By Chris Haak

07.26.2008

We’ve covered this lengthy saga several times before – when the companies announced their intention to merge in March 2007, when the companies said a year later, in March 2008, that they still expected the merger to be approved, and finally when the Department of Justice approved the merger on antitrust grounds. The last remaining obstacle – albeit a theoretically formidable one – was the FCC. The FCC voted on Friday to allow the merger to proceed, so it’s likely to close as quickly as the companies are able – even as soon as next week.

The FCC is composed of five commissioners – three Republicans and two Democrats. At the time that the FCC granted the licenses to the two satellite radio companies, the agency had a formal rule on the books that said the companies could never combine. Meanwhile, in spite of growing their audience to just below 20 million users combined, both companies remain mired in losses and have become sob stories for their long-suffering shareholders.

In spite of the no-merger rule, nearly everyone expected the deal to eventually be approved, but with some conditions attached to it, because without a merger, neither company is probably viable for the long-term without significantly cutting back on programming and marketing expenditures. The companies successfully argued that their combination was not a monopoly, because they not only competed with each other, but also iPods, CDs, terrestrial radio, and now HD radio.

The conditions that the companies had to agree to in order to secure the merger’s approval included settling enforcement actions (fines) regarding unauthorized terrestrial signal repeaters and too-powerful transmitters in portable radios that the companies had previously sold to consumers. The total cost to settle will be $19.7 million, which is peanuts compared to the cost savings the companies will enjoy by combining operations. Other concessions the companies agreed to were a three-year price freeze, the addition of some a la carte programming choices (allowing customers to, in some cases, pay for only the channels that they want), and setting aside eight percent of their combined channels for the public interest and minority programming. Further, the companies agreed to release an interoperable radio that receives both services within one year, and to have an open standard on the technology that allows more innovation in radio development, hopefully bringing more device manufacturers into the fold in the future.

As I said before, I was initially opposed to this merger based on my expectation that it would give the combined company too much pricing power, but I really do enjoy satellite radio service, and if prices will be frozen, with the possibility that I could eliminate several unwanted channels from my lineup and potentially save some money, plus the availability of the best of Sirius on my XM radios at some point, it might not be all bad. Now, if my six month old portable XM radio (a Pioneer Inno) stops working before it’s worn out, or the built-in XM radio in my Honda is no longer compatible with the combined service, then I reserve the right to change my mind and complain about the merger. I also promise to complain – loudly – if the companies jack up prices in three years. But, based on the premise that for the next three years I should get more programming for the same price, or less programming for a lower price, I’m glad that the FCC finally approved the merger.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

By Chris Haak

07.25.2008

According to a report in the online edition of today’s Wall Street Journal, Chrysler LLC has started telling its dealers that they will no longer offer auto leases through its Chrysler Financial subsidiary. The move comes as domestic automakers are seeing increasing losses as a result of lease write-downs, on top of the current credit crunch which makes credit less accessible and more expensive for companies that have a less-than-rosy outlook. You know, companies like Chrysler.

Companies generally incur large lease write-downs when the residual values projected for leased vehicles at the time of the lease origination are higher than the actual value of the vehicles –or the new projection of the vehicles’ values based on current market trends. Amidst Ford’s results released yesterday was a $2.1 billion charge against Ford Motor Credit Company attributed to its operating lease portfolio, so it’s not just Chrysler that is having this problem.

So, why are the resale values so out of alignment with the projected lease residuals? Two reasons, but they’re both intimately related. First, the collapse in consumer interest in large, fuel-thirsty vehicles such as full-size pickups and SUVs resulted in there being far more supply of these vehicles than demand for them. Simple economics moves their prices downward. Second, in response to reduced demand for these same vehicles, the manufacturers slap huge rebates and discounts on them, which serves to further lower the values of the used models currently out there.

I personally ran into this issue several years ago when a Saturn that my wife was leasing approached the end of its lease. It was a 2001 L200 five-speed manual, 65,000 miles, and had been in two accidents. The car was properly repaired both times, but the accidents didn’t help the car’s value, nor did the clutch pedal. GMAC wanted over $8,000 for us to keep this three-year old car, when it was worth less than $4,000 at wholesale. We turned it in and bought basically the same car from a used car lot, two years newer, with just 15,000 miles and an automatic transmission, for roughly what GMAC wanted for us to keep the old one. When GMAC “disposed” of the 2001 Saturn at auction, it likely suffered a loss of about $4,000 – on that single transaction.

