The Fiat 500 has arrived in the USA

In the midst of high gas prices and a trend toward smaller vehicles, the Fiat 500 is still a head-scratcher.  One simple reason:  price.

Per this story on Boston.com, the Fiat 500 will have a 101-hp engine starting at $16,000, topping out around $21,000.

While this vehicle is not meant to compete with, say, a Honda Civic - which has grown in size in lockstep with the Accord to the point that the Accord is now a "full size" car - it'll still be difficult to find a market for the upstream trim level, which will likely surpass $20K.  For $20K, you can get a Civic with decent features and the gas mileage will be about the same in an auto transmission: 34/27 for the AT Fiat 500, and 38mpg highway for the 2011 Civic coupe.

I can understand the novelty of such a vehicle but feel it will have a limited market, appealing to hipsters looking for something different as well as the article's protagonist - Boomers who are of Italian descent or who used to own a "CinqueCento" back in the day.

Still, one can hardly blame Marchionne for not showing all his cards in Fiat's first romp back in the States since 1984.  It didn't cost Fiat much to re-enter the market, having brought no cash to the table when obtaining a stake in the bankrupt Chrysler back in 2009.  So, much like with the Alfa 8C Competezione, he's aiming for a very targeted campaign, hoping they sell out, and having this car be, in effect, free advertising for the next wave of more sensible Fiat vehicles. 

Here's to hoping Fiat sells out the 500 at all of the 130 dealerships at which it will be offered, and we see more Fiats and Alfas in the coming years.

Update, and Ford C-Max vs. Mazda5

Can't believe it's been nearly two years since I wrote in this thing.

Back then, I owned a Benz and my wife a Lexus.  My wife still has the Lexus.  After my insurance nightmare with the Benz E-320,  I sold the Benz in August of 2009, our first child was born that same month, and a few months later we were down to one car and had a new house.  That forced us to stay conservative as it pertained to vehicle purchases, so I bought a used Mercury Sable LS Premium for cheap money as my daily commuter car.  It's a nine mile commute with no traffic congestion, so it didn't make sense even to go with an older Benz where you don't know if the air conditioner or heater core is going to go at any time.  Not that Benzes aren't reliable, but I didn't want to tempt fate.

And of course, wouldn't you know it, less than a year in I had to replace the transmission on my Mercury.  I was playing with house money given the payment was so cheap and I wanted to trade it in soon anyway, but it hurt big time to have to shell out $2K for a car that cost me only three times that.  The Ford-made Duratec engine is great for what it is - not nearly as peppy as our 3.0-liter V6 in the Lexus, but torquey enough to pull the floaty whale through tough waters when necessary.  But the trannys, I heard, had plenty of problems in the Taurus and Sable in the early 2000s.  I just figured with only 63K miles on the thing when I bought it, it shouldn't be an issue - and was wrong!

We plan on trading our Mercury in this year for either a new Ford C-Max or a new Mazda5.  Both are mini-minivans and both are based on Ford's worldwide C platform.  Think longer-wheelbase Focus with a minivan rear end and the sliding doors to go along with it.

For a family that will likely grow from three to four in the next couple of years, it's a hell of a lot better price-wise than going for a huge Odyssey or Sienna - while nice, loaded up those things can cost upwards of $40K and we simply cannot afford one new with the features we want.

Before having driven either car - and I do expect the Mazda to drive better than the C-Max only because the Mazda3 has such a large enthusiast base with testimonials about how it handles as close to a BMW as any compact car has a right to - the C-Max may edge out the Mazda5.  (Both would be 2012 models as the C-Max hasn't landed for sale yet in the States and the Mazda5 skipped the 2011 model year).

One thing not considered here is price.  Let's assume that a C-Max SEL will cost roughly the same as the Mazda5 Grand Touring.  With the Mazda5, we will need to add a couple grand in for a roof cargo container, a DVD entertainment system should we opt to buy one, and any other dealer options.  Same with the Ford C-Max, but we do expect the C-Max to come with more electronic gadgets as standard in the SEL trim.

