HarleyEarl

General Motors to nearly triple number of cars it produces in India Media Release Dec. 13, 2005 General Motors Corp. said Tuesday it plans to nearly triple the number of cars it produces in India to meet growing demand in the South Asian country. The announcement came just weeks after the company said it would slash 30,000 jobs and scale back production in the United States. GM had earlier announced plans to increase production in India from more than double the 25,000 cars a year it currently produces in the country. Lawrence Burns, vice president for research and development, said Tuesday that the number of vehicles made here would eventually reach 80,000. However, Burns provided few details of GM's plans for India, a country of 1 billion people with a fast growing economy that many Western manufacturers have long viewed as a potentially huge market. Burns insisted jobs were not being moved from the United States, and said much of the new production would come from increasing the hours of workers already employed by the company, although he did say that some new ones would be taken on. Burns said the production at GM's plant in the western Indian city of Halol would be increased in phases, but did not offer a timetable. GM said in November that declining sales and rising health care costs would force it to close 12 North American manufacturing facilities by 2008 and cut 30,000 jobs, which represent 17 percent of GM's North American hourly and salaried work force of 173,000. The plan will cut the number of vehicles GM is able to build in North America by about 1 million a year by the end of 2008. GM will be able to build about 4.2 million vehicles a year in North America, down 30 percent from 2002. GM also said Tuesday it would add about 50 researchers in India to the 450 current staff "Our target is to employ 500 people in India early next year and the hiring momentum here will continue," Taub told reporters in Bangalore, India's technology hub. Burns said, "The creation of research jobs here in India is consistent with the need for us to invest in the markets where we sell our products."

Sometimes the things GM does. That brush guard is so dorky awful.

It's cottage cheese and yogurt and stuff.

