Honda GX Stonewall? Hardly.

According to this piece in TheAutoChannel by one Edwin Black, Honda is pulling an Evil GM (see: EV1) and intentionally limiting the number of Civic GX (compressed natural gas) vehicles it produces and sells.

For all the sinister insinuations, Black doesn't really have an explanation for why it would be that Honda might be producing Civic GXs in limited quantities. That's because Honda clammed up and won't talk to the press about it, which is not surprising. All he can come up with is that Honda is pushing its much thirster Pilot SUV. As if a mid-sized SUV would somehow be hurt by sales of a compact sedan?

There are a number of plausible explanations for why Honda, which is certainly interested in polishing its already good environmental credentials, would be cautious with the Civic GX. Here are a few that are obvious to me:

Quality. Honda is obsessive about quality, and they may want to roll their CNG Civic out slowly until they fully understand how it can fail in the harsh environment of real American drivers.

Cost. Honda may not be making money on these, in fact they could easily be losing money on them, perhaps due to supplier issues. Honda may be treating the program as more of a marketing and product research exercise (like the original Insight?) until they understand the market for CNG better.

Dealerships. Since the CNG Civic has a specialized fuel system, different engine software, and perhaps other changes, special tools and training are required to service it. Since Honda doesn't (can't by law) own dealerships, dealers may have to put up significant capital to get CNG certified. Or perhaps Honda foots the bill, in which case Honda pays significant money for each dealer.

Honda isn't going to spread CNG dealers around the country, if there aren't enough fuelling stations, or customers for that matter, for it to make sense. They will pick a few entry markets, like California and New York, and go there.

And since Honda is obligated to service their CNG Civic, they obviously aren't going to want to sell them in places where they don't have a dealer certified for it yet.

The market is shifting rapidly this way and that. At first, pundits thought diesel was the new way--then the price of diesel shot up so that there was not much of an advantage over gasoline. The ethanol pendulum is swinging one way now, but could swing back the other way again if a backlash builds up. Oil is starting to look cheap again.

Honda isn't being sinister, they're eing cautious in an unpredictible and dangerous economy.

Adobe Photoshop Elements 5.0.2 Vista Bug

I'm posting this to help others find the answer to this bug.

Vista is running fine, but Adobe Photoshop Elements 5.0 had me pulling my hair out... after patching it up to v5.0.2 like Adobe says, and importing my catalog from my old computer, like Adobe says... the Organizer application wouldn't run. It showed me a splash screen, then disappeared.

Task Manager told me that it was running, but it wouldn't open a UI.

After much fooling around, un-installing and re-installing PSE, I finally found this article on Adobe's support site.

Apparently, the file monitor service breaks Organizer on some Vista sysems (like mine). To fix it, I simply turned off the service. From Adobe:

Solution

Turn off the Active File Monitor service.

1. Choose Start, type msconfig in the Search box, and then press Enter.
2. On the Services tab, deselect Adobe Active File Monitor V5.
3. Click OK, and then click Restart.

Note: You may not be able to use the Watch Folders function if you turn off the Active File Monitor service.

This fixed my problem, but now the Organizer won't be able to find new photo files that are dropped in disk folders.

WIndows Vista: Not So Bad

I needed to buy a new PC, and I found a pretty good deal on a Dell Optiplex 330 (dual core, 2GB ram, 160GB HDD). I decided to take a risk and get Windows Vista (Business), even though I read all kinds of horror stories about how unstable, slow, annoying, buggy it is.

Here is my experience so far (after using it for a few hours)

Good:

• UI is nice. Lots of eye candy, Aero interface is a bit blingy but effective. Decently organized. Lots of options for different views.
  
• Boot time is OK for me (my old XP machine took about 45 seconds to boot up, the new one takes about 30)
• Ubiquitous search boxes are neat.
• Sidebar is neat.
  
• Lots of built in goodies like scan/fax, system backup.

Bad:

• The User Account Control thing, the box that comes up and asks you "are you sure" for every little thing is annoying. I appreciate the added security, but I am tempted to turn it off.
• If I ran Windows XP on this machine, I bet it would boot in like 20s.
  

I also heard that much of my old software would not work in Vista. Not true, so far all this stuff seems to be working fine:

• WordPerfect Office 12 SP1 (but SP2 won't install!) I may break down and upgrade to the latest WP Office anyway.
• Microsoft Office XP
  
• Adobe Photoshop Elements 5.0 (with patch)
  
• FireFox 3.0
• Mozilla Thunderbird
• Ad-Aware
• Antivir Free Antivirus
• Quicken 2007 (with patch)
  
• Roxio Media Creator 10
• Apple iTunes

Software that won't work:

• Epson Smart Panel (don't care, Vista has nice built-in scanning functions anyway)
• WP 12 SP2 won't install.

