Over the past week I’ve needed to order several vehicles for clients. That’s a bit unusual; during the past two decades, I’ve normally been able to get what someone wants either through one of the dealer fleet departments I work with on a regular basis, or by having them do a ‘dealer trade’ to get it—especially on American vehicles. But no more; I couldn’t find the right Chevy Traverse for one couple, nor a GMC Denali for another. I also ordered an Audi A4 and a Range Rover Sport. This reflects a change in the mentality of manufacturers, as they move from a ‘push’ strategy of shoving millions of unwanted cars, trucks, and SUVs down dealers’ throats (in order to keep factories running to cover fixed costs and meet union contract demands), and one reliant on people actually buying their vehicles. This began to be apparent last summer and fall, after the Cash for Clunkers program cleared out dealer inventories, and savvy new leadership at GM and Ford took advantage of the situation, keeping production as low as possible going forward. Chrysler’s B/K turmoil delayed them a bit, but by year’s end, everyone was aboard on the ‘pull’ ...

In the 1980s Audi was almost bankrupted by media frenzy about ‘sudden acceleration’. By the time 60 Minutes and other news outlets sheepishly admitted the truth—that the condition didn’t actually exist and that the fault was with the drivers, not the cars—it was almost too late. It took two decades for Audi’s sales to recover to pre-fiasco levels. Is history repeating? The current uproar really got started when an off-duty police officer, driving a loaned Lexus ES350, crashed, killing himself and the other three people on board. Minutes before this tragic event, someone in the car called 911, saying that the “accelerator is stuck…there’s no brake.” This struck me as very odd: there aren’t any production cars that have engines so powerful they can overcome standing on the brakes—especially a V6 sedan with 268hp. So when I got the new issue of Car and Driver I read with interest their take. They tested three different vehicles, including the ES350’s twin, the Camry, and found that, from 70mph, with the accelerator pinned, stopping distances increased 16 feet (which is still shorter than many other cars, trucks, or SUVs under normal conditions. They also confirmed that you ...

At the turn of the century the ‘Big 3’ were riding high: huge sales and even grosser profits drove Chrysler, Ford, and GM to think they could do no wrong—or that whatever sins they did commit would be washed away in a flood of black ink. Americans were in love with SUVs and trucks, and drunk on the cheap gasoline that propelled them. No one steering these corporate behemoths seemed to see the rocks ahead. Now referred to as the Detroit 3, they’ve watched their market share erode to only 44% of a much smaller market; foreign firms gobbled up an astonishing 21% over those years. Automotive News says the domestics sold 6.8 million fewer vehicles in 2009 than they did in 2000. The pain (and ineptitude) look even more obvious when you realize that the drop in the overall new car market between those two years was about 7 million vehicles, meaning that, basically, import brands stayed flat in a market down 40% while Detroit crashed and burned. I’ve seen this reflected in the brokering I do; there was a time when the inventory we stocked, or trades we kept, were split about 50/50 domestic to import. Now, ...

There were some fascination contrasts on display the first day at Detroit. It started with Ford; not only did they sweep the North American Car and Truck of the Year awards with the Fusion Hybrid and Transit Connect, but their unveiling of the new Focus was unmatched by any pomp and circumstance that followed. [caption id="attachment_942" align="alignleft" width="300" caption="A hatchback even Americans might like: the Focus"][/caption] [caption id="attachment_943" align="aligncenter" width="300" caption="Focus interior (we hope)"][/caption] [caption id="attachment_944" align="alignright" width="300" caption="Durn good looking for a Focus"][/caption] Here is a company that exudes confidence and chutzpah—no surprise with sales and market share up and a profitable quarter to end last year. And for the first time we Americans didn’t get the hand-me-down version of their C-segment offering. This new Focus looks terrific in both four- and five-door form, and its interior (if it’s close to that inside these preproduction units) is simply stupendous for a vehicle in this price range. Ford is ‘democraticizing’ high-tech with this car; whether it’s the second-gen Sync system or the intuitive touch-screen interface, or features like self-parking or the twin-clutch tranny, the Focus makes mainstream—and small—feel premium. In comparison, General Motor’s first two intros felt a bit lacking. ...

Welcome to sunny Detroit! Tomorrow the North American International Auto Show (NAIAS) begins. Most of us motoring writers—or ‘Muttering rotters’ as the late, great English journalist Phil Llewellyn dubbed his cohorts—just call it the Detroit Show and get on with it. Tonight Suzuki and Infiniti try to grab some good will by hosting pre-parties, and those of us who are here are very thankful for it, as going out on your own in downtown Motown is not to be contemplated lightly. This year’s show is very exciting, as so many changes are going on in the car business. General Motors and Chrysler have emerged from bankruptcy, electric cars are the Next Big Thing, and carbon footprint vs. horsepower are just a few of the themes I expect to be big tomorrow and Tuesday. Despite the smaller role the Detroit 3 (formally the Big 3) play in the automotive universe these days, this is still the most important show on the calendar for the manufacturers. The LA Show would like to be seen as a bigger deal—and we’d all rather go there—but it hasn’t quite come of age yet. And China’s burgeoning auto industry and vehicle sales ...