Backseat Driver The Small Car Conundrum Jerry Flint, 12.13.05, 12:12 AM Small cars make sense for obvious reasons, but they have never caught on big in the U.S. While such vehicles may gain ground in this market, I don't see them becoming a dominant force here--unless gasoline climbs past $5 a gallon. Detroit first flirted with small cars a half-century ago. As World War II ended, the big U.S. automakers believed there would be a tremendous demand for a new generation of small, light cars to put car-hungry Americans back on wheels. In 1944, then-young Henry Ford II said his company would build "a lower-priced car than had been offered the public since the day's of my grandfather's famous Model A." The rumors were that Ford was planning a $500 car. Ford Motor (nyse: F - news - people ) set up a special light-car division, with plans to have the car ready for introduction by October 1947. General Motors (nyse: GM - news - people ) jumped in, too, planning a new plant in Cleveland for its new little car, and Chrysler promised that if the others moved, it would be in the small car ballgame, too. Well, it didn't happen. Detroit found out that it could take size out faster than it could take out cost, and that American buyers would be happy getting the big old pre-war models in those early post-war years. The little Ford and Chevy never made it to market here. Of course, "selling small" has always been a challenge in a country enamored with bigger houses, bigger refrigerators and even bigger food--such as the Big Mac and the Whopper. A mantra of bigger, taller, wider and heavier doesn't quite mesh with the concept of a small car. From time to time, small cars have been successful here. The original Volkswagen Beetle immediately comes to mind. Little vehicles from Renault, Fiat (nyse: FIA - news - people ), GM Opel, German Ford, French Simca and the U.S.-made Henry J (by the now-gone Kaiser car company) all caught the imagination of consumers for a short period of time. The first Toyotas (nyse: TM - news - people ) and Hondas (nyse: HMC - news - people ) sold here were small, but successive models increased in size. Little cars, such as the Beetle and the new Mini, that are successful here have had other things in their favor. They are small, but they are hot, like Lil' Kim. I think that it is harder to design an attractive small car than a larger-scale vehicle. Tiny cars often end up looking like a poor man's vehicle, which even turns off poor people. I remember a story about a Georgia farmer describing the tiny Henry J of the early 1950s: "Like an unsavory gal ah once knew. She was really pretty great--but ah wouldn't associate mahself in public with 'er." I wonder what that farmer would think about the new wave of small cars headed to this market. I'm not talking about cars such as the Chevy Cobalt, GM's shortest U.S.-made sedan, which is 180 inches long. To me, a true small car is anything shorter than 165 inches in length. U.S. Sales Of Small Cars Length (Inches) 11-Month 2005 Sales Chevrolet Aveo hatch/sedan 153/167 64,706 Toyota Scion xB 155 49,699 Toyota Scion xA 154 25,641 BMW Mini 144 38,384 VW New Beetle 161 33,139 Sources: Automotive News, Forbes In the first 11 months of this year, the tiniest cars racked up over 200,000 sales, which isn't much in an annual market of 17 million units. One size above these Lilliputs are vehicles from 165 inches to 169 inches in length. The VW Golf, the Suzuki Reno and Aerio SX, the Kia Rio, Hyundai Accent, the Ford Focus hatchback and the Chrysler PT Cruiser all fall in this category. The PT is a big seller (about 124,000 in 11 months), but that exceeds the total sales of all the others. The two smallest segments will soon have new additions. Coming next spring is the Toyota Yaris, in three-door hatchback and four-door sedan. At just 150 inches in length, the Yaris hatchback is tiny, whereas the Yaris sedan, at 169 inches, is close in size to a contemporary U.S. subcompact. A thoroughly modern 106-horsepower, four-cylinder Toyota engine propels both cars. I would guess that Toyota would sell them for $13,000 to start. The yen is so cheap now that Toyota can lowball this car and make money. Like the four-door Yaris, the upcoming Nissan (nasdaq: NSANY - news - people ) Versa, due next summer, is also 169 inches long. This car intrigues me. It carries a new 120-hp aluminum engine, which is quite ample for a small car, and either a six-speed manual or CVT (continuously variable transmission) automatic. Nissan claims combined (city and highway) gas mileage of 38 miles per gallon, and it plans to build the Yaris in Mexico. The third small car headed our way is the Honda Fit, a four-door that is only 152 inches long. Honda's chief executive has even said that should the Fit be a hit, he would think of building it here. What is Detroit doing? General Motors is importing the Chevy Aveo from Korea and doing quite well with it. DaimlerChrysler (nyse: DCX - news - people ) has hinted it might be looking at an import, perhaps from China. Ford apparently has nothing in the works. All of them have imported small cars in the past, but none lasted. It probably doesn't make sense for them to build such cars here because they would need heavy volume--300,000 in a triple-shifted factory--to make them profitable. Even a sexy and higher-priced small car would be a tough sell. U.S. Mini sales ran only 40,000 this year, but BMW can make money because it builds 200,000 Minis and sells them around the world. It's hard to see production of tiny cars for this market alone succeeding. Detroit even has a problem making money on its compact models. Frankly, I'll bet on the Big Mac and the Whopper.

Cars from years ago look ok with the front plate because they designed a place for it....modern cars just slap it on with no integration.

'73

I really have a new appreciation of the '73 Eldorado...it's a gorgeous car. I don't see many around and almost forgot how nice it was.

There is nothing cheap about this interior. It is very well done and Buick has a right to be proud of their effort here. It's light years ahead of the Regal it replaced. The new LaCrosse interior is completely appropriate. I find nothing lacking in this interior at all. It is where Buick should be.

Where I live, only the rear plate is required. I honestly couldn't live in a jurisdiction that needs front plates...just ruins the look of most cars. Especially the Corvette and Solstice....like a wart.

And I sat in the LaCrosse/Allure and the interior is beautiful...well constructed, nice materials. Nothing cheap at all about it.

I think this is an incredible entertainment toy. I predict, one day this will be in many people's homes. I would get one in a chevy heartbeat.

And if GM didn't do some research on alternate technologies, there would be a big outcry because they didn't do enough. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't. And frankly the whole 'sky is falling' oil stuff is all doomsday fantasies. There is much oil still available...for example, Alberta, Canada. It is calculated we have as much as, or more than Saudi Arabia. In the tar sands alone, we have at present production levels, 500 years worth.

