Special Car, auto, cars, vehicles

Toward that end, the new 2009 Ford F-150's fully boxed chassis is further fortified to provide best-in-class rigidity, payload capacity (up to 3030 pounds), and tow ratings (up to 11,300 pounds). As such, the new F-150 is well positioned to capture contractors migrating down-market out of Super Dutys to save money and gas (did we mention that a new six-speed automatic, a lighter, more aerodynamic cab, and other tweaks boost fuel economy by 12 percent with the 5.4-liter?).

Ford claims payload and towing numbers like that simply can't be had with a coil sprung rear axle, so it stuck with leafs but made them longer to smooth the ride and wider with new mounting hardware to improve lateral rigidity and roll control. Lateral grip of 0.70 g for both Fords bested all but the feathery base Dodge and Suzuki, and our rear-drive SXT scored the best stop at 133 feet from 60 mph (the three-ton Lariat needed 144 feet).

Status-conscious contractors will have eight F-150 models from which to choose (including the forthcoming SVT Raptor), which Detroit editor Todd Lassa reckons is "about four too many," adding, "If this Lariat is the third truck from the top, how much of a boudoir must the King Ranch and Platinum interiors be?" Judges praised the low noise levels and interior materials quality, though some found the design cartoonishly macho.

Still, handy features like the Tailgate Step, Box Side Step, a stowable bed-extender, and rear seats that fold up with one hand to reveal a broad, flat load floor help tally a strong superiority score. On the negative side of the ledger is Ford's aging all-V-8-engine lineup, which is composed of two- and three-valve 4.6-liters and a three-valve 5.4. SVT will bring a bigger 6.2 in the Raptor, and an EcoBoost V-6 is likely to join the lineup for folks who don't tow, but the diesel is on hold.

The base V-8 handily outruns and outhauls the V-6 Dodge, but sounds and feels strained doing so. Gearing that's a third shorter than the Dodge's kept our 5.4L 4x4 within 0.6 second of the big Dodge, but costs it at the pump, where both trucks averaged just 13.2 mpg over 500 miles of mixed driving. The new six-speed automatic features excellent tow/haul-mode programming (ordering downshifts with a tap of the brakes on downhill grades, holding lower gears, etc.), but in normal mode, it's lethargic to kick down, and there's no way to manually select the higher gears.

Both Fords tackled our off-road sand-loop with aplomb. The 4x4 transfer case engaged high-and low-range settings quickly and easily, with the message center confirming the shift was in process. We're disappointed, however, that there's no on-pavement AWD option as offered by Dodge and General Motors.

Will the 2009 Ford F-150 be crowned the 2009 Motor Trend Truck of the Year? Find out Tues, December 16.

Photogragy by Brian Vance, Julia LaPalme, and William Walker

Okay, the sequential blinking doesn't save anything noticeable, but the LED lamps that are flashing (and serving tail-lamp and brake-light duty) consume 87 percent less power than the incandescent bulbs they replace. This helps save 10.5 gallons of gas per year in the typical Mustang, according to Osram, the folks who produce the system and that pioneered myriad other lighting innovations on earlier Ford/Lincoln-Mercury products. More good news: Unlike most LED signal and tail lamps you're aware of, which position an array of LEDs behind some sort of lens in a custom fitting for a particular car, the Mustang's LEDs work very much like a traditional incandescent bulb.

They're bulb-shaped, so they fit into a traditional lens and reflector housing with a push-and-turn base, drastically reducing the replacement cost of the tail lamp after crash damage (costing about half as much). They typically last the life of a vehicle and are unaffected by shock and vibration, so they're ideal in extreme applications (Pratt & Miller has used Joule lamps for three seasons of Corvette endurance racing without a failure).These so-called Joule lamps incorporate the LEDs, the thermal management (that ring sitting just behind the reflector housing), and the control circuitry (which resides in the connector).

Joule lamps cannot replace incandescent bulbs in existing applications (at least not yet), but this plug-n-play approach allows manufacturers to work LEDs into their product lines for vastly less investment cost than all those custom applications you see out there, which is why Chevy can afford to have an LED fitment on only the LTZ model of the Malibu. Joule lamps are also in use on the Ford Taurus X and the Mercury Mountaineer and Sable.

