chest. Whaaaaat? Don’t RWD V-8s hibernate with the bears in winter time?
Nossir. This is 21st century. Indeed, there is no better illustration than the Equus of how electronics have utterly changed vehicle safety. I not only drove the Equus through the teeth of Old Man Winter’s January tantrum, I taunted him with it. Like a skier in fresh powder, I tackled southwest Detroit’s unplowed streets. I turned into corners hard. I stomped on it. I lived to tell the tale. In fact, I enjoyed it. The rear end would wag, but the Electronic Stability Control system would instantly bite, cutting throttle and wheel spin. No drama, no mess.
Even at full throttle, the electronics would virtually stall the engine, taming the beast. All hail the engineers.
‘Elevate the brand’
In the late 1980s Toyota, Honda, and Nissan targeted the U.S. market with new name-brands — Lexus, Acura, and Infiniti — to sell luxury cars without the stigma of their more pedestrian parents. They made their mark, at huge marketing cost. By contrast, Hyundai has eschewed a high-cost strategy and launched its luxury models under the good ol’ Hyundai name. “We’re not pouring money into a establishing a new luxury channel,” says Hyundai’s Johnson. “We’re looking to elevate the brand.”
It’s a riskier strategy than Hyundai’s Japanese forebears, but the tactic is the same: Provide a quality luxury experience at an affordable price. Hyundai will deliver your Equus to your home. It’ll pick it up for maintenance. It’ll provide you a substitute while your car is being repaired. Heck, they may even bring you a massaging recliner if you ask. The result is that the Equus now out-Lexuses Lexus as the luxury bargain.
Can Hyundai become a top-selling luxury brand? Can Equus and Elantra both thrive under the same dealership roof? Time will tell. But one thing’s for sure: With Genesis styling and better attention to detail, the next Equus won’t take a backseat to anyone.
Fuel-Efficiency Rules Are Already Raising Costs in Detroit
Posted by hpayne on January 22, 2014
Electric cars are a sideshow. The real story is Ford’s big bet on aluminum and other expensive design changes.
By Henry Payne
Jan. 22, 2014 7:19 p.m. ET
Detroit
At the dawn of 2014 the federal government has exited General Motors GM -0.19% and Chrysler. Both companies have repaid their auto-bailout loans and Fiat F.MI +1.97% is purchasing Chrysler outright. But federal carbon limits imposed on the auto industry in the depths of the Great Recession—when it was powerless to resist—will haunt manufacturers for years to come. The re-election of Barack Obama has cemented EPA fuel-efficiency regulations requiring that, by 2025, auto makers’ products average 54.5 miles per gallon.
On the floor of the 2014 Detroit Auto Show, which is open to the public until Jan. 26, there is ample evidence that the regulations are starting to bite. Detroit temperatures have hovered in the single digits after hitting a record low, minus-14 degrees, in the first week of January—temperatures consistent with a planet that hasn’t warmed in more than a decade. Yet the gods of global warming must be satisfied, and the sacrifices to the EPA’s climate ideology come with a big price.
While auto makers are once again parading cars and trucks their customers want to own, company strategies are nevertheless being driven by government fuel-economy rules. Behind the glitzy displays, gorgeous vehicle introductions and relief that vehicle sales are almost back to 2007 prerecession levels, there is worry about the costs the fuel-efficiency rules impose.
Take the radical, expensive redesign of the Ford F150 pickup, America’s best-selling vehicle. The F150 is the talk of the show because it is the first truck—and the first large-volume vehicle—to have its body made entirely of aluminum to save weight and reduce fuel consumption.
The driving force behind Ford’s decision was the EPA standards that will force full-size trucks to get upward of 30 mpg in 10 years—up from 20 today. Ford had already made significant gains in efficiency by redesigning its powertrains to add less-thirsty turbo V-6s to its lineup, but the step to aluminum is an indication that the EPA rules will require much more than squeezing engines. The switch to costlier, lighter aluminum means a massive capital investment that involves the retooling of factories and the remaking of Ford’s material supply stream as it shifts away from steel sheet for body panels. Ford won’t disclose the investment, but it runs into the billions.
Ford sells 700,000 F150 trucks a year, so industry experts say it could overnight become the second-biggest aluminum customer outside of the U.S. military. The change brings significant risk to a truck class where buyers put a premium on durability and toughness. While Ford is confident that its aluminum alloy will match steel for strength, its move is also a gamble given the higher cost of aluminum to repair and the subsequent insurance cost to customers.
What is the hardest thing about launching a new car today?
“The new government regulations—whether it be fuel economy, safety or whatever—are very difficult and pose a significant challenge to the development of any new vehicle,” Ford Mustang engineer Dave Pericak tells Car & Driver. The mighty muscle car will offer a turbocharged four-cylinder engine for the first time in a bow to federal regulations.
Ford’s strategy is not to criticize the regulations, calculating that they are here to stay and it’s a marketing nightmare to fight government and media campaigns for better fuel efficiency. So Ford is trying to turn the rules to its advantage, playing to its marketing strengths in selling vehicles like the Mustang and the best-selling F150 as the most innovative products in their segment. The F150, for example, will be 700 pounds lighter, 3-4 mpg more efficient, and therefore save customers—especially companies with truck fleets—millions in fuel costs.
Aluminum’s costs are significantly higher than steel, and Ford won’t disclose how much the changeover will erode its profit margins. Those F150 margins are significant, with each truck sale adding $10,000 to the company’s bottom line. In the highly competitive truck segment, however, Ford will likely swallow those costs to maintain a competitive sticker price and hope that increased sales will bring more cash.
GM, by contrast, is banking on a different path that it thinks is less disruptive and less costly. Less costly is a relative term, of course. The company plans to introduce an entirely new vehicle for the midsize truck segment that Detroit auto makers had abandoned. GM hopes that the sales gains of the Chevy Colorado and GMC Canyon will mitigate the costs of regulatory compliance—and fill its coffers so it can invest in any changes necessary (an aluminum body perhaps?) to keep the steel-skinned, full-size Chevy Silverado compliant with EPA rules.
Chrysler, meanwhile, has invested heavily in nine-speed transmissions and diesel engines. Its RAM pickup diesel competes against the Ford F150 and gets an impressive 25 mpg. One of Ford’s Great Recession advantages, reports Karl Henkel of the Detroit News, is that by avoiding bankruptcy it could invest in aluminum. GM insiders say the government penalties of not meeting the regulations are too steep not to make new product investments.
Bob Lutz, former product guru of General Motors, once predicted that the 54.5-by-2025 EPA regulations would cost consumers an additional $5,000 per vehicle—essentially the cost of making every car a hybrid. Auto makers have spent billions on Washington lobbyists, as well as engineering research and development, to help carve loopholes in the EPA rules.
Significantly, auto makers receive mpg credits for producing so-called zero-emission vehicles—that is, coal-burning electric cars. Barack Obama once predicted that there would be one million EVs on the road by 2015 in the quixotic hope that if auto makers just built electrics, buyers would come. This year’s show is confirmation that battery-powered vehicles are a niche vehicle—like sports cars—not a mainstream choice. With a 3% market share, hybrids and EVs, like sports cars, are pricey, with Cadillac and Tesla showing new offerings beginning at $70,000 while BMW BMW.XE -1.87% is marketing its new i-Series of electric cars at anywhere from $40,000 to $105,000.
These cars will be costly to taxpayers as well, as each of their well-heeled buyers will get a $7,500 government tax credit.
Detroit swagger: Your guide to the greatest show on wheels
Posted by hpayne on January 17, 2014
MIDSIZE SEDANS — Chrysler 200: The only thing notable about the previous 200 was that Eminem introduced it in a Super Bowl ad. The sleek new 200 won’t need a rapper to sell it. (Chrysler)
The Christmas holiday is over, but the shelves are full of automotive toys at Cobo Center for the 2014 North American International Auto Show. If November’s Los Angeles Auto Show is all about Hollywood green and April’s New York show bows to Park Avenue luxury, then Detroit honors corn-fed American swagger. It’s where the world’s automakers come to show off their trucks, performance cars, and family haulers.
Detroit has gone from zero-to-wow in four short years.
Reborn from the ashes of the Great Recession, American automakers are leading an extraordinary convergence of automotive hardware and electronic technology. The dashboard embraces iPad design. Horsepower joins chip power. The Industrial Revolution meets the Digital Revolution.
