1995 Ford Mustang Gt Convertible on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Best and worst car brands of 2022 according to Consumer Reports

It's that time again, Consumer Reports this morning lifting the curtain on its 2022 Annual Car Brand rankings and its 10 Top Picks in the car, crossover, and truck category. Drumroll, please: This year, Subaru climbs two spots to claim the winner's circle, having come third the last two years. Last year, Mazda climbed three spots from 2020 to take the crown. This year, Mazda slipped to second, BMW taking the last spot on the podium, also a one-spot drop from 2021. Six automakers in the top 10 hailed from Japan, which is one more than last year, and five luxury makers occupied the top 10, which is two more than last year. And South Korean representation didn't crack the top this year, after Hyundai managed tenth last year. The seven makes after BMW are: Honda, Lexus, Audi, Porsche, Mini, Toyota, and Infiniti.  The magazine and testing concern says its Brand Report Card "[reveals] which automakers are producing the most well-performing, safe, and reliable vehicles based on CR’s independent testing and member surveys," and that "Brands that rise to the top tend to have the most consistent performance across their model lineups." The domestics also took steps back among the 32 OEMs ranked on the 2022 card. Chrysler and Buick were the domestic carmakers who made last year's top 10 in eighth and ninth, respectively. This year, Buick dropped to eleventh, Chrysler to thirteenth. Dodge went from fourteenth to sixteenth. CR continues to ding Tesla's yoke steerer, the not-exactly-natural handhold responsible for the electric carmaker going from sixteenth last year to twenty-third this year.

Detroit 3 and UAW set for showdown over tiered wages

This week, thousands of United Auto Workers will converge on Cobo Center in Detroit for the Special Convention on Collective Bargaining, an every-four-year event that lets members tell UAW leaders what the negotiating priorities should be during contract negotiations. This is where a lot of sand and a lot of lines start coming together in preparation for contract negotiations between the UAW and the Detroit 3 automakers, which will happen later this year. Number one on the UAW agenda is the end of the two-tier wage system created in 2007 to help the automakers get through bankruptcy; veteran workers are paid the Tier 1 rate of around $29.00 per hour, new hires are paid the Tier 2 rate of between $15 and $20 and get about half the benefits of Tier 1. Tier 2 hiring has been an undoubted success for the automakers, allowing them to keep factories in the US and hire more workers. By agreement, it is capped at a certain percentage of each automaker's workforce, and while the union's ultimate position is to get rid of the dual-scale system entirely; one leader said Ford could easily afford the $335 million it would take to convert all its workers to Tier 1 out of its $6.9 billion in 2014 North American profit, and General Motors could do the same out of the $5 billion it is handing to investors through the (admittedly forced) share buyback. Other delegates say that at the very least they'd be happy with enforcement of the current caps in the new contract. The automakers, conversely, would welcome expansion of the Tier 2 ranks. Including benefits, import automakers pay workers "in the high $40 range" per hour, according to an analyst, while Ford and GM pay about $59 in wages and benefits per hour. More Tier 2 workers on the rolls would let those two companies get labor cost parity with the competition. Fiat-Chrysler pays wages closer to the imports because of special exceptions in its UAW contract that allow unlimited Tier 2 hiring; those exceptions will end on September 14 and bring FCA into line with the other domestics, unless the new contract maintains them. FCA CEO Sergio Marchionne is opposed to the two-tier system, having called it "almost offensive." One analyst says the UAW might win a sizable pay raise for Tier 2 and a small increase for Tier 1, but the keystone issue will be how the hiring matrix can help the automakers keep overall wages in line with the imports.

EPA says fuel economy test for hybrids is accurate

The EPA says it stands behind its fuel economy test for hybrid vehicles following controversy about the testing process after Ford C-Max Hybrid customers and automotive journalists alike struggled to achieve 47 miles per gallon, the advertised mpg number, Automotive News reports. Ford responded to the issue almost two weeks ago by claiming that a 1970s-era EPA general label rule was responsible for the inaccurate mileage numbers, rerating the C-Max Hybrid's mpg numbers and offering customers rebates. Ford later said it didn't overstate the C-Max Hybrid's fuel economy and that it was surprised by the low numbers.
Ford technically didn't do anything wrong because it was following the general label rule, but agency regulator Christopher Grundler says the automaker was exploiting a loophole when it came up with the hybrid C-Max numbers, and that the testing process remains accurate. The general label rule allows vehicles that use the same engine and transmission and are in the same weight class to share fuel economy numbers, but it doesn't take into account other factors such as aerodynamic efficiency, which affects hybrids more drastically than non-hybrid vehicles. Ford originally used the Fusion Hybrid economy figures for the C-Max Hybrid and claimed the engineers didn't realize that its aerodynamic efficiency would affect fuel economy as much as it did.