The Mustang's other Osram lighting flourish is found inside, where the MyColor dash gauge backlight color is now keyed with the rest of the interior ambient lighting, so that when you dial up ghoulish green or whorehouse red on the dash, the footwells, cupholders, etc. all glow with the flow.

As you may have read elsewhere, some of us in the moto-journo biz got an early preview of the next LX sedans Wednesday in Auburn Hills. Online car magazines not invited to the event reported on what we saw, based on reports by other journalists who were invited. Those leaky journalists told Jalopnik the future cars and trucks looked like "lipstick on a foam pig" and "smoke and mirrors."

Well, of course. They were full-scale fiberglass models. They're not scheduled for production until 2010, probably the third or fourth quarter if things get better, so nothing's been retooled to stamp actual '11 model sheetmetal. I found their designs to be impressive, and several colleagues agreed. The second-generation 300 and Charger could be to the first-generation cars what the current Cadillac CTS is to its predecessor. And by the way, General Motors showed journalists the new CTS two or three years early - the same sort of "smoke and mirrors."

The difference this time is that everything we saw in the last couple of days could go up in smoke. And don't misunderstand this: I can't vouch for the quality of any future Chrysler product, or say anything good or bad about the way these cars and trucks ride, handle, perform, hold themselves together. That's what first drives and comparisons are for. I can only tell you that Chrysler has quickly exorcized retired design chief Trevor Creed. Yes, he's been gone only a couple of months, but with Tom Gale hired on as a consultant when Cerberus took over, I doubt Creed had much authority while these models were being designed. There's not a hint of Dodge Avenger/Chrysler Sebring styling here. And virtually no hint of the concepts Creed foisted on us in the last few years.

I doubt these new cars and trucks would impress Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid. They'd rather see electric cars or bio-diesels running on mulch. But Chrysler ought to show the new 300, at least, to President-elect Obama, who owned an '05 300C. Attractive, desirable product could make a bigger impression than any "turnaround plan" or union concessions.

Why did Chrysler show us these 2011 models? To prove it's not quite dead, and to give us a reason to root for its survival through 2010. If its future stuff looked like more Avenger/Sebring, I'd be saying as much right now.

Why did Chrysler refuse to invite Jalopnik and Autoblog? Automakers worry that automotive websites are quick to spread leaks, even when they're not necessarily the first entity responsible for such leaks.

That kind of thinking is obsolete. Most of us at the Chrysler preview, some in print journalism and some not, also post online news and columns like this one.

While they would like to be considered part of the New Media, Jalopnik, Autoblog and others have become as entrenched in the moto-journo establishment as motortrend.com. I'd find it more interesting to hear what they think of the '11 300/Charger firsthand than read about the impressions leaked to them by invited journalists eager to pander to Jalopnik's irreverent image.

BRICKYARD CROSSING INN CLOSES IMMEDIATELY;

NEW HOTEL POSSIBLE IN FUTURE

Restaurant, pub, conference space, Golf Shop to remain open

INDIANAPOLIS, Monday, Dec. 15, 2008 – Brickyard Crossing Inn will close immediately and be razed in a few months, said Joie Chitwood, president and chief operating officer of the Indianapolis Motor Speedway Corporation.

The motel was built in 1963 on the eastern edge of the IMS grounds. It has 96 rooms.

“To bring the motel up to the standards and quality of what guests expect at the Speedway would require significant capital expenditures,” Chitwood said. “After reviewing the alternatives, we have decided to discontinue its operation.”

Plans are being made for the demolition of the motel buildings. Use of the space after the removal of the motel has not been determined, Chitwood said.

“IMS has been looking at alternatives to the future of the motel property for several years, including constructing a new hotel,” Chitwood said. “We continue to evaluate how a new hotel operation on Speedway property might fit in with the planned redevelopment of the Town of Speedway.

“To date, we have reviewed proposals from several groups and have met with some of these firms. We’re farther along than we’ve ever been in the process to build a new hotel at IMS.”

The closure of the motel will not affect the main building of Brickyard Crossing, which is home to a public restaurant, the Flag Room pub, conference space and the Brickyard Crossing Golf Course Golf Shop. All will continue operation. Closure of the motel involves the termination of 15 permanent employees.

The opening of the motel 45 years ago filled a void in lodging on the near-west side of Indianapolis and before the growth associated with Interstate 465.

