By Kevin Miller

04.24.2008

Volkswagen of America announced this week that they will introduce a no-charge scheduled maintenance program on all MY2009 vehicles. Called Carefree Maintenance Program, it will provide the scheduled maintenance described in each vehicle’s maintenance booklet for the length of the factory warranty (3 years/36000 miles). An additional inspection and adjustment service will be offered within the first 90 days or 6000 miles of ownership. The first available 2009 Volkswagen vehicle will be the Tiguan crossover.

Volkswagen’s press release was cleverly worded to state that all “current” Volkswagen vehicles combine the use of synthetic motor oil and state-of-the-art German engineering to require maintenance every ten thousand miles (meaning that each of those cars will get free maintenance at 10k, 20k, and 30k miles), while the service requirements of the forthcoming (Chrysler-sourced) Routan minivan will receive free scheduled maintenence at 6k, 12k, 18k, 24k, 30k, ad 36k miles. What that statement implies, then, is that the Routan does not benefit from that same state-of-the-art engineering, and will cost VW more money per vehicle in this service program. But I digress.

While no-charge maintenance has been offered by some luxury carmakers for over a decade, Volkswagen is the first to provide such an offering to the mainstream auto market. Volkswagen’s ambitious US sales goals will only be met if they are able to set themselves apart from their competition in the mainstream market, and offering free scheduled maintenance is one way to do that. Unlike warranty costs, which can vary depending on component failures, scheduled maintenance costs are known, and can easily be factored into the price of a new vehicle.

Addition of the Carefree Maintenance Program will likely cause VW to raise prices for their cars, though it is pure speculation whether the price increase will fully cover the cost of the program. If not, the program will eat into already-thin profits that are a result of the disadvantageous exchange rate between the euro and the dollar. Adding this program nudges Volkswagen ever-so-slightly toward the realm of a luxury carmaker, which could help some consumers justify spending the extra money to buy a Volkswagen rather than a competing (and usually cheaper) domestic or Asian vehicle.

On the other hand, while no-charge scheduled maintenance is nearly universal across luxury marques in the US, such a program isn’t necessarily a given. Volvo has offered such a program for nearly a decade, but to hold down vehicle price increases the program was quietly discontinued for the 2006 model year. Evidently Volvo believed the costs outweighed their lure to prospective customers. Finding out that was not the case, Volvo’s program is back for MY2008. If Volkswagen finds that their program is causing vehicle prices to be be uncompetitive with other cars in their respective segments, pulling the plug on the Carefree Maintenance Program would be an way to remove cost from their offerings.

Whatever the outcome, adding no-charge scheduled maintenance to a volume brand is an interesting idea, and it is a clever move on Volkswagen’s part. It will likely be attractive to shoppers who are wary of vehicle maintenance costs, especially for those shoppers who would otherwise avoid VW because they believe that it is more expensive to service a European car than it is to service a domestic or Asian car. If VW can get some of those shoppers (who would not have otherwise considered buying a Volkswagen) into their stores and buying their cars, the program will have been a success.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net- All Rights Reserved

By Andy Bannister

04.24.2008

New Chinese cars with improbable names are ten-a-penny these days, and you’d be forgiven for thinking the Roewe 550, launched this week in Beijing, fits in to that category.

There’s a clue in that odd name, however – Roewe is the mangled form of Rover, that ill-used but once proud British marque. The new moniker was invented by Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation (SAIC) after it made off with a cupboard full of bankrupt British company’s designs, but not the Rover name.

At the time rights to the title belonged to Ford, and it is now the property of Tata, thanks to its recent purchase of Land Rover.

SAIC already makes the big Roewe 750, a facelifted version of the much-underrated Rover 75 executive saloon, transported lock, stock and barrel to China . Since SAIC took over Nanjing (which originally got the rights to the MG half of the old UK company) it now has in-house competition in the shape of the 75-derived MG 7.

