1972. Chevy Nova on 2040-cars

Auto blog

800k car names trademarked globally, suddenly alphanumerics seem reasonable

What's in a name? This cliched phrase probably gets tossed out at every marketing meeting that happens when a new car gets its nomenclature. We know the answer, though: everything. The name of a car has all the potential to make or break it with fickle customers that are more conscious than ever about what their purchases say about them.
That's giving headaches to marketing folks across the automotive industry. "It's tough. In 1985 there were about 75,000 names trademarked in the automotive space. Today there are 800,000," Chevrolet's head of marketing, Russ Clark, told Automotive News. Infiniti's president, Johan de Nysschen, echoed Clark's sentiment, saying, "The truth of the matter is, across the world, there is hardly a name or a letter that hasn't already been claimed by one car manufacturer or another. You can go through the alphabet - A, B, C and so forth - and you will quickly see that almost all available letters are taken."
What has that left automakers to do? Get creative. In the case of Infiniti, it made the controversial move to bring all of its cars' names into a new scheme, classifying them as Q#0 for cars and QX#0 for SUVs and crossovers. So the Infiniti G, which was available as the G25 and G37, is now the Q50. The FX37 and FX50 are now the QX70.

GM won't pay owners of recalled cars for lost value

Kenneth Feinberg, the man in charge of the General Motors compensation fund dealing with the its widespread ignition switch woes, has issued an informal, two-letter response to the plaintiffs in more than 70 lawsuits seeking redress for lost resale value of their Cobalts: "No." The cases were recently combined into one, but Feinberg told The Detroit News that the fund will deal "only with death and physical injury claims," and that "perceived diminished value" will get no consideration.
ALG, the firm specializing in establishing residual values, determined that Cobalt owners had lost $300 compared to the segment competition and doesn't envision any long-term effects from the recall situation. Feinberg's statement comes in advance of public details on how the compensation fund will work and adheres to GM's long-held position on the matter. The company has already asked a judge to throw out such suits using the pre-bankruptcy defense, even as it stopped using that defense in cases of injury and death.
With plenty of potential gain from the GM suit, however, don't expect the plaintiffs to give up yet. When Toyota was sued for the same reason during the unintended acceleration debacle, it eventually settled the case for between $1 billion and $1.4 billion just to get it over with. Since the 85 law firms involved in the Toyota litigation took home more than $250 million of that total, we shouldn't expect the attorneys to give up on a GM payout, either.

Pure Vision Design TT Camaro has 1,400 reasons to want it

We've talked about Pure Vision Design before, a California-based company that made waves at last year's SEMA show with its Martini-liveried, Indy-car-powered Ford Mustang. That same car later starred in a Petrolicious video we showed you just a few weeks back. The company's latest creation is a menacing car it calls the Pure Vision Design TT Camaro. Based on a 1972 model, this car shares the Martini Mustang's clean styling and obsession with details.
Unlike the Mustang, which draws its power from a mid-60s Lotus-Ford Indycar engine, the "TT" in this Camaro's name implies something far more potent. The Nelson Racing Engines 427-cubic-inch V8 has been fitted with a pair of turbochargers, with a claimed output of 1,400 horsepower. That's almost 1,000 more than the Martini Mustang.
A six-speed Magnum transmission dispatches that power to the ground, while Pirelli PZero tires are tasked with (somehow) trying to grip the road. Baer brakes hide behind those HRE rims, while JRI coilovers and HyperTech springs bless the Camaro with some degree of competency in the bends.