Where taxpayer-funding compelled companies to show half-baked green displays (who can forget GM’s push for ethanol power?) in lieu of their meat-and-potatoes products, automakers this year are bringing innovation on their own terms to pickups, sports cars and luxury vehicles. The Detroit show offers everything to every customer with displays of tech, power and connectivity in vehicles across every segment. Increasingly, all those things can be found in a single vehicle.
Take the new Ford F-150, which sports an all-aluminum skin (once found only in small-volume super-cars), all LED lights (once found only in luxury sedans) and a powerful, turbocharged V-6 engine (once found only in sports sedans). Or the luxurious, dual-climate control, 625-horsepower Corvette Z06. Or the loaded, rotary-dial shifting, roomy, sculpted Chrysler 200 … That’s right, even the midsize grocery haulers are sexy. So grab the kids and get down to the Greatest Show on Earth. Here’s your program. Here are the highlights:
Living large
After ogling Cobo’s airy, Metro Airport-like makeover (you half expect a 747 to be parked at the south bay window), plunge into the show at the central Macomb Hall entrance.
Behold the most beautiful sedans on the planet.
Acura, Cadillac, Tesla, BMW, Audi, and BMW displays flank the carpeted aisle. It’s like you’ve died and gone to luxury heaven. Did I mention Bentley is wedged in there too? Its land yachts seem old school in such athletic company.
The stunning Caddy CTS was my 2013 Detroit News Car of the Year and it holds its own in this rare air. Indeed, Cadillac’s show introduction of its more modern logo complements the sedan’s cutting-edge styling. The logo adorns the grille of the new ATS coupe, but the two-door is a reminder of how much ground is still to be made on class-leader BMW and Audi. The German brands not only have coupe versions of their best-selling 3-series and A4 sedans, but that they have created whole new numerologies to market the coupes (4-series for BMW coupes, A5 for Audi) and their earth-pawing BMW M and Audi S sports versions. BMW chose Detroit to debut its new M3 and M4, stealing Caddy’s thunder.
The competition is also stiff for Cadillac’s sharp, new $75K ELR plug-in — call it a Volt in a tuxedo. Next door lurks the $70K Tesla Model S, the darling of the country club, and BMW’s electrified i-series. The 357-horsepower i8, Bimmer’s first super-car in 35 years, will bring grown men to their knees.
Cute corner
Hang a right at BMW and gold chains give way to beach balls. Literally. Volkswagen offers a Beetle Dune Concept, an update on VW-based dune buggies that kicked sand in the seventies. Next door, the Mini Cooper stand gives the Bug stiff cuteness competition — even its muscular John Copper Works concept is huggable. Not to be outdone, Kia sports the redesigned Soul — its diet-conscious hamsters never far away.
Kia’s got Soul, and much more. The nominal budget brand from Korea stole away Audi’s chief designer a few years back and the brand has been transformed into one of the hippest lineups on the floor.
The titans
The rear, west wall of the exhibit is dominated by the titans, Toyota and GM, which perennially vie for the title of biggest global automaker. Toyotaville’s avenue of Prius, Camrys, Scions, and SUVs gives way to miles of Chevys, Buicks, and GMCs. They should hand out Segways to explore them all. But notable in the acres of smart vehicles are two sports cars that burn with passion.
The Toyota FT1 concept is a ruby red roller-skate that will get speeding tickets standing still. Toyota calls it a concept, but its racy lines hint at the second-coming of the late-’90s Supra, the stallion that brought to the street Toyota’s years of racing experience. The Chevy Corvette Z06 is so closely aligned with the General’s racing program that it debuted alongside the Chevy C7.R race car that will take the green flag at the 24 Hours of Daytona later this month.
The 625-horsepower Z06 joins a lineup that already boasts a 455-horsepower base model and a convertible. You could buy all three for the price of a Lamborghini.
The underdogs
The exhibit space’s core features the smaller American and Japanese companies that try harder because they have to stay ahead of the titans galloping hooves. Nissan’s flowing Maxima concept and Mazda’s nimble 3 are the heart of these sporty brands while nearby Subaru’s AWD commitment has bred a cult of followers.
Detroit’s underdog, Chrysler, has rebounded from bankruptcy led by workhorses like the Grand Cherokee and SRT Viper GTS. This year, the company births a new entry into the midsize sedan segment. Want to see the child of an Italian-American marriage?
The Alfa Romeo-based Chrysler 200 is sleek, roomy, and loaded with tech — including a nifty rotary dial shifter that frees up the center console.
The engine boys
Anchoring the east wall of Cobo are Honda and Ford, a fitting couple. No two companies have been more innovative in bringing new drive-train technology to market. Both have storied racing histories. Both also bleed green. This year they add to their legends.
Honda shows the Honda Fit, a remarkably versatile tool for the compact car market with a cute face yet interior room that would make a minivan proud. Ford’s light-weight, turbocharged F-150 is the most talked about vehicle in town, a daring truck that refuses to sit on its laurels.
And then there’s the iconic Ford Mustang. The muscle car turns 50 this year with a plan to the conquer the world with more European styling and fuel economy while retaining its muscular attitude. Transformed, but still a pony car. Efficiency, but on Mustang’s terms.
That Detroit attitude is back.
Cartoon: Global Warming Ship Stuck
Posted by hpayne on January 6, 2014
2014 Formula Skip Barber: America’s entry-level race car
Posted by hpayne on January 4, 2014
The Payne family goes racing. From left: Sam Payne, Henry Payne Sr. (News auto critic), and Henry Jr. (Henry Payne / The Detroit News)
If the Honda Civic is America’s best-selling entry level sedan, then the Formula Skip Barber is our most popular entry-level race car.
Every year, some 10,000 drivers with the need for speed sign up for Barber driving school programs to experience high-performance cars on major U.S. race tracks. Over 500 of them will belt themselves into Barber’s open-wheel, so-called formula cars for a 3-day, $4000 racing school that will teach them how to race a purpose-built race car. The school attracts a menagerie of motor heads from enthusiasts checking their bucket list to boy racers climbing the racing career ladder. All receive a race license qualifying them for entry in Barber’s own racing series. In last year’s Indy 500 field, 66 percent of the car jockeys got their start in one of Barber’s race mules.
This Christmas holiday, the Payne family got behind the wheel for a test on Mazda Raceway in picturesque Laguna Seca, California.
Video: Henry Payne: Barber School
The Barber car was originally manufactured in 1986 by Mondiale for the racing school but has since been made in-house. The current car – there are 90 in Barbers stables nationwide – was last modified in 2000 and is powered by the old, 2.0 liter Dodge Neon engine. The four-banger produces 132 horsepower and is the only thing the car shares with your average grocery-hauler.
The cockpit is all business. The single-seater has no navigation screen, no radio, no cup-holders. All you get are the essentials: a tachometer and dials for monitoring oil and water temperature. Cloth seats? Fuhgetaboutit. A hard plastic bucket is standard. Back problems? Shove in as many foam inserts as you like. If there is a convenience to formula cars it’s that the steering wheel is removable – in order to help giants like your 6’5” author to get his knees under the dash. The inconvenience is no eight-way adjustable seats. Zero-adjustable, in fact. Pedals too close? The mechanics will have to find you another car with deeper pedals.
Where the 2.0-liter egg-beater originally resided in a 2,600 pound Neon with steel unibody and panels, the Barber car’s bullet-shaped, fiberglass body is mated to an aluminum tube frame weighing just 1,400 pounds. That makes for a nice 1:10.6 power-to-weight ratio – significantly better than the best compact pocket rocket today (the 247-horse Ford Focus ST’s ratio is 1:13) but well shy of an Indy racer at 1:2.5 (1,600 pound rocket ships lit with 650 hp).
Barber drivers can acclimate to a racing environment with enough power to thrill, but not enough to get them in serious trouble around Laguna’s legendary 2.2 mile, 11-turn roller coaster.
Our 16-man Barber school was a typically diverse lot ranging from a 15-year old karting ace to a 50-something who had never turned a wheel in anger to your racing-addicted scribe and his two sons. Track sessions over the three-day school are preceded by classroom instruction explaining everything from vehicle dynamics to course layout.
Suited up and safely secured in a five-point safety harness, you find a car surprisingly amenable for even those with little experience depressing a clutch pedal. The gearbox is a sturdy, 5-speed sequential that requires a pull for up-shifts and a push for downshifts. No mis-shift prone H-pattern to labor through, no double-clutching required for downshifts (though instructors urge a simultaneous blip of the accelerator with clutch depression to smooth downshifts under braking).
