In the late 1800′s, as cities grew larger and more crowded, the automobile become more and more of a necessity to offset the unhealthy and malodorous pollution from horses. Each horse could produce upwards of 35 pounds of waste per day, not to mention the macabre detail that dead horses littered the cities in the thousands per year. In 1903, William Phelps Eno wrote the first traffic code in the world for the city of New York and very soon the world was introduced to the Stop sign. Several years after that, Henry Ford put the modern assembly lines into practice, thus making the automobile cheaper and accessible to a wider range of consumers. This all led to the prevalence of automobile use and ownership facilitating the migration of people from cities to newly created suburbs post-World War II.

Now, in year 2011, we are at a similar crossroads. The trend has reversed; people are moving back to cities to decreasing space and resources. The streets are once again congested and, as a result, generating unhealthy emissions. Not only that, but the cost of filling up the gas tank just keeps skyrocketing. In the United States, CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards, enacted in 1975 as part of the Energy Policy Conservation Act, were updated in 2007 by the Bush Administration with the mandate to improve fuel economy (and therefore reduce tailpipe emissions) to 35mpg by model year 2020. President Obama announced another agreement July 29, 2011 to increase fuel economy to 54.5 miles per gallon by model year 2025.

Automakers have responded to both federal mandates and consumer demand by introducing hybrid and electric cars. In the past few years, more and more green leaf-badged vehicles have been plugging in and quietly zipping, emissions-free, onto main Street. But is this enough for burgeoning urban environments and ancient infrastructure? Does this even begin to address the complex problems and needs of modern urban transportation?

The thinking folks at General Motors Research and Development think not. To navigate modern urban spaces, vehicles should be a little more innovative than powering a car on a lithium-ion battery in the same old automobile size and shape. So in 2010 at the Shanghai World Expo, GM presented the EN-V (Electric Networked-Vehicle) concept, a product of three global GM design teams, as an inventive answer to personal mobility.

After nearly four years of development and extensive testing with the pre-production models, General Motors has officially announced pricing and has begun taking customer orders for the 2011 Chevrolet Volt in seven select markets starting today. For the general public who are not up to speed on the details, the Chevy Volt is the first electric vehicle with extended-range capability and not limited to the battery’s capacity. The Volt’s MSRP will start at $41,000 ($33,500 net of full federal income tax credit, which ranges from $0 – $7,500) and includes the $720 destination charge.

The Chevy Volt has a total range of approximately 340 miles. The beauty is that the Volt uses a small gasoline engine which recharges the Li-Ion batteries and extends the car’s range another 300 miles after it runs tailpipe-emission-free for 40 miles on battery power. The purpose of the small engine is to recharge the batteries and extend the range of the vehicle — not to assist the powertrain as with the case of hybrid vehicles.

Even though the Volt is an electric vehicle with a 111 kilowatt motor, many people can set aside their anxiety of being stranded with a depleted battery. A 55 hp engine and a gas tank not larger than 10 gallons is enough to drive the Volt an additional 300 miles. The Volt gives you the choice to recharge the battery either by plugging into an electrical outlet or using the small onboard engine.

The $33.5k price tag (after the maximum federal tax credit) approaches the luxury car segment. GM realizes that EV technology isn’t cheap and has made it a point to offer a lot of value by including a long laundry list of standard equipment such as an 8 year/100,000 mile warranty on the battery, 7 inch touchscreen navigation system, Bose premium sound system, and full OnStar “Directions and Connection” service for 5 years (a $1500 value) as standard equipment.

After speaking with Volt marketing director, Tony DiSalle, GM is confident in the overall value of the Volt and is offering a lease program with a monthly payment as low as $350 for 36 months at MSRP with $2,500 due at lease signing.

With a list of standard equipment longer than Pacquiao’s string of boxing titles, there isn’t much left to add on to the Volt. Thus, upgrades are limited to three options: a leather upgrade package, 17 inch aluminum polished wheels, and premium paint. A fully loaded Volt totals up to $44,600.

The Volt incorporates a lot of sophisticated technology and GM has developed an advanced mobile app for Volt owners to interface with their car. The apps will integrate into the Volt’s OnStar system enabling both groundbreaking vehicle remote control operations as well as information retrieval. The mobile app will be available on the iPhone, Blackberry and Droid smartphones.