The other credit-related issue that Chrysler is undergoing right now is that Chrysler Financial is in the midst of its annual credit facility agreement with several (somewhere around 20) banks. The company is looking for about $30 billion in credit, but it’s having a tough time finding any takers at attractive rates. If it can’t get good rates, they will still find the credit, but borrowing costs will be higher, which will either force the company to pay larger subsidies on discounted interest rates, or pass those higher rates onto consumers, thus crimping sales further.

While the lack of lease availability will likely cause some harm, leases usually aren’t the greatest deals on cars with rapid depreciation, which unfortunately describes the makeup of most of Chrysler’s lineup today. A bigger concern would be the difficulty in finding low-interest loans to help dealers close sales of the company’s products until the newer, more fuel-efficient vehicles such as the rebadged Nissan Versa/Tiida arrive in coming years.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

By Kevin Miller
07.25.2008

It’s not every day that a car with a 361 HP, 6.0 liter V8 is introduced in the US. Even less often is that vehicle a four-door sedan. Never in recent memory has such a vehicle been introduced by GM. Its price hovering around $30,000 makes it a rare vehicle indeed. But perhaps not for long. Because with that big V8 under the hood at that price, the Pontiac G8 GT is a performance bargain. And it’s a great car, too.

Besides being the most powerful sedan available under $30,000, the G8 is the best sedan Pontiac has sold in decades. Gone are the bulbous body cladding and horrid interior materials. In their place are discreet rocker panel extensions below the doors, shapely wheel arches, and yet another well-implemented GM interior featuring nice perforated leather seats.

The attention-getting Liquid Red G8 GT I tested is nice to look at from the outside. Pity, then, that the rear of the car with its clear tail-lamp housing which shows off odd-looking interior details is the least attractive part of the car, because that is what most other drivers will be seeing of the G8. The pedal on the right is connected to a motor that is fast, Fast, FAST. Besides having that powerful 6.0 liter V8 underhood, the G8 has nicely weighted steering with good steering feel, a well-balanced suspension, and a stability control system that lets the driver have a reasonable amount of fun before stepping in. Happily, the car is well-enough balanced that when the stability control is turned off, oversteer is easily controlled by modulation of steering and throttle inputs.

Having recently spent time in domestic GM vehicles including the Cadillac CTS, Chevrolet Malibu, and Buick Lucerne, the first thing that struck me about the G8 was the first part I touched: the key. Unlike domestic GMs, the G8 has a switchblade-style folding, laser-cut key with integrated remote. It reminded me of the keys Audi and Volkswagen use. It really felt upscale; the CTS would benefit from using such a device. Another feature of the G8 that is not common in “domestic” vehicles is the integrated roof rack mounting points, concealed in the black “gutter” under a piece of removable trim.

The interior theme of my G8 GT was black. Black leather seats, black dash, black carpets, black door panels, black headliner, black… um, you get the idea. It is all tastefully done, though. The materials look nice and most are soft touch, even if they don’t look like the highest quality materials in the world. They are certainly classier than most materials found in GMs of the recent past. Too, the G8′s interior is very spacious. The rear seat has LATCH anchors and tethers in all three seating positions.

My complaints about the G8’s interior are few: The Passenger Airbag Indicator in the rear-view mirror is too bright at night. The blocky LED charge system and oil pressure display at the top of the center stack is poorly implemented and pointless (this screen is used for climate-control and stereo display information in Australian models of the car). The nice-looking Blaupunkt stereo has a huge color display with tons of unused space (and no XM or navigation capabilities), while the climate control which shares the display screen has a tiny row at the display’s top which cannot simultaneously display exterior temperature and climate mode. There is a terrible glare on the gauge cluster around noon when the sun is directly overhead. And my wife complained about the lack of a passenger assist handle above the front door opening; she had nothing to hold on to when I took advantage of the G8 GT’s ample power and grip.