Press the starter button and the engine roars to life (burbles to life is more accurate – a can muffler swallows the end of the tailpipe, choking sound to preempt NIMBY nabobs from shutting down the track for disturbing the peace, destroying the planet, etc.). Row the gears on Laguna’s humped main straightaway and you’ll hit 120 mph before plunging into Turn 2, a daunting, 190-degree, second-gear, double-apex left hander. It is here that the race chassis really shines. The track demands driver precision and the car’s stiff frame and multi-link suspension takes you where you want to go with none of the drama of a sedan chassis (Barber offers a parallel school with race-prepared Mazda MX-5s and the formula cars run rings around the sports cars despite the Mazda’s 45 HP advantage). This predictability builds trust between driver and car — essential for the track’s signature, blind, downhill, corkscrew Turn 8 that would make a hardened Cedar Point roller coaster rider scream.
Armed with walkie talkies and strategically placed around the track, the school’s Barber-graduate instructors supplement the track experience with immediate input. Early track sessions bring each car to a “stop box” after each lap to review a driver’s mistakes and improvements. The advice is offered with a mix of instruction and fun. “If you’re going somewhere you don’t want to go, don’t go there faster,” quips one.
By Day Three, you and car are one. The final checker falls and the spell is broken. Back to real life. Back to work. Back to the Civic. Hmmm, how many Barber schools could I sell it for?
From Burgundy to Benz: Best (and worst) of 2013
Posted by hpayne on December 29, 2013
Will Ferrell as ‘Anchorman’ Ron Burgundy pitches Chrysler’s Durango. (AP)
It’s been a heckuva ride and we were there every click of the odometer. With 2013 in the rear-view mirror, The Detroit News’ expert auto team reflects on the most memorable developments of the last 12 months.
The Burgundy backfire
Bryce Hoffman
Auto reporter
Chrysler Group LLC kept it classy in 2013 by tapping Ron Burgundy to peddle its new 2014 Dodge Durango to the masses. Sales soared with the comedic clout of Will Ferrell. But Chrysler also learned why other automakers had not gone this way before when Burgundy bit the hand that fed him and lampooned the ute’s quality for an easy laugh on Conan O’Brien’s late night show.
VW OMG
Daniel Howes
Business columnist
Global domination is not as easy as it looks. Just ask the world-beaters from Wolfsburg, the Teutonic horde that would use its (maybe soon-to-be-union) assembly plant in Chattanooga to take the rich American market by storm. Instead, Volkswagen AG’s eponymous brand is on track to post a down year in a rising U.S. market, with sales off for each model in its lineup. VW’s North American boss, General Motors Co. refugee Jonathan Browning, is out to pursue other interests. VW’s Passat midsize sedan, dulled of overtly German cues to satisfy stereotypical American tastes, is falling short of expectations. And VW’s boast that it would be the next new-new thing in the States is proving hard to realize.
Turbos take over
Karl Henkel
Auto reporter
Automakers sold some three million vehicles with turbocharged engines in 2013, up from 2.1 million in 2012. That number will almost certainly grow, especially since two major automakers plan to make turbocharged engines their standard option in future vehicles. A top Volkswagen AG executive said earlier this year that the automaker plans to replace its three remaining, conventional gas engines with a completely turbocharged lineup in “three, four years maximum.” Turbocharged engines are more powerful and efficient than naturally-aspirated engines because more air and fuel is forced into the combustion chamber. Ford Motor Co. Vice President of Powertrain Engineering Joe Bakaj says conventional engines could soon become extinct in Ford’s lineup.
The year of Tesla
Henry Payne
Auto critic
For better and worse, 2013 was the Year of Tesla. The Palo Alto-based automaker proved that an auto startup could successfully launch in the highly regulated, capital-intensive industry while its luxury-electric compatriot Fisker sunk beneath the waves. Tesla’s mercurial CEO Elon Musk laid claim to becoming one of America’s great auto entrepreneurs even as he threw infantile temper tantrums when even friendly media (cue the New York Times) found flaws in his product. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration awarded the production Tesla S its highest safety rating, then announced the model was under investigation after two vehicles burned to the ground. And Tesla’s stock soared, then came back to earth when closer inspection revealed profits were based on fuzzy math like counting cash from leases and California global warming credits. Whatever the headline, Tesla demands to be watched.
From Government Motors to alternative motors
David Shepardson
Washington bureau chief
Best: The year 2013 was when the U.S. Treasury finally exited General Motors Co., ending the historic five-year bailout and partial government ownership of the Detroit automaker. Both the government and GM were eager to see the partnership end — even if it meant that taxpayers lost $10.5 billion.
Worst: Lots of hype for alternative fuels and technologies that may be a long way away from use in significant numbers: Cellulosic ethanol, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, E15 ethanol, and self-driving cars.
Caddy in the fast lane
Melissa Burden
Auto reporter
The new, midsize luxury Cadillac CTS truly made me want to drive fast. I test drove a model with the 2-liter turbocharged four-cylinder engine under the hood and found it highly capable. But Cadillac designers also did a lovely job with the entire package, from interior features to outside styling. No wonder my colleague Henry Payne named it his 2014 Vehicle of the Year. Sadly, this sedan — starting at about $46,000 — is not in my price range.
Driverless Benz
Neil Winton
Detroit News contributor
The most memorable moment of 2013 came at the Frankfurt Car Show when Dieter Zetsche, CEO of Daimler AG and Mercedes Cars, emerged from the rear of an S-class Mercedes limo which had driven on to the stage without no one at the wheel. Its computer had driven it there. Cynics who think the moon landings were filmed in New Mexico will look for signs of cheating, but I think this clever advance in technology will have huge ramifications. Accidents will be slashed, as will insurance premiums. Mothers Against Drunk Driving will disband. Infirm old people will be liberated. If you can move from your home to your destination in the back seat of your car, who’s going to take the train or plane? Highway speed limits will be raised when the new technology demonstrates it can eliminate accidents, cutting journey times.
Q&Auto: Tom Peters, Corvette designer
Posted by hpayne on December 22, 2013
Brawny, bold, and brash, the Corvette is the iconic American sports car
. When Chevy debuts a new design, the car has the presence of a rock star. Men’s knees buckle. Women swoon. Yet its lead designer, Tom Peters, is an unassuming, soft-spoken man who you would probably walk past at a fancy cafe as if he were any other patron.
Which is how I first encountered Peters, 59, in Palm Springs, Calif., this winter at the unveiling of Corvette’s new convertible. Thin and bespectacled, with a chin of grizzled whiskers that matches his balding pate, Peters sat alone studying a menu. Just a week into my new gig as Detroit News auto critic, I had to aska table-full of colleagues to identify him.
Peters (officially Chevy’s director of full-size truck and performance car exterior design) is as modest in demeanor as he is in appearance. There is no braggadocio. No bling. No hiding behind dark sunglasses. But when he talks cars, he is passionate and precise. I interviewed him about his latest prodigy, the 2014 Corvette C7.
HP: Let me start with the question that every motorhead asks every time we get a Corvette redo. Why stick with the front engine architecture as opposed to going mid-engine?
Peters: In addition to the balanced platform from a performance standpoint, there is usability: Where the passenger sits, the ability of getting in and out, and the usable storage space in the rear. I think it has become a kind of a brand key and a level of expectation for the Corvette customer. There’s something about a V-8 with a front location with the proportional fenders, that I like to refer to as a fire canopy on a fuselage. It’s part of Corvette’s DNA.
HP: How do you guys produce a car that performs on par with Ferraris and Porsches for half the price?
Peters: I don’t know if I can answer that completely. I think there is an element of scale. That engine is derived from our aluminum 6.2 liter engine that we utilize across platforms — most notably the trucks, actually. So it’s amortized over several platforms. Not having a multi-valve engine keeps prices down. And this is a production vehicle. There’s automation involved. There’s all those efficiencies.
HP: Why update the Stingray design? What is it about Stingray that made it right to do now?
Peters: The reason I’m in the business is because you always remember the first car you were involved with. I loved cars when I was a kid. Way back in third grade, I remember the local rich kid — his father one day pulled up in a silver, split-window Stingray. It was like a spaceship had landed. That left quite an impression over the course of my life growing up through the muscle car era. I’ve been trying to get Stingray on a car since the C5. But Ed Welburn (GM V.P of Global Design) said we’re not going to call this a Stingray unless we are confident that it lives up to the name.
HP: The front of the Stingray and the Ferrari F12 and the new Viper seem to share an international design language. True?
Peters: There might be, yes. We didn’t consciously look at them, but I think there are certain levels of functionality and where they need to be optimized. Our design challenges are universal.
HP: Talk about the Corvette racing program’s influence on the production car.
