Check it out.
Blogged with the Flock Browser
Friday, April 03, 2009
Sunday, January 04, 2009
What Makes Your (future) Car Ugly? Cadillac SRX Edition
I used to like the Future/Art designs that Cadillac has been pushing for a number of years now, but when they started applying it to rebadged vehicles shared with other divisions, it just looked wrong. Case in point? Any Cadillac Escalade you see can't possibly lose the air of Tahoe/Yukon/Suburban/Avalanchiness that makes them so ermmm... common. Granted, these vehicles take a lot of work to disguise, but that doesn't mean Cadillac doesn't lose copious amounts of respect for poorly done makeovers. Today's target is a vehicle coming to a Cadillac showroom soon (if GM lasts that long), instead of a vehicle that has been out for a while.
The 2010 Cadillac SRX truly embodies desperation and lack of monetary resources (which kinda reminds me of the K-car), which I can't really blame the designers for (I'm thinking management here) , but have no problem disliking nonetheless. It is singularly unoriginal in every way and has no piece it can call its own.
The original SRX (which was completely original for the US market, by the way) may look somewhat pedestrian by the current standards, but has character and individualilty wholly missing from the new model. Let's examine the sources from which the newfound ugly has been derived, shall we?
Like all the other vehicles in the Cadillac stable, the new SRX has the standard design elements that make them destinctive from GM's other brands. Unfortunately they put the Stink in distinctive this time, because they decided to borrow the same platform used for the Saturn Vue and new Chevy Equinox
. While I'm not impressed with the Vue, I think the new Equinox got a change for the better, sharing more visuals with the new Traverse and Malibu than the Trailblazer it used to mirror. At least something good came out of this for the Equinox! 
Just like the Equinox, the SRX features strong familial resemblances to other Cadillacs. In this case the Escaladian features are hard not to see, which only shows what a bad match this bulbous platform is for the hard edges and sharp creases featured across the Cadillac lineup.
One last item to address here is the front fender vents prominently featured on the new SRX. Where else have I seen those awesome wheel-arch decorations? Oh yes!! It was something from Ford... The Focus!!! 
Blogged with the Flock Browser
Saturday, November 22, 2008
The Search Begins
Having had a few days to think on it, I'm slowly putting together some loose specifications for storm chase vehicles. Here are a few of the items on the wish list:
- Looking for decent traction available at all four corners
- Hoping for a BIG sunroof and windows
- Some extra bit of ground clearance for when we have to leave the road temporarilly, or when the road has surprises
- Gas milage in the high twenties (or better) for lots of range
- Room enough for four to crash for a short time without rearranging too much gear.
- Isuzu Vehicross
- Cadillac SRX
- Toyota RAV (3rd gen)
- Toyota Highlander
- Chevrolet Traverse
- Dodge Journey
- Lexus RX
- Mazda 5
- Honda CRV
- Honda Element
- Volvo XC70
- Dodge Sprinter
- Nissan Rogue
- Nissan Murano
- Ford Taurus X
- Ford Edge
- Ford Flex
- Ford Kuga
- Ford Escape
- Audi Q5
- Volkswagen Tiguan
Blogged with the Flock Browser
Thursday, November 20, 2008
What's New and Hot? Storm Chasing!!
Stay tuned for discussions about choosing the right tornado tracking transportation for your and your loved ones! We'll be ping-ponging it with What the heck is happening here? to bring you the latest!
Blogged with the Flock Browser
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
New Toys for Old Boys
As I have mentioned before, problems with the world economy in general and the United States' economy in particular are making it hard to make good on new and innovative ideas.
One particular product on its way out is the Dash Express. Dash has decided to become a software solution provider, and no longer sell the Express. I'm sorry, Dash. I truly hope you get to stick around to lend your influence to anyone who might need it.