• Electronics:  if you click on the above link for the C-Max and toy around in the mini-site, you'll see a lot of cool gizmos available on the C-Max:  factory-installed DVD, factory navigation, SYNC, etc.  Ford has been pushing to really load up their cars with as many electronics as possible.  It's really neat in the Edge, and the difference is astounding when you get into a Limited or SEL with navigation vs. an SE without any cool electronic features. It's a joy to plug in a route or play with the radio in the Limited, but the SE looks very plain in comparison.  My 63-year old father uses the bluetooth hookup with ease for his cell phone, and when he calls me from the car the sound quality is great - expect more of the same in the C-Max.  The Mazda5 falls short here as you can't get factory navigation, can't get a factory installed DVD system, and has nothing like SYNC.
  
• Design:  The Mazda5 has the C-Max beat here.  Ford's new designs overall have been great; the refreshed Edge looks better than the original.  But Mazda's designs aren't so bad either, and the 5 looks fantastic compared to what now looks like its pedestrian predecessor.  The C-Max doesn't have the cool new grill gracing many of Ford's newer models.  While I understand it's hard to find room for that type of grill on a compact car with a smaller hood, there's still a stark difference, and the front end looks more like a Fiesta.
  
• Upstream features:  We are likely to get the most loaded version of either car as we can.  Beyond the interior comforts, where the C-Max wins, it will also bring the Hands-Free Liftgate, likely to be standard on the SEL trim.  This is a neat feature - all else being equal, with Mazda5 not even having a power liftgate for the 2012 model, this is pure, convenient joy.
  
• Seating:  The C-Max is being billed as a "5+2", because there is a stowaway middle seat option. It seems likely, though, that this stowaway middle seat will not have LATCH (few cars have three LATCH seats across the second row as it is).  And it may make more complicated what may already be a tight squeeze to get to the third row of seats.  Neat feature, but if I had the option, I'd probably stick with the Mazda5 orientation:  Six-seater, pure and simple.  Two kids, each with their own bucket seat, in the second row, with the third row available for kids who are in booster seats (no LATCH logos on the third row of either car, so assuming it won't be available) if necessary.  Mazda wins here, but it's not a big win because you can simply keep the Ford's middle seat in the second row stowed.
  
•  Dimensions:  The Mazda's dimensions have been published as the car is available now, but the C-Max's haven't.  Will Ford make the dimensions about the same?  It could just be the design cues, but the C-Max looks smaller to me than the Mazda5.  While we aren't buying the car for cavernous cargo room, we wanted a car with a third row that folds flat more for cargo space than the expectation we'll have three or four kids, or need to haul lots of kids around all the time.  How easy is it to get to the third row in both cars?  Does the sliding door open past the second row of seats so you could sneak back there from the outside?  These are things we'll be looking at when we hit the showroom floors.

 If the Mazda5 drives better, one thing for us to consider is that my wife will be doing most of the driving.  She doesn't care about driving dynamics, so that might not even be enough to steer us away from the C-Max given all the other goodies one can get.  This is a long term car for us, and despite the six seats, we will likely keep the third row folded flat most of the time for shopping trips.

2010 Ford Taurus: Review & Pictures

After some odd renaming of the brand, Ford finally has settled on a new design for the Ford Taurus sedan. And it looks like a real winner, per Road and Track:

Soft springs and heavy dampers absorb Michigan's ever-present potholes nicely, yet allow for crisp corner entry. Roll control is good, but if you push too hard there's a benign transition into moderate understeer that is wholly predictable. With higher cornering speeds come a proportional amount of body roll, but thankfully not as much as might be expected. The improvement is related to revised rear suspension that moves the shocks farther outboard for a better motion ratio that's now 1:1 as opposed to the previous car's 0.6:1.


Gripes are minor. The shift paddles feel plasticky, as if they were supplied by Mattel. And the standard wheels of the top-of-the-line Limited model are not alloys; they are steel wheels with plastic chrome cladding.


[+]

If this Ford Taurus is anywhere nearly as successful as the Fusion has been in the mid-size segment, we'll finally have a great American 6-cylinder car that people want to buy over a foreign counterpart. Many drivers will chime in that they have been loyal to American brands even despite the awful cars coming out of Detroit for decades now, but I'm talking about mainstream appeal for, of all things, a Ford Taurus that was thought to be dead years ago.