Peters: Incredible. I remember the day that former design executive director, Jerry Palmer, started the C5 program — I want to say 1996ish — they wanted a vision for Corvette and LeMans. I remember Jerry saying, we want the Z06 to be a race car for the street and we want brutal functionality. That set the tone. We spent more time together with the race team. The hood vent came from the race car; the radiator angle, the corner intakes, and moving the trans coolant to the rear had direct influences from the race car. That’s why this stuff is true design. Everything is done to feed the beast. When (the race team at Pratt & Miller) came and first saw this design, I kind of bowled them over.
Wagon wars: Subaru Impreza vs. BMW 328xi
Posted by hpayne on December 18, 2013
The Impreza is powered by a 2.0-liter DOHC aluminum-alloy 16-valve horizontally opposed SUBARU BOXER engine with Dual Active Valve Control System. It delivers 148 hp at 6,200 rpm and 145 lb-ft of torque at 4,200 rpm. Performance: 0-60 mpg, 8.0 seconds; 119 mph top speed (Car & Driver) (Subaru)
Seriously? I’m going to put the modest Subaru Impreza wagon up against the BMW 328xi uberwagon? The same 3-series that has made mincemeat of the luxury division? That has set the standard for sporty opulence? That has made Car & Driver’s Top Ten list for the last decade? Yes, I am. Why would I do it? Not to embarrass the little ’Ru, but quite the contrary.
If the all-wheel-drive 328xi is the gold standard, then at $20,000 less than King Bimmer, the AWD Impreza is simply the best bargain in all of Autodom.
My Subaru versus Bimmer test is not really a buyer’s guide, as shoppers for these cars will likely never step on the other’s lot. Rather, like comparing a Timex and Rolex, this face-off weighs the value of brand name and engineering in two products that occupy opposite poles of the midsize, C-wagon segment. It’s a diverse-price segment that, at its core, provides sporty, all-wheel-drive transportation to carry a family of four over the river, and through the woods (and up a steep, snowy driveway) to grandmother’s house.
First, a few comments on station wagons. I’m a supersized, 6-foot 5-inch Yankee, yet I’ve resisted America’s love affair with sport utes over wagons. I prefer low and fast. Our low speed limits and high seating preference has bred a car culture in which light trucks own over 50 percent of the market. In Germany, by contrast, sky-high gas prices and unlimited Autobahn speeds have favored smaller vehicles with a lower center of gravity. As a result, the American wagon has all but disappeared but for the luxury segment which is, naturally, dominated by European imports.
Hit the American motor mall in search of a wagon and you better pack gold bricks in your purse as most vehicles start north of $30,000, including non-German entries from Volvo and Cadillac. Enter the remarkable Japanese entry, Impreza wagon, which adheres to Subaru’s cult of four-wheel locomotion while sporting a base sticker price of $23K. With a nav system and sports trim, the 2.0i Sport Limited model tops out at just $26,600.
The ’Ru achieves this miracle even as it matches the luxury, $46,575 BMW 328xi on all-wheel drive, electronic stability control, heated seats, all-wheel disc brakes, anti-lock braking, an automatic tranny with steering-wheel mounted paddles, and a four-cylinder engine.
Behind the wheel, the low-slung Impreza combines Bimmer-like agility with all-wheel grip that could climb the face of Mount Rushmore. But step hard on the pedal and the BMW comparisons slow down. That’s because the Subaru’s 2.0 liter, 4-cylinder power plant shares the same displacement as the BMW — and not much else.
Possessed with almost 100 more horsepower than Subaru’s noisy boxer four, the gutsy Bavarian turbo blows the doors off the Impreza’s 148 horsepower on its way to 60 mph in just 6 seconds. It feels even faster than that thanks to the BMW’s smooth, 8-speed automatic while the Subaru’s continuously variable transmission (CVT) feels like its stuck in molasses, ponderously compelling the car forward.
So what? replies my long-suffering wife, pulling her motorhead husband back to earth. Her needs are more practical. Indeed, she celebrates the ‘Ru’s engine because it delivers better fuel economy (30 mpg) than the Bimmer (26). If it were up to me, we would have lugged the kids on family trips cramped in the backseat of a high-revving BMW M3 coupe. A typical car conversation in my family goes like this:
Me: It has a 330 horsepower and a Sport mode where you can override electronic stability control and really test the limits.
Her: Does it have cupholders?
The Impreza has common sense in spades. Where BMW has long resisted the American commuter culture’s demand for cup holders, Subaru (from a country that also features a train-bound commuter culture. One Japanese correspondent tells me he has never seen a drive-thru restaurant in Japan) provides two in the center console and one at the ankle of both driver and passenger. Rear passengers also get cup holders in the doors. BMW grudgingly succumbed to cup holders only with this year’s model, finally providing center-console/door holders after years of offering a single, flimsy, fold-out, dash cupholder that only Mayor Bloomberg could have loved. It barely held a Styrofoam cup much less a 32-ounce Big Gulp.
The Impreza also offers better rear headroom (I can sit up in the Impreza’s rear seat, a rare C-segment accomplishment) and cargo space than the Bimmer. And the instrument cluster is intuitive and aesthetically refined, even as the Impreza can’t compete with the German car’s beautifully trimmed, wood and silver design. Included in the Impreza’s bargain-basement price is a very competentnavigation system. BMW’s iDrive system takes the multimedia experience to another level, allowing coordination of phone, nav system, and car settings with a single dial located aft of the gearshift. Where its complexity once drove grown men to the nut farm, it has evolved into an impressive piece of digital equipment. That sophistication extends to a heads up driver display and a rear hatch where you merely need wave your foot under the bumper to open it.
But where it lacks electronic wow, the Impreza achieves its biggest victory in curb appeal.
Where BMW boasts the head-turning appeal of Heidi Klum, Subaru long turned off the uninitiated with its lumpy designs. If BMW has been tardy in recognizing the necessity of cup holders, Subaru has been late to recognize the importance of looks. But the current model is a huge step forward.
Like Elisa Doolittle in Pygmalian, the Impreza has learned the BMW’s aggressive stance and forward lines that converge in a front end with a pleasant, chrome accented grill and sculpted headlamps.
No one will mistake the poised duckling for the swan — and that difference is crucial to the German car’s luxury premium — but neither is the Subaru second class. Where ’Ru owners once hustled their passengers inside to show off the car’s road-hugging practicality, they can now proudly linger on its exterior.
Overall, the BMW is better looking and better equipped. Is it worth $20K more than the Impreza? That is the beauty of marketing and technology, and BMW is king because it sells automobiles as symbols of social status and athleticism. But the Impreza is a testament to the fact that you don’t need a luxury badge to drive an attractive and extremely capable sport wagon.
2014 Corvette Convertible: Christmas just got merrier
Posted by hpayne on December 12, 2013
Sitting on top of 6.6 million pounds of thrust (44 million horsepower), it’s been said that the manned Space Shuttle launches were the most exhilarating 0-60 times ever recorded. But astronauts didn’t get to do them with the top down.
Buckle up for launch in the 2014 Corvette C7 Stingray convertible.
Depress the clutch. Select first gear. Rotate the driving mode dial next to the shifter to “Track.” Stab the button — once, twice — on the top of the dial putting the car in “launch control” mode. With the clutch still depressed, floor the accelerator. No, really. The great beast howls, its RPM redlines at 6,000, its 460 horsepower and 465 pound-feet of torque straining at the leash.
Like the shuttle astronauts, you’ll feel like you’re strapped to a bomb. When the revs modulate to 4,000 RPM that’s your signal to drop the clutch and hang on for dear life. No wonder the new C7 comes equipped with two “passenger assistance grips” on the door and dash.
Incredibly, the C7’s 11-inch wide rear tires claw the asphalt and throw the car forward with no wheel spin, the space-age electronic traction control working beautifully. But the speed is breathtaking. Grab second. Your field of vision narrows. Your hair stands on end. A mere 3.8 seconds later you are at 60 mph and heading for orbit fast.
Thanks to the Vette’s massive Brembo brakes, you can quickly haul yourself back to earth then slink innocently away before the local city police department empties out looking for the source of the sonic boom they just heard.
“The wives always urge me not to tell their husbands about the launch control. But that’s always the first thing their husbands want to know about.” says Harlan Charles, Corvette’s product marketing manager who has been introducing loyal Corvette customers to the drop-top Stingray as it hits dealer lots this December.
I see the husbands nodding their heads. But they’re scratching them too. What’s that? Corvette has introduced its Corvette convertible in December?