The Volt will initially be sold to Chevrolet customers in California, New York, Michigan, Connecticut, Texas, New Jersey and Washington D.C. area. with an initial production run of 10,000 cars for the 2011 model year that starts delivering to customers near the end of 2010. With next year’s model, production will increase to 30,000 units and availability will expand across the U.S. in anticipation of the growing demand for electric vehicles. The best way to find a Chevrolet Volt dealer is to visit the website http://www.getmyvolt.com.

Right now 600 dealerships have been authorized and trained to manage the Volt transaction process. GM is working hard to make the customer experience to be a positive experience from the moment the customer contacts the dealer, to the time the vehicle is delivered, and beyond. All authorized Chevy Volt dealerships are working hard to meet the higher training requirements and increased requirements for tooling, parts, and service.

Chevrolet Volt customers will receive one call that confirms the production date of their car and a second call (2 – 3 months later) that confirms the ship date. The Volt is expected to begin shipping to customers near the end of 2010.

General Motors is looking to the future and realizes the current generation Corvette has a problem, its buyers are getting old. The average age of a Corvette buyer is 54 and each year is getting higher. Chevy is hoping to fix this by designing the next generation (C7) Corvette to appeal to a younger audience.

Chevy’s plan is to draw upon its pool of international design studios to come up with something that will interest a younger buyer. GM also hopes the international design will help give it more global appeal. Outside the US the Corvette is a poor seller. GM’s VP of global design, Ed Welburn said the target for the C7 is a design that feels trimmer and overcomes the stigma of being a large car.

Welburn has also said that the C7 will have a greatly improved interior. Less than stellar interior quality has been a sticking point for the Corvette for years and it would be wonderful to see it fixed. The question is, can GM make all these improvements and still be able to sell the C7 at a price a “younger buyer” can afford? Perhaps the age of the average Corvette buyer keeps going up because only an older buyer can afford a $50,000 car that seats two.

If you adjust for inflation, a 1980 Corvette would cost under $35,000 in today’s money and a 1970 model would just be a tad under $31,000. Inflation calculator’s are not perfect, but this does show an interesting trend. The Corvette average owners age may have less to do with the car’s image and more to do with economics. The Corvette may be priced to only attract an older buyer in the first place, so it seems odd that they would even want to pull in younger buyers. Also GM claims they want to interest European buyers, but in Europe the value added tax makes the Corvette rather expensive. A well equipped Camaro SS costs well over $30,000 so don’t expect the price on the C7 to drop.

So if the price cannot change, great looks and awesome performance will likely attract a younger buyer. It seems with all the design studio’s hard at work, the cars looks will not be a problem. Performance has never been an issue either with the Corvette, but GM has so far been silent about what will be under the hood of the C7.

Will GM keep the venerable large-displacement pushrod V8 or perhaps try something new like a turbocharged V6? Likely we will see improvements to the V8 in the form of direct-injection and maybe someday overhead cams. We will probably not see a twin-turbo model except if it has a ZR1 badge attached to it.

Perhaps the C7 will finally have coil springs in the back and ditch the transversely mounted leaf springs? This may be a mistake because the leaf springs used in the Corvette are lighter than traditional coil springs. Maybe composite materials can be used in the C7′s leaf springs and make them even lighter.

The next-generation Corvette is years off and right now we can merely speculate what the C7 will be. GM’s bid to attract young and foreign buyers may pay off if the economy continues to recover. We will have to wait until at least 2012 to see if the internationally designed C7 is a hit.

Chevy is going to offer a Cruze SS model in Singapore and for the love of god, let’s hope we get something better here in the US. In the island city-state, the SS model will just be a $3,500 stripe and body kit appearance package. Where is the great suspension setup and the 260-hp turbo engine the Cobalt SS had? With any luck, we get a true Cruze SS model in the US.

You might be wondering why it even matters if the Cruze does get a high performance option. In the 2011 model year, the Cruze is going to replace the Cobalt, but there is no high performance option. The Cobalt SS was a solid performer, but it suffered from rental car looks. Our team of editors at CarReview raved over the Cobalt SS and Road and Track Magazine considered the Cobalt SS best in its class for it’s outstanding performance.