There is another posting similar in Industry News.

FOR RELEASE: 2005-12-12 GM Overhead Cam Engines Named Among Industry's Best High-performance Ecotec Supercharged and 2.8 V6 Turbo recognized in Ward's 10-Best Engines PONTIAC, Mich. – Two of General Motors newest, high-performance overhead cam engines – the 2.0-liter Ecotec Supercharged and 2.8-liter V6 Turbo – have been named among the industry’s 10 best engines of 2006 by the editors at Ward’s Communications. Both engines are variants from two of GM’s most popular global, modular engine families, designed, engineered, and produced around the world. They also share a similar attribute, which Ward’s noted as an important development occurring in the industry today: forced induction. “Turbocharging and supercharging allow us to develop big-displacement-like engine performance, while maintaining the efficiency benefits from a small displacement engine,” said Sam Winegarden, GM Powertrain executive director of engine engineering. “We’re pleased that the editors at Ward’s recognize our expertise in developing these efficient, high-performance engines. Supercharged Ecotec "GM makes serious inroads into the affordable performance market with its thrilling 2L supercharged DOHC I-4 used in the Cobalt SS performance coupe,” said Bill Visnic, Ward’s senior technical editor. “Thanks to supercharging and intelligent design, GM engineers squeeze more than 100 hp per liter from their 4-cyl. dynamo, while achieving an impressive 23/29 EPA city/highway fuel economy rating.” The Ecotec 2.0L supercharged is a variant of GM’s global Ecotec family, which features an aluminum block, inline four-cylinder, dual overhead cam, four-valve-per-cylinder engine design. At the heart of the Ecotec supercharged is an Eaton M62 helical roots-type supercharger. Maximum supercharger boost pressure is 12 pounds, and the system includes an air-to-water intercooler to increase intake-charge density, which in turn enhances power and reduces a supercharged engine’s propensity to “knock” at high boost levels. The Ecotec supercharged also received upgraded components in critical stress areas, thanks to experience in the tortuous crucible of the National Hot Rod Association’s Championship Drag Racing series – where the Ecotec has developed a “bullet-proof” reputation as a formidable powerplant for front-wheel drive dragsters. Available in either the 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt SS Supercharged or the Saturn ION Red Line, the Ecotec SC slams out a formidable 205 horsepower at 5600 rpm and 200 lb.-ft. of torque at 4400 rpm. It is built exclusively at GM Powertrain’s Kaiserslautern, Germany, engine plant. 2.8L V6 Turbo “A sophisticated mid-displacement V-6 and turbocharging are a remarkably effective combination,” says Visnic. “GM and Saab have created an impressive performance-car engine with high specific output and the thrill of turbocharging.” The 2.8L V6 Turbo is the newest addition to GM’s contemporary global V-6 engine family. All engines in the global V-6 family share traits that include a 60-degree lightweight aluminum cylinder block with iron cylinder sleeves, an aluminum structural oil pan and aluminum cylinder heads, dual overhead camshafts and four valves per cylinder. The 2.8L V-6 Turbo builds on those strengths with components and technology developed with Saab specifically for the turbo system, variable valve timing, and a variable fuel pressure system to ensure smooth idle and driving characteristics. The 2.8 turbo system features a unique, twin-scroll turbocharger. It has an integral bypass valve and is fed by two exhaust ducts – one from each cylinder bank. Separating the exhaust gas pulses with two compressor zones improves gas flow and reduces energy loss. The turbo system’s charge cooler promotes performance by reducing the temperature of inlet air. Delivering 250 horsepower at 5500 rpm and 258 lb-ft of torque from 1800 – 4500 rpm, the 2.8 V6 Turbo is standard globally in all 2006 Saab 9-3 Aero models, which includes the Sport Sedan, SportCombi and Convertible. It is also featured in Europe in the Opel Vectra and Cadillac BLS. The 2.8L V-6 Turbo is built at Holden’s Port Melbourne, Australia global V-6 engine facility. Ward’s Communications publishes Ward’s AutoWorld and Ward’s Engine and Vehicle Technology Update. The criteria for the 10 Best Engines competition includes a range of customer drivability factors such as horsepower, torque, technical relevance to the vehicle, and low levels of noise, vibration and harshness. Now in its twelfth year, Ward’s 10 Best Engines was created as a way to recognize superior performance and showcase the critical importance of powertrain technology and excellence in engine engineering. GM Powertrain is a global producer of engines, transmissions, castings and components for GM vehicles and other automotive, marine, and industrial OEMs. Headquartered in Pontiac, GM Powertrain has operating and coordinating responsibility for GM’s powertrain manufacturing plants and engineering centers in North America, South America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region.