Sure, the sleek toy makes for an excellent Christmas gift under the tree (especially in “adrenaline red,” the color of the car I tested), but shouldn’t convertibles be hibernating in the winter? Fear not, inhabitants of Snowtown, because one of the revelations of the 2014 Vette is not just its launch control but its cozy convertible cabin.
This is the 21st century after all. With its top up, the Stingray is not just secured tightly against the elements, but it’s quieter than the coupe. Where the Corvette’s cabin normally segues into the rear luggage compartment, the convertible top requires a separate space for storage when its down. That means a loss of luggage space (though your golf clubs will still fit comfortably), but better cabin quiet since you are now segregated from the trunk.
But I wouldn’t call you crazy (your wife might be another matter) if you tooled down Woodward topless on a 32 degree days either. That’s because the Vette’s raked windshield, ridiculously low .29 drag coefficient, dual cabin temperature controls, and heated seats make the interior surprisingly comfortable. Too chilly? No problem. Slow the car down to under 35 mph in the right lane, press the button, and the roof will deploy in a mere 20 seconds.
In my test of the convertible on a brisk, sub-60 degree California morning, I put on a cap to go with a light jacket, lit the heated seat, cranked the temperature control (located at my right knee on the dash) to 82 degrees, and sat comfortably in the passenger seat as a media colleague and I zipped along at 70 mph — talking easily despite an open top and a V-8 the size of a TRex at our feet.
Officially, Chevy says the convertible is appearing in dealerships now because the coupe model hit stores in September and the manufacturer wants to keep the product flowing. But the beauty of the drop top Stingray with electronic traction control is that it’s mobile 12 months of the year.
What can be said about the convertible that hasn’t already been said about the coupe?
It’s an all-business exterior, all-luxury interior two-door that delivers supercar performance at a quarter of the price of a Ferrari 458 Italia and half that of a Porsche 911. The Stingray I tested included stocking stuffers like 10-speaker Bose audio, heads-up display, active exhaust, MyLink navigation and those red Brembo calipers (hey, the socks gotta match the jersey) —goosing the $56 grand base price to $63,790.
It’s also surprisingly svelte given that this is a convertible – tipping the scales by just 70 pounds over the 3,298 lb coupe. This is achieved, says Corvette Chief Engineer Tadge Juecheter, thanks to the Corvette’s strong, backbone architecture, eliminating the need to add body reinforcement because the convertible’s severed B-pillar hoop isn’t structural. With an all-aluminum chassis and carbon-fiber hood, the Stingray’s weight and 50-50 balance make this one nimble athlete.
But for all the raw animal instincts the Stingray provokes, it exudes practicality. Thanks to its 7-speed transmission, it sports an EPA fuel economy rating of 17 city and 29 highway. Five different performance modes — Weather, Eco, Tour, Sport and Track — allow drivers to match the car to their mood. Most impressive is Corvette’s “rev-matching” technology which makes the roughest novice seem like a pro when downshifting. Don’t know how to heel-and-toe? No problem — the electronics will smooth out rough downshifts for you.
The car’s exterior is influenced by international style cues and Corvette’s racing program. The low front maw evokes Ferrari’s front-engined beauties and its day-glow LED lamps remind of its German competitors. But further back, the car’s extensive air venting to cool brakes and oil-systems is a direct result of its successful, LeMans-winning racing program with the legendary ZR1.
The 610-horsepower ZR1 briefly made an appearance in production form in 2008 and I had the chance to ring its neck around GM’s awesome Milford race track. My test of the new C7 convertible did not include track time, but Chevy engineers say that’ its 1.03-g skid-pad performance is already on par with the old, track-prepared, Z06 sport version.
I’ve noticed grown men in line to see Santa at the Somerset Collection. No doubt they’re asking for an adrenaline red Corvette convertible Stingray for Christmas.
2014 CORVETTE STINGRAY CONVERTIBLE
Vehicle type: Front engine, rear-wheel drive, two-door, sport convertible with eletronic retractable top
Price: $56,000 base ($63,790 as tested)
Engine type: 6.2 liter, aluminum V-8 with direct injection and dry sump, gas-power
Power: 460 horsepower, 465 pound-feet of torque
Transmission: Seven-speed manual, seven-speed automatic
Performance: 0-60 mpg, 3.8 seconds; 190 mph top speed (manufacturer)
Weight: 3,362 pounds
Fuel economy: EPA 17 mpg city/29 mpg highway
Highs: Comfortable cabin, best performance-to-price ratio in class
Lows: Might get you thrown in jail
Grade:★★★★
Camaro ZL1 is a Mustang-tamer
Posted by hpayne on December 7, 2013
ZL1 shares DNA with sibling Corvette (behind). (Henry Payne / The Detroit News)
The lower, wider, sleeker 2015 Mustang debuted this week to broaden its appeal to European and Chinese markets. “We’ve benchmarked it to the BMW M3 and the Porsche Cayman,” says Frank Davis, Executive Director of Ford North American Product Programs. But it’s not just foreign-born stallions that the iconic pony will be chasing.
It will also be hoofing after the Chevy Camaro.
Since the latest evolution of the Camaro in 2010, the chiseled sports sedan has displaced the mighty Mustang as America’s muscle car of choice. The Camaro appears poised to retain its title in 2013 with 77,000 in sales so far this year, a healthy 4,000 more than its rival. Just as significantly, the Camaro has carved out its own pop culture niche as star of Hollywood’s “Transformer” movies to counter Mustang’s celebrity status as a star of screen (“Bullitt”) and song (“Mustang Sally”). “The Transformers movie has made Camaro very popular in China,” says David Leone, GM Executive Chief Engineer for Performance Programs. High import duties keep sales low at 500 units a year, but the car’s celebrity gets new Chinese buyers inside showrooms.
But Camaro doesn’t succeed on good looks alone. Its independent suspension-induced athleticism has forced Mustang to abandon its solid rear axle for the first time in 50 years. Where the powerful Mustang made its name pulverizing the competition into submission, the Camaro floats like a butterfly and stings like a behemoth.
“If it were only about straight-line acceleration, we would take our fallout-shelter time machine back to the ’60s and stay there,” wrote Car & Driver in crowning Camaro best muscle car in 2012. “The Camaro does almost everything with more refinement and with more empathy for its driver. One’s a gorilla, the other’s a racehorse. Which one would you rather ride?”
A ride in the two bloodline’s top performers, the Mustang Shelby GT500 and Camaro ZL1 confirms that conclusion. The awesome, 662 HP GT500 is a ball in a straight line, but turn the wheel and the adventure begins. Thanks to electronic stability control, you can do lurid things in the $55K Shelby and never lose control. But I still wouldn’t recommend riding that wild horse on a country road without lessons first.
Not so Camaro’s ZL1 which I drove in Palm Spring’s intimidating San Bernardino Mountains recently.
With 580 HP and 556 lbs-ft of torque at its disposal from a 6.2 liter, supercharged V-8 (getting goose bumps, aren’t you?), the ZL1 can gobble up plenty of road, but throw it into a corner and you won’t be reaching for the ejector seat button. Thanks to magnetic ride shocks and supple suspension, the Camaro shares more DNA with its Corvette sibling than just an engine. The result is behavior more akin to a sports car than a bucking bronco. With the first rule of torque in mind — modulate, don’t floor, the pedal on a car with more than 3 liters out of corners — the big ZL1 blasted nimbly through the hills of California.
There are flaws, sure. For drive-in lovers the big Camaro’s tight back seat is not much of an option, and rear visibility is compromised by the car’s high window sills and big corner pillars. And the hand brake is on the passenger side of the center console. Huh? But even Arnold Schwarzenegger had gapped front teeth.
Competition lifts all boats — er, horses — and the Camaro-Mustang rivalry has delivered a class of muscle car almost unrecognizable 40 years ago. My $61,140 ZL1 came with accessories like leather Recaro sports seats, a grippy suede steering wheel, smoldering ring-white LED lights, and huge Brembo brakes hiding behind wide, 20-inch wheels front and rear.
Mustang will counter this weapons assault with a more fuel-efficient, 2.3-liter turbo engine in its entry-level 2015 pony to go with its more European face. That attention to the muscle car’s base customer looking for affordability — not just brawn —in their sports sedan should pay dividends with both women and foreign buyers (where ya’ gotta’ rob banks to afford gas). Will Camaro counter when it redesigns its icon? Will it reveal its own small-block turbo? Will it soften its menacing front cowl?
For now, the new Mustang has had to adapt to the Camaro, which, as the ZL1 proves, sets the standard for American muscle.
