Post by Kasey Kagawa

Formula 1 is supposed to be the fastest road-racing motorsport around. Millions upon millions of dollars poured into R&D, an international race spectacle that features the absolute pinnacle of technological development and driver skill, all dedicated to going around a track as fast as is physically possible. And when it was announced that BMW was bringing one of their BMW-Sauber F1 cars from last year and Nick Heidfeld, their best driver, down to be driven around the Nordschleife at the Nurburgring, the infamous “Green Hell” that was deemed too long, too demanding and too dangerous for F1 racing, we were all expecting some sort of mind-blowing record that would stand for years to come.

Read the rest of this entry »

Post by Kasey Kagawa

In the interest of providing you, the reader, with quality entertainment (and boosting our page views), this is the inaugural post of our Video of the Week series, showcasing whatever bit of video footage happens to catch our fancy. And yes, there will be a short quiz next week covering this material.

This week, we will take a close look at the hidden and tragic threat of imagination in children. Specifically, when a child gets a little too involved in their particular fantasy. Observe this case study filmed by the Volkswagen Automotive Group. It clearly shows that this child is so committed to his fantasy of driving a car that shifts better than the 1960’s manual school bus his friend is clearly driving that he is driven to the edge of unconsciousness. Also, as hypoxia takes hold of his mental processes, he forgets that even the mighty DSG gearbox still pauses as it shifts from one clutch to the other, and begins to tragically simulate a CVT gearbox instead. Some among you may argue that they could have simply reshot the footage with the child accurately simulating the sounds of the DSG gearbox, which would have allowed him to actually breathe at some point during this ad, but some things are more important than accuracy in advertising, like the image of a child turning purple as he passes what seems like 15,000 RPM.

Read the rest of this entry »

Post by Kasey Kagawa

Back when I was sixteen years old, all of five years ago, my biggest concerns were passing Japanese class and studying for the county Academic Decathlon competition. For Max Chilton, he’s got a few other things on his plate, like passing strategies, trail braking and tire degradation, as one day after his 16th birthday, he raced in his British Formula 3 competition at Donington Park in Leicestershire. Similarly, seventeen year olds Kris Hall and Ella Flynn will be boning up on their opposite lock application and pace notes for their position in the 2007 Yokohama 205 Challenge rally series.

Nick Trott of Top Gear had a few comments about that on the Top Gear motorsports blog. He says that there are two sides to this issue; on one hand, racing is a very athletic activity, encourages competitiveness and social skills, and requires discipline and grace under pressure. He also points out that the odds are your kid will be too busy worrying about driving technique to be smoking everything that they can find. On the other hand, you’re sticking your kids in a hunk of metal that’s flying around a track and potentially through the air at very high speeds, being propelled by a highly flammable liquid that could turn the entire contraption into a rather spectacular fireball.

Read the rest of this entry »

Post by Kasey Kagawa and Zerin Dube

It’s official. We’re idiots. Thanks to the efforts of intrepid reader uberR32, who was under no obligation to tell us that we were wrong, we now know that what we asserted in our “stunning expose” on the disconnect between the new EPA standards and the gas guzzler tax, that the downward shift in MPG ratings caused by the new testing procedures would force more cars to be taxed as gas guzzlers, was wrong. Gas guzzler tax ratings are actually calculated using the original CAFE standards from 1975, and as the commenters at Autoblog pointed out, the EPA actually has nothing to do with the assessment of the gas guzzler tax, as the CAFE numbers are calculated by the Department of Transportation. Not only is this what the law on the books say, it was actually on the EPA fuel economy website.

I could make all different kinds of excuses about what happened, that the EPA website is extremely vague, that the idea that a government agency would use a standard that’s more than thirty years old is insane, that we were caught up with the heady feeling of discovery, but it doesn’t matter. We fucked up. I wish I could say that this is some sort of clever proof of my belief in journalistic integrity, but in reality, we’re just morons. Everyone screws up on occasion. It’s not an excuse for what we did, and it’s up to you, the reader, to decide whether or not to listen to a single thing we say ever again. All that we can do is apologize for what’s been done, and promise that we will never get our facts wrong again, until the next time that we do.

Post by Kasey Kagawa

In a stunning blow for common sense, the EPA changed the way they test the fuel economy of all cars a few months ago, accounting for such wild and reckless behavior as driving at 80 MPH, running the air conditioning in 95ºF temperatures, and driving in 20ºF weather, all of which use more fuel than the standard tests. These changes won’t show up on cars until the 2008 model year, but at least it’s done, and we the consumers didn’t get screwed in the process.

Well, not entirely. As we lounged at 35,000 feet in the Dubspeed private jet, sipping the finest cognac in our silk smoking jackets and enjoying the services of the many fine dancing girls under our employ, Zerin mentioned the gas guzzler tax to me. It seemed to him that a decrease in MPG ratings across the board, especially if it reflects a more realistic rating, should lead to a corresponding decrease in the numbers on the tax schedule for the gas guzzler tax, yet this had not happened.