If I were in the market for a new car, I'd run to a Ford dealership and test thing out to see if it's as good as the review indicates. Judging by the brand new 2008 Ford Edge that a relative of mine recently purchased, all I can say is, Ford is on the right track. And yes, there definitely is a correlation between their recent success and not taking any bailout money.

Wow, I Miss Royal Ford

I live in the Boston area and the only use I've had for the Boston Globe (the hard copy) in recent years has been to read the automotive section. I always enjoyed Royal Ford's weekly column in the Globe. He struck a great balance between giving important information to everyday drivers when reviewing a vehicle, but also pointed out some of the more specialized aspects of the car for enthusiasts. Sure, he'd take the occasional jab at German companies for higher prices and higher expected maintenance costs in some cases, but the banter was always playful and he also gave a nod to the excellent way those cars drove. He is a journalist to be respected.

In complete contract to Mr. Ford is Sherrice Gilbash. Let me start by saying I think she fits in wonderfully for the website she writes for - Motherproof.com. The articles she writes are clearly geared toward Moms who are shopping for a grocery-getter but maybe with some niceties attached that Moms can appreciate - and surely, even some Dads.

But some of her articles have shown up in the Boston Globe lately, front and center in the automotive section where Royal Ford's (and then Cars.com journalists') used to reside - and strangely, they have not been republished on Boston.com. Even reviews by Cars.com folks will show up on the Boston.com website a day or so after the review is published in the paper. Not so with those written by Sherrice. Not too important, but odd and of note.

Here are some of the bits and pieces published in the Boston Globe recently:

For the 2009 Volkswagen CC 3.6L 4Motion review:

From the outside, the CC is incredibly smooth-looking — think stilettos and a black mini dress. This car turns heads and even gets people to point; that’s something I usually discourage my kids from doing, but in this case I told them it was a compliment. I started feeling guilty for being in sweats with no makeup when I was driving the CC.

Combine that punchy power with VW’s 4Motion all-wheel drive, and the CC proves you can look sporty and sexy and still plow through the snow like it’s nobody’s business. Too cool!

Stilettos, black mini dress, sexy, and the full sentence (?) "Too cool!". Again, clearly geared toward a female demographic, and that's fine for Motherproof.com, but for the Globe?

Here's more from her 2009 Audi A4 quattro review:

From the outside, the A4 has an incredible presence. It exudes style and sets the tone for the complete image of what and who an Audi driver is. I certainly wanted to be seen in the A4. For me, it was like wanting to be seen on that one day each month when I actually do my hair and makeup to pick the kids up from school. Darn it, I worked hard on my look and I want to reap the rewards of recognition!

This car may carry carpool by day, but by night — look out! My husband and I enjoyed a night out on the town while I had the A4. Getting ready, we felt as if we had to dress to the car’s level of class — definitely strappy heels with this one! As we hid the booster seats in the trunk, we glanced at each other with glee and said, “No kids!”

Sherrice goes on and on about the snack space given in the A4's rear armrest too. She focuses on what the driver should be in relation to this car instead of taking this car on a track and seeing what it can actually accomplish, and how it compares to its rivals and current technology in the marketplace. Honestly, anyone halfway familiar with German cars will surely find the armrest storage feature useful, but a little nod in that direction is all that's needed - not paragraphs worth of praise. An Audi is something you want to drive, and again, while her articles are useful for readers of Motherproof.com, I'm not sure why The Boston Globe switched from Royal Ford's more technically oriented articles with still a dash of his excellent, witty personality, to just about anyone on the internet who reviews cars. Maybe they'll ask me to write a review for them next?

By the way, there doesn't appear to be an official Royal Ford website, so here I'm linking to the closest thing I found in Google...enjoy!

http://labs.daylife.com/journalist/royal_ford

Supreme Court Delays Sale of Chrysler

The sale of the core Chrysler business to Fiat is at the heart of Barack Obama's plans to save the automaker from liquidation, something which the administration's lawyers argued is inevitable if the Italians walk away. Under the terms of the agreement, the deal must be completed by 15 June.

