Traditional Hot Rod Old School Survivor on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Detroit and Silicon Valley: When cultures collide

Culture is a subject that rarely, if never, gets discussed when traditional auto companies buy — or hugely invest — in Silicon Valley-based companies. The conversation surrounding the investments is usually about how the tech looks appealing and how it's an appropriate step to move the automakers toward autonomy. Culture — the way things are done, the expectations, and the approaches — is something that is overlooked only at one's peril. The potential cultural gap is almost always evident in the obligatory photos of the participants in these deals, with is essentially a photo op of auto execs with their Silicon Valley counterparts. The former — rocking jeans and no ties — look like parochial school kids playing hooky. Don't worry: The regimental outfits will be back in place once they get back in the Eastern time zone. Consider what happened back in 1998 when Daimler bought Chrysler. First of all, there was a denial in Detroit that it happened. It was positioned as a "merger of equals." Which it wasn't. In any corporate situation, when one has more than 50 percent of the business, it owns the whole thing. And the German company was in the proverbial driver's seat. People who were around Auburn Hills back then kept their heads down and their German Made Simple books at hand. Things did not go well. Daimler had had enough by 2007, when it offloaded Chrysler to Cerberus Capital Management — which brought ex-Home Depot CEO Bob Nardelli into the picture, which is a story onto itself. But when you think about the Daimler-Chrysler situation, realize that these were two car companies (at least the Mercedes part of the Daimler organization), so they had that in common, and the language of engineers is something of an Esperanto based on math, so there was that, too. Yet it simply didn't work. It doesn't take too many viewings of HBO's Silicon Valley to know that the business people in that part of the world are far more aggressive than people who ordinarily head and control car companies in Detroit. About 20 years ago, a book came out about the founder of Oracle titled The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison* - and the asterisk on the book jacket leads to: God Doesn't Think He's Larry Ellison. It would be hard to imagine a book about a Detroit executive, even a book that had the decided bias that the tome about Ellison evinces, that would be quite so searing. Sure, there are egos. But they are still perceived to be, overall, "nice" people.

GM, Ford, Toyota, Stellantis CEOs want EV tax credit cap lifted

For just over a decade now, the U.S. has had a federal tax credit worth up to $7,500 for buyers of electric cars and plug-in hybrids. The catch has been that, once 200,000 of them were claimed for a manufacturer, that credit would be phased out. Now, automakers are asking for this cap to be lifted across the board, specifically General Motors, Ford, Toyota and Stellantis. The request comes in the form of a joint letter to Congress (which you can read here), signed by the CEOs of each company. And the ask really is as simple as that. The automakers would like the cap lifted for all EV manufacturers, and instead have a sunset date for the tax credit put in place. Broadly speaking, they want it lifted because of concerns about rising costs from materials and supply chain issues, which can lead to higher prices and could discourage buyers from getting an EV. It would also put automakers back on an even playing field. GM reached its tax credit cap a few years ago, meaning that none of its EVs are eligible for the tax credit. So while it reaped the benefits early on, it now has something of a disadvantage to competitors with credits remaining, such as those that signed on to this letter. GM wouldn't be the only beneficiary. Tesla ran out of credits years ago, too. Nissan still has credits, but likely not for much longer, as InsideEVs reports around 190,000 Leafs have been sold in the U.S. as of April. So it will probably face a phase-out soon, just as the anticipated, and more expensive, Ariya is heading to market. Making this change would also seem like a good choice for continuing to stimulate EV sales, if that's what the government is looking to do. While EVs are now reaching parity in practicality and performance with gas-powered cars, having an additional financial incentive will surely keep them looking more attractive. And automakers can push EVs without fear of running out of credits early. Certainly some sorts of changes to the EV tax credit are likely. There are bills in the works focusing on cap changes as well as the amount of money available, and which vehicles are eligible. Credits up to $12,500 have been proposed, plus possible credits for used EV sales and restricting some credits to vehicles of certain price brackets. Of course, any changes will require some cooperation in a deeply divided Congress. Related Video: Government/Legal Green Chevrolet Chrysler Ford Toyota Electric EV tax credit

Ford Explorer, Jeep Grand Cherokee flunk IIHS passenger-side crash test

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has uncovered major safety-related problems while crash testing a number of popular midsize SUVs. Among those that scored an overall rating of "poor," the lowest possible score, are the Ford Explorer and Jeep Grand Cherokee. Both SUVs showed a high risk of injury to a front passenger during the IIHS' passenger-side small overlap front crash test. This test simulates what might happen if a car or SUV strikes an immovable object, like a telephone pole, at 40 mph and with roughly 25-percent of its front width. "Although some vehicles in this group offer very good protection, in other models, the airbags, safety belts and structure showed serious deficiencies," says IIHS chief research officer, David Zuby. "In those SUVs, a front-seat passenger would be at risk of injuries to the head, hip or leg in a right-side small overlap front crash." In the 2018 Ford Explorer, the front of the SUV showed the structure was "seriously compromised" during both driver- and passenger-side small overlap crash testing, according to the IIHS. The lower and upper door hinge pillar showed intrusion levels of 15 and 13 inches, while the door sill itself was pushed inward 6 inches toward the crash test dummy. The IIHS states these results indicate a high probability that a front occupant would suffer injuries to their right hip and lower left leg. The 2018 Jeep Grand Cherokee didn't fare much better. Not only did the Jeep exhibit 10 inches of intrusion at the lower door hinge pillar, the front passenger crash test dummy's head hit the dashboard through the front airbag. Worse still, the side curtain airbag didn't deploy and the front passenger door opened. The IIHS says there is a strong chance this would result in right leg injuries, along with the possibility of a serious head injury. Even vehicles that earned an "acceptable" in the small overlap front crash test showed definite room for improvement. The 2018 Honda Pilot, for example, showed good structural performance during the crash itself. But the front passenger crash test dummy's head slid off the deployed airbag and hit the dashboard hard, indicating a head injury might result in a similar real-world crash scenario. Two other SUVs that scored "acceptable" ratings included the 2018 Nissan Pathfinder and 2018 Toyota Highlander. Scoring top marks of "good," the highest rating, in these IIHS crash tests were the 2018 Volkswagen Atlas, 2018 GMC Acadia, and 2019 Kia Sorento.