The Batsmart by Barris

Batsmart from SEMA George Barris has officially gone batty. While he is one of the men generally acknowledged for creating the original Batmobile, he hasn't shown anything with those trademark wings since Joel Schumacher almost ruined the franchise. And then we passed this in the North Hall at SEMA today. Maybe it was Catwoman standing next to it, but the Batsmart instantly takes us back with those trademark high-mounted rear wings, a rear jet exhaust, roof-mounted flutes and vertical doors. We don't have many details, but we really don't need them. Just look at it - it's a smart fortwo wearing a Batmobile costume for Halloween! Maybe gas has risen to $11 a gallon in Gotham and this is the best Bruce Wayne can do. Who knows? We've actually heard that 40 lucky Bat fans will be able to get their hands on one of these in the near future. The standard package won't include the roof flutes or rear chutes and exhaust, but they will be available options. Keep your eye on smart42parts.com website for updates. Meanwhile, we don't think our modern day Caped Crusader has any plans to replace his Tumbler with this toddler. Gallery: SEMA 2008: Barris BatSMART

 

Volkswagen developing car even smaller than up! with 117.6 mpg!

VW up! Concept In Fall of 2007, Volkswagen unveiled a series of three mini car concepts called the up!, Space up! and Space up! Blue. Apparently the German automaker has determined that the tiny "four seat" up! just isn't small enough and is planning an even smaller machine to take on the Smart ForTwo directly. The goal is to create a two-seater that can achieve a fuel consumption rating of 2 L/100 km or 117.6 mpg! According to Auto Motor und Sport, the smaller car will be based on the up! architecture with power coming from a 1.0L three-cylinder diesel making 50 hp. VW has been testing a two-cylinder engine, but is unlikely to go that route. A twin would have to work too hard to provide any mileage benefit, so the slightly larger engine is likely to find a home in the new car. The first of the up! models are expected to debut in 2010 with larger models, and now smaller ones, to follow. Thanks to Christian for the tip! Gallery: VW up!

 

 

Report: Toyota working on car powered solely by solar energy

According to the Nikkei Japanese newspaper, Toyota is working on a compact-car that will be solely powered by solar energy. The newspaper said that it will be years before the vehicle ever makes it to the markets but Toyota is quickly looking for ways to differentiate itself in the "green car" market. Nikkei said that the Japanese automaker is currently working on an electric-car that gets some of its power from solar cells and will later develop a model that will be totally powered by solar cells mounted onto the roof of the vehicle. While Toyota forecasted its first operating loss in 70 years last month, it is still the leader in green technology and Toyota executives have emphasized that they will not cut back on environmental research despite the company's financial troubles. Toyota is expected to gain knowledge of solar energy in vehicle use from its partner, Panasonic Corp., which currently produces batteries for its hybrid cars. Source: Detroit Free Press

 

Pininfarina exits contract building, focusing solely on electric vehicles

This year has been a hard one for a lot of people, companies and industries. It has been an especially tough one for Pininfarina, losing its CEO, Andrea Pininfarina, to a traffic accident in August. Today news is breaking that the company has decided to end its stint as Italy's last contract manufacturer and focus solely on building electric vehicles. Pininfarina's new plan is as much about finances as it is about the future: the new plan facilitated an agreement with its creditors that helped avoid bankruptcy for the legendary design and coachbuilding firm. Pininfarina B0 electric vehicle at Paris Motor Show

View article...