Just in the nick of time (or so it would seem), Telenav is offering their own Connected Personal Navigation Device, called the Shotgun. Again, this device is capable of some pretty interesting stuff. My favorite feature is "Gas by Price," which is something I've been looking for in a PND. Again, I am afraid for anyone attempting to bring a device like this to market, but at least it has some "good financial support" in Nokia. We'll see how that works out.
One particular product on its way out is the Dash Express. Dash has decided to become a software solution provider, and no longer sell the Express. I'm sorry, Dash. I truly hope you get to stick around to lend your influence to anyone who might need it.
Just in the nick of time (or so it would seem), Telenav is offering their own Connected Personal Navigation Device, called the Shotgun. Again, this device is capable of some pretty interesting stuff. My favorite feature is "Gas by Price," which is something I've been looking for in a PND. Again, I am afraid for anyone attempting to bring a device like this to market, but at least it has some "good financial support" in Nokia. We'll see how that works out.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
How do you measure a Plug-In Hybrid vehicle's mileage?
I read a Motor Trend News blog entry recently, discussing problems the EPA and General Motors are having with each other over the forthcoming Chevy Volt. This car is revolutionary for the traveling public, not because it's never been done before (it has), and not because they invented the idea (they didn't), but because they are finally going where so many people have been asking car manufacturers to go for so long. This will be our first mass-market electric vehicle to come equipped with a fossil-fueled generator to extend the range of the vehicle.
That's great, so what's the problem?
The EPA wants to measure the Volt's MPG in a manner different to the way GM would like them to. I think they both have valid points, and I think that neither is entirely correct.
For those of you who don't know, a Plug-In Hybrid vehicle can have just as varied a set of powertrains as a Hybrid vehicle can, but the difference is that the Plug-In has been optimized for recharging its batteries by use of a power cord plugged in to your house or other place of business, and then using that same electricity as long as possible before tapping a different source of energy to continue driving, allowing you to run exclusively on electricity for as long as possible.
What this means is that the Chevy Volt could possibly handle your entire daily commute and a few errands without using a single drop of gas. That's what GM wants you to know (and that it gets 100MPG!!!). It also means that if you don't remember to plug your car in over night, you might need to tap into your gas reserves the next day. That's what the EPA wants you to know (which could drop it as LOW as 48MPG).
I believe that both sets of numbers have significant meaning, and should be used with newly defined standards that highlight the capabilities of this type of car, otherwise the consumer will be getting the wool pulled over their eyes (and that would be a story for another blog).
Maybe we need to take a vehicle's range into account more than we have been. Something like: Look, if you only need to go 40 miles and your car is all charged up, you won't use any gas, and if you need to go 400 miles and your gas tank is full, then you won't need to get MORE gas on the way. Sure, you can also go a few nights without needing to plug it in as well. Oh yeah, don't forget to check your electric bill see if you are saving any money, okay? Thanks!!!
That's great, so what's the problem?
The EPA wants to measure the Volt's MPG in a manner different to the way GM would like them to. I think they both have valid points, and I think that neither is entirely correct.
For those of you who don't know, a Plug-In Hybrid vehicle can have just as varied a set of powertrains as a Hybrid vehicle can, but the difference is that the Plug-In has been optimized for recharging its batteries by use of a power cord plugged in to your house or other place of business, and then using that same electricity as long as possible before tapping a different source of energy to continue driving, allowing you to run exclusively on electricity for as long as possible.
What this means is that the Chevy Volt could possibly handle your entire daily commute and a few errands without using a single drop of gas. That's what GM wants you to know (and that it gets 100MPG!!!). It also means that if you don't remember to plug your car in over night, you might need to tap into your gas reserves the next day. That's what the EPA wants you to know (which could drop it as LOW as 48MPG).
I believe that both sets of numbers have significant meaning, and should be used with newly defined standards that highlight the capabilities of this type of car, otherwise the consumer will be getting the wool pulled over their eyes (and that would be a story for another blog).