Considering how blazing fast the new machine is compared to my old Dell 3000 (P4), and that it cost all of about $500, I'm very pleased.

Video: Motorcycle Wreck On Board

I don't think the guy was seriously hurt, maybe he learned a lesson?


Crazy Motorcycle Crash Caught on Dash Cam - Watch more free videos

More Thoughts on GM-Chrysler Merger

A few more thoughts on the possible merger of GM and Chrysler.

It sounds preposterous because it would add even more brands to GM's already confusing portfolio.  Consider:

• Cadillac - Luxury
  
• Saab - Euro Luxury
  
• Buick - Soft near-luxury
  
• Saturn - Euro basic / near luxury
  
• Pontiac - "Sporty"
  
• Jeep - Rugged go-anywhere SUVs and some rugged looking cars
• Hummer - Rugged go-anywhere SUVs
• Dodge - "Sporty" cars, manly trucks
  
• GMC - manly trucks
  
• Chevrolet - full line of basic transportation from small cars to trucks
  
• Chrysler - full line of basic transportation from small cars to trucks
  

Chop too many brands and you starve your dealer network.  Keep too many and you get a big badge engineered mess, or lose efficiency.  The new religion in the industry is to be lean, simple, agile--picking up more brands is like going back to the 1990's.  

On the radio this morning, I heard an interview with the guy who broke the story in the New York Times, Bill Vlasic.  One theory, mentioned in the paper,  is that GM may be after a cash-out deal, where they get a pile of cash along with Chrysler.  This may make short term sense, but it would leave GM with the albatross of Chrysler's crummy products, legacy costs, UAW contracts.

Another possibility is that, somewhat like a star expanding into a huge red giant as it begins the final stages of its life, GM may be trying to grow into a company so huge it can not be allowed to fail.  The government would have to come with support, or risk an economic supernova (or black hole?).   

Also, it would make strategic sense in the long run for GM to off a major competitor.  By removing capacity from the system, it may ensure more business for GM in the future.

Video: Old Guy Backs Up Onto Cop Car

A 70 year old guy in Illinois is upset that he got a speeding ticket. He intends to speed away, but is in reverse, and winds up backing up onto the hood of the cop's car.


How To Get Jail Time For A Speeding Ticket - Watch more free videos

GM Acquiring Chrysler?

The WSJ reports from unnamed sources "familiar with the matter" that GM was in talks with Cerberus to trade the rest of GM's stake in GMAC with Cerberus for the car (not finance) part of Chrysler.

This seems like a bizarre idea to me. GM would be picking up a big portfolio of non-competitive products (Sebring, Caliber, etc.) and redundant products (Ram). GM would also get lots of deflated real estate, such as the sprawling Auburn Hills headquarters, not to mention the plants, such as Belividere, which make the weak products. GM would also wind up with more UAW workers, and more UAW pension obligations. And GM would wind up with Chrysler's dealer network, compounding the problem of having too many dealers making too little money.

But GM's management would have some business reason to want Chrysler, what would those reasons be? Here's my theory.

1) Minivans. GM got killed in the minivan segment, and this would put them back in the game.
2) Truck dominance. GM could kill off the separate Ram platform and sell a Ram based on the Silverado, taking the truck sales crown from Ford once and for all.
3) Jeep. Even though Jeep has been watered down somewhat by Chrysler's attempt to grow Jeep into small crossovers (Compass), it is still a strong brand.

But all of these strengths are in the light truck and SUV sector, precisely where GM is already too heavy. With the coming tightening of CAFE rules, what business case would there be for GM to acquire more trucks and SUVs?

The idea just doesn't make much sense to me, as the armchair CEO.

Chrysler Hijacks "Volt" Keyword

Heh, I noticed a little bit of web advertising sneakiness on the part of Chrysler. On my own blog, no less. Take a look at the Google Adwords panel in this screen capture.

The New eBay Motors Scam

There's a new scam going around, which is a slightly more sophisticated variation of a fake escrow trick.

Scammers post for sale ads in classified services such as Craigslist or AutoTrader, with a too-good-to-be-true price. Here is one example I found: 2005 Honda Accord.

"Email me for more details : brendapharell@ymail.com .The car is in a perfect cosmetic and engine conditions, and meticulously maintained. No damage, no scratches or dents, no hidden defects, never been into accidents and it is as advertised. Email me for more pictures at : brendapharell@ymail.com . I cannot get in touch with you if you use the "Email this Seller" option because my email address on autotrader is full so please e-mail me directly at: brendapharell@ymail.com"

The car is a real car--in the sense that they borrowed some photos and a VIN from somewhere, so if you run it through CarFax it will check out as a real vehicle.