Down in Australia, where the G8 is manufactured and sold as the Holden Commodore VE, they put the steering wheel on the other side of the car. It’s easy to see how that is done, with the modular design of the dash, and with the window and mirror controls between the front seats. The right-hand-drive bias of the Australian designers is evident, with the audio system’s POWER button and the climate control’s AUTO button both on the right side of the instrument panel, a long reach for American drivers but just right for RHD markets.

The large trunk houses the battery on its left side behind an access panel. It has nice interior trim for a vehicle in its price class, and even includes a hook on the interior of the trunk lid to which a string on the trunk floor can be attached to access the storage well beneath the floor. The storage well does not contain a spare tire, instead it has a small compressor and sealant, and a lot of room for extra stuff.

On a summer-evening drive through hills outside of Portland, Oregon, the G8 GT’s balance impressed me, and so did its six-speed automatic transmission. Set in Sport Shift mode, the transmission would hold revs if I accelerated briskly. Even better, when I was braking hard approaching a corner, the transmission would do a rev-matched downshift to a lower gear, and would hold the gear until I had powered out of the corner and eased off of the throttle. In those instances the transmission seemed to be reading my mind. On very few occasions, however, the lower gear selected by the transmission would be held too long, requiring me to manually intervene.

The G8 GT has an EPA fuel economy of 15/24 city/highway. With the cruise control set at about 80 MPH, I achieved 26.1 MPG over a 170 mile trip. Running around town, 15 MPG is pretty accurate. Because the V8 sounds so great when it is working, I liked to roar away quickly from stops. Not great for mileage, but great fun.

Pontiac has priced the G8 GT at $29,310. The car I drove was equipped with the $1250 Premium Package, which includes leather seating, heated front seats, six-way power front seats (backrest rake adjustment is still manual), and leather wrapped shift lever. Including the $685 destination charge, the total price of my test vehicle was $31,245, which is an incredible deal for such a potent sedan.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

By Andy Bannister

07.24.2008

Here’s the ideal antidote to all those fears that electric cars will mean an end to any hint of speed or driving excitement.

A small British company is promising to put into production a vehicle that theoretically should leave other high performance cars standing in the acceleration stakes, with literally electrifying performance – 0-60mph achievable in just 4.0 seconds.

The Lightning GT is the brainchild of the Lightning Car Company, based in Peterborough, England. It is currently showing a prototype of its impressive-looking sports car (with a distinct hint of Aston Martin in its looks) at the British International Motor Show in London.

How are these performance figures possible? It seems electric vehicles have maximum available power at the wheels at any speed, unlike a normal petrol engine where maximum power is only obtained high up in the rev range.

To deliver this power to the road the Lightning is will use electronic traction control which negates wheel spin and unbalance in the power being applied.

The GT has 30 onboard rechargeable high power electric batteries by US company Altairnano Inc. It features motors in each of its wheels – effectively making it four-wheel-drive – and has a 200 mile range between charges.

The car applies racing construction techniques and is built around a tubular spaceframe backbone chassis. Weight is kept down by the use of carbon fibre/Kevlar body panels.

As there is no conventional engine, the Lightning is said to be almost maintenance-free. It should not need anywhere near the amount of servicing demanded by other sports cars.

Planned features are as you might expect in an prestige model and include traction control, an electronic door entry system, and bespoke interiors.

A more unusual standard item will be the “programmable external engine sound generator” to give the electric Lightning the sound of a proper sports car, should customers require it.

In its publicity material, Lightning says the GT will do 0-60 in 4.0 seconds and produce the equivalent of more than 700bhp. It compares this with 5.0 seconds and 400bhp for Jaguar’s 4.2 XKR convertible (and 10.9 seconds/76bhp for the hybrid Toyota Prius, but that’s not exactly a fair comparison!).

The prototype displayed in London looks remarkably professional but no doubt there’s still some way to go before we can expect to see a Lightning GT on the road. The company is, however, already taking 10 per cent deposits (at £15,000 or $30,000) for would-be supercar drivers with a green conscience.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

By Brendan Moore

07.24.2008

Fresh off their failed venture with Chamco that was supposed to retail their vehicles in the United States, Chinese pickup truck maker Hebei Zhongxing Automobile Co is now talking with General Motors about a possible tie-up that may include an equity stake in the Chinese company.