2014 Fiesta ST: The mouse that roared
Posted by hpayne on December 5, 2013
I love pocket rockets. These sedans-on-steroids for drivers with a lead foot but not enough silver in the bank to afford a Porsche have been around for decades. The offerings have included such icons as the Volkswagen GTI, the Ford Focus SVT, and the Honda Civic SI (I’ve owned two and came within a hair of owning an SVT). Well, pocket rocket lovers rejoice, because now they’re available in subcompact size too.
Meet the Ford Fiesta ST, which joins the Fiat 500 Abarth and Mini Cooper S in this rambunctious niche.
I’m already a fan of the base Fiesta which I like to rent when I’m on the race circuit, traveling to tracks to pilot my Ford-powered Lola sports racer. The stylish little four-door has plenty of room for my 6-foot 5-inch frame and luggage, while providing rear seating and superb fuel mileage (race trips are expensive enough without guzzling gas). But let’s face it: Despite its name, the Fiesta is hardly a party on wheels.
Enter the ST (a member of the Blue Oval’s Sport Technologies brand), which finally lives up to the car’s name — and not because it’s made in Mexico. With nearly 200 horsepower driving the front wheels, this five-door hot hatch brings performance to this segment without sacrificing roominess. Indeed, the car’s five-door configuration is an improvement even on the base four-door, with ample cargo room (even with a spare tire in the rear quad).
The ST’s fascia conforms to the Ford line’s attractive, Aston-mouth theme that adorns everything from the Fusion to the Fiesta to the coming 2015 Mustang (brace yourselves, pony car faithful). The ST version says hello with a tinge of menace, its slit headlights peering out over a honeycomb-mesh black grille. Its stance is aggressive, its body lowered by almost an inch from the base model, its rear haunches raised like a cat — well, kitty — ready to spring. The ST begs to be noticed from its snout to its rear spoiler to its color palette.
My ST came in lime green. Ford calls it Green Envy.
“Not my color,” my wife said when Ford delivered it to my driveway (would you prefer Molten Orange, dear? Race Red, maybe?). But if the outside screams “boy toy,” the inside is very passenger-friendly. Sure, the ST is built for speed, but it comes with a generous helping of accessories.
The grey-toned, ST-badged Recaro seats have hefty hip huggers to keep you centered when pulling Gs. But the interior’s built for comfort, too. Heated seats. Convenient cupholders in the center console and door pockets. My wife quickly warmed to this hot hatch.
A useful MyFord Touch screen sits atop the center console with dial-themed climate and radio controls. The screen itself is easily programmed for your favorite radio stations and smartphone. Indeed, I found the Sync system to be one of the easiest in any car I’ve driven to set up. An iPod jack and two USB ports are within easy reach, at the driver’s elbow. The Fiesta knows its digitally connected young shopper.
Open the rear doors and the ST is surprisingly roomy. My head hit the ceiling, but no more so than in the rear seat of a BMW 3-series. If you’re not a circus freak like me, you’ll fit comfortably. You’ll also find the door grips useful for your maniacal driver. Because once the pilot pushes the start button (just like a C7 Vette!), this little tamale wants to boogie.
You’ll find yourself picking fights against bigger game. I hooked up with an aggressive, brand-new BMW 320 on Southfield Road. My Green Goblin slimed him out of the next light, surprising the Bimmer with its torque. The ST comes in stick only and the compact throw shifter and closely placed pedals are perfectly situated for combat. Shift throws are compact, heel-and-toe downshifts easy. Like all pocket rockets, the horsepower is delivered to the front wheels, which takes some getting used to given the power on demand. In low gear on Michigan Avenue, the furious front paws feel like they are throwing bricks left and right as I row the gears.
My gold-standard for pocket rockets is the 2003 Honda Civic SI and its 100-horses-per-liter, normally-aspirated 8,000 RPM engine. The Fiesta’s 6,000 redline can’t rival the SI’s glorious exhaust note above 6,000 RPM, but the ST’s turbocharged engine provides its own charm with plentiful torque from 2,500 RPM where the Honda is wanting. Indeed, that the ST is comparable to the larger, one-generation old Civic SI is testimony to how capable Ford’s subcompact is. The little Ecoboost engine may be the same power plant that inhabits the Ford Fusion and Ford Escape — but tweaked for 20 more horses and beating inside the Fiesta’s lighter, 2,700-pound body, it acts like a different animal.
This is the mouse that roared.
The ST leaves its subcompact competition panting. At a mere $25 grand fully loaded, it’s about $5,000 cheaper than its competition, the Fiat Abarth and Mini Cooper S. Its 0-60 mph acceleration is just shy of the Mini and a half-second faster than the Fiat. Cargo space? Fuhgettaboutit. The ST’s five doors mean you can fill it with friends and baggage.
The subcompact ST’s performance will force shoppers for bigger, compact hot hatches to take a look. Even the Fiesta’s big brother — the snarling, 252-horsepower Focus ST — should be nervous about the Fiesta’s better brakes and nearly comparable, .92 G skid pad handling according to Car&Driver testing (though big brother is a bargain too at just $2,500 more). My standard, rental Fiesta returns an impressive 36 mpg, but even as I flogged the Fiesta ST from stoplight to stoplight across Metro Detroit, it still returned a handsome 28 mpg.
The fun of a sports car without the thirst. Hey, Honda Fit, Chevy Spark, Mazda 2 … won’t you join the subcompact party?
As Obamacare implodes, what’s the GOP alternative?
Posted by hpayne on November 5, 2013
Robert Young, a 29-year old independent filmmaker in Lansing, had his health insurance plan canceled. In Sherman Oaks, Calif., meanwhile, Anthem Blue Cross has canceled 64-year old Yale Goodman’s policy after 20 years, offering him a replacement plan with a $1,129 monthly premium, up from $594.
From young to old, from heartland to coast, millions of Americans are feeling the effects of President Obama’s fraudulent Affordable Care Act that promised lower costs and no loss of coverage.
But in crisis there is opportunity, and Obamacare’s pain has created a Republican opening for a workable alternative that actually addresses the twin problems of high costs and the uninsured. Despite a conservative consensus on free-market health care reform, Republican leadership has so far been content to point out the ACA’s flaws. But if America is to be rescued from Obamacare’s botched, centrally-planned surgery, Republicans must pivot to a positive solution.
Like Young and Goodman, the policies of some 15 million people in the individual health market are threatened (ironic since the ACA remade the entire health system to address an estimated 12-32 million uninsured). But they are just the first wave of ACA casualties. An estimated 129 million Americans will ultimately see their plans canceled or premiums hiked, finds Duke University economist Christopher Conover, due to mandates on employer-provided insurance. But what is also clear is that a return to the pre-Obamacare status quo is unacceptable.
Fortunately, GOP-sponsored plans are shovel ready and straightforward in implementation.
Michigan representatives Dan Benishek, R-Crystal Falls, and Mike Rogers, R-Brighton, are at the forefront of legislative proposals that build on President Bush’s 2007, consumer-based insurance reform. Indeed, Dubya’s plan would likely be the law of the land today had he not been weakened by his own over-reach into Iraq. As it was, his health reform was DOA in Nancy Pelosi’s Democratic House.
The Galen Institute’s Grace Marie-Turner, a health care expert who recently met with GOP leadership on health reform, says the GOP plans share three basic elements:
– Federal dollars to incentivize states to create high-risk pools/exchanges for individuals with pre-existing conditions (Utah already had implemented a state exchange for small business and scholars like Shikah Dalmia at Reason have advocated deregulating Obamacare’s exchanges to include Medicaid and Medicare recipients).
– Extending employer-based tax credits to individuals so that health tax benefits follow the individual, not the job (most uninsured are between jobs).
– Allow states to create interstate insurance pools, broadening the individual and small business marketplace.
These reforms are at the center of the Empowering Patients First Act, co-sponsored by physicians Benishek and Rep. Tom Price, R-Georgia, a comprehensive alternative that Price first introduced in 2009. The bill extends health tax credits to individuals, which would grant consumers the same buying power as businesses.
“Dr. Benishek has consistently argued in support of replacing Obamacare with patient-centered reforms like allowing insurance to be sold over state lines (and) making health insurance portable,” says a spokesman.
Rep. Rogers’ reform, the 2009 American Health Care Solutions Act, includes similar provisions and echoes Bush’s plan in directing federal health dollars to the states to set up high-risk pools covering pre-existing conditions.
Josh Archambault, a health policy expert with the Pioneer Institute in Massachusetts, has embraced similar solutions as Romneycare — Obamacare’s troubled model — has goosed premiums and reduced choice. However, he says that Romneycare was successful in addressing pre-existing conditions. How? By extending employer rules to individual policies prohibiting insurers from asking about pre-existing conditions.