The press praise did not end with Road and Track Magazine. Car and Driver Magazine noted in 2008 the Cobalt SS beat the Mazdspeed3′s lap record by 3 seconds in a road course performance comparison conducted at Virginia International Raceway. The Cobalt’s time matched that of a $40,000 Mitsubishi Evo MR. This was all done with a car that did not even have an independent rear suspension. A rather light 2,900-lbs curb weight and a torquey 260 hp turbo engine helped make the Cobalt SS a fast FWD car. The Cobalt SS also had an interesting no-lift shift technology that allowed you to change gears without ever taking your foot off the gas. A feature like that is normally reserved for race cars, not $24,000 grocery getters. GM discontinued the Cobalt SS in the 2009 model year.

The Cruze is on a much improved platform, so one would assume a Cruze SS done right would be a great car. Employees at GM seem to agree and according to Motor Authority, there are people inside the company that are campaigning to make the Cruze SS a reality.

Hopefully GM will deliver and give us a true SS model and not the vinyl and plastic option Singapore is getting. It would be interesting to see an SS version that did not use the 260-hp 2.0-liter, but instead retained the turbo 1.4-liter found in the standard Cruze. With forged internals, the small-displacement engine could produce more horsepower and at the same time still deliver good gas mileage. A car that could deliver 200 plus horsepower and still get 35mpg would be a great car.

If a true high-performance Cruze SS model is ever produced, don’t expect it until the Cruze gets a mid-model refresh in 2014. It seems likely that other markets will be stuck with the appearance package Singapore is getting. The standard Cruze model should be available to buy later this year.

Continuing my focus on the American automakers’ efforts at the North American International Auto Show (NAIAS), I want to look at one of Daewoo’s descendents, the 5-door, 5-passenger, Chevy Aveo. I wrote that everyone borrows from everyone else, though less from the Americans, and while it’s not surprising that it was Chevy was doing some borrowing, it is surprising is how bi-polar they are being about it.

Some say that Chevy is re-appropriating the Daewoo but complaining that just because you bought ‘em doesn’t mean you gotta be ‘em, and if you’re gonna do it, be honest. My belief is that they borrowed just as much from the Scion xD and a little from the Scion xA, but its more fun for people who write comments on articles to kvetch about its similarities to Daewoo.

They went on to quash most of the Asian references by referring to the hatch as “a European-inspired hot hatch look designed to appeal to young enthusiasts.” As I referenced yesterday, they said the same thing about the Spark, so I think the design shout-out was again to the MINI, but they also used the term “upscale- looking.”

They also said, “We are…serious about redefining the Aveo, and its place in the small-car segment.” Translated: “NOT a Daewoo!” But then Chevy does the bi-polar thing by using the term “many personalization options.” Is this a veiled remark to steal L.A. Scion drivers who have had a long love affair with the aftermarket?

Throwing a wrench, Chevy marketing explained that there is a team – who I picture in lab coats – working to localize the car, hopefully without making it obvious with images of Uncle Sam, apple pie and the cast of “Jersey Shore” painted on the side. Are they trying to be all things to all people?

As I’ve said, slowly, but surely the Americans are trying to transform their lineups using the “homage” model, but again, baby steps are smart. It’s like when my brunette friend who wanted to go blonde did it slowly over a year, one highlight session at a time. I’d totally forgotten she was ever brunette until I started writing this story. So let’s take a look at those highlights.

We’ve got the straight-up Chevy-ish dual element grille, round taillamps and fender flares, an upgrade wrench with low openings and a lower mouth with a combination of brushed and polished aluminum around the edges. Outboard fog lamps co-mingled with a brake-cooling inlet that eases into the front fender flares, creates an angry-looking face.

I was fascinated by last year’s 370Z offering by Nissan’s angry off-looking headlights, but I’m all for it, and angry-faces are just as American, especially these days. Chevy wants folks to have an emotional reaction to the fresh design choices, and I think when you look angry, you’re going to get a response. My being a fan of a pissed looking cars-my reaction is “Yesss!” I guess I still like bad-boys with street cred.