Fiat will emerge with management control and with an initial 20 per cent ownership of Chrysler under the deal, hammered out ahead of the bankruptcy filing at the end of March. A union-run healthcare trust will own most of the company, while unsecured bondholders will get only a sliver. Mr Obama condemned hedge funds holding the bonds for refusing to sign up to the deal, but a trio of Indiana state pension funds continued to try to block it.

They lost in bankruptcy court, and in an appeals court ruling last Friday, but were given permission to pursue the matter at the Supreme Court. They argued that the interests of unsecured bondholders had illegally been placed behind those of the union.

[+]

The Obama spin here is laughable: Chrysler is being sold because, since 1979, it has needed bailout after bailout & is in the business of providing pensions to former and current workers, instead of making great cars people want.

While I definitely want to see Fiat & Alfa vehicles sold here as soon as possible, I didn't know the majority shareholder of the new entity would be a union-run healthcare trust. This spells trouble, and this is exactly why Fiat refuses to put up any of their own cash to be part of this deal: because even Fiat knows subsidizing healthcare pensions and union corruption with their own money coming into this deal means that money disappears and is never heard from again.

Much as I hate to see the union be any part of this, I still want Ginsberg to finally let Chrysler die - in part, at least - and allow Fiat to take control to send the message that American car companies need to be more like Ford if they want to survive.

UPDATE 6/11/2009: It appears Chrysler is finally going to die, for the most part, as Fiat has been approved to take over all of Chrysler's assets. Let's hope this leads to a rebadging of the brand to Fiat and Chrysler finally dies a decent death, as should have happened in 1979.

New Corrupt.org commentary on 2010 Honda Insight Hybrid

I wrote a blog post about the new 2010 Honda Insight hybrid for the website Corrupt.org. Check it out here.

Vehicle lighting: Daniel Stern Lighting Consultancy and Supply

Vehicle lighting (headlamps, fog lamps, tail lights, and especially directional bulbs) is more important than most people realize. In the US, we're so used to options on the shelf that when we see a blue-looking headlamp at AutoZone and the manufacturer tells us it'll allow us to see better at night, we take the info at face value, and buy the lamp, thinking we look cool with blue-ish headlamps.

There's also the issue of use: today, on my way to work, it was raining hard and there was a lot of mist & fog in the air, such that visibility was down below 50 feet or so. There were many people who didn't even have their tail lights on, let alone fog lamps. So if you were driving and a person stopped suddenly in front of you, you may not have even known they were there until you saw their brake lights, and by then it would be too late if you were unknowingly following too closely. Unfortunately, fog lamps are used as an odd fashion statement here: "hey, my vehicle came with these cool extra lights, so I'm going to use them!" This is particularly a problem with pickup truck owners: they're already too high up, and have fog lamps, so instead of using their low beams, they use their parking lights (big no-no) and fog lamps. Simply odd; not sure where pickup truck drivers learned this or why they do it, but it's dangerous as almost no one sees your fog lamps, particularly not anyone behind you or directly in front of you.

Then there's directional bulbs. Of course, many people don't even use them when they should. But they cast a wide beam and have little in the way of glare (when they are yellow - fashionable white or red tail lamps are just a bad idea). As such, they should always be used as appropriate.

In Europe, lighting regulations are much more strict. In many countries, all vehicles come with fog lamps, and you can be fined for using them outside of the normal use. My 2002 Mercedes-Benz E320 comes with a rear fog lamp, which some Audis and Volvos also have here in the States (BMW has opted not to include rear fog lamps in their US inventory). The rear fog lamp on the Benz lights up on the driver's side tail light assembly, so an approaching car knows which side of the car they may hit if they approach too quickly, and can effectively maneuver to the appropriate side.

There's an entire science behind vehicle lighting and its effects on the eyes, as well as its effectiveness in certain situations, which depends on which area of the country you live, etc. Daniel Stern Lighting Consultancy & Supply was recommend to me on a Benz board a while back, and Daniel has been great to work with & buy from. He gives his time via email to explain to you what types of bulbs one should use depending on your car and in which area of the country you live. Drop him a line if you're shopping for lighting.


Click here for Daniel Stern Lighting Consultancy and Supply