Zhongxing had to delay plans for a $300 million plant in Mexico after it walked away from its planned distribution joint venture with Chamco Auto, a U.S.-based vehicle importer. Chamco has fallen into a legal abyss, with partners and executives of the failed company slugging it out in court, and the operations of the company turned over to a trustee of the New Jersey courts.

Zhongxing is not one of the major car companies in China, but it is a major producer in the pickups and sport-utility vehicle segments. It’s agreement with Chamco had called for Zhongxing to supply two of its largest pickup trucks and one of it’s SUV models (which would have still be considered small truck in the U.S.) for sale in the American market. The company forecasts sales of approximately 45,000 vehicles this year, including 15,100 overseas.

Zhongxing is also talking with FAW Group in China about a possible tie-up.

It is easy to see the benefit to FAW Group of having Zhongxing as a partner: the small trucks would perfectly complement FAW’s mid-size and large commercial trucks in the market. Less obvious is the benefit to GM, since the vehicles Zhongxing makes are the ones having a bit of a bad time of it in some markets. But, small trucks and SUVs are still going great guns in developing markets worldwide, as well as the home market of China, so maybe GM would buy a piece of them just to get those sales. Or, maybe they would like to have Zhongxing produce a small car for them, especially right across the border in Mexico, where the shipping costs would be very low. Or, perhaps some combination of both.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

By Chris Haak

07.24.2008

As Autosavant previously reported would happen (and in the process, scooped the rest of the journalistic world by five whole weeks), Ford announced the details of its newest turnaround plan today, including the conversion of several truck plants that were otherwise slated for closure, and instead will be retooled for production of European-based small cars.

In the light of an $8.7 billion loss for the second quarter of the year (of which $8.0 billion was non-cash impairment charges to write off the value of troubled assets, such as the $5.3 billion write-down for the company’s North American operations that are part of the $8.0 billion charge), Ford CEO Alan Mulally provided a lot more detail about the plant retooling that Autosavant had previously reported.

The company will move production of the Expedition and Navigator from its Michigan Truck Plant in Wayne, Michigan to the Kentucky Truck Plant in Louisville early in 2009. The Michigan Truck Plant will then be retooled to produce C-segment small vehicles based on the platform shared with the European Focus. That accounts for one of the three plants.

The Louisville, Kentucky plant that currently builds the Ford Explorer (a former cash cow for the company that has seen its sales nearly collapse for the past few years) will also be converted to build more C-segment small cars beginning in 2011. The plant will be available then because the next Explorer is due in 2010 and will move to a new unibody architecture, so will be produced at a different plant, likely where the company’s other large crossovers are produced in Ontario.

The Cuautitlan, Mexico truck plant will produce the B-segment Fiesta small car for North American sales in early 2010. That plant currently builds F-series pickups.

Since Ford’s F-series truck sales have struggled this year, and the company has commensurately reduced production plans, Ford will only have three shifts at two plants building F-series trucks, which is quite a shift from years past, when multiple plants were running multiple shifts just to keep up with demand for the pickups back in the “good old days” of cheap gasoline.

Other product moves (or non-moves, as the case may be) that Ford announced this morning was confirmation that the Ranger pickup will soldier on for two more years than originally planned, until 2011. Its plant in the Minneapolis, Minnesota area that builds the small pickup had been slated for closure at the end of 2009, but concern about fuel prices – plus the fact that the Ranger is the only true compact, non-midsize pickup in the North American market – gave the Ranger a new lease on life. The company also restated plans to introduce a seven-passenger Lincoln crossover based on the Ford Flex in 2009, the Transit Connect small van in 2009. The European Focus will also finally hit the US market in 2010, shortly after the Fiesta small car makes its debut.