Trying to be Smart

I think my editor has some personal vendetta against yours truly that I am not aware of.  The evidence is pretty damning: he chuckles every time I get miffed about something, purposely assigns me to drive the cars he knows cause me trouble, and sends me on overseas assignments at the moment when I am least inclined to go abroad.  Apparently I produce better work when I am in dire straits.  So he says.  Does this count as abuse? Here is the grand quandary: I know he does it for the benefit of the Publication.  It's just my bad luck that what is best for the Publication happens to be what is generally bad for me.  The best writing I do is not when I'm under pressure, or when I'm excited to be an intrepid reporter, or when I'm being repressed by the violence inherent in the system.  I write the best simply when I have a thick frown.  My editor knows this, and goes to great lengths to keep my frown consistent and my feathers ruffled. Case in point: "Hey, J-, I've got a beat for ya.  Here's the keys to a 2009 Smart ForTwo.  Drive it for a week." Now I have tolerance for most cars.  Cars are not like people. They don't do things that make you hate them because they can't do anything.  They are inanimate objects, so therefore, it is not their fault if they are grade-A pieces of flying cow-pie.  Thus cars have an innocence about them: you can't hate a car if it is bad, you can only hate the people who made it that way. With the Smart ForTwo, there is something about its sneering little face and miserable scrotum-like shape that develops within me an irrational hatred towards it.  It is the epitome of an automotive gimmick.  No matter what the boffins and clueless mainstream media buffoons say, its fuel economy is not spectacular, and when it does drink, it demands spicy premium.  Cha-ching.  So can we stop with the green argument and actually talk about it as a car?  It is not made from biodegradable young saplings, and it does not shit artesian spring water.   It's got seats and a steering wheel, and a little motor that puts out carbon dioxide like all the rest.  It is NOT special. And that is the reason why I dislike the Smart.  Slick marketing and an undeniably noticeable presentation has rendered the Smart a cultural icon without any sort of meat or background to back it up.  The Smart is sort of an automotive incarnation of Barack Obama. Walking out of the Publication's humble offices and seeing your assignment parked next to a brand-new Dodge Challenger SRT8 tester is a demoralizing experience rivaling the realization that you've lived your entire life in the Matrix.  Every great accomplishment you have achieved in life was part of a simulation; it never happened.  I personally felt like all my years of journalistic experience, the misery I put up with for the sake of my craft, had all been in vain.   Opening the plastic door of that Smart had to be the greatest anti-climax of my life.  I was prepared to give the most biased, one-sided, dishonest, personally-motivated opinion of my entire career. Wow, this thing has a lot of room inside.  The first thought that went through my mind was positive, so that's no good.  I should have been complaining.  Okay, let's fire up this guinea pig of a motor.  Oy, it sounds pitiful.  Memories of the unmistakable clatter of the old Volkswagen Beetle's air-cooled "engine" came to mind.  The Smart I was driving was the base "Pure" model, MSRP $11,990, and had about as many bells and whistles as a wooden plank.  Considering the state of the financial world at this time, twelve grand for a car the size of a Roma tomato seems like wishful thinking on the part of Daimler's bookkeepers.  This "Pure" had the standard 1 liter 3-cylinder gasoline, which runs on (remember this one, folks?) premium fuel.   That's right.  The "fuel efficient, green" car of the year runs on the expensive stuff.   That is properly batty. The idea for the Smart was originally dreamt up by the Swiss watchmakers Swatch, back in the early 1990's.  Spearheaded by Swatch CEO Nicholas Hayek, the designs and plans to create the ultimate, efficient city car were shopped around to various manufacturers.   General Motors shunned the idea as being potentially unprofitable. (And that was back when GM stock was worth more than your 5-year old's milk money!)    Volkswagen wanted in, but had to back out just as fast;  their financial situation at that time was too dire to take up the hefty new idea.  Finally, in 1994, it was Daimler-Benz who agreed to build the "Swatchmobile" in purpose-built "Smartville" in Hambach, France. In 1998, after its debut at the Frankfurt Motor Show in 1997, the first Smart ForTwo rolled off the assembly line, greatly modified from Hayek's original vision.   The biggest change was Mercedes' scrapping of the "super-super-super eco-friendly" part of Swatch's plan.  Instead, the Smart got a petrol engine. A small petrol engine, mind you, but a petrol engine nonetheless. Not so innovative, especially for the Swiss.  They did not like it.  Heavy losses and disputes did not help, either, and the joint venture between watchmaker and carmaker had to end.  Daimler has since held the Smart phenomenon close to their bosom, and over the last ten years, coaxed it forward into the world automotive theater.  Now the Smart is available in North American markets such as Canada, Mexico, and the US; and most recently, Daimler AG has introduced the car to Asian markets: China, Japan, and Taiwan. It is all well and fine, this expansion.  Yet the amateur economist in me cannot figure out one market: North America.  The reason why the demand for the Smart is so high in Europe is because street in Europe is a precious commodity.  Centuries of urban build-up has rendered the classic European city a no-man's land for most vehicles of American proportions.  Rome is literally ancient, and I do not think the Caesars had Citroens and Alfas in mind when they were building the Eternal City's byways and highways.  Neither did the Anglo-Saxons consider queues and traffic patterns when they were building out London.  In the New World, city planning was used, streets were mapped, roads were laid all from scratch.  America's transportation infrastructures are comparatively young to those in the Old World. As population increases, the amount of road in Europe does not, therefore it is necessary for cars to decrease in size to be able to utilize what road Europe has left.  Here in the grand old US of A, we have lots of space to build extra-wide parking spaces and extra-wide interstates.  Main Street USA is one big wide swath of beautiful, jet-black, steaming asphalt.  We are the nation of the great American highway, the Route 66s, the interstates.  We have roads leading in and out of our arses.  So who needs a Smart? Pleasant thoughts like this ran through my head as I puttered down a massive street in southern California.   The car was just too damn small.  I could do a bloody u-turn without leaving my lane.  Also, I had a feeling that I would look better in the car if I had a paper bag over my head.  Just for anonymity's sake.

 

Pininfarina to cease contract manufacturing, will concentrate exclusively on electric-cars

After being approved for a financial rescue that saved it from the equivalent of a Chapter 11 bankruptcy, Italian firm Pininfarina has announced that it will cease contract manufacturing when current production ends. Pininfarina said that it will concentrate exclusively on building electric-cars. In a press release, Pininfarina said that it will not look to get new contract manufacturing orders after its current contracts expire at the end of 2011. The Italian company is currently working on the Alfa Romeo Brera coupe and Spider and the Ford Focus coupe-convertible. The company said that it will launch production of the B0, an electric-car that it is building in a joint venture with French company Bollore, in 2010 with volume production to begin in 2011. Pininfarina B0 is a 4-seater, 4-door, automatic electric-hatchback that is powered by an electric-motor and lithium-polymer batteries produces by Bolloré. The B0 will have the capacity to travel 153 miles on a full charge with a top speed of 80 mph.

 

Triple White New Beetle Convertible Review

There are only two reasons why anyone would buy a New Beetle convertible: a craving for cute or a need for nostalgia. Once you rule out these emotional drivers (so to speak), you're far better off in any number of more economical and practical machines. But that's OK, isn't it? Acquiring a Ferrari isn't exactly a rational decision. So analyzing the New Beetle's desirability comes down to this: does it suck enough to put off the retro- fashionistas?

View article...