Monday, December 12, 2005 John McCormick The case for hydrogen as an industry transformer Wondering where the automotive industry is headed? Spend time with General Motors Corp.'s research and development chief, Larry Burns and you will come away with a pretty good idea. I was fortunate enough to catch up with this far-sighted Detroit executive at a recent auto show. Our conversation ranged far and wide, from the ramifications of Hurricane Katrina, to the hegemony of the energy companies, to the major progress GM is making towards a commercially viable hydrogen fuel cell vehicle. Like any large automaker, GM is concerned about the effect on sales of higher fuel prices, whether induced by hurricanes or other causes. But Burns believes that there will not be a radical change in consumers" choice of vehicles. "That’s not what happened in the previous oil shocks,” he points out. The bigger concern, not just for the automotive industry but for the entire economy, is the threat of a global recession. The way Burns sees it, the big energy companies have little incentive to invest in new capacity production that carries the risk of being in excess of demand for fuel. “As such, the oil companies have the favorable perfect storm,” Burns argues, “in that they have capacity short of demand and they have constraints in their supply chain that explain away why they have to raise prices.” The result is an “outrageous” transfer of wealth to the oil industry, as evidenced by the fact that ExxonMobil’s profits are greater than GM’s market capitalization. What galls Burns is that the auto industry has been driven to the point where it is giving its cars away and the oil industry is making the money on supplying fuel. The potential long term answer to this dilemma is the hydrogen fuel cell vehicle. Burns plans to have an 'automotive competitive’ FCV ready by 2010, meaning a running vehicle that could be put into production on an equal footing - in terms of costs, performance and durability - with a conventional automobile. To hydrogen skeptics out there, this goal - the most aggressive of any the major automakers engaged in FCV development - seems optimistic, to put it mildly. But Burns points to dramatic progress at GM on improving the FCV hardware; for instance, the fuel stack power density (a measure of output versus size) has improved by a factor of 14 in the last seven years. Today, GM’s fuel cell team has not reached its objective of $50 per kilowatt output for the hydrogen fueled powertrain, a figure that would make it cost competitive with a conventional internal combustion engine. But Burns is more confident than ever before that this competitive target can be met over the next five years. Once the feasibility of FCVs is proven by GM, DaimlerChrysler, Ford, Toyota, Honda, VW and the other leading automakers all working hard in this field, then in Burn’s vision, the whole paradigm could change for the auto industry and the energy companies. Currently, there is a proliferation of different powertrains and transmissions, from gas to diesels to hybrids. “So you’ve got a wide range of fuels that are rivals, a wide range in the cleanliness of fuels around the world, and the auto industry is carrying all that structural cost,” Burns contends. Instead, the auto industry will perfect and simplify the hydrogen fuel cell system and by doing so, shift the focus of competition to the energy companies, who will be forced to develop the multiple available sources of hydrogen. All this presupposes that the automakers will not trip over themselves in their efforts to develop and refine the fuel cell vehicle itself. As Burns puts it: “If every automaker goes down a separate path to get to a hydrogen economy, we will be saying, ‘mine’s better than your’s’, and we’re going to be fighting each other in front of governments, in front of energy companies, in front of suppliers; that’s not going to shift the industry.” One obvious answer would be collaboration at the highest level. Joint fuel cell technology development by GM and Toyota has been discussed repeatedly by both companies, but so far no deal has emerged. Clearly, Burns sees advantages to a GM/Toyota alliance on FCVs. “The benefits would be significant,” he notes, “in terms of accelerating the transformation to hydrogen and fuel cells.” In 2010, we should know whether GM’s pioneering FCV role has borne fruit. And the ensuing decade will determine whether an industry transformation is to be realized or not. John McCormick is a columnist for Autos Insider and can be reached at