Street cred? Separating  it from the Spark, the front-wheel drive subcompact has 19-inch, gun-metal metallic five-spoke wheels whose openings have big ole’ Boracay Blue brake calipers; an integrated spoiler coming from the roof; a center-mounted exhaust and chrome exhaust tips; motorcycle-inspired rear taillamps featuring tinted aluminum housings and a low-key Bowtie logo exposed for all to see.

They talk about the interior, but until I drive the car, and see that the features are not going to fall off and hit me in the face, descriptions of the – Will it rip? – accent stitching, and gear shift boot can wait.

Fast and tough? Powered by the same 138-horsepower (103 kW) 1.4L I-4 Ecotec turbocharged engine, as the upcoming Chevrolet Cruze, the six-speed manual transmission promises to  provide a “spirited driving experience.” Bad boys of the world unite.

And what’s more, the engine cover is shiny graphite silver with brushed aluminum. These features of the car, which goes into production late 2010, and comes out in 2011, can proudly sing, “America, America, God grant its faith in thee.”

My only experience with Daewoo was a trip to Joshua Tree where a couple of bad boys and I rented a Daewoo (when it was still straight up Korean) with total irony. Aside from the designated driver, we were on some, um, “natural substances,” and screamed “DAEWOOOOO,” the whole way–until the driver threatened to leave us under the tree.

The next time we drive to Joshua Tree (we’re all too old for substances), will we be screaming, “AAAAAVEO?” We’ll decide once we do a test drive from “sea to shining sea” without the steering wheel coming off of its column into our hands.

By Adrienne Gruben

As I wrote in my Camaro Synergy Green Special Edition article, the Americans are trying to put their best feet forward at this year’s North American International Auto Show (NAIAS) in Detroit.

Now, it’s no secret that saddled by the stigma from a rough decade or two, the American wow factor isn’t always as high as with Japanese or European product. And despite the fact that everybody borrows, no one will argue that some of the Americans have been snoozy on innovation, and even classics like Mustang and Corvette (a market that some foreign automakers have wanted to enter) are sometimes referred to as pieces of s*#t because of laziness about features as basic as cheap control panels. You’re going to want to add other negatives to the list, but you can’t – it’s my keyboard. Bottom line: American cars haven’t inspired foreign automakers to rip them off for decades.

With that out of the way, there are some efforts that seem to indicate a shift in perspective with some of the US automakers, and while they are baby steps, it may point to a larger movement here in the US of A. Now, we aren’t in the rip-off worthy realm, not even close, but we may be paying some long-needed homages, and some American car markers are going one step further–making sure their homages are up-front.

Like with its new Lilliputian lineup, regarding which Chevrolet used the word mini-car in its January newsflash headline, the automaker seems to be saying, “Ok, you have a MINI? We’re going to Americanize it, and broaden its market far beyond hip girls with the “Sex and the City” soundtrack in their iPod hookups. Ha!”  So with that, let’s take a look at Chevrolet’s smallest member of that lineup: the Spark.

With car names, sometimes you think, “What the hell?” but the Spark – which is leaving its Daewoo-ian roots and now, from some angles, calling to mind a MINI Cooper or MINI Clubman, and from others, a Scion or Yaris – seems right on. Actually, the whole thing is super smart.

On the MINI website, the Clubman is described as having a “bulldog stance” and “Spartan charm,” which would make hip “Sex and the City” fans feel like insiders.  The five door Spark, on the other hand, is not for insiders, and the un-pretentious, simple, “We are what we are,” marketing vibe let’s you know it, like when Margaret Brooks, Chevy’s marketing head for small cars said, “This small vehicle makes a big statement. With its fresh, youthful approach, we believe Spark will appeal to customers who want excellent fuel economy, functionality and style at an affordable price.”

No bulldogs or Scottish references anywhere to be found, and by using the word youthful, I don’t think Brooks just means it’s for kids driving several hours away for college at a good state school. It’s a euphemism. I also picture a newly single Mom celebrating her first self-supporting purchase, or workers who hold down several jobs needing to get from A to B, but because of its zippiness, if they’re driving home at 4AM after a double, they can at least have some fun.