After our return to the ground, I navigated to the EPA’s website on the gas guzzler tax, and it turns out that he was right. The tax is assessed by multiplying the highway MPG by 45% and the city MPG by 55%, and then adding those numbers together and comparing the total to the tax schedule, which is published on the gas guzzler website. This tax is charged to the manufacturer, but it often is passed down to the consumer. The current tax schedule that is in place has been used since 1991, and there is nothing on the website indicating that it is under review as a result of the changes in the EPA gas mileage ratings, which means that more than a few cars are in danger of being bumped up to a higher tax bracket, even though their real MPG ratings haven’t changed one bit, just the way the government measures them. For example, the Chevrolet Corvette Z06 rings in with a 21.5 combined MPG, which is good for a $1300 charge, but with the new combined MPG of 19.95, it jumps up two brackets to cost $2100 per car. A manual Nissan 350Z scores 23.15 MPG and avoids the gas guzzler under the old ratings but with a 21.15 MPG on the new ratings, it also comes up two brackets with the IRS charging Nissan $1300 for every 350Z sold in the US, an amount that will undoubtedly be passed down to the consumer.

This is bad enough, but there’s an exemption in the gas guzzler tax. Guess what it’s for? That’s right, our old friends the truck, sport utility vehicle, and the minivan. All of these vehicles are exempt from the gas guzzler tax, which means that while those of us who drive reasonable transportation instead of 18-foot-long monstrosities with one person in them get screwed by Uncle Sam, the thundering idiot who thinks that a truck that you need a stepladder to get into is the pinnacle of the automotive industry can keep on buying vehicles that struggle to get their fuel economy into double-digits. If you’re looking into buying a four-banger, you should be pretty safe, but if your dream car has six cylinders or more, I’d buy it now, as it’s about to get a lot more expensive.

EPA Fuel Economy [US EPA]

Edit: Before you Corvette zealots jump all over me about the fact that the consumer doesn’t get charged gas guzzler for the Z06, remember that it’s the manufacturer that takes the hit. It’s up to them to pass it on down to you, and in this case, they obviously chose to eat the costs for PR purposes. If you don’t believe me, do the math.

Post by Kasey Kagawa

Ford’s taken a lot of flak recently over their somewhat lack-luster debuts (2008 Ford Focus, anyone?), and rightly so. As we’ve endlessly heard from the various media outlets and the teeming millions of commenters on automotive websites, Ford’s been dropping the ball on their “Bold Moves” theme at a time when they need to be stepping up their game and showing not just US consumers but the rest of the automotive industry what they can really do. The new Ford Flex, however, shows that Ford does have the capability to turn it around.

There’s been one thing that people have been consistently forgetting when they say that Ford hasn’t been following their own principles, and that is the fact that it takes a considerable amount of time to design a new car. Ford’s “Way Forward” and “Bold Moves” initiatives are just over a year old, and it takes at least that amount of time to design and debut a new car. The Ford Edge and new Focus were influenced by these programs, but they didn’t go from greenlit concept to completion under them. The Flex is probably the first car that’s gone from start to finish with these programs, and it shows in the design. The improved interior design from the Edge is present, but the exterior design is much more distinctive than recent efforts, and integrates the Modern Styling or Dave design themes from the 427 concept much better than previous cars, especially the Focus, which looks unbalanced and like it had that three-bar grill slapped on it at the last minute. The exterior design for the Flex is definitely unique for a minivan, which tend to be much more plain and uninteresting in their designs, but the creases, tasteful use of chrome trim, and the distinctive paint scheme makes this a minivan that you won’t lose in a parking lot.

While the interior and exterior designs are right on target and make this car a prime example of Ford of North America’s ability to keep up with the leaders in automotive design, the name is a bit of a puzzle to me. I don’t quite understand what was wrong with Fairlane, to be honest. It’s perfectly representative of the way the car looks and of the images the design is intended to create. Hell, look at their own promotional material. When I look at the photograph at the top of this post, taken from their own press pack, I don’t think of Flex. In fact, the only things that spring to mind when I think of the word Flex are Funkmaster Flex and large, overly-muscled men, neither of which seem to be particularly congruent with the image Ford is trying to create with their new car. I understand how they got to this point, I really do. Ford listened to their marketing department, who then waved around focus group studies that demanded a more “urban,” “hip,” and “edgy” aspect to their cars. The thing is, Ford’s been listening to their marketing department a bit too much as of late, and it’s time that they learned to take a chance and go with what they’re hearts and guts are telling them, not what the focus groups tell them to do. After all, isn’t that what “Bold Moves” are all about?

2008 Ford Flex - Dubspeed Driven Photo Gallery [Dubspeed Driven]

Click to View Larger Image

Source: Ford Motor Company

NEW YORK, April 4, 2007 – Ford Motor Company redefines the modern American family journey with the introduction of the 2009 Ford Flex, a full-size crossover that sets a new standard for style, features, functionality and comfort in the U.S. industry’s hottest segment.

Click to View Larger Image

Read the rest of this entry »