The changes will be difficult for Ford to implement, and the company’s financial results will probably look worse in the coming quarters before they start to look better, but the company is making all of the right moves to address the US market’s seismic shift of the past quarter. With these announced moves, Ford appears to have taken far more aggressive and decisive steps to fix its situation than GM or Chrysler have taken. It makes one wonder if GM or Chrysler will announce similar ideas in the coming months.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

By Chris Haak

07.24.2008

Toyota’s Scion sub-brand has had some sales struggles lately (down 5.3% in June); many of its newest products (particularly the second-generation xB “box on wheels”) have been criticized as having lost the charm of the originals. Yet, the brand’s three models are relatively fuel efficient in an era of $4.00 per gallon (or more) gasoline in the US, so I felt that it would be relevant for me to review at a time that consumers are rapidly showing interest in small, fuel efficient vehicles. Toyota was happy to supply a Barcelona Red test vehicle to me for a week for evaluation.

While the xD shares its platform with the Yaris and is definitely a very small car, it also has the larger 1.8 liter engine (128 horsepower) from the Corolla instead of the puny 1.5 liter (108 horsepower) mill from the Yaris. Dimensionally, the xD is very close to the Yaris sedan, but has a shorter wheelbase, and therefore less legroom in the rear. However, its hatchback body allows for significantly more cargo volume behind the back seat, and even more still if the back seat is folded.

Before I receive most of the vehicles that I will test from manufacturers, I usually get a copy of the window sticker (called the Monroney sticker in industry parlance), so I have an idea of what to expect. From the Monroney, I was a little puzzled that my test vehicle was to be equipped with the TRD sport exhaust (a $469 option), but there was no mention of alloy wheels. Fortunately, it was equipped with some presumably dealer-installed alloys that weren’t too big and weren’t too small. Unfortunately, all of the photos of the xD accompanying this review are from Toyota’s media website, because I lost our digital camera containing about 25 photos of the xD on vacation before uploading them to my computer, but my test vehicle was the same color, with smaller (and different) wheels.

The other thing that I most anticipated about the xD before I got it was that it had a five speed manual. I owned several cars over the years with manual transmissions, but it’s been probably two years since I last drove one, and I was looking forward to re-synchronizing my feet and shifting arm.

As noted above, the car was in a really attractive, deep red. It featured the TRD sport muffler (which has a large diameter exhaust outlet) and a $385 rear spoiler. Rounding out the options list were VSC (stability control) for $650, floor mats for $155, a cargo net for $65, a premium Pioneer stereo with iPod connector for $389, and XM Satellite Radio for $449.

While the car’s appearance was certainly enhanced by the spoiler, dark red paint (one of my favorite hues in any vehicle anywhere), and aluminum wheels, I couldn’t help but think that Scion tried too hard to show a family resemblance between the xD and xB in terms of their shape. Not that it’s ugly – and actually it’s better looking than the xA that it replaced – but the xD has interesting proportions. For example, the hood is extremely short. It’s almost twice as wide as it is long. The hood’s width to length ratio is probably more extreme than that of a minivan’s, which is really saying something. The short hood, at least, meant that a fashionably short front overhang was possible. Another nod to automotive fashion was the short side windows; they look cool from the outside but do somewhat restrict visibility from inside the car.

Although the car did not include many additional options ($2,562 worth), Scion packs their vehicles with standard features. The car had power windows, power locks, six airbags, cruise control, keyless entry, ABS, and air conditioning. The final tally came to $17,732 including destination; the Corolla that I tested had an MSRP of $18,410 and had an automatic transmission (which the xD lacked), but did NOT have cruise control, power windows, or keyless entry. TrueDelta.com shows the xD as being between $1,500 and $2,200 cheaper than the Corolla when adjusting for equipment differences, as well. Basically, if you want to buy a small Toyota, the xD is a much better value than the Corolla. Dimensionally, the xD is very similar to the Corolla, except that it’s a few inches narrower, which affects hip and shoulder room in both rows.

Inside, it’s not a bad place to be, but like the Corolla, there were too many hard plastics. The headliner was the same “furry cardboard” that the Corolla suffered from, and the sun visors were the cheap-looking vinyl-covered variety, which I did not care for. The entire dash panel is hard plastic, with soft points throughout the interior fairly difficult to find (the armrests on the doors have fabric near them and the seats are fabric; that’s about all). There was no center armrest, which was somewhat annoying when driving longer distances.