Doing OK: Dodge's Charger showing positive signs, but not selling like 300 MARY CONNELLY | Automotive News Posted Date: 12/12/05 DETROIT -- Since its launch in May, the 2006 Dodge Charger has attracted a younger buyer to Dodge and is selling for a higher price than other premium mid-sized vehicles. But more Chargers are sold with rebates than is typical in the premium mid-sized car segment. And it's taking dealers longer to sell the Charger than its platform-mate, the Chrysler 300, according to data from the Power Information Network. Power data show that in its seventh month on sale, the Charger averaged 36 days on dealership lots before selling. The 300 averaged 16 days in its seventh month in the market. "It is doing respectably," says Tom Libby, senior director of industry analysis at the Power Information Network. "But it requires more time to determine how it will do long-term." The car held 3.7 percent of the premium mid-sized car segment, Libby says. Vehicles in the segment include the Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, Chevrolet Impala and Nissan Altima. Through November, Dodge sold 37,667 Chargers. November sales were 6,827 units. Chrysler has produced 69,328 Chargers this year. By comparison, Chrysler built 68,616 units of the 300 in its first seven months, from January through July of 2004. After the 300 went on sale in April 2004, Chrysler reported 82,721 sales during the next seven months, although that included some sales of the predecessor vehicle, the 300M. Power data show: >> In November, 88 percent of Charger sales included a customer cash rebate, compared with 52 percent for the segment. But the Charger rebate averaged $1,104 a unit in November - below the segment average of $1,487. >> In November, the Charger's average transaction price, less customer cash rebate, averaged $29,366. That compares with a segment average of $23,550. >> The Charger is capturing a younger buyer than the segment average. In November, Charger buyers averaged 40 years of age, compared with 44 years for the segment.

Yes....all Camaro names, Newbie be right.

Correct.

That Foose convertible is a stunner.....I like his approach, subtle muscularity....tailored..crisp.

Buick Bling.

I have never seen or heard of it...if it was here, I sure missed it....it's unforgettable. Blu there was this Buick concept, maybe you are thinking of this?

Honestly some fins almost get me hard...is that wierd?....That '71 Coupe DeVille just has the most incredible rear, profile and well it's perfect. Razor you are so right, please Cadillac bring back these iconic elements...do the slim vertical tailights in a subtle fin....I will be forever greatful.

Mary Kay used to and still does.....there is actually a new 'Mary Kay' model in soft pink for the DTS model....an actual model with here name in chrome raised letters on the side.

It's fun seeing unexpected cars being done like this. Crazy.

The 360 degree LED television November 29, 2005 If you’re looking for a new centrepiece for your new entertaining area, the new 360 degree LED display from Dynascan offers exactly that – quite literally. Taiwanese-based Dynascan has been developing the 360 degree LED display for several years now and it is initially being used as an advertising medium in shopping centres and public areas, with an outdoor version just launched too. The first time you see one of the screens you’ll understand what the fuss is about – the quality, colour, contrast and definition is extraordinary and the screen is absolutely huge – the third generation of the new LED screens is being introduced at present with the largest being a 2.5 metre high, 5.46 metre circumference screen and capable of being viewed clearly from 30 metres away. Interestingly, the screens can actually display one image around the full 360 degrees, so it would be possible to use them as output for a 360 degree camera. In their commercial configuration the screens are usually configured as three identical images, with each image claiming 120 degrees of the surface. Two 180 degree screens is also possible and … if the ambitious Tholos Project hadn’t died, it would have had an ideal screen. (gizmag.com)