Like the Speedway, the Brickyard Crossing Inn has famous history. Besides being the home for several Indianapolis 500 drivers and owners during the month of May, scenes from Paul Newman’s movie “Winning” were filmed in rooms of the motel. And NASCAR legend Jeff Gordon celebrated his victory in the inaugural Allstate 400 at the Brickyard in 1994 by eating a pizza in his room at the motel.

Except there's one small problem: Sales of the Prius last month were about half the level they were in November 2007. Meantime, helped by deep discounts -- up to $6000 on some 2008 models -- Ford F-150 sales for November were down just 18.5% compared with November last year, while Chevy Silverado sales were down just 22%.

Obviously, the meltdown in the economy accounts for some of the fall-off in Prius sales: Toyota's total volume in November was down 32% as fearful, credit-crunched customers stayed away from dealerships in droves. But the fact that gas in the U.S. now costs, on average, less than half as much as it did in the summer, is undoubtedly having an effect. The 8660 Priuses Toyota sold last month compares starkly with the 21,000-plus it sold in April as gas raced toward the $4/gallon mark. It also compares starkly with the 37,911 F-150s and 29,534 Silverados shifted by Ford and Chevy dealers in November despite frozen credit and swirling rumors of bankruptcy.

The Prius problem highlights the major challenge facing any bailout of the Detroit Three. If Toyota, allegedly the smartest guys in the room when it comes to the auto biz, can't figure out what American consumers want one month to the next (as of a few months back the Tupelo plant was actually slated to build Highlander SUVs) how on earth is Capitol Hill, or any so-called "car czar" for that matter, going to be able to figure out which direction Detroit's salvation lies? Building Prius clones? Or pickups? Which will give us the best chance of getting our loan money paid back?

There's no question gas prices will rise again once the global economy climbs out of the crater and demand for oil picks up. But as of right now, no one has any idea when that might happen and how fast gas prices might rise. Goldman Sachs recently forecast oil would slump to $30 a barrel, but these are the same geniuses who predicted it would hit $200 a barrel earlier this year. So it's anyone's guess, although futures for deliveries beyond 2013 are trading above $75 a barrel.

Against that background, full-size pickup trucks look like they could still be profitable business for a leaner, lower cost, slimmed-down Detroit for a few years yet.

As has been widely reported, it now looks likely President Bush will allow some of the TARP bank bailout funds to be used to throw GM and Chrysler a financial lifeline. The specter of a massive jump in unemployment -- and what that would do to an economy already reeling from a collapse in consumer confidence -- seems to have gotten the attention of even the hardliners in the White House. "If the auto industry goes belly up now," Vice President Dick Cheney told talk show host Rush Limbaugh, "there's a deep concern that would be a major shock to the system." D'oh...

Of course, any money doled out by the White House this week won't solve the problem. All it will do it buy time -- little more than three months -- to leave the freshly minted Obama administration between a rock (letting the Detroit Three fail and dealing with the grim social and economic cost of 12% unemployment within two years) and a hard place (pouring what has been estimated at $75 to $125 billion into creating a retooled Detroit that will almost certainly be composed of fewer companies making fewer vehicles).

President-elect Obama has said he won't let the American auto industry fail. But will he see pickup trucks as part of the solution? Or part of the problem that got Detroit in this mess in the first place.

Small-volume Japanese and European brands also had increased sales: Nissan, up 9.9 percent, to 28,971, Mazda, up 2.4 percent to 5,356, smart, up 12.1 percent to 10,486, Subaru, up 10.5 percent to 4,439 and Jaguar, up 13.3 percent to 4,120. For reference, be aware that Chevrolet sold 9,469 Malibus in November (GM's only gainer), up 31.3 percent.

For the first 11 months of '08, General Motors' European divisions sold 32,000 more vehicles than Renault, making it third in sales behind VW and Ford. It was the biggest loser in Europe in November, however, dropping it to fourth place for the month.

Here's JATO's top ten for November:

1. Volkswagen: 110,034, down 18.9 percent
2. Ford: 80,979, down 16.3 percent
3. Renault: 73,628, down 22.6 percent
4. Opel/Vauxhall: 61,780, down 37.1 percent
5. Fiat: 59,517, down 23.8 percent
6. Peugeot: 58,948, down 23.8 percent
7. Citroen: 55,441, down 24.3 percent
8. Audi: 50,292, down 1.1 percent
9. Mercedes: 45,460, down 22.2 percent
10. BMW: 43,357, down 28.5 percent
    

At the end of the first session, Representative Thaddeus McCotter, Michigan Republican serving Livonia, outlined the reasons for his compromise bill.