Scion may view the Pioneer stereo head unit (which was an uplevel one in my test vehicle as well) as a selling point, but I really disliked it. Not only was the sound weak (there is no subwoofer), but it has an extremely annoying animated display that constantly moves when the radio is powered on, and it was far more difficult to operate than any factory-installed system I’ve seen this side of BMW’s iDrive. For instance, the power button was on the top-right corner of the unit, about as far away from me as it could possibly be. It took me half a day before I actually found it there; instead, I was just muting the volume when I wanted silence. Further, the standard iPod integration is not a regular USB interface like Ford’s SYNC system; instead, the connector requires a proprietary plug, so I was unable to test the car’s iPod integration.

The xD’s front seats seemed to be reasonably comfortable, although I didn’t spend more than an hour at a time in them during my time with the car. The rear seat in the xD split and folded forward to make a flat cargo area, and also could slide forward and backward on tracks to either enlarge cargo area or rear seat legroom by a few inches, depending on needs. A clever touch was that the seat could be moved forward or backward via a lever on the seatback, so you did not have to leave the vicinity of the cargo area to adjust the seat’s position if necessary.

On the road, the five-speed manual slightly helped performance relative to the slightly larger and heavier Corolla that I drove (which was saddled by a four-speed automatic). Clutch takeup was pretty easy to get used to, even for someone like me who was a bit rusty (I suppose it really is like riding a bike!) The electric power steering didn’t seem to be quite as uncommunicative as it was in the Corolla, but still didn’t exactly inspire confidence. The biggest annoyance when driving (other than the animated stereo and lack of a center armrest) was the TRD sport muffler. I felt some embarrassment as I boomed down my street, the same way young kids do in my neighborhood in their souped-up 15 year old Eclipses (who always cause me to mutter nasty things about them under my breath). I doubt that it adds much power to the car, but it adds not only a loud bark upon acceleration but also a constant booming drone at highway speeds. The car is geared relatively low, too, so it is running around 3,000 RPMs at 70 miles per hour, and that doesn’t help the noise issue. Unless you’re 22 years old or younger and want to piss off your neighbors, I’d advise against the TRD sport muffler.

EPA fuel economy figures are 27 city/33 highway. My observed economy was about 31 miles per gallon, which is among the best I’ve experienced (about tied with the Camry Hybrid and Corolla, and behind only the Prius.)

To me, the biggest irony about Scion is that nearly all of the brand’s marketing is focused on the youth market (who generally cannot afford new cars, even if they cost $17,732), yet the brand also appeals to practicality-minded empty nesters who want a value-packed Toyota at a fair price. If you can tolerate the Pioneer stereo’s interface, the nighclub beat marketing, and hard interior plastic (which is pretty much par for this class and price range, anyway), then the Scion xD is worth checking out. I’d let my son drive one – if he was 16, and if it had a “normal” muffler.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

By Andy Bannister

07.23.2008

The craziest-ever version of Renault’s Focus-sized Megane hatchback, the track-focused R26.R, has been unveiled in Europe, at a time when interest in the standard car is seriously on the wane.

Revealed for the first time at this week’s British International Motor Show, just 450 units will be available globally, each with a numbered plaque. More than half will be coming to the UK market, which has a surprisingly big appetite for the most extreme hot hatchbacks.

The stripped-out R62.R is based on an already-available RenaultSport version of the three-door version of the Megane hatch. The latest version comes with an impressive pedigree, having just set a new record lap time at Germany’s legendary Nürburgring racing circuit of 8 minutes 17 seconds – the best ever for a front-wheel-drive production car.

The R26.R, built at the specialist Alpine factory in Dieppe, France, features a turbocharged 2.0-litre 227bhp four-cylinder engine with a power-to-weight ratio of 189bhp per tonne. It can hit 62mph in just 6.2 seconds.

The extremely light weight for this class of car is achieved by some pretty drastic weight saving measures. The R26.R has polycarbonate windows, Sabelt bucket seats with five-point harnesses, a carbonfibre bonnet and a titanium exhaust system.

It also loses its sound deadening, carpets and its passenger and curtain airbags, rear wipers, heated rear window, climate control, radio, front fog lamps and many other items the factory’s engineers consider mere “fripperies”. Oh, and the rear seats are dispensed with entirely.