If you respond, they send you a fake invoice from eBay Motors, along with a fake "Vehicle Purchase Protection" service email.

Here are examples, cick for larger view:


It isn't a perfect fake, but it may be convincing to someone who doesn't know much about eBay. The real eBay Motors does not operate an escrow service, and they explicitly don't allow MoneyGram payments! Also note the fake eBay email address, "ebay@support-center-vpp.net".

The scammers want you to send a non-traceable payment (MoneyGram, Western Union) to a "payment agent", who is probably some idiot who signed up for a "work at home" job "processing internet payments". That guy cashes the payment, and forwards it on to the scammers.

I tried to make contact with the scammer, but he was being very careful--he wouldn't give me a phone number. He stopped respoding to my emails after I pointed out that eBay doesn't allow Moneygram payments, and asked if he could take a PayPal payment instead.

Update: I am starting to see reports of this scam spreading out into Canada and the UK, using other services such as Moneybookers. The rules are the same. If the price is too good to be true (way below market) or the guy wants you to buy a car without being able to look at it, it's not real.

Oilonomics 201

There seems to be this persistent theme in the energy policy and fuel economy debate that we need to be independent of "foreign oil". In his latest column, for example, John McElroy writes about ways to reduce our use of "Pesian Gulf" oil.

This is really an emotional play, to get people worked up about the issue. There is no such thing as "Persian Gulf" oil, in terms of public policy.

Oil is a commodity, which is traded on commodities markets worldwide. Traders buy and sell contracts, and customers who actually want oil arrange delivery via tanker and pipeline.

The "middle eastern oil" label implies that if we could just reduce our consumption by a few million barrels a day, we could bankrupt the Saudis (a worthy goal) while keeping our Canadian and Mexican friends in business. But really, what would happen, is that we would drive down the global price of oil. The Saudis wouldn't starve, but they would make less profit, as would the Canadians, Russians, and Nigerians.

An unintended side effect of reducing our use of oil would be to make it cheaper for the Chinese and Indians to burn more of it--so from a global warming point of view, reducing our oil consumption may not have that big of an impact if the developing world picks up the slack.

Video: Woman Ejected

As if you didn't need another exhibit of how bad it is to not wear your seatbelt. It is very hard to be thrown out of a car if you are buckled in.


Chick Tossed Out Of Flipped Car - Watch more free videos

Video: Dumb Dad

One day, he might Darwin his way out of the gene pool.


Not Father of The Year - Watch more free videos

GM Dropping Orlando MPV

According to various sources (see Autoblog), GM is killing its plan to bring a c-class (compact) 7-seat people mover to the U.S., the Chevrolet Orlando.  

This puzzles me, for several reasons.  The concept is a handsome vehicle, and looks quite practical.  It reminds me of a down-sized Traverse.   I think it is an exciting vehicle that would compete well.

Other carmakers are already selling small people-movers with some success, such as the Kia Rondo, Mazda 5.  More small MPVs are going to be sold in the U.S. in the near future, such as the rumored Ford C-Max (and possibly S-Max) MPVs based on the European Focus.  Honda may bring the Stream here as well.

Maybe, for some reason, the economics didn't work out for GM.  But from my seat, this looks like a mistake.

WSJ On Future Powertrains

Last weekend, the Wall Street Journal ran a supplement  with some generally well written articles about the future of energy, including such things as LED light bulbs (not quite ready yet) and underground coal gassification.  It is very interesting reading, and if you haven't seen it, take half an hour and read it through.

There was a good article by Joseph B.

 White about why the gasoline engine will be with us for the foreseeable future (lots of power for the pound, low cost).  But the Journal also published a table comparing some of the different upcoming greener powertrain options, which had some issues.  

I can't reproduce the whole table here easily (but you can read it here).  I'll just hit on the parts I think they got wrong.  

First, describing Flex Fuel vehicles, WSJ wrote that they have "no price premium" compared to gasoline vehicles.  This is not really true, as ethanol capable fuel systems must be made of different materials to resist the corrosive effects of alcohol.  Also, the engine control system (mostly the software on the PCM) must be more complex to handle ethanol, because it can be present in any concentration from E10 to E85 due to fuel mixing.  This requires substantially more development work by the powertrain engineers, and substantially more testing.  The actual cost per vehicle of a flex-fuel system is somewhere closer to $100-200/car, in large volumes.

Regarding plug-in hybrids, WSJ noted that the "advanced batteries are not yet available".  This is true, in the high volume commercial sense.  However, it was not mentioned that the high capacity batteries required to make plug-in hybrid cars work will be rather expensive, on the order of $3000/car more expensive than the current hybrid batteries. 