It is not enough for Republicans to watch as the Obamacare Hindenburg explodes. “My goal is always to have a positive alternative if the current system isn’t working,” Rep. Price tells National Review. “And in health care, the current system clearly isn’t working.”
Republicans have the tools. Time to lead.
Barack Bush: The lesson of Iraq and Obamacare
Posted by hpayne on October 30, 2013
Barack Obama’s second term is getting off to a disastrous start not unlike George Bush’s did: Both are promising surges to fix flawed polices. Bush’s troop surge was an attempt to salvage the bad decision to invade Iraq. Obama’s tech surge is an effort to save a wrong-headed Washington takeover of the insurance health market.
Both Iraq and Obamacare should be lessons to future presidents: Enough with the grand, ideological Big Government crusades.
Rather than eradicating the problem — Al Qaida in Afghanistan — Bush tried to remake the Middle East with a nation-building, democracy-spreading invasion of Iraq. Rather than fixing the problem — an uninsured population caused by employer-based health insurance — Obama tried to remake the entire health system. Washington can’t build democracies, and neither can it remake insurance markets.
Tellingly, both ideological adventures were sold with bad intel: Bush promised Iraq had WMD, Obama promised no one would lose their existing insurance plans. Both disasters hit Americans where they live.
As the casualties rolled in, middle-class support for Iraq ebbed away. And as middle-class insurance policies are cancelled and premiums skyrocket, so too will Obamacare support dry up. (The difference? Unlike Obamacare, Dubya at least secured bipartisan support for Iraq before committing the country.)
Note to future chiefs: Stick to government budget reform, tax reform, entitlement reform. Stay out of foreign countries and private markets.
Romneycare foretells Obamacare failures
Posted by hpayne on October 29, 2013
Mitt Romney’s health care reform law in Massachusetts has gone down a path that should concern supporters of Obamacare. (David Goldman / AP)
Weeks after the botched rollout of Obamacare’s exchanges, Democrats are desperately trying to reassure Americans that a not-ready-for-primetime website is unrelated to the benefits customers will experience when they can finally enroll.
“Despite this initial bump in the road, we must remember the Affordable Care Act is more than a website,” wrote Congressman John Dingell, D-Dearborn, in a constituent email over the weekend. “It’s affordable, quality health insurance made available to everyone.”
But that reassurance is no more credible than the fib that website crashes were due to high traffic volumes. Yes, Obamacare is more than a website — it is more premium hikes, more government deficits, more waiting to get care. How do we know?
Because Obamacare is modeled after Massachusetts’ 2006 health care law. Indeed, President Obama will be in Boston Wednesday singing its praises. But for the last seven years, Romneycare has failed in its promise of lower costs, better care access and universal coverage.
Passed by Republican Gov. Mitt Romney and a Democratic legislature, Romneycare pioneered Obamacare’s now familiar individual mandate, government-built health exchanges, and Medicaid expansion. Defensive about his signature gubernatorial achievement being the model for his presidential rival’s unpopular reform, Romney in 2012 said that reform should be state-based and not centrally-planned from Washington, D.C.
Romneycare was actually tailored for the known demographics of its state’s uninsured population, unlike its wide-open federal counterpart. As a result, Romneycare’s smooth rollout was a contrast to Obamacare’s chaos.
But, ominously, the wheels started to come off as Romneycare’s features kicked in. Within two years of its launch, the program’s costs were exploding.
“Coverage for the uninsured in the state exchange was more expensive than estimated,” says Josh Archambault, director of Health Care Policy at Massachusetts’ Pioneer Institute, of 20 percent cost over-runs that necessitated tax hikes. To control costs, he adds, Massachusetts also doubled down on exchange regulation, reducing customers’ choices.
What’s more, Romneycare inflated state health premiums that were already among the nation’s highest. Which is to say, while Romneycare has failed to reduce costs, its residents were already paying for a heavily regulated system. Not so for the rest of America, which is now witnessing sticker shock as Washington imposes Massachusetts-sized costs on everyone. Michigan premiums for an average family will grow 12 percent, according to exchange data compiled by the Heritage Foundation. Indiana’s premiums rise 26 percent; Florida’s 25 percent.
Massachusetts’ health entitlement spending ballooned to 40 percent of its budget (and you thought Michigan’s 25 percent was out of control). But didn’t all this spending lead to universal health coverage in Massachusetts? No. The state already had an unusually low 6 percent of its population uninsured. Romneycare has cut that number in half, mostly with hundreds of millions in government subsides. But coverage is still not universal.
Meanwhile, access to health care has declined.
If Romneycare predicted Obamacare’s high costs, it warns of worse: growing physician shortages as regulations drive caregivers from the market. A 2011 survey “by the Massachusetts Medical Society reveals that fewer than half of the state’s primary care practices are accepting new patients, down from 70 percent in 2007,” reports Anne-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute. “The average wait time for a routine checkup with an internist is 48 days. It takes 41 days to see an OB/GYN, up from 34” in one year.
This doctor shortage, driven by poor government reimbursement for health services, also has increased hospital emergency room visits, contradicting Obama’s — and Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder’s — claim that Medicaid expansion will reduce uncompensated care. Just 53 percent of internists and 62 percent of family physicians, for example, will see Massachusetts Medicaid patients.
“Insurance rates have continued to increase with more mandates like fertility coverage,” says Paul Bachman, director of research for Boston’s Beacon Hill Institute. “So now the governor has approved price controls that dictate that health costs can’t increase more than inflation.” That means more doctor shortages.
As Romneycare shows, the future does not fulfill John Dingell’s promise. The Affordable Care Act is unaffordable.
Obamacare’s middle-class sticker shock
Posted by hpayne on October 22, 2013
President Obama defended his health care reform at the White House on Monday, citing three consumers who he says have benefited from the law. But millions of others are losing their insurance policies, or are seeing premiums balloon. (Chip Somodevilla / Getty)
Last week I got news that my health insurance costs are going up. A lot. In 2014 my monthly premium for a family of four will increase 15 percent to $575, my deductible will double to $3,000 and I will lose my drug coverage, adding another $100 a month to my expenses. My story is typical for employees of Gannett, the Detroit News’ parent company, and other businesses across the country.
Obamacare is not just creating havoc in state exchanges, it is roiling the larger private health insurance market. Costs are skyrocketing thanks to the expensive mandates, regulations and taxes buried in the Affordable Car Act.
Call it the Unaffordable Care Act.
Billed by President Barack Obama as a historic reform that would reduce heath insurance costs by $2,500 a year and cover 40 million uninsured, the program is dictating terms to every health insurer while offering employees a grim choice of rising costs with their company plan or seeking refuge in unworkable, expensive government-run state exchanges.
While many small employers have welcomed a delay in the ACA’s employer mandate until 2015, businesses that already provide insurance are facing Obamacare’s new reality. The bad news has come in waves as companies like Home Depot and Trader Joe’s announced they are dropping coverage for part-time employees. Hundreds of thousands of consumers are losing their “mini-med plans” because they don’t meet Washington’s minimum requirements. Now come the premium increases for self-insured businesses that an analysis by Duke University’s Center for Health Policy estimates will cost an average family $800 a year. In Michigan, for example, insurance costs for the Extreme Chrysler dealership in Jackson are going up 70 percent and Michigan Group Benefits insurance says its clients’ average increase is 23 percent.
The $2,100 cost jump in my Gannett plan, administered by United Health, is actually worse than it appears, as my premiums have already swelled by 45 percent since 2011 as insurers anticipated federal regs forcing, for example, coverage of dependents up to 26 years old. Gannett must also swallow a $63 tax for each individual in its group plan and another $2.13 fee per head to “study heath care outcomes.” Similar costs threaten private, union-negotiated health plans, leading Teamsters President Jimmy Hoffa to say Obamacare will “destroy the very health and well being of our members.”
“Health care costs historically have been going up 7 percent a year, so anything above that is probably due to provisions in Obamacare,” concludes Drew Gonshorowski, a policy analyst for the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Analysis, who says the ACA’s over-regulation is upsetting important insurance calculations like “age-brand compression” that balances risk pools.
“Insurance pricing is one of the most complicated, difficult-to-price markets,” he says. “The ACA doesn’t allow insurers to price freely.”