Buyers will also be able to specify a competition-grade roll cage, race compound tyres and either red or black 18-inch alloys. And if the car doesn’t look distinctive enough with those in place, it is also smothered in decals.

Despite its track emphasis the R26.R will be totally road-legal although with such power delivered through the front wheels it is likely to be quite a handful to drive on the highway.

RenaultSport, the company’s performance division, also makes notably fast versions of the smaller Clio and Twingo hatchbacks, and has carved a niche for itself which is largely at odds with the crash-friendly family image cultivated by the mainstream Renault brand in Europe.

The Megane is one of Europe’s most distinctive family cars in styling terms, with the singular – some would say downright ugly – appearance of the hatchback models being cheekily highlighted in a successful TV commercial featuring the Groove Armada song “Shakin’ That Ass”.

However, demand for the Megane and its Scenic mid-size MPV sister has recently faded fast in the wake of newer competition, notably Peugeot’s latest 308. As Renault cuts Megane production, French arch-rival Peugeot is hiring extra workers as it struggles to keep up with demand.

To redress this balance a “radical” new-look Megane is promised to debut this autumn.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved

By Andy Bannister

07.22.2008

Electric city cars up to now have mainly been fairly nasty little devices which look like they’ve been cobbled together in a dark shed with no regard for what the hapless driver will look like behind the wheel.

Things are set to be shaken up a bit in London, world sales capital for these odd vehicles, with the launch of the little MyCar, styled by the legendary Italian stylist Giorgetto Giugiaro, and built in Hong Kong.

Making its debut at this week‘s British International Motor Show, it is imported by NICE Car Company, who already successfully selling an electric vehicle based on a French Aixam microcar.

The MyCar name is pretty horrible – it sounds like it should be in a kids’ TV commercial driven by Barbie. Given the diminutive size and shape of the car it’s true that, sprayed pink, it looks like it could still fulfil that function. Equally, in most of its palette of bright colours it would look nicely at home on a golf course or theme park.

What city buyers will get is a two-seater that runs exclusively on electricity. It has a top speed of 40mph and a range of around 40 miles in normal urban driving, which should be enough for the short distances most cars in the British capital drive.

Running costs vary depending upon when and where you recharge it, but it is possible to run it for as little as two pence (four US cents) per mile.

In London, one of the most taxed cities on earth, the MyCar will be exempt from the infamous daily London Congestion Charge, which is why electric cars are such big business in the capital but almost unknown in the rest of the UK.

Other benefits include parking concessions and no road tax, as the MyCar doesn’t emit any CO2 when it’s driving.The MyCar does, however, need an overnight recharge of up to eight hours using mains electricity, so obviously these vehicles aren’t as entirely carbon neutral as is sometimes made out.

Electric cars are not cheap to buy, and the MyCar will be no exception. Prices for the standard model will start of £9,000 ($18,000). Even in rip-off Britain that is over half as much again as a perfectly decent, if basic, “proper” hatchback from a mainstream manufacturer.

Options for the MyCar include seven colour choices, 15-inch alloy wheels, a glass or removable fibreglass roof, a leather interior and even cooled and heated seats, which could push the price of a loaded model into heady territory.

Still, if it ousts the hideous little Indian-built G-Wiz from its spot as the top-selling electric car in London that would be a price worth paying.

NICE, founded in 2006 and a company with big ambitions, is also showing the Ze-0 hatch, described as “the world’s first affordable, 5 seat, five-door electric car”. The Chinese-made Ze-0, is said to bring all the benefits of electric motoring without compromising safety, specification or styling, and will cost from £14,000 ($28,000) when it goes on sale later in the year.

The company is also toying with importing an electric version of the Fiat 500 and is currently gauging interest from would-be punters on its Motor Show stand, as the car is unlikely to come cheap. More prosaically, it also offers electric scooters and various converted electric Fiat and Piaggio commercial vehicles.

Meanwhile, the competition is hotting up for NICE, with Norway’s Think also launching its electric car in the UK at the London Motor Show.

COPYRIGHT Autosavant.net – All Rights Reserved