WSJ got sloppy with pure-electric cars.  They wrote, "Technology still unproven. Batteries not available."  Except that pure electric cars have been in mass production since about 1900.  And batteries are available--until recently, most electric vehicles used lead-acid batteries.  The article also misidentified the Chevrolet Volt as a pure electric car, which it is not-it is a "series hybrid", which is a car that has electric drive but can use gasoline to power the electric motor through a generator.   What the article was probably trying to get at was that currently, pure electric cars can not compete in range with gasoline cars, but they didn't' say so explicitly.

Finally, regarding clean diesel, WSJ neglected to mention that most implementations require the driver to top off a urea tank to aid in NOX reduction--a definite annoyance, and a minus in my opinion.

Just. Plain. Wrong.

Today, minding my own business, driving up Southfield Road, I came accross a brand new shiny black Lincoln MKS.

With a glued on vinyl roof.

Any dealer caught doing that to a modern car should have their franchise yanked.

Happy Birthday GM!

Today is GM's 100th birthday. For all of its problems, you can not ignore the impact that GM has had on the automotive industry, and the impact that it continues to have today. Even in its current, pruned form, GM is still one of the largest companies in the world. Some stats:

• 266,000 Employees
• 9.37 million 2007 Vehicle Sales
• Operations in 35 countries
• 13 global brands, plus OnStar
• 6,776 U.S. dealers
• Revenue of about $172 Billion

Some GM Innovations:

• Electric headlamps
• Electric starter
• Energy absorbing steering column
• Unibody construction
• Independent front suspension
• Engines that run on unleaded gasoline
• First mass produced automatic transmission
• Production airbags
• Catalytic converter
• Frigidaire, first room air conditioner
• First mechanical blood pump (for open heart surgery)
• First metal highway barriers
• OnStar, first telematics service

And GM has made some very popular and important cars over the years. Corvette. Suburban. Impala. Camaro. Bel Aire.

Here's a toast to GM. Keep fighting, guys, Michigan and the whole industry needs you.

Food Vs. Fuel: Soybeans Spike

I was browsing through a recent copy the WSJ when I came accross an article about soybean prices. On Friday, soybeans jumped by 23% on worries of short supplies.

The writer attributed the increase to to main factors: lower supply due to displacement by corn, and a delayed harvest due to a wet spring and summer.

Agriculture processors such as Archer-Daniels-Midland Co., and Cargill Inc. crush soybeans into soybean oil and soybean meal. Soy oil is used in cooking and has industrial applications such as biodiesel. Soymeal is fed to livestock.

Soybean stocks are at near-record lows this year. That is partly because farmers last season planted more corn instead of soybeans to cash in on high corn prices driven by a booming export market and a growing appetite for corn-based ethanol.

This illustrates the danger of quickly shifting to food based bio-fuels. The high demand for corn caused farmers to plant more corn and less soybeans (and other crops, like barley and wheat). This reduces the supply of those crops, and causes our animal feed and food prices to increase. Beer is getting more expensive!

Instead of propping up corn based ethanol, making big agriculture even richer, and driving our food prices up, Congress should kill the ethanol tariff and allow importation of ethanol and sugar beet feedstock from Brazil. This will allow us to bridge our ethanol needs until the point when non-food sources of ethanol are viable.

Of course the ethanol mandates and price supports are not the only reason that food has gone up in price so dramatically, probably the largest factor is the price of oil, followed by a weakened dollar.

We have ways to reduce the price of oil, but Congress is not yet willing to use them. It's a shame, because downward pressure on oil would result in downward pressure on food prices also.

Carnival Of Cars 09/13/2008

If you haven't been watching his blog in RSS, be sure to add Mark Tapscott's Straightline Blog over at Edmunds. He just posted the latest version of the Carnival of Cars.

I started the Carnival of Cars for "independent" bloggers some time ago, and later Mark Tapscott took it over and has kept it going.

What's a blog "Carnival"? it's a compendium of posts from a few different blogs, sort of the "best of" and a quick way to check up on what different bloggers are doing. By "independent" bloggers, I mean the small guys who write their own thoughts, rather than repackaging press releases like the corporate owned blogs like Autoblog.

Not that there is anything wrong with Autoblog, but their ratio of original content to repackaged press releases is sometimes pretty small. I wonder what happened to Eric Bryant ("The Angry Engineer")? he was a good source of down-on-the-ground original writing.

The neat thing about small bloggers is that most of us don't make money from our blogs, and are doing it for fun, or as a way to vent.

Biker Vs Biker

An amusing contrast. From UrbanGrounds


(Not that there is anything wrong with riding a pedal bike, or anything. I think Palin has better legs).

Video: Euro Truck Wreck

Car Clips Speeding Truck - Watch more free videos