Obamacare promises that its state exchanges offer insurance options, but the government-run system is dysfunctional. Three weeks after its launch, the federally run Michigan Health Care Exchange is still a nightmare. In the first two weeks I couldn’t sign up because the three security questions wouldn’t load. Last week, the security questions were finally there, but then I stalled at the next page. After waiting in a chat room, an Obamacare assistant finally responded: “Unfortunately, (high volume) is causing some glitches for some people trying to create accounts, log in, and complete their application. Keep trying and thanks for your patience.”
But if/when if I do get in, more sticker shock awaits.
An analysis of the feds’ own data by Heritage’s Gonshorowski finds Michigan consumers (as in most states) will experience cost increases across the board. For a family of four, the state exchange will increase costs from $771 to $864 per month. Even for a 27-year old, the youth demographic on which exchanges depend to subsidize older applicants, the exchange increase costs from $117 to $255 per month, a 118 percent hike.
“The essence of the law is working,” said the president at his Monday news conference. “The prices are lower than we expected, the choice is greater than we expected.” Do you believe him or your lying eyes?
THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT You didn’t build that, Mr. Obama
Posted by hpayne on October 15, 2013
The rollout of Obamacare has been a disaster. You did build that, President Obama. (Charles Dharapak / AP
)
The disastrous rollout of the $634 million Affordable Care Act health exchange this month is the latest in a long line of flawed Obama administration investments. From green energy startups to the health market overhaul, the White House has wasted billions in taxpayer dollars.
Meanwhile, Aon Hewitt’s private health insurance exchange serving thousands of corporate employees has launched without a glitch. How come? Because when it comes to his federally-funded businesses, President Barack Obama didn’t build that.
“Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges,” sneered the president in the 2012, belittling American entrepreneurs. “If you’ve got a business – you didn’t build that.”
But Obama has it backwards. Private enterprise creates markets at enormous financial risk to entrepreneurs and investors. Government infrastructure follows. Henry Ford built the auto industry; the resulting tax revenue built roads. Private investment demands results, or the capital goes elsewhere. By contrast, the president is spending taxpayer money with political, not financial, goals. No business plan. No beta test. No consequences. If the Obamacare exchange is a catastrophe, so what? Taxpayers can’t disinvest.
“Obama would have had his own resources at risk if this were a private company,” says Michigan political consultant Stu Sandler. “But it’s not. The result is hundreds of millions of dollars spent on a website that doesn’t work.”
As the federal health exchange was crashing, a private health exchange serving businesses like Walgreens’ 160,000 employee workforce was going smoothly. Why?
Because the exchange’s creator, health consulting firm Aon Hewitt, has had to meet customer demands or lose business. So before it rolled out its exchange in 2011, Hewitt first beta tested its exchange on its own employees.
Despite over three years of preparation, Obamacare tripped out of the gate (“It’s not even ready for beta testing in my book,” computer programmer Luke Chung told CBS News). Imagine if the White House had subjected its own executive branch employees to it first?
Hewitt then rolled out its innovative exchange for Sears and Darden Restaurants in 2012. The exchange is designed so that businesses give their employees “credits” (subsidies) to shop multiple insurance plans for their health needs. Unlike the clunky, one-size-fits-all federal exchange, Aon Hewitt spokeswoman Maurissa Kanter says her firm administers health benefits to 9 million employees, conducts client sign-ups on a rolling timeline rather than opening to everyone on the same day.
Impressed, Walgreens this year signed up for the Hewitt exchange, along with more than a dozen other companies. Satisfied customers Sears and Darden have also renewed their contracts for 2014.
“We can offer better coverage options through the private exchange for our employees,” says Walgreens spokesman Michael Polzin. Wary of previous government-run health efforts like Medicaid, companies like Walgreens have resisted dumping their employees into the federal exchanges – even as they feel compelled to provide employees health coverage in a competitive labor market.
Obamacare has already broken its promise to allow employees to keep existing coverage. Walgreens employees, meanwhile, have been able to keep their coverage with Blue Cross and United Health, while getting more insurers and more plans. Without government-imposed mandates that make insurance premiums prohibitive for young people, the Aon Hewitt exchange offers high-deductible plans for healthy consumers at just $5 a month.
The president compared the Obamacare meltdown to Apple’s difficulties in rolling out its latest iPhone operating system. But the Apple comparison only magnifies Obamacare’s biggest flaw: It doubles down on employer-provided health care rather than liberating insurance markets by extending the health tax credit to individuals. Giving individuals the power to buy their own health care would decouple health insurance from employment and vastly expand their range of insurance options, just like they have in smartphones.
“Apple can’t allow its stockholders to face this sort of failure,” says Sandler. “It has doubled over to fix the problem to prevent losing customers.” Because Apple built it.
Obama repeats Granholm’s government shutdown
Posted by hpayne on October 7, 2013
Before President Barack Ex-Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm’s dismissive relationship with key legislative leaders like House Leader Mike Bishop (right) contributed to repeated government shutdowns. AP photo. )
Obama won re-election with a negative assault on Mitt Romney’s wealth, former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm’s 2006 class warfare campaign earned her a second term over businessman Dick DeVos.
Before Obama launched his second term with a GOP-defying State of the Union speech demanding more spending to stimulate a sluggish economy, Granholm’s 2007 State of the State speech promised the same. And before Obama and the GOP went over the cliff on a government shutdown, Granholm and Republicans took the plunge in 2007.
Michigan has seen this train wreck before. We are reliving Granholm’s failed second term.
The dysfunctional tenures of Obama and Granholm are a lesson in what ails Washington today and what once dogged Michigan: A lack of executive branch leadership. While the pundit class sniffs at the current shutdown as an aberration “brewed by the tea party” (as The Washington Posts’ reliable purveyor of conventional wisdom, E.J. Dionne, puts it), the Michigan shutdown came in 2007 — before the tea party existed — because Democrats and Republicans have fundamentally different visions about the role of government.
Such governing splits are hardly unprecedented and demand executive leadership. In the tense budget standoffs of the early 1980s, former President Ronald Reagan and House Speaker Tip O’Neill built a relationship based on respect. “Horse trading, compromise and negotiation made the government work,” recounts ex-Reagan Chief-of-Staff James Baker in The Wall Street Journal. Bill Clinton too “was willing to negotiate when he had a body controlled by the opposite party.”
But in the Obama and Granholm eras, that leadership has been absent.
Harvard Law School-trained and charismatic — but with little governing experience — Granholm and Obama are political twins who manage by elevating demagoguery over political relationships. As a result, their governing styles breed crisis after crisis.
In the first budget of her second term, Granholm insisted on new taxes to pay for new green “investments” even as Michigan’s economy struggled. Similarly, Obama has insisted on enacting Obamacare despite evidence its mandates are strangling job creation.
Grassroots activists are the backbone of both political parties and in 2007, pink pig-hauling activist Leon Drolet stiffened elephant spines by threatening to recall legislators who supported Granholm’s tax hike. Battle lines were drawn: pro-Big Government House Democrats vs. small government Senate Republicans. Lansing careened toward a shutdown. Ratings services warned the state’s bond rating would be downgraded.
But rather than bridge the divide, Granholm reacted with a page right of Obama’s playbook. “People will die,” she said of Republican offers to cut services rather than raise taxes. No negotiations. Just a relentless game of shutdown chicken.
Granholm “appeared to be disassociated from the process, except to issue occasional press releases criticizing ‘the legislature’ or ‘Senate Republicans’ for failing to adopt her budget recommendations,” wrote the Mackinac Center.
Sound familiar?
For five years, Obama has neglected the hard work of building relationships with Congress. Instead of fighting the country’s fiscal fires, he has given incendiary speeches. And when the GOP foolishly overreached and demanded defunding Obamacare, Obama predictably reacted in kind, putting Washington on course for shutdown.
Where do we go from here? Granholm’s second term foreshadows more of the same. Following the 2007 debacle (Republicans caved to a tax hike yet deficits soared), Granholm would go on to preside over another shutdown in 2009.
Ex-GOP Senate leader Mike Bishop recounts he and Democratic House Speaker Andy Dillon tried futile compromises (a bromance that does not exist between Boehner and Reid). Yet Granholm ignored them, plastering notices in public buildings that read “State offices are CLOSED effective Thursday, Oct. 1, 2009, due to the Michigan Legislature’s failure to act to meet its constitutional responsibility to enact a balanced budget.”
“Boy, that’s the kind of leadership and maturity citizens expect from their state’s CEO,” wrote MIRS political analyst Susan Demas for MLive. “Stay classy, Jenny.”
Having failed to head off a 2013 shutdown, the White House is shutting down WW2 memorials to maximize public pain. Stay classy, Barack.