As we’ve discussed, dealers typically buy fewer cars between Thanksgiving and New Year’s. Then they pull out their checkbooks in January, as consumers start spending in earnest. Those trends look set to continue this winter as well, and the result will be strong used car prices. Other factors driving this trend include smaller ex-rental car fleets, reduced numbers of lease returns, and tighter inventories of new vehicles. The numbers from Manheim, the world’s largest car auction company, bolster this; prices were up on a wholesale basis through year’s end, with cars roughly 10% higher than a year earlier and full-sized trucks running almost 20% more. With a decent amount of positive economic news of late and fewer and fewer layoffs being announced, buyers are regaining their conviction that they can get behind the wheel of something new—at least to them. Also, vehicles get old and break no matter what, so when consumers defer buying (as they did in 2008 and 2009) it creates huge pent-up demand that needs to be filled. The confluence of all these trends looks set to keep the prices of used cars, trucks, and SUVs up for at least the next few months.

It was only a matter of time, we all knew, before Ford flogged off Volvo to the Chinese. In this case, it is Geely who picks up the charismatic division. In theory Volvo gets lots of money to continue its comeback and the new owners get access to loads of cutting edge tech for their own offerings as well. Ford gets money to pay off its debt, and can continue to focus marketing and engineering resources on its core brand—the irony being that Mercury is pretty much a total waste of said resources, except as a sop to its dealers, who usually also carry Lincolns. Ford is estimated to get $1.8 billion for Volvo; in 1999 they paid $6.45 billion for the company. As sad as some of us in the industry might be to see the deal completed, Volvo’s fate is much better than that of their Swedish cousin, Saab, who looks set to join the growing list of storied brands that just cant compete in the new world order.

GM’s deal to sell Saab to tiny supercar maker Koenigsegg fell through recently, and the chances don’t look good that they’ll find a new buyer, which means Saab will be shuttered. I, for one, am sad. I have fond memories of our ’76 Saab 99; though it needed fairly constant upkeep—like most European cars of the day—it stoked my budding automotive enthusiasm. My dad would explain to me why the ‘cockpit’ style dash layout was superior to that of the Oldsmobile it had replaced, and both its traction in New England winters (courtesy of front-wheel drive) and staggering safety were ahead of their time. We were hit by a Chevy Suburban coming home one day; the 2000-pound heavier SUV was totaled, and most of its occupants injured. But we were all unmarked, and the faithful 99 still ran! Dad fixed it and sold it about a year later for a Volvo. I lusted after a Saab Turbo, the first successful, mass-produced car with forced induction, and when I finally got to drive one at 16, I was thrilled. A year later I went to work for the (Skip) Barber-Saab Pro Series, and though the Swedish company ...

Hum it with me: Raindrops on roses And whiskers on kittens Bright copper kettles And warm woolen mittens… These are a few of my favorite things Since scraping ice off your windshield at 6am isn’t one of anyone’s favorite things about winter, I had planned to make life a little easier for my better half, by adding a remote start system to our old Honda. Zap! A toasty warm cockpit to climb into, a clear view all round, and no Jack Frost nipping at her nose. “But,” she told me, “They’re illegal in Denver!” Friends concurred. Indignant, I leveraged my awesome journalist skills and made a few phone calls. Turns out they are not. What was causing the confusion were various ‘Puffer’ ordinances (named after the telltale puffs of smoke from the tailpipe as a vehicle warms up on a frigid day). And yes: leaving your keys in the car as it defrosts is a no-no. Aurora will give you a $75 ticket; other cities and counties have similar ordinances. This has nothing to do with environmentalism, and everything to do with cutting down on thefts. From a climatic-impact standpoint, it’s actually better to allow a car’s catalytic converters and other parts ...

I recently read an essay in Foreign Affairs magazine by Edward L. Morse, a very respected specialist on oil and energy markets. His well-researched and logical thesis is that the price of oil may stay low for the medium term, especially if the government makes some smart decisions in the near future. What’s behind his contention? Several factors, foremost that the head of OPEC, Saudi Arabia, has an interest in a stable market, both as a U.S. ally and for its own economic benefit. During the oil price spikes of the last few years, the Saudis hadn’t finished building and bringing online a ‘reserve capacity’ to handle major increases in demand and/or shortfalls elsewhere (caused by hurricanes, terrorist disruptions, etc). But now Saudi Arabia has the capacity to produce 12.5 million barrels per day—compared to only 9.5 in 2002. This gives it even more influence in OPEC, and with the G-20 (the group representing the world’s leading economies). These savvy Arabians know that not only does cheap oil drive global growth, but that it deters investment in alternative energy—which just doesn’t make short-term economic sense when oil is under $80 per barrel. It’s not like OPEC ...