Archives for 2014

Friday morning car news roundup, December 12, 2014

Today is Friday

[ There is more … ]

Thursday morning car news roundup, December 11, 2014

Today is Thursday

[ There is more … ]

Tesla under water soon? Company looks for “diver support system” experts

Pictyure courtesy gansbaaisharkcagediving.com

Yesterday, the Daily Kanban did cast doubts on the technical prowess of Tesla’s alleged game-changing lane-changer, the overpromised “Autopilot.” This assessment was based on a discussion with intelligent vehicle system experts, who said that systems of much higher sophistication would be required for an automatic lane-changer. It now appears as if Tesla has decided to do the necessary research. [ There is more … ]

“Mahindra buys Saab brand.” No, it doesn’t

Picture courtesy saabworld.net

Yesterday, Financial Times reported that “Mahindra & Mahindra, India’s leading sport utility vehicle maker by sales, plans to buy a majority stake in the parent company that owns Saab’s brand.” Slight problem: It’s not true. “Mahindra is set to take a majority stake in NEVS, in the process acquiring the Saab brand,“ the FT continues. Not true again. NEVS, as in “National Electric Vehicle Sweden” was started in 2012, when a murky Chinese “electric-vehicle consortium” bought what little was left after Saab went bankrupt. The consortium soon found out that it bought a factory, and some tooling, but no Saab brand. [ There is more … ]

Tesla’s Tough Road Ahead

The industry zeroes in on the upstart Tesla.

The industry zeroes in on the upstart Tesla.

The Tesla bears are on the march, tearing away at the startup EV maker’s still-sky-high valuation, but not because low oil prices are killing off EVs. Quite the opposite, in fact. As I explained in last week’s Bloomberg View column, falling oil prices will not kill off alt-energy drivetrains for a wide number of reasons, most importantly because it’s one of the few ways to stand out in a sea of commodified internal-combustion engine-powered cars. Though automakers could easily plan a low-efficiency product cycle in response to low oil prices, they are keeping the technological arms race going. And that is Tesla’s real challenge: not a decline in EV interest, but strong competition from established players with more experience building vehicles at scale. [ There is more … ]

Tesla’s game-changing, lane-changing Autopilot? “Currently, there is no radar on the market that can achieve that,” Toyota engineer says

1978 sensor technology, now in Model D

1978 sensor technology, now in the Model D

Two months ago, Tesla launched its Model D. Not quite a new car, not even a refresh, but the webs went wild. The Model D sports an extra electric motor, and a sensor package. Any other automaker, and such non-news would not even elicit a yawn from the press, save for a few snarky blogs that would torture the maker for not delivering the software for the hardware. Come to think of it, no automaker would dare to deliver hardware sans software, for fear of getting their derrieres handed to them. Tesla is unlike any automaker. As a Silicon Valley company, Tesla has marketing rights to vapor ware. The Model D was feted like the second coming of the Model T, and it was pronounced as equally, if not more disruptive to the industry than the mass-produced Ford.

Musk’s acolytes expected a self-driving car from Tesla, and they were given what they wanted to hear: The Autopilot. The official feature-list of The Autopilot is surprisingly feature-less. Currently, it offers exactly nothing, except for some “exciting long-term possibilities. Imagine having …” Then, a list of imaginary stuff follows that would have made Ford/Microsoft’s derided Sync system look worse. The listed exciting long-term possibilities, even those, are completely devoid of anything even remotely autopiloting.

The media came to Musk’s assistance, and made the missing Autopilot up. The members of the gadget press quickly reduced The Autopilot to a “smart lane-change system which will automatically move across a lane when you hit the blinker,” as Slashgear wrote. Not quite an Autopilot, but hey, good enough.

Trouble is: You won’t find the game changing lane-changer in Tesla’s Model D description, not even under “long-term possibilities.” Smart move on Tesla’s part, because it’s not going to happen. The hardware package renders the presumptive Autopilot blind.

[ There is more … ]

Wednesday morning car news roundup, December 10, 2014

Today is Wednesday

[ There is more … ]

Black Friday Deals Behind The Chrysler 200’s Hot Sales

On closer inspection...

On closer inspection…

After years of having to put a brave face on what everyone knew was just an updated Sebring, Chrysler’s 2015 200 was supposed to be the brand’s bold return to the midsized segment. Reviewers gave mixed-to-positive reviews, all concluding that the new 200 is a definite step up from the old model. Sales were up over 150% Year-Over-Year in November… so has Fiat’s CUSW platform made Chrysler competitive in the hotly-contested midsized sedan segment?

As the numbers above indicate, probably not. According to national sales data from TrueCar’s website, only the cheapest model of the new 200 (LX FWD) is selling close to MSRP ($68 above, actually). Every other trim of the new 200 is selling at deep discounts, despite having launched just this year. In fact, consumers spent less on average for the second level (Limited FWD) than the base trim, and average discounts for the top trim reach nearly $4,000. Though it’s impossible to know what the average of these averages is without knowing the sales mix, the fact that the typically loss-leading lowest trim is the only one maintaining any pricing discipline, its clear that this brand-new car is buying market share in hopes of appearing successful. Given that Edmunds says the Chrysler brand as a whole averaged a 20% discount in October, it’s clear that FCA’s attempt to transform Chrysler into a mass-market offering is not going to be a gimme.

This site automatically detects and reports abuse