In its last desperate years the old MG Rover company lacked a decent mid-sized car to compete with the likes of the Focus and Golf in Europe. Their entry, the feeble 45, was a Rover-grilled version of a fairly ordinary Honda from the early 1990s. With the new 550, Roewe has effectively introduced its version of the car Rover couldn‘t afford to put into production.

Based on a cut-down version of the BMW-developed Rover 75 platform , the 550 was being planned before MG Rover collapsed in 2005 and that work has carried on with the help of British consultancy, Ricardo. The initial 550 has a 1.8-litre turbo engine, with other ex-Rover power units to follow.

The largely British-designed 550, then, looks modern although lacks any real character, as you might expect from its strange Anglo-Chinese parentage. It is a mish-mash of styling cues from makers around the globe, but is not going to turn many heads.

A sportier MG version is likely to follow in close order, and could be the car which finally brings that name back to Europe. Certainly, although tarnished it in recent times, it is still a much more exportable and familiar marque that Roewe.

Despite endless false dawns, the Chinese persist in encouraging journalists to believe, even now, that large-scale MG production of some kind will one day restart at the mothballed old MG Rover plant in Longbridge, Birmingham.

This still seems highly unlikely – would a British-assembled Chinese kit make financial sense, and, more importantly, why would anyone want to buy one?

SAIC must have poured a fortune into this project as well as the purchase of Nanjing, and so far the results have been modest to say the least. The cars’ sales are miles behind Chinese competitors like Chery and Geely – in 2007 Roewe shifted just over 16,500 of its 750 model in China, and the MG7 sold little more than 3,000.

Over many years, despite some promising designs, Rover persistently failed to make profits or persuade enough customers to buy its cars. If things are to turn around for the Chinese who now have inherited the company’s mantle and heritage, the 550 and its forthcoming MG twin need to lay the ghost of past failures once and for all.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

(from left to right: Top Gear hosts Jeremy Clarkson, Richard Hamm and James May)

By Alex Ricciuti

04.23.2008

There have been some minor rumblings about bringing the BBC’s Top Gear to US television. As Jay Leno confirmed in a recent Sunday Times piece, NBC has bought the US rights to Top Gear and has asked him to host the American version of the show. Leno turned them down (wisely, I believe) and in his column he explains why he thinks a direct translation would not work. I agree. At least, not on network television.

There are many challenges to a US adaptation of the show, the main one being that the BBC’s independence from advertising allows it’s hosts, in particular, the lethally-tongued Jeremy Clarkson, to bread and fry any car they don’t like. In fact, that is the main appeal of the BBC show and part of a trait that is perhaps uniquely British – reveling in the language of clever insult and sardonic savaging.

For the show to survive on network/commercial television it would have to get most of its sponsorship from the automakers themselves, who are one of the largest buyers of prime-time TV advertising anyway. Leno says it himself in his column, that you couldn’t criticize the cars anywhere near how they do so on Top Gear because the car makers would pull their advertising and the network would pressure the hosts to tone it down and hence, the formula is no longer. Leno should know something about all the sensibilities required for working in TV; his Tonight Show has been the leading late-night talk show for about 15 years.

But even if NBC were to take the show to cable, like the Discovery Channel, owned by NBC Universal, you still have the fundamental problem of whether there is really any sizable audience for such a show. A cable channel would not be dependent on ad sales and would require a much smaller audience for the show to be a hit, but they would still need to have broad appeal. Why wouldn’t there be? Because, there is no equivalent car culture in the US as there is in the UK or Germany, which has about half a dozen popular car shows on TV too Some of those German shows air on private networks that run on advertising dollars. Those advertisers include automakers and, hence, the reviews are relatively sedate. (Besides Germans love their domestic makes and never really dog them. Fortunately, German cars happen to be pretty good anyway.)