Maybe we need to take a vehicle's range into account more than we have been. Something like: Look, if you only need to go 40 miles and your car is all charged up, you won't use any gas, and if you need to go 400 miles and your gas tank is full, then you won't need to get MORE gas on the way. Sure, you can also go a few nights without needing to plug it in as well. Oh yeah, don't forget to check your electric bill see if you are saving any money, okay? Thanks!!!
Blogged with the Flock Browser
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Which costs more, Fuel or Freedom?
At the beginning of the summer, as gas prices were still going up, my family moved to a new house within walking and biking distance of a number of conveniences, including public transportation. Up until this point, I had been celebrating all of the great technological wonders that were going to be making life on the road so much better for us. I realized that I may be honking up the wrong sway bar and that our most recent gas crisis may end up hindering the introduction of many of these devices, just because so many people (myself included) were scrutinizing their time at the fuel pump so much more. What use would you have for an in-car concierge if you weren't driving more than 20 miles a week?
I rejoined the local Vanpool, which I had left a couple of years before, and was enjoying using it for about 2 months. I felt both liberated and responsible. Liberated from the gas pump, I had started the Vanpool with 5/8ths of a tank, and I didn't have to fill up for another three and a half weeks. For once I felt like a responsible citizen as well, in that I was doing my part in reacting to the "gas crisis" with a level, and conserving mindset.
A short time ago, somebody at work finally realized we were hitting a major time crunch, and we had mandatory overtime. This rather outwieghed the need to conserve gas, so I have begun driving myself to work once again. In my musings on the road, I became aware of an application for the same navigation devices I had thought might be doomed to a shallow market.
Just the same as UPS has optimized their own routing to save gas, everyday automobile drivers could use the same techiques with the help of navigation devices -connected to their engine computer- to more accurately assess their mileage capability with regards to current traffic conditions and plan their route accordingly. Like many other commuters, my driving time and gas mileage can vary greatly depending on the time of day I am driving. When driving at the most congested times, it is often faster to take an alternate route, but is it more efficient? Do you really save gas?
Most drivers have absolutely no idea, but I think that more of them would like to use that knowledge to their advantage. I'm not aware of any device that is capable of both routing and measuring fuel consumption, so I'm claiming the idea here for my own. And don't get me wrong, this isn't just for vehicles using gasoline propulsion. Unless you can power your vehicle 200 miles down the road for a few dollars, you can benefit. I hope you'll buy my invention!! :)
I rejoined the local Vanpool, which I had left a couple of years before, and was enjoying using it for about 2 months. I felt both liberated and responsible. Liberated from the gas pump, I had started the Vanpool with 5/8ths of a tank, and I didn't have to fill up for another three and a half weeks. For once I felt like a responsible citizen as well, in that I was doing my part in reacting to the "gas crisis" with a level, and conserving mindset.
A short time ago, somebody at work finally realized we were hitting a major time crunch, and we had mandatory overtime. This rather outwieghed the need to conserve gas, so I have begun driving myself to work once again. In my musings on the road, I became aware of an application for the same navigation devices I had thought might be doomed to a shallow market.
Just the same as UPS has optimized their own routing to save gas, everyday automobile drivers could use the same techiques with the help of navigation devices -connected to their engine computer- to more accurately assess their mileage capability with regards to current traffic conditions and plan their route accordingly. Like many other commuters, my driving time and gas mileage can vary greatly depending on the time of day I am driving. When driving at the most congested times, it is often faster to take an alternate route, but is it more efficient? Do you really save gas?
Most drivers have absolutely no idea, but I think that more of them would like to use that knowledge to their advantage. I'm not aware of any device that is capable of both routing and measuring fuel consumption, so I'm claiming the idea here for my own. And don't get me wrong, this isn't just for vehicles using gasoline propulsion. Unless you can power your vehicle 200 miles down the road for a few dollars, you can benefit. I hope you'll buy my invention!! :)
Blogged with the Flock Browser
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)