And even with these design references to folks who eat blood pudding and raw fish, the car’s styling is somehow still American. Sadly, the company is being a little tight-lipped on specs, except to say it’s aimed at younger folks, will be roomy, but small enough to have agile-handling while still providing enough sturdiness to prevent from being carried away by the Lilliputians in Gulliver’s Travels.

I need to get this out of the way: Camaro’s Synergy Green Special Edition is NOT green in the trendy sense; it’s not a an electric vehicle, or even a hybrid. It’s actually green. REALLY green. “Shrek” Green. So what’s up with the green, and why do I sort of love it? Camaro spoke to me personally about it–me, and 3000 other enthusiasts.

“Just as those colors helped make the first generation Camaro an icon, modern colors like Inferno Orange, Rallye Yellow Transformers Edition and Synergy Green will define the 2010 Camaro.” And the green aint’ just on the outside. The instrument panel is green. The door inserts are green. And the Jet Black (yes they capitalized it) cloth seats, steering wheel, shift knob and center console, have Synergy Green (caps again) stitching. Hey you guys, did I mention the vehicle, which will be produced in limited quantities from February to May, was green? However, after years of attracting fans of a certain feathered hair, feathered personality ilk, Camaro is getting hip–it’s even getting props from the makers of Infiniti–Nissan. (Ok, Nissan also makes the 370Z, the company’s Camaro equivalent, but mentioning Infiniti sounds better, no? )

Like Domino’s Pizza issuing a mea culpa for its “cardboard crust”, ketchup-like sauce and a damaging YouTube video made by two rogue employees who spit on the pizza, Nissan Design America Chief Bruce Campbell issued a modified mea culpa at the NAIAS AW Design Forum (but without a controversy to apologize for). To further his point, he issued a surprising shout-out.

“There’s too much sameness. We are guilty of this sameness,” but he went on to give the Camaro props for bucking sameness, taking risks and standing out. And while he also gave props to his company’s 370Z, he continued, “We need to be bold and really challenge ourselves and challenge the sameness. We need to be bold and not to be fearful.” Now I really get why someone wrote the song “Bitchin’ Camaro.”

The company also offers more stuff that we traditionally associate with the bitchin’, iconic, sports car. The $27,000 price keeps the Synergy Green Special Edition in Camaro’s customary low to mid-range. It’s based on the Camaro LT1, has a rear spoiler, a 3.6L direct injection V-6 engine, which they’ve paired with your choice of a six-speed manual or automatic transmission. The benchmark powertrain emphasizes both performance and efficiency by having the V-6 deliver 304 horsepower and 273 lb.-ft. of torque.

Not a shout-out to Camaro’s days of yore are the amenities. There’s Bluetooth phone connectivity, a USB port for MP3 players, and remote vehicle start for models with automatic transmission, but its MPH is more old-fashioned: 29 mpg on the highway, which definitely disqualifies it from being trendy, energy-efficient green, but I guarantee you this: as grouchy as Shrek can be, it is a sports car that the pretense-loathing, but still somehow hip ogre would love to drive through the winding roads of Far, Far Away.

This was a bad year for both the auto industry and the American taxpayer. The Obama administration’s effort to save General Motors and Chrysler will cost taxpayers $30 billion. The Detroit News reported last week that the losses were less than expected. Earlier forecasts projected a loss of $44 billion of the $82 billion loaned-out.

GM received $50 billion of the money, with $43 billion given in exchange for 61 percent of the company.
A large portion of the $30 billion loss is due to Chrysler. Chrysler has had much of its $12 billion debt forgiven. The government is requiring Fiat to pay back $6 billion in loans before it can increase its 20 percent stake in the company, said Detroit News.

Briefing.com has reported that domestic auto sales are up 5.3% for the month of November. The question is will auto sales continue to rise without the benefit of the “cash for clunkers” program?

CNNmoney.com reported that the program cost Americans $24,000 for each car sold. To make matters worse, the program mostly benefited Japanese automakers.

President Obama defended his administrations action to save the auto industry in a speech given last week, “We also took steps to prevent the rapid dissolution of the American auto industry, which faced a crisis partly of its own making, to prevent the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs during an already fragile time.”

“These were not decisions that were popular or satisfying; these were decisions that were necessary,” he said.