Half of the loans, presumably $17 billion for the Detroit Three, should come from the financial industry TARP, because if the D3 get no loans, there will be thousands more home foreclosures.

The other $17 billion, under McCotter's proposal, would come from the Energy Bill's $25 billion for advanced fuel-efficient technologies. McCotter says that without the loans, a lot of research & development the D3 already has funded would be lost to foreign competitors.

Almost sounds too logical for Capitol Hill.

"Just like British Leyland."

Indeed. Earlier, Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner described how GM looked at acquiring Chrysler before the credit crisis. When the credit crisis hit, GM had neither the money nor the time to pay attention to Chrysler.

I don't know what's more troubling: that GM might re-consider buying Chrysler, perhaps to refill its North American brand lineup now that it has a plan to change or get rid of Saab, Saturn and Pontiac, or that a Republican senator is willing to mandate a "shotgun wedding."

Corker's interest in a federal government-forced merger does stem from a rational concern. The good senator, much to Chrysler chairman Bob Nardelli's dismay, said he spoke with a Cerberus Capital Management board member Wednesday who told him the automaker's private equity owners has enough cash on its own to avoid a government bailout. Cerberus has no interest in giving Chrysler more money for its operations, Corker said.

Nardelli replied that private equity doesn't work that way; it consists of pension funds and other investment money, just like investors in public GM and Ford Motor Company. He also asserted that Cerberus isn't considering selling Chrysler. Corker said that Nardelli's probably the only person with knowledge of the matter who believes that.

Ford and Chrysler wouldn't have come to Capitol Hill to request bailouts, Corker said, if not for GM's desperation. And therein lies the rub. Corker, and his Republican and Democratic colleagues don't want to lend Chrysler $7 billion just to see it sold to a foreign company.

Corker also wants GM to consider restructuring its debt, a kind of pre-bankruptcy, including paying 30-cents on the dollar for its bonds, and of course, getting a better deal from the United Auto Workers. The UAW remains conservative Republicans' biggest target. Senator Richard Shelby (R-Alabama) maintained his status as biggest opponent of the loan guarantees.

Senator Christopher Dodd (D-Connecticut), the committee chairman, said that the only person at the witness table who has already contributed to a Detroit Three turnaround is UAW President Ron Gettelfinger. "They haven't said what they're going to do. They're saying what they've done. Hundreds of thousands of workers at the Big Three already have made concessions."

Good to see someone still calls them the Big Three, even if it's someone with little prior knowledge of how the auto industry works. From dealership floorplans to the vagaries of production, the Senate committee learned a lot about the industry Thursday.

Senator Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), asked Wagoner what it takes to "ramp up" production for the 2011 Chevrolet Cruze.

"A good rule of thumb would be half a billion dollars," Wagoner responded. "If we have to develop the product as well (if it's all-new, not on an existing platform) that's three years. It's a long-cycle business."

"What happens in Lordstown (Ohio)?" Brown asked.

"We're going to proceed. We're going to build the Chevy Cruze in Lordstown," Wagoner replied.

Will GM still be around to do it? "We're not going to write a blank check, but we're going to get something done," Dodd told reporters after the hearing. "People are angry about bailouts. I suspect they'd be angrier about the failure of the auto industry with hundreds of thousands of jobs. My preference would be if the Federal Reserve and Treasury would step up with the authority we gave them."

Dodd believes the public opposition to loan guarantees for the D3 stems from the mishandled Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). Wagoner, Mulally and Nardelli all agreed to oversight - they said they'd prefer a "car czar" to a government board.

Dodd, who blasted Fed Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson several times Thursday for failing to show up at the hearing, said he'll continue to push to fund automaker loan guarantees from the $700-billion TARP. GM, Ford and Chrysler have requested a total of $34 billion, and it appears the "136" funds from the Energy Bill for fuel-efficiency are not available.

"The secretary of the treasury is in China right now. He needs to come home."

Perhaps Paulson is trying to find a buyer for Citicorp.

And so, after a six-hour hearing with no break, things don't look so bleak for GM, Chrysler and Ford, at least not on the Senate side. The fun continues Friday, at the House Financial Services Committee. Stay tuned.