Top Gear gets about 8 million viewers in the UK, a country of 65 million people. That would be comparable to something like 30 million viewers in the US, numbers only American Idol achieves on network TV. In Germany and the UK, these shows have broad appeal, primarily to a male audience, yes, but to the general male audience. The same kind of viewer who watches football matches and F1 races on Sunday. Just about every adult male is a potential viewer. There is no comparable generalized male demographic in the US. Even NASCAR is a particular kind of sport and not nearly as mainstream as football, basketball or baseball. In Europe, football (soccer) and F1 are the big sports. And other motor sports such as WRC are huge too.

Also, Jeremy Clarkson is a contradiction of a television personality. He can be an acerbic jerk or a witty cynic with a hidden humanity; often, all in one sentence. This, I believe, is too…just too ‘much’ for a mainstream American audience. In the US you are either ‘edgy’, in which case, you have no broad appeal, or a milquetoast host, like Leno himself, who’s mass appeal comes partly from the fact that he’s not the type to cut anyone down mercilessly, let alone the product of a major sponsor.

Also, a show where a host talks wittily about cars would come off as odd and peripheral to critics. Americans tend to see cars as utilitarian and only a very small percentage are buffs of any kind. In a success-obsessed culture, critics unfamiliar with what is to them an alien sub-culture would ask of a talented host like Clarkson (or Hamm or May), why is this guy’s talent being wasted on some low-brow car show? The Top Gear hosts are smart, witty gents. ‘Smart’ and ‘cars’ don’t mix so easily in a American culture subdivided and pigeonholed into niches.

And where are the fun and affordable cars to talk about? If you’re only covering high-end brands like BMW or Lexus or Mercedes, that can alienate your average viewer who has no reasonable chance of ever owning one. Conversely, many of the models that have any mythology attached to them, that bear any character, are actually pick-up trucks, since that is what the domestic automakers have been focused on for the last 15 years. But with oil at 117 dollars a barrel do you really want a host to be waxing poetically on all the fun she/he had driving across country in their old ’93 Chevy Z71, which gets about 13 miles per gallon?

It’s tempting for auto enthusiasts to want a show like Top Gear to come to the US and expect it to work. The US is just as much a car culture as the UK, right? Just as much, yes, but very different. Americans drive a lot because they have to; which may explain why as consumers they prefer large, comfortable vehicles to small, nimble performers. They also see premium brands more a measure of wealth than as vehicles with superior driving dynamics. Many observers have noted that cars in the US are a commodity and often taken as an appliance by consumers. Some automotive writers have made that point to explain the popularity of Toyota models which may be unexciting to journalists but are extremely reliable and therefore a favorite for consumers. The percentage of time commuters in the US are spending in their cars is ever rising, much of it stuck in unbearable traffic. And maybe those drivers don’t want to go home and watch a show that is just about driving.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

By Igor Holas

04.22.2008

General Motors has finally released official fuel economy ratings for the new Cobalt XFE and for the 2009 Malibu I-4 LTZ . As we reported previously, the General made some mid-year changes to the Cobalt with 2.2 liter engine and manual transmission and significantly upgraded its mileage to an outstanding 25/36 miles per gallon. To commemorate this change, the applicable Cobalts will sport a new XFE badge, which stands for [E]Xtra Fuel Efficient.

For the Malibu, GM replaced the four-speed automatic currently paired with the 2.4l four-cylinder engine with a six-speed unit in the top-level LTZ trim. The new power train combination delivers 22 miles per gallon in the city and 32 on the highway.

While (of course) neither of these numbers beats the hybrids, these are class-leading for both the Malibu and the Cobalt. After a long time of “hanging out” mid-pack with their mileage, Chevrolet finally woke up and delivered class-leading fuel efficiency both core car segments in the market. In light of the just-announced extreme CAFE regulation hike, and the breach of $3.50 per gallon of gasoline barrier, these changes are perfectly timed for the consumer demands.

Follow the jump for comparison of the Malibu and Cobalt to their competition.

Compacts with manual transmissions:
Cobalt: 25/36
Corolla: 25/35
Focus 24/35
Civic: 26/34
Mazda3i: 24/33
Elantra: 24/33
Sentra: 26/31
Spectra: 23/30
Lancer: 21/29

Midsize Sedans with four-cylinders and automatic transmissions:
Malibu: 22/32
Altima: 23/31
Camry: 21/31
Accord: 21/31
Optima: 21/31
Sonata: 21/30
Sebring: 21/30
Avenger: 21/30
Fusion: 20/29
Mazda6i: 21/28
Galant: 20/27

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

By Andy Bannister

04.21.2008

In the perennial battle between Ford of Europe and GM’s Opel and Vauxhall marques, the blue oval has scored a major hit with the success of the latest Mondeo. Wounded by falling sales and desperate to keep buyers interested, GM has now released teaser shots of its rival contender, the Insignia.

Due for its world debut at the London Motor Show at the end of July, the new model will be on sale in November.

The Insignia replaces the fast-fading Vectra, a model which shares its platform with Saturn’s Aura (though, unlike the smaller Astra, the European and North American cars are far from being identical).While the current Vectra is pretty square-looking, the Insignia sits on an extended wheelbase and in pictures appears notably sleek, with a very low drag coefficient of just 0.269.

In profile it looks spookily similar to Jaguar’s new XF, and possibly some offerings by Lexus.

As well as the four-door saloon, a sleek five-door hatchback and a station wagon will be offered. The line-up will feature petrol engines ranging from a 138bhp four-cylinder to a 256bhp V6.

Diesel versions will probably sell the best of all, and customers get a 2.0-litre turbo with direct injection, available in 128bhp or 158bhp versions. Inevitably there will be a low-CO2 Ecoflex model too.

The quirky stretched Signum version of the current Vectra, which features a roomier, more executive-looking interior and an odd upright hatchback rear end, has been a notable flop and is unlikely to be replaced in the Insignia family.

As the first GM product to be based on the group’s new Epsilon 2 architecture, developed from today’s Vectra, the Insignia will eventually be the basis of a dozen or so Opels, Saabs, Buicks and Saturns over the next few years. It seems a fair bet the next Aura will be very much like the Insignia.

In Europe, Britain and Germany will be by far the Insignia’s biggest markets, accounting for over 80% of sales in total, so the company can ill afford to get this model wrong. It’s not just the Ford Mondeo this car needs to beat – this is a hotly contested sector, with other European-built competitors including the VW Passat, Renault Laguna, Toyota Avensis, Honda Accord and Peugeot 407 all vying for sales.

The Insignia will be badged as an Opel everywhere except the UK, where the century-old Vauxhall marque name is still used. At one time, Vauxhall and Opel were completely separate entities effectively competing with each other, but the two GM-owned companies gradually came together from the 1970s onwards.

This year Vauxhall has just unveiled a new version of its time-honoured griffin logo, in another signal GM wants to move its image upmarket. It’s unfortunate, then, that the Insignia name itself evokes memories of a similarly-titled and fairly cheap-and-nasty men’s shower gel sold in Britain in the 1980s.

For years, successive generations of the Vectra, and before that the Vauxhall Cavalier, sold in huge numbers to UK company fleets and were the archetypal salesman’s cars, alongside their Ford rivals.

“Vectra Man” is now a pejorative turn for such drivers in British popular culture, usually to be seen steaming up the overtaking lane of highways or at a fast food joint filling up en route to another business meeting. No doubt the company would like to leave this particular stereotype behind, even though fleet sales will still be of key importance.

Vauxhall does sometimes take independent decisions from those of big brother Opel. It has put a lot of effort into developing the sporty VXR sub-brand, and its most notable attempt at independence has been importing small numbers of high performance Australian Holdens to the UK and selling them with Vauxhall badges.

The current mighty 6.0-litre Vauxhall VXR8 therefore has no Opel equivalent but is closely related to the Pontiac G8 sold in the States. It is definitely a left-field choice but offers unrivalled performance for a fraction of the cost of pedigree competitors from the likes of BMW.

In due course, it’s likely that a hot VXR Insignia with 300bhp or so to its name will come along to be the big Aussie’s little brother.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved