backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 167 comment(s) - last by Imaginer.. on Oct 17 at 6:27 PM

Citroen C-Cactus Concept
Citroen combines diesel engine with electric motor for ultimate hybrid economy

When talk turns to hybrids, the argument for a diesel engine rather than hybrid power is often raised. Modern diesel engines are capable of fuel economy near or better than some gasoline hybrid cars on the market.

It would seem that the ultimate hybrid system would be a combination of a diesel engine and an electric motor. This is exactly what Citroen has plans on making. Citroen introduced the C-Cactus concept car in 2007 featuring an odd design and a diesel/electric hybrid powertrain.

Citroen announced this month that it intends to produce a version of the C-Cactus concept car. The hybrid powertrain isn’t the only thing green about the vehicle. Citroen has greatly reduced the number of components needed to make the vehicle, slashing construction costs and environmental impact from the manufacturing process.

The production version of the C-Cactus will use the HYmotion2 hybrid system featuring a 1-liter diesel engine paired with an electric motor. The French automaker says that the hybrid system could provide up to 100 miles per gallon.

Another option for the production car is an all-electric version that would have a goal of achieving 100 miles of driving range at a 70 MPH top speed. Images of the C-Cactus are from the concept car, and as such, you can bet that the design and interior will be toned down significantly.

One thing you can count on for sure is that the car will never see roads in the United States. The Citroen brand is not sold in America.

If Citroen can hit that 100 MPG  number, it will be impressive. The Honda Insight is one of the most fuel frugal cars American's will be able to purchase in the coming years.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Weird looking bug car
By psychobriggsy on 10/10/2008 11:57:54 AM , Rating: 2
I guess this is using Imperial gallons however, not your puny US gallons ;)

Might be a nice car for inner-city driving, especially if it is exempt from charges like the congestion charge in London.




RE: Weird looking bug car
By MrPickins on 10/10/2008 12:31:16 PM , Rating: 2
If this is using imperial gallons, then it's about 83 mi/US-gal. Since energy density of diesel is ~10% higher than that of gasoline then the efficiency of the car might be viewed as ~75 mi/US-gal of gasoline. Not shabby by any means, but not that much more than the Honda referenced in the article.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Oregonian2 on 10/10/2008 1:16:38 PM , Rating: 2
Also, one was referenced as "about 70mpg" and the other "up to 100 mpg", slight phrase difference can be significant sometimes. :-)


RE: Weird looking bug car
By DeepBlue1975 on 10/10/2008 4:55:55 PM , Rating: 4
This all happens because of the silly measurement units used in both the USA and the UK, that are not only different from what the rest of the world uses, but also incompatible between themselves in a couple of cases like this (gallons).
And not to talk about the questionable practicality of making serious calculations using those units.

Why won't the USA and the UK go metric once and for all?
Even in the USA metric units are used many times in scientific calculations, as those other ones are a joke.

1 feet = 12 inches = 34.27 navigator noses... come on... :D

Liters and meters rule! :D


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Jack Ripoff on 10/10/2008 6:20:07 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Liters and meters rule! :D


Actually, the litre is not an SI unit. The official SI volume unit is the cubic metre (m³).


RE: Weird looking bug car
By dubldwn on 10/10/2008 6:30:24 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, but it's a part of the metric system.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By PlasmaBomb on 10/10/2008 6:47:26 PM , Rating: 4
Handily though the definition of a litre is -
a measure of volume equivalent to 1 cubic decimetre.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By ggordonliddy on 10/10/2008 6:42:01 PM , Rating: 5
> Why won't the USA and the UK go metric once and for all?

 
I agree; the US should use the metric system, and the rest of the world should drive on the right side of the road.

But do you really expect us in the US to learn the metric system? Most people "graduating" high school nowadays are virtually illiterate.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Tsuwamono on 10/11/2008 12:02:18 AM , Rating: 2
Just the way we like them so we can Reelect presidents like bush. Wake up man. Illiterate is where its at obviously.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By DeepBlue1975 on 10/11/2008 12:17:59 AM , Rating: 2
Could be something gradual, like, for example, on gas stations telling the volume in both units, using speedometers with both scales, talking about heights in both ways and so on.
And once people start to realize how straightforward is to make calculations using metric, I think the imperial system would start to slowly but steadily fade away.

Most of the world already know that English is the most similar thing to a universal language. Metric is the same for measurement units, except for just 2 countries :D

Oh, and BTW, driving on the right side? I think only Japan and the UK do it that way :D

That could be solved by 3 seat cars with the driver always in the middle of the front row, just by himself. Better viewing angles and less distractions because of some girl flashing her legs and potentially leading to driving accidents :D


RE: Weird looking bug car
By andrinoaa on 10/11/2008 2:55:56 AM , Rating: 2
Just add Australia, New Zealand. I don't know about any asian countries, might be a few there too! The infrustructure change wouldn't even be contemplated, lol.
We went metric in the sixties, and a good thing it was.
If this backward "penal " colony can do it, I think good ol USA should have no problems. ( if there is any money left in the system! )


RE: Weird looking bug car
By kontorotsui on 10/11/2008 1:10:15 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
That could be solved by 3 seat cars with the driver always in the middle of the front row, just by himself. Better viewing angles and less distractions because of some girl flashing her legs and potentially leading to driving accidents :D


Sure, so now TWO girls on BOTH sides backward, so the driver has two chances to peek at her legs AND from an even better point of view... and much less safely. Result: 10 times more accidents!


RE: Weird looking bug car
By DeepBlue1975 on 10/11/2008 10:39:26 PM , Rating: 2
LOL

But accidents would be twice as happy that way, or wouldn't they?


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Solandri on 10/11/2008 7:18:47 PM , Rating: 4
This was tried in the 1970s, when I was a kid in elementary school. We had extensive lessons introducing us to both metric and imperial units (e.g. cm is about the width of your finger). Unfortunately, like most of the math lessons taught in school, Americans chose to simply forget it all when they grew up. The program was terminated shortly after, I was never quite sure why.

The U.S. will switch over eventually, but it'll be at the whim of the people. Most carpenters and contractors are fluent in both systems (and indeed screws and drill bits come in both metric and imperial sizes). The Auto industry has switched to metric, as has the U.S. Army. Certain applications though I expect will never be metric. e.g. navigation being done in nautical miles, because one nautical mile is equivalent to minute of longitude (1/60th of a degree) at the equator, approximately one minute of latitude anywhere. When your charts are primarily labeled in degrees lat/lon, it's handy having a distance unit that's a simple fraction of a degree.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By afkrotch on 10/14/2008 8:46:03 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Oh, and BTW, driving on the right side? I think only Japan and the UK do it that way :D


You mean driving on the left side. Majority of the world drive on the right side.

Japan, UK, South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, and a few other countries drive on the left side. Pretty much the countries that England owned for a little while.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Countries_drivi...

Red for right side driving. Blue for left side driving.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Oregonian2 on 10/13/2008 2:31:59 PM , Rating: 3
Almost every packaged product one buys in a U.S. store that has weight or volume on it will also have the metric version on it as well. And has for a very long time. Liquids often will also be even metric sized (1-liter, 0.8 liter, etc).


RE: Weird looking bug car
By shin0bi272 on 10/11/2008 1:03:52 PM , Rating: 1
My major problem with the metric system is theres no mid range between the tiny little centimeter and the meter for units of measure. I dont want to sit here and try to visualize how tall someone is in centimeters or try to figure out how tall they are in meters when they are 1.296m tall. Yes theres a decimeter but thats not much better than the centimeter. Why doesnt every one else change to the US system? The US (even now) is the worlds leading economy so we must be doing something right. Why dont you switch?


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Zirconium on 10/11/2008 1:26:54 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I dont want to sit here and try to ... figure out how tall they are in meters when they are 1.296m tall.
They are 1.296 meters tall.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By shin0bi272 on 10/11/2008 7:39:38 PM , Rating: 1
yeah obviously but if you were told someone is 5'2" tall you would have a hard time visualizing that in meters if you were used to meters and all the signs in your country were in meters. Not that you cant do it but its uncomfortable because of the differences between the two systems. If it was a meter is a yard (3 ft) it wouldnt be so hard but its 1m = ~3'3" so it gets complicated to think about if youre not accustomed to it.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Zirconium on 10/11/2008 9:18:16 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
if you were told someone is 5'2" tall you would have a hard time visualizing that in meters if you were used to meters and all the signs in your country were in meters.
You're pulling that one out your ass. I wouldn't have a hard time at all. I have no trouble visualizing metric. Talk to your Canadian friends if you have any, and provided that they aren't as dumb as you, they should have no problem converting metric to imperial. I'm sorry you don't have a good grasp of mathematics, but don't foist your inability to estimate on the rest of us. Here is a tip:

1" = 2.54 cm

For quick estimation, assume that 1" is 2.5 cm and round up to two significant digits in the end.

1' = 12" ~ 12" * 2.5 cm/" ~ 30 cm
...
5' ~ 1.5 m
6' ~ 1.8 m

For people's heights (usually between 5' and 6'), you should be able to quickly estimate. If 4" is approximately 10 cm, just split up that range and round. For instance, I'm 5' 11, so according to the above system, that puts my height around 1.8 m. That is actually pretty spot on. If someone tells me that they are 165 cm, I know they are somewhere in the range of 5' 6".

Forget this. I just explained 2nd grade estimation techniques to someone on a tech news forum. I'm going back to slashdot.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Sandok on 10/11/2008 1:27:51 PM , Rating: 2
... no wonder the US is being hit hardest by the financial crisis, with people like you doing the math.

Apart from that, let's say you are 6 feet tall. In meters it would give 1.8 meters tall and in centimeteres, 180cm tall and in decimeters, 18dm tall.

What about 6 feet, what does that give in other units? 72 inches tall and 2 yards tall. Nothing complicated there either.

The reason the US should switch is because it's easier to teach 300 million people a new (and easier) system than teach 6.5 billion a old (and tougher) system.

NASA has lost a satellite once to the metric to imperial conversion... Not even China has lost a satellite for that.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Solandri on 10/11/2008 7:04:50 PM , Rating: 2
Lots of equipment has been lost to faulty units conversion. One of the basic things they teach you in engineering is that a number without a unit is meaningless (except for the dimensionless numbers, and you still have to label what those are, e.g. Mach 1.5). But every now and then, people fail to do this. I've seen goofs mixing Centigrade with Kelvin, or CGS (centimeter-gram-second) with MKS (meter-kilogram-second), or degrees and radians, or decibels re 1 watt re 1 meter with decibels with some other reference, or assuming a log is base 10 instead of a natural log. All of these can be prevented if you just write the unit after each number and carry it through your calculations.

It isn't rocket science, it's algebra-level math. The Mars spacecraft wasn't lost due to an imperial/metric problem, it was lost due to sloppy engineering math. If the spacecraft had been done all-metric, all that would've done is hide the sloppy math until it reared its head elsewhere, probably just as fatally for the mission. Someone could've plugged in numbers into the same equations in meters when it turned out they were actually in km. That's just as devastating as using miles instead of km.

The biggest (maybe only) flaw with Imperial units in technical applications is that it uses the same label (pound) for both mass and force. It's usually clarified as lb-m and lb-f, but mix the two up and you're off by a factor of 32. Other than that, it just shouldn't matter for engineers and scientists because the math is often so much more complicated than a simple unit conversion. For regular people and everyday applications, metric makes a lot more sense. But for technical applications, it just shouldn't matter.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By daniyarm on 10/13/2008 12:20:42 PM , Rating: 2
Except when you are programming or designing hardware it's a lot easier to divide or multiply everything by multiples of ten rather than 12 or 5280 or any other weird number you have to remember. The UK system is completely illogical and requires one to memorize conversion factors.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Imaginer on 10/17/2008 6:27:56 PM , Rating: 2
For engineering purposes and machining using CNC machinery and whatnot, I would agree metric units would be better for it.

But for trades dealing with woodworking for example, carpentry, and construction, it is easier to deal with dividing quantities in halfs, forths, eights, etc rather than dealing with decimal measurements for such representations (other than the half). I can also vouch the same with cooking as well. Would you rather try and measure out 236.588237 ml instead of just using 1 cup?

Of course, the devil advocate in me says to adjust all recepies to use round metric numbers but I don't think you can do this with woodworking, construction, and building things without loosing that "even-ness" of being able to divide things as such.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By shin0bi272 on 10/11/2008 7:41:17 PM , Rating: 1
>.. no wonder the US is being hit hardest by the financial crisis, with people like you doing the math.

actually were just being hit first... youre about to get hit by it... the G20 nations are meeting in ...oh yeah the US... to discuss ways of preventing your economy's collapse. Your welcome.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By zpdixon on 10/11/2008 6:49:35 PM , Rating: 2
Why would 1.70 m be harder to visualize than 5 ft 7 in ?

Nobody tries to visualize 5 ft and add 7 in to that.
Nobody tries to visualize 1 m and tries to add 70 cm to that.

We all have mental images of the approximate size of things. You obviously have never used a lot the metric system in real life so you can't comment on how hard it is to use. The truth is that it is easy to get used to any of the 2 systems. Then the metric system wins because: it is more universal and is based on decimal multiples.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By shin0bi272 on 10/11/08, Rating: -1
RE: Weird looking bug car
By DeepBlue1975 on 10/11/2008 10:38:00 PM , Rating: 3
Metric system annoying???

Come on... You've got to be kidding. It is that or that you really hate math and physics.

Don't tell me that for you is more comfortable in an equation to express gravitational acceleration as something like 32ft 3in / s^2 instead of just 9.8m/s^2.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Screwballl on 10/13/2008 11:10:39 AM , Rating: 2
agreed.... it all depends on who was raised where and how they use it.
In the US, it is easier for me to visualize or estimate something or someone that is 5'6" just as someone elsewhere in the world would find it just as easy to estimate or visualize 1.8m tall.
As a natural born American that has also dealt with metric, I see the US standards easier to deal with because it is a bit more exacting in many cases. I think it is due to the whole cm to m to decimeter level of measurement. Otherwise for liquid and volume and such, I prefer the 0.5L over 16.9 fl oz.

For the record I am about 2m tall (1.96m = 6'5")...


RE: Weird looking bug car
By 9nails on 10/12/2008 12:20:07 AM , Rating: 2
Heck, if gay people can marry in the USA, then why not use the Metric System? Life's crazy enough when two parts of the same sex bump into each other and think to call it a family. It's impossible for that marriage to produce offspring from all of that friction, but at least in the madness we can count on a simple base-10 measurement system! Plus WTF is with kitchen measuring tools? Teaspoon, table spoon, cup, quart... Just give me 100 ml's of creme and sugar and some coffee!

But I agree, write a proposition to switch to the Metric System DeepBlue and I'll sign/vote for it!


RE: Weird looking bug car
By CubicleDilbert on 10/12/2008 1:24:08 PM , Rating: 3
What is wrong with you?

This cars is 15 feet and 4.75 inch long, weight is 3 rocks, 4 stones, 13 pebbles and 27 grains of sand.

It makes 75 miles per gallon which is about 8.76 hours mustang horse ride per 3.5 water stops along the road...

Haha... it is soo funny.
The reason that Europe has useful metric systems for everything is that Germany took over Europe in 1940 and introduced their own system everywhere, except the British railway width, which is still based on the old Stevenson rails from 1865 that Germans bought in Britain.
But at least all or Europe drives their cars on the right side, and not on the wrong one...


RE: Weird looking bug car
By DeepBlue1975 on 10/14/2008 9:42:59 AM , Rating: 2
All drive on the right side except for the UK :(


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Keeir on 10/10/2008 1:45:07 PM , Rating: 2
This seems to happen alot

Automaker releases numbers based on driving 40mph with no wind, or accessories running using imperial gallons and everyone gets excited.

EPA performs standard testing on model with varying loads and Air Conditioning etc running using US gallons and now your looking at 60-70% the claimed MPG or less...

See Honda Insight "70mpg --> 45 mpg", Jetta TDI "60mpg-->40mpg".

Based on that observation, I think a US version tested by the EPA would get closer to 60mpg. A fairly respectable (believable) jump from the 45mpg gasoline Prius.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Cypherdude1 on 10/10/2008 2:23:32 PM , Rating: 2
You're right. The automakers constantly fix the MPG numbers to make them better than they really are. I wish they would stop doing that and be more realistic (honest).


RE: Weird looking bug car
By icrf on 10/10/2008 3:00:55 PM , Rating: 2
I've always exceeded EPA ratings on my vehicles. Methinks most people just need to learn to pay more attention while driving and take some time to think about efficiency.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Keeir on 10/10/2008 3:11:55 PM , Rating: 2
Me too... typically by 10-15%. That's not the point... the issue is people take EPA numbers and compare them to pipe dream marketing claims... the only purpose of EPA numbers is to be able to directly compare different autos under the same conditions.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Spuke on 10/10/2008 3:28:10 PM , Rating: 4
There numbers aren't "fixed" the automakers. They're European numbers. The Imperial gallon is different that the US gallon and their testing methodologies are different. Why should a Europe-only car be tested using a US standard? And if said vehicle is destined for US, simply WAIT for the US EPA numbers to come out. There's no conspiracy here. LOL!


RE: Weird looking bug car
By omnicronx on 10/10/2008 4:27:18 PM , Rating: 5
You mean the Universe does not revolve around the United States?


RE: Weird looking bug car
By ianweck on 10/13/2008 6:01:23 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
You mean the Universe does not revolve around the United States?


This got rated a 5? Really?
How did this topic turn into America-bashing?


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Keeir on 10/10/2008 7:12:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
There numbers aren't "fixed" the automakers. They're European numbers.


Actually in this case it is... its a claim made by an auto-company for a product not yet produced or tested by the European Testing.

The Tiny European Yaris gets 62 imperial miles to the gallon of diesal

http://www.toyota.co.uk/cgi-bin/toyota/bv/generic_...

It may be possible for the Cit. car to get 100 MPG under some situations, but I doubt in European testing it will acchieve a nearly 60% increase in fuel efficieny over the Yaris unless they are using a drastic different diesel engine.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Screwballl on 10/10/2008 8:29:22 PM , Rating: 2
Based on the information at hand, this is more of a Chevrolet Volt type of car. Completely battery powered but uses the small diesel to recharge the battery... thats what I took from their website anyways.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By kamel5547 on 10/11/2008 11:54:10 AM , Rating: 2
Why would a "European" car use gallons? Outside of the British no one uses the Imperial gallon, as a French based company I wager that Cirroen does all their calculations using the metric system and simply used gallons to ge the most impressive number possible.

After all they could have released a MPL instead that would make sense ot the rest of the world.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Zapp Brannigan on 10/12/2008 8:38:04 AM , Rating: 2
Most European car companies use 100 kilometres driven at certain speeds, like 40kph or 100kph and show you how much fuel is consumed in litres. for example 100km/8.9 litres for 100 kph or 100km/6.5 litres for 40 kph. These figures are calculated at constant speeds and so don't incorporate stop/start urban driving.

The UK is a very important market for all european car companies, it's generally the second most important market for them aside from their home market, and the only place were they sell right-hand drive cars so figures released in UK imperial are to be expected.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By BarkHumbug on 10/13/2008 4:47:13 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
These figures are calculated at constant speeds and so don't incorporate stop/start urban driving.


What have you been smoking? Please provide ONE link to an automaker that calculates their fuel consumption while driving at constant speed.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Strunf on 10/13/2008 6:28:45 AM , Rating: 2
I'm pretty sure they incorporate stop/start on urban traffic... if they didn't then I would never match their urban estimate. On average when I go to work and back home I make like 16km/h, they say 9.9l/100km and that's about what I'm doing, at 40km/h without stops I would a lot better than that.

Also at 40km/h I would be on my 3th gear which is much less economic than the 5th gear, I haven't done any tests but I would guess I would burn more fuel doing 100km at 40km/h than at 100km/h.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Fireshade on 10/13/2008 8:46:43 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Automaker releases numbers based on driving 40mph with no wind, or accessories running using imperial gallons and everyone gets excited.

That's because automakers do not know the actual efficiency yet in the concept stage of a car, so all they can do is a lab estimate. It wouldn't be fair to entirely fault the PR department of the automakers.

It will always be easier if you have the full production model at hand, as the EPA will have to perform their tests.
Also, the EPA performs their tests according to a specified protocol that in some way emulates real practice (based on questionnaires?). This can of course always be different from your personal situation, as some commenters have already noted.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Keeir on 10/13/2008 3:16:54 PM , Rating: 2
I agree... but at the same time, EPA cycle is very well known to automakers. They know exactly what energy output levels will be required and how they change over the cycle. They should and are be able to give much more accuracte numbers, they just choose to create big splashes by stretching the truth. Overall, I think this is determental decision making and public perception.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By Screwballl on 10/10/2008 8:25:47 PM , Rating: 2
100 Imperial gallons = 120.095042 US gallons

100 miles per imperial gallon = 83.27 miles per US gal

Now this begs the question... does the story refer to Imperial or US gallons? I checked the original story and they refer to just MPG.

As for the style, I normally don't care for these types of vehicles but something about that style, I actually like and would probably own... now only if 1) they could import to the US and 2) they would change the name.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By ZoZo on 10/11/2008 8:17:27 AM , Rating: 2
Peugeot-Citroen is a French car-maker. If they release any information it's in the metric system. So the mpg rating in this article must be a US translation of the original metric figures. That means it's most probably US gallons.


RE: Weird looking bug car
By A28 on 10/13/2008 1:07:25 AM , Rating: 2
Citroen's website states a fuel consumption of 2.9 l/100 km.

http://www.citroen.com/CWW/en-US/CONCEPTCARS/CCACT...

Google gives the following conversions:

81 MPG (US)
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=2.9+...

and

97 MPG (using imperial gallons)
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=2.9+...


By phazers on 10/10/2008 11:46:27 AM , Rating: 3
A "thorny" issue :)




By lainofthewired on 10/10/2008 11:50:41 AM , Rating: 1
You had me at "thorny" <3


By TechGuyCalifornia on 10/10/2008 1:03:28 PM , Rating: 2
I think this car is great! I remember my Mom had a boyfriend back in the late 70's, he had a Citroen, I remember vaguely that she said instead of a blinker it had these little hands with a finger pointing right or left. I could be wrong, but I recall that.


By TechGuyCalifornia on 10/10/2008 1:09:25 PM , Rating: 1
Try facing up to a Hybrid full size Navigator, the front tires alone would run over this little thing...Drive defensively that's for sure...


By Mitch101 on 10/10/2008 1:13:18 PM , Rating: 5
With the current economy and the inability to borrow money on your homes equity to purchase such a vehicle I don't feel this will be an issue for very long. Melt down the navigators and make a dozen smaller cars.


By austinag on 10/10/2008 1:51:52 PM , Rating: 5
You can have my giant SUV when you pry it from my cold dead hands...

Or you can buy it at auction for half price after the repo man takes it, either way, what ever works for you. I'm not trying to be confrontational or anything.


By ebakke on 10/10/2008 2:20:44 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe people will take this opportunity to pay off their current debt. ...probably not though.


By WTFiSJuiCE on 10/10/2008 6:05:48 PM , Rating: 3
And they all laughed when I poured all of my hard earned savings into that Mongolian cactus farm.

Well who's laughing now! Pay up Frenchie!


By rudolphna on 10/10/2008 7:01:09 PM , Rating: 2
love the title :)


Citroen
By Grumpy1 on 10/10/2008 2:19:45 PM , Rating: 3
In the movie "The longest yard" , the original, The car that Burt wrecked at the start of the movie was a Citroen.




RE: Citroen
By ebakke on 10/10/08, Rating: -1
RE: Citroen
By foolsgambit11 on 10/10/2008 3:23:22 PM , Rating: 3
Obviously he's saying that despite the looks, Citroens are really macho cars. That, or they were really good cars for drunks.


RE: Citroen
By geddarkstorm on 10/10/2008 3:24:52 PM , Rating: 5
Isn't that why we're all here?


Insight Specs
By ebakke on 10/10/2008 1:10:57 PM , Rating: 3
Per the most recent Insight article on DT (http://www.dailytech.com/Honda+Reveals+More+Insigh... ):

quote:
Other new information revealed at the Paris Auto Show is that the new Insight will have fuel economy ratings identical to the Honda Civic Hybrid – 40 MPG city, 45 MPG highway (for comparison, a Prius gets 45/48).


Vastly different from the 70 MPG that this (and the other referenced) article claims.




RE: Insight Specs
By vleek on 10/10/2008 4:56:33 PM , Rating: 2
There are some confusion in model names. Original Honda Insight was 2-sits 3-doors small car with aluminium body, low rolling resistance tires and etc. It really could get 70-75 mpg on freeway. New Honda Insight 2 is much bigger 4/5-sits car, comparable to Prius. I guess C-Catus is more comparable to original Insight (though it's not in production any more).


RE: Insight Specs
By vleek on 10/10/2008 4:59:04 PM , Rating: 2
There are some confusion in model names. Original Honda Insight was 2-sits 3-doors small car with aluminium body, low rolling resistance tires and etc. It really could get 70-75 US EPA mpg on freeway. New Honda Insight 2 is much bigger 4/5-sits car, comparable to Prius. I guess C-Cactus is more comparable to original Insight (though it's not in production any more).


Hond Insight
By Jimspar on 10/10/2008 2:57:48 PM , Rating: 2
The latest Auto Magazine info puts the new Insight at only 40mpg, less than the all mighty Prius. As stated earlier, and proven earlier, one does not have to be American to be ignorant.




Why not sell in in the US?
By RabidDog on 10/10/08, Rating: -1
RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By chris2618 on 10/10/2008 12:14:27 PM , Rating: 5
Citroen has been running since 1920s and they have done perfectly well with out selling cars in the US. They are going to sell it but just not in the US


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By B3an on 10/10/2008 12:22:15 PM , Rating: 1
Thanks for that Chris i was going to say the same. The ignorance of some yanks is amazing.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 10/10/2008 12:29:37 PM , Rating: 1
The ignorance of some people from other countries is just as amazing.

He still has a valid point about them not selling it in the USA, just his point about failure due to not selling in the USA is uninformed at best. I am curious as to why they do not market this car in the USA, it is afterall a fairly large and developed market and demand is there for higher fuel efficient cars.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Dribble on 10/10/2008 12:48:27 PM , Rating: 4
It's a French company - that's enough to stop lots of American's buying.
It's probably got seats designed to fit your average French person. I would expect many Americans will just be too big to fit in it.
It's a small car with a small engine - while some American's might be giving up their monster trucks, I think it's a while before you'll see them in something as small as that citroen.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By pmonti80 on 10/10/2008 1:01:47 PM , Rating: 2
Americans complain about european cars being too small. Ok, I could understand that you have bigger roads and cheaper gas.
But now they complain that Citroën doesn't sell their small european cars in USA, just amazing.
What's next?


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By an0dize on 10/10/2008 1:08:29 PM , Rating: 1
So much for intelligent discussion...


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By augiem on 10/10/2008 1:13:25 PM , Rating: 4
Because not ALL Americans only watch cheesy blockbusters and eat hamburgers...
Seriously, why must everyone stereotype as if there is only 1 mind per country/group/race? Unfortunately, that's how many companies that sell in America think -- ONLY target the LARGEST market and ignore the rest.
I'm sure there would be a very nice market for small euro cars in America, even though not nearly as large a market as lumbering brick wall pickups.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By heffeque on 10/10/2008 2:05:03 PM , Rating: 2
Well... I guess that Citroën (guys from DailyTech forgot to put the two little dots on top of the "e") doesn't want to spend a huge amount of cash on entering the US market just to try to catch a small niche. There's where the Mercedes Smart comes in, or the BMW Mini Cooper, or the VW Fox... although now that I think of it, VW doesn't sell the Fox or the Polo in the States.
Citroën doesn't sell in the States, neither does Renault and neither does Peugeot; but if you think of it, they're not the only big European brands that don't sell in the States. Neither does Alfa Romeo, neither does Fiat, neither does Seat... and I don't even know if the now-dead company called Rover has ever sold anything in the States that wasn't a LandRover.
I do know that Volvo and Saab are sold in the States, but their are a minority market in Europe and they're also a minority market in the States.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By achintya on 10/10/2008 3:08:42 PM , Rating: 2
FYI the two little "dots" on top of the e is called an umlaut....


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By heffeque on 10/10/2008 3:55:10 PM , Rating: 2
It's also called diéresis or tréma... depending on the language :-)


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Spuke on 10/10/2008 1:15:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
But now they complain that Citroën doesn't sell their small european cars in USA, just amazing.
Americans like pretty cars and, quite frankly, that concept is a pretty car.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By ceefka on 10/10/2008 5:14:42 PM , Rating: 3
RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By bruce24 on 10/10/2008 5:42:14 PM , Rating: 2
>>> Would you Americans have liked these amazing cars in the 60s?

Citroen's were sold in the US into the 1970's. I liked the unique look of many Citreon cars through the 70's and some of the models since, but unfortunately for Americans, Citreon did sell enough cars in America to make money so they stopped trying. Just like Renault, Peugeot, Fiat, Lancia, Alfa Romeo and others I can't think of...although Alfa Romeo is going to start to sell cars in the U.S. again next year (I think).


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Cypherdude1 on 10/10/2008 2:30:51 PM , Rating: 2
I am an American (S. Calif.) and I have never understood what some Americans have had against the French. Exactly what is it? Is it a media thing? Is it because the French refused to join Pres. Bush43 in the Iraq War blunder? What? Or is it just some kind of running joke here? Frankly, I think the French should sell their car here. The only winner would be the American consumer.
quote:
It's a French company - that's enough to stop lots of American's buying.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By mdogs444 on 10/10/08, Rating: -1
RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By dubldwn on 10/10/2008 4:12:55 PM , Rating: 4
But Americans have no problem buying German cars, the people that actually invaded France? Because brutal aggression commands so much more respect? By the way, the French Resistance was a big help for the Allies. Also, the Japanese actually bombed us. This won America’s respect? Forget about that. That was a long time ago. All these people are our friends. Like the op, I find anti-French rhetoric puzzling.

I would buy a French car.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Cypherdude1 on 10/10/2008 4:36:35 PM , Rating: 5
mdogs444,
your WW2 timing is a bit off. I am a WW2 buff; I know quite a lot about WW2. The French and the English lost their war on the Continent with the Germans in 1940, long before Americans step foot on Normandy in June 1944.

The British were essentially fighting a holding action in the Battle of Britain in late 1940, waiting for America to join the war in Dec 1941. Even then, America did not join the fight in earnest with Germany until 1942 in the deserts of Africa.

The French lost against the Germans, not because they were weak, but because they had outdated tactics and had even more outdated generals. They had a governmental system which allowed their top (old WW1) general to remain even when their President tried to fire him. The French were constantly squabbling and British command was below them.

The French surrendered because all their military units had been outmaneuvered or destroyed and there was nothing between the German Panzer units and Paris. The remaining British and French units had been pushed into Dunkirk port and were lucky to escape because of German mistakes. Over 338,226 soldiers, 198,229 British and 139,997 French, escaped. Even so, the English and French units were forced to leave all their heavy equipment on the Dunkirk beach. Had they not been able to escape, the British government would have also been forced to seek an armistice and the Germans would have won WW2 before the USA had even entered the war.
quote:
Its becuase the French rolled over and caved like a dog to wave their white flag during WWII, all while about a half million American's were dying trying to fight and help the French.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Starcub on 10/11/2008 5:59:46 AM , Rating: 2
I can't believe this post got down modded. I thought it was common knowledge that the Frech got steamrolled by the Germans in WW2 because they were never good fighters. BTW, I don't understand the animosity either.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Nitrof on 10/11/08, Rating: 0
RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Ringold on 10/10/2008 10:40:25 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Is it because the French refused to join Pres. Bush43 in the Iraq War blunder?


If you're 20-something, I know it's easy to think history itself started in the mid 90s or so, but many in America have had a strong, and very mutual, distaste for the French since after WW2. If you don't know all the little things that happened during the Cold War that fed this, it's not my job to make up for your lack of education in that department. That might not be entirely your fault though; public school education gives the candy-ass version of history, and tells the same story basically grade after grade. At any rate, their lack of involvement in Iraq was just one slight among many going back half a century. The fact France isn't a NATO member should tell you something must've gone wrong prior to Bush, if you bothered to think about it at all instead of automatic Bush bashing.

However, I would say there are some French companies that are successful in America. As long as they don't wave the French flag, the vast majority of people would ignore the location of their corporate headquarters if the product was competitive, especially if they gave their US operations an English-sounding name.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By andrinoaa on 10/11/2008 3:05:28 AM , Rating: 4
I think its more like they wouldn't follow Americans into suicidal oblivion in Iraq. Iraq was your mess anyway, why get involved, I would have stayed away too, given a choice!
The French may be stuck-up, but definitly not dumb asses.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Reclaimer77 on 10/13/2008 1:02:46 AM , Rating: 2
Dude even the freaking Aussies got involved. And they are certainly not in the midst of " suicidal oblivion ". Whats that say about the French ?


By Penguinhunterd on 10/11/2008 5:25:25 AM , Rating: 2
I am aware of the slights you're referencing that occurred during the cold war such as France leaving NATO and evicting the U.S. Fleet. But I just wanted to point out that France rejoined NATO in the 90's and is in the process of being fully reintegrated. French troops serve in Afghanistan alongside other NATO forces.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Starcub on 10/11/2008 6:27:56 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
At any rate, their lack of involvement in Iraq was just one slight among many going back half a century. The fact France isn't a NATO member should tell you something must've gone wrong prior to Bush, if you bothered to think about it at all instead of automatic Bush bashing.

The irony is that France along with most of Europe were screaming for America to help them against the Germans, but it took an attack on American soil before the US would commit troops. And people can't understand that the French might hold some resentment?

To add insult to injury, you have people like GWB saying stuff like 'if you don't join US in the fight against the terrorists, then you are part of the problem'. He made me sorry that I voted for him on that day.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Reclaimer77 on 10/11/08, Rating: -1
RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Ringold on 10/11/2008 5:03:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The irony is that France along with most of Europe were screaming for America to help them against the Germans, but it took an attack on American soil before the US would commit troops.


Again, I know history is taught in a watered down fashion, but look at all the things the US did prior to Pearl Harbor. We were pouring supplies in to England, first of all. Second of all, while we were proclaiming neutrality, we were engaging in an incredible military build-up. If we'd just jumped in Leroy Jenkins-style (Okay guys, I'm back lets go, UNCLE SAAAAAAM!), like how you and the French apparently suggest, we'd of done so without the military capacity to make a difference. Even early on, after that build-up, it was rough going, and the allies only really managed to carry the day because Stalin fought like hell. France made its own pathetic bed, and they had to sleep in it for a while, before they were saved from their own mistakes by others.

Besides, you DO know that your suggestion amounts to a 1940s version of the "Bush Doctrine," at least the version that is defined as preemptive military action? ;)

To the other poster, I know France rejoined NATO, but to my understanding they're members but not a part of the military command structure. That's a carrot they're dangling before NATO in return for the US supporting an EU-based defense club. Sounds like it's going to happen, but this is all of course after half a century of mutual disdain, and it wouldn't happen at all if not for Sarkozy, who isn't a rabid anti-American dog like certain former French presidents.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Kunikos on 10/13/2008 12:26:25 AM , Rating: 2
I think you're missing the greater historical background, Ringold. Citizens of the British Empire have hated the French since the dark ages, where they would raid each other incessantly. This continued into the middle ages and beyond, especially adding religious reasons when Britain divorced itself from the Roman church and again later when Napoleon invaded their shores. Americans may think they are so very different, but they inherited this legacy of francophobia.

Later on, especially during the 50's, it became popular to discriminate against all more liberal or socialist leaning countries. The ridiculous attitude that French peoples are all "snooty and arrogant" makes about as much sense as thinking that all Americans are fat, rude thugs.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Fireshade on 10/13/2008 9:52:04 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The fact France isn't a NATO member should tell you something must've gone wrong prior to Bush

Why is it wrong for a sovereign state to decide for itself not to join NATO?


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By jimbojimbo on 10/10/2008 1:18:07 PM , Rating: 1
Simple why they won't sell here. With all the safety requirements legally needed to be street worthy here the sucker will get 40mpg just like everything else. Let's thank legislation for screwing us over no matter what.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Spivonious on 10/10/2008 1:23:04 PM , Rating: 2
Yay for big government!! /sarcasm


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Solandri on 10/11/2008 8:01:23 PM , Rating: 2
I suspect the more stringent diesel emissions standards in the U.S. have something to do with it too.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Oregonian2 on 10/10/2008 1:47:42 PM , Rating: 2
From 1959 to 1992 as best I can tell, Peugeot was in the American market. Peugeot is another brand name in the same company as Citroen.

Judging by old Peugeot cars that I vaguely remember and the picture of the Citroen above, they may have failed in our market because their cars are ugly. Mind you, I'll admit that's all in the mind of the beholder, so that's only my opinion, and I may be missing it's inner beauty by only looking at photos. Probably a cultural thing and perhaps they made world-cars rather than designing for the target market like some companies do.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Ammohunt on 10/10/08, Rating: 0
RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By omnicronx on 10/10/2008 2:17:35 PM , Rating: 2
Yes because demostic cars of the 70's and 80's were all about quality. Peugeot stopped selling cars in the US because they were french, and nobody wanted to buy a tiny french car.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Ammohunt on 10/10/2008 2:21:20 PM , Rating: 2
Who is talking about the 70's and 80's iam talking about now. I would take any German made automobile over any car made anywhere else in the EU.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By mdogs444 on 10/10/08, Rating: -1
RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Lord 666 on 10/10/2008 5:26:12 PM , Rating: 2
Chevette and Cavalier were quality cars? Pinto? Caddy 4-6-8 or GM's passenger car diesel motor?

Agreed about the rust; had a 300zx turbo that just rusted away. Great fun car though as a teenager.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By 9nails on 10/12/2008 12:31:54 AM , Rating: 1
You can't beat American steel with light weight / fuel efficient imports. Try to put a car with a plastic radiator, fuel-pump cutoff switch, and crumple zones against an older Impala! We would all know where to place our bets. Historic America couldn't produce cars to dominate the highway, so at least they could dominate the county fair grounds! :)

Today's cars transform into crumpled paper and fluffy beanbags if you bump at 10 MPH. Sure, it saves lives, but you can't put these cars in crash-up derbies. Rednecks be the victums here. :(


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Oregonian2 on 10/10/2008 6:49:57 PM , Rating: 2
My first car was a '69 Cadillac Calais (slightly bigger version of the DeVille) which although not techincally a 70's car, I got it in '73, so that's close. It had a 472 cu engine (375 HP) and was a VERY good car, probably the best one I've had (albeit not the safest, the car could go through a brick wall w/o damage, but driver would be dead). Still got 20 mpg on the freeway on summer trips (albeit with leaded premium gas that was cheap back then). Sigh....


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By andrinoaa on 10/11/2008 3:08:03 AM , Rating: 2
Get over it guys, they were great cars of their times. The problem is thet never got any better!!!


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Hare on 10/11/2008 3:21:53 AM , Rating: 2
You don't even have a clue. Sure, cheap Fiats etc are not the best quality, but you really need to google what Citroen or Peugeot make:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citro%C3%ABn_C6
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peugeot_607

Compare those to the plastic toys made by GM or Ford (although the European Fords are quite nice actually). I mean look at the F150, the quality is ridiculous.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Reclaimer77 on 10/12/08, Rating: 0
RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Fireshade on 10/13/2008 10:04:35 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
If your going to make a 4k+ pound car, those engines just aren't cutting it.

What are your plans with a car then? If it's racing or red light duels, then you have a point.
But really, the majority of drivers are businessmen who just use it for comfortable drives of around 50 miles per day. And besides, in Europe there are very limiting laws on speeds in cities and on highways. I'm sure it's the same in the USA.
So in common sense, why would you need more than 173 HP on this car?


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By foolsgambit11 on 10/10/2008 3:29:16 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe they will eventually. Even Ford has taken a couple of years to port its viable European models to the U.S. market (exempli gratia, the Focus). And Ford is a well-respected, well-recognized, good ole American auto maker with lots of retail outlets. The difficulties for Citroen in moving into the American market with one model, during an economic downturn/recession/deep recession, are immense.


By Zapp Brannigan on 10/12/2008 9:28:42 AM , Rating: 2
Citroen did sell cars in the US but were too radical looking for most US tastes, they didn't have V8 engines, had an innovative hydraulic system that powered the brakes, suspension and steering, but felt different to what US drivers were used to so was shunned, the system was also shockingly unreliable and the cars were build poorly.

Citreon stopped selling cars in america around the time they almost went bankrupt in 1976 and were bought by Peugeot and formed PSA Peugeot Citroen, the company has gone from strength to strength since then (apart from the disastrous buying of chrysler europe).

The company turned over about $80 billion last year and made a profit without selling any cars in the US. They can't really justify the costs of expanding to the US when they don't need to, and with today's current financial situation making any money from the selling this car there is hardly a sure thing.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Choppedliver on 10/10/2008 3:59:19 PM , Rating: 2
I love the way people assume one stupid comment makes everyone from that country stupid.

The USA does not have a monopoly on ignorance or stupidity ( as you have proven by your statement )


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Strunf on 10/10/2008 12:19:25 PM , Rating: 1
Cause they would need to rethink their whole lineup just for the US... and in the end all the EU automakers do poorly there.

In Europe they have a good reputation cause of their legendary 2 horses (2CV) and do quite well in the rally.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By The0ne on 10/10/2008 12:24:43 PM , Rating: 2
They always had unique vehicle designs. This one is no exception although it's a concept. I remember driving one in a video game...Amiga game called Test Drive :) Don't recall the model though.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By bldckstark on 10/10/2008 12:29:34 PM , Rating: 2
The EU automakers do poor there? Don't tell Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Volkswagon, Porsche, and Jaguar that.
They don't know they are supposed to fail yet.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By cleco on 10/10/08, Rating: -1
RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By dubldwn on 10/10/2008 1:04:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Mercedes is owned by Chrysler

quote:
Audi,Porsche and volkswagen might as well be consider one company since they work closely together and share designs

Outstanding. Just outstanding.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By ebakke on 10/10/2008 1:07:03 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Mercedes is owned by Chrysler

Actually Daimler bought Chrysler, and then sold it.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Spivonious on 10/10/2008 1:28:59 PM , Rating: 3
Audi and VW are the same company (Volkwagen AG). They also own Bentley and Bugatti. Porsche has a majority stake in the company.

Daimler used to own Chrysler, but no more.

BMW comes from Deutschland, not Deutchseland (which isn't even pronouncable in German).

Last time I checked, VWs, Audis, Mercedes, and Porsches are everywhere. I see the occasional Jaguar, but they're really a niche market.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Strunf on 10/10/2008 3:59:17 PM , Rating: 2
OMG do I have to explain everything it's pretty obvious I was referring to the commoners car... the market for the cars you pointed has nothing to do with the one Citroen targets.

From the ones you pointed only VW has some cars that compete with the Citroen ones, and VW is NOT making any money in the US.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Lord 666 on 10/10/2008 5:39:20 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, VW was up about 60 points today.

Their mistake was closing their PA factory. With the way the dollar is, some cars have been deemed too expensive to import. If they still had the factory open, their presence would be greater in the US.

They are currently looking to open a factory in the US. That's good news for jobs.

VW has already demonstrated the golf TDI Hybrid... It all depends on the cost to build and the economy if its produced and imported.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By B3an on 10/10/2008 12:30:04 PM , Rating: 1
If Citroen want to do well in the US all they have to do is design extremely ugly, dated and chunky looking american style cars, and i'm sure they will sell great ;)


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Spuke on 10/10/2008 1:45:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
dated and chunky looking american style cars, and i'm sure they will sell great ;)
You mean like the Camry and Accord? Or the Civic and Corolla?


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By elessar1 on 10/10/2008 12:22:21 PM , Rating: 5
- They sold more than 3.000.000 units in 2007
- They are a part of PSA, wich includes Peugeot and Citroen
- They are moving around the 8th place in world sales
- Citroen cars have won the WRC (World Rally Championship) since 2003 (Xsara WRC, C4WRC)

Personally, my father have been driving Citroens for 20 years...with no problems at all...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citroen

cheers...


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Chemical Chris on 10/10/2008 12:24:06 PM , Rating: 2
Citroen *did* sell cars in the US, along with Peugot, Roverr, MG, Triumph, Fiat, Alfa, Vauxhaul, and many more. They all started dropping off in the 70's, with the exodus complete by the late 80's/early 90's.
They left for various reasons, many of which circled around the general crumminess (or, if you will, their poor suitability for american tastes), especially compared to the japanese who were competeting in their niche.
And actually, a lot of the grief they got was justified (not that american cars of the era, or today, are much more reliable....), and so, they left the market, for good reasons.
I do agree that a lot of their offerings are quite good these days, and a return to the US market could be successful (look at the results of the overpriced SMART cars, for example)
ChemC


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By The0ne on 10/10/2008 2:53:47 PM , Rating: 2
Early 90s I believe. There was a dealership here in Miramar, CA that offered European vehicles. I don't think they are there any longer.

I'm a rally fan and wish they bring the xsara over :) already got the subie and evo, avoiding the focus :D but want the 206 and xsara.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Lord 666 on 10/10/2008 5:47:50 PM , Rating: 2
Peugot stopped selling cars in the US in 1989. Common complaint was how close the pedals were together and the overal size of the footwell.

My uncle swore by them, especially the diesels.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 10/10/2008 12:27:11 PM , Rating: 2
Why not sell in the US?

That should not be your question. The correct question is: Why are US auto manufactures dragging their feet in creating cars like this (super high mpg). Normally they would be among the leaders in new technology, now they are bucking the advances, and they wonder why sales are down for their cars....
Yes, of course I know of the Volt - but that's only one, there should be several models coming.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By bldckstark on 10/10/2008 12:37:28 PM , Rating: 2
The answer to your question is a question. Would they sell enough of them to make a profit?

The answer has always been a resounding "NO" in the past. It is looking more and more likely that U.S. auto companies will start importing their European designed and built cars, and continue to make their trucks in the U.S. a la the Saturn "Opel" Astra.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 10/10/2008 12:46:52 PM , Rating: 2
I'd agree with the past would be a "no" on successful sales. However, this last run on gas prices was a cold slap to the face for most Americans. I guess it's a question of how long will they remember? Or as price drops will it just slip their memories?

So, I guess you have a good point to why they are not jumping in with both feet.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By rudy on 10/10/2008 2:55:18 PM , Rating: 2
Or was it? Gas is down to 3.25 here I am not saying it is right but the big 3 went through this before and maybe they think its just another itteration. Ford got its start on the assembly line not by revolutionary design. They may still stick to that value. They with low capital maybe they just dont want risk so they let others with more capital invest and then they liscense the technology. I am not saying it the way we would like it to be but it is a valid business model.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 10/10/2008 3:10:05 PM , Rating: 2
Gas still $3.60 to $3.70 in Chicago land area, where are you?


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Spuke on 10/10/2008 3:40:21 PM , Rating: 2
Average price in the US is $3.27. Some places don't have hardly any or no taxes on their gas. Where I live (CA), gas is $3.55 a gal. If you go over to Arizona, it's right around $3.00 even.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Rugar on 10/12/2008 1:33:57 PM , Rating: 2
Well, here in S. Texas right next to the refineries I just filled the tank for $2.49 a gallon (or about 66 cents a liter for you people who want the metric).


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Suntan on 10/10/2008 1:36:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Why are US auto manufactures dragging their feet in creating cars like this (super high mpg).


Sorry buddy, but the answer to both questions is the same. That car would never be legal here. Due to both emissions and crash safety.

That is why they don't sell it here, and why American automakers don't offer it. Nobody (here) would pay the extreme cost that would result from building a little car such as this which can pass crash and emissions.

-Suntan

-Suntan


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By William Gaatjes on 10/10/2008 2:06:05 PM , Rating: 2
It was already summed up : profit.

Back in the Clinton era, Al Gore and Bill Clinton (and afcourse all real responsible people) came with a proposal to increase fuel efficiency of American cars. Clinton gave 1,5 billion dollars to pay for the research. But there never came a production car with 3 times the milage. SUV's sold better. That is what the american customer wanted. Anyway, the american car companies had a few demands :

1 No japanese companies involved.
2 the car companies would not invest a penny on it.
3 No garantuee that a production car would ever be build, not even a concept car would be build if the car companies did not wanted to.

Instead they came with bigger and more thirsty trucks and suv's because there was where the profit could be made.

Irony is that the japanese companies did not like this at all and that is where the prius sold today comes from. They started there own research and the prius is one of the fruits from that research.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Suntan on 10/10/2008 2:29:43 PM , Rating: 2
reread the parts in your own post about what the American customer wanted...

Anyway, nothing you have stated changes the fact that a little car like that would price itself out of the market here. Because of what the customers want.

-Suntan


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By William Gaatjes on 10/10/2008 2:43:01 PM , Rating: 2
I guess it is time for Dr Phil to have a show about cars then. Maybe then people will start to think.

All normal cars are not save when hit by a truck or a SUV. I can know, i got rear ended by an idiot in a truck who rather drive over children near a school then use common sense. I am just glad it cost me my car and not some kid's life.

The problem is educating the customer with real information and not marketing stories.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Suntan on 10/10/2008 2:59:38 PM , Rating: 2
Your post doesn’t make any sense. How does federally mandated crash protection and emissions equate to running over children?

-Suntan


By William Gaatjes on 10/10/2008 5:04:10 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder if that citroën has an emission problem. And crash protection well, when that car drives into another car not really a problem. But when it drives into a truck or suv, brrrr.

I can also remember that cars are designed in such a way that when a human get's hit frontal, that the shape of the car increases the chance for the human to survive. If i am not mistaken , when an truck hit's you or an SUV, the chance to survive is less likely.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 10/10/2008 3:06:52 PM , Rating: 2
Sounds like someone has a bit of truck envy... :)

Really, I hate the fact that SUV and Trucks do not have to pass the same safety tests as a "normal" car would have to pass. The test should be for all vehicle... Yes, understand Semi-truck, garbage trucks, and such type vehicle have to much mass - but those will not be used as family vehicles.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By William Gaatjes on 10/10/2008 4:58:27 PM , Rating: 2
If i want to drive something big, i will get an Abrams M1 :).

No i do not have a truck envy, i just feel that with these trucks you sometimes have people who really need that truck to feel like king of the road. And i don't like those people.

I do not buy a big truck cause where i live the weight of the car is taxed. The heavier the car , the more tax you pay. I do not mind having a truck as long as you can switch it's motor management from gasguzzling super HP mode to modest but sufficiënt HP mode and much better milage. But then i would still be paying lot's of tax. I like big cars,trucks and so on as much as anybody else. But i do not like the thirst those cars have. I can understand the tax, although i prefer the tax should be determined on the fuel economy of the car as well. Even when it's heavy, if it has high fuel economy then the tax should go down. That way, the need for fuel effeciënt cars would rise immediately.


By William Gaatjes on 10/10/2008 5:05:36 PM , Rating: 2
typo : fuel efficiënt.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Reclaimer77 on 10/12/08, Rating: 0
RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By surt on 10/10/2008 12:41:28 PM , Rating: 1
Actually, I believe China has recently surpassed the US as largest car market in unit volume if not in dollar volume.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By RabidDog on 10/10/2008 1:06:26 PM , Rating: 1
My point was not a nationalism point, but a marketing point. If you make a product you should sell it where people will buy it.

Someone said they are the 8th largest auto maker in the world, why don't they try to be Number 1?

Someone else said that it was that Americans would hold it against the company being French. The French didn't do anything to the US. Remember the whole War against Japan and Germany? They seemed to be able to sell a few autos here.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Spivonious on 10/10/2008 1:30:39 PM , Rating: 2
I think it's the reputation of rude Parisiens that causes the dislike of French people in the U.S.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Suntan on 10/10/2008 1:38:41 PM , Rating: 2
And those French-Canadians aren’t helping the image either…

-Suntan


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By pmonti80 on 10/10/2008 2:06:22 PM , Rating: 2
Well, the tipical comments found in this forum about anything european don't help USA's reputation here in the old continent.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 10/10/2008 2:16:24 PM , Rating: 2
yea, but at least the French-Canadians can play hockey.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By heffeque on 10/10/2008 2:54:50 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Suntan on 10/10/2008 3:02:55 PM , Rating: 2
Which country has currently has the Cup? Hint, they aren’t called the Windsor Redwings.

for that matter, does Canada even have a team in the NHL anymore?

-Suntan


By Seemonkeyscanfly on 10/10/2008 3:14:19 PM , Rating: 2
for that matter, does Canada even have a team in the NHL anymore?

Not sure, but there are more Canadians playing in the NHL then people from the USA. Sure, I'm guessing but I know it has to be true. when you are born on ice you know how to skate.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Spivonious on 10/10/2008 4:47:23 PM , Rating: 2
Not when they play the Flyers :P


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Starcub on 10/11/2008 6:54:29 AM , Rating: 2
LOL!


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By andrinoaa on 10/11/2008 3:17:53 AM , Rating: 2
There is another elephant in the room. Its called backup support. Millions would have to be spent on backup infrastructure. Maybe PSA isn't ready or run factories flat already without wanting to get too big. They wouldn't enter the US market to only sell a handful of cars. Safety, quality and emissions wouldn't be the reasons. The Europeans are way ahead in R&D.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By andrinoaa on 10/11/2008 3:25:40 AM , Rating: 2
Also, they would have to design cars for Americans ie like MB and BMW, Volvo etc. The French design cars they don't like to drive? an oxymoron!! They design cars French people like to drive and to hell with anyone who doesn't like them.
Got to love the attitude, dudes!


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Guttersnipe on 10/11/2008 4:09:09 AM , Rating: 2
the truth is the most nationalist buyers are the french and germans. i remember reading that the percentage of people who only buy their countries car makes is very very high in both places.

its nothing like the us where foreign cars get plenty of sales. and well, french cars haven't had the greatest reputation for quality anyways.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Ptosio on 10/11/2008 12:02:06 PM , Rating: 3
So tried Citroen but was forced to leave. Guess why? The reason was simple: the lack of profit and I don't think that WWII has that much to do with it.

Oh, it's surely their "frenchness" that matters, just not in that sense. Poeople don't have any problem with buying, say, French cheese or mustards - I saw them all over American supermarkets. French food sounds right - the problem is that the "French automobile" just doesn't, neither in America nor even over here, in Europe. French cars are considered not to have the same kind of quality/durability that German or Japanese produced cars have. And it's probably not without the reason: see that article on why did Peugeot left America(http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1038/is_n3_... Of course their cars were not THAT bad - if they had been, these manufaters wouldn't have survived for 80 years or so, but they certainly did gain some kind of a bad fame. Some people in the USA, UK, France or Poland may not like, say, the Germans but at it's worst they'd say something like "those are the bastards, but they are the bastards who know how to make solid cars". Even Citroen itself has started to recegnise it, just look at this TV ad that is on air all over Europe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMQnPWjK5pE

The real question however is different. Their frenchness clearly isn't helping them, but considering that it's not only the American thing, why they are able to sell cars in Europe? I guess that article I posted earlier can give some hints. The first thing is the price. Many customers would
rather buy a German or Japanese car instead of a French one, but the latter is just cheaper. However, with so high costs of bringing their product into the US (again, see the article) and overall tendency of Americans to spend more on their cars it is no longer the case. The second: how many cars of that size (i.e small city car) do you really see on American roads? I know that the fuel usage awarness is increasing, but I don't think that the Americans are ready for the transision. Someone has pointed out that they make SUVs too, but the large chunk of their line-up consist of the small city cars that Americans just tend not to buy. That makes the whole US expansion thing just too risky for them.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Ratinator on 10/10/2008 4:55:56 PM , Rating: 1
You do realise there are countries in this world other than the US that drive vehicles?


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Guttersnipe on 10/11/08, Rating: 0
RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By 9nails on 10/12/2008 1:22:08 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Why don't they want to sell in in the US?


1) The US is a huge territory with lots of land. US cars require a different car design than what is needed in small French corridors.

2) The US's large territory make it difficult to locate a dealer network near their customers. The whole territory of France is smaller than the size of Texas.

3) The US economy is in a downturn and behind the Euro. This translates into a more expensive car to import American's.

4) If Citroen could gain popularity in US, it would be cheaper to manufacture cars in America. This would be a lengthy time to develop this market.

5) As you pointed out, red tape. The NHTSA has different measurements than NCAP. Which can require a different design to meet the laws.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By lagomorpha on 10/13/2008 3:12:01 AM , Rating: 2
You forgot
0) Renault tried to sell cars here and they failed. French cars suck and we hate them. If they wanted to have any success in selling this car in the US they would have to make a deal with some automaker that already has dealers here. I'm sure Chrysler would love to have a little french made diesel at their dealerships they could slap a Chrysler badge on to improve their CAFE.


RE: Why not sell in in the US?
By Fireshade on 10/13/2008 9:44:14 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
1) The US is a huge territory with lots of land. US cars require a different car design than what is needed in small French corridors.

Just how many Americans would be driving coast to coast "every day"? I think it's wiser to to look at how many miles the target group drives (on a regular basis). Real every day usage would make much more sense to determining what car you would need.
quote:
5) As you pointed out, red tape. The NHTSA has different measurements than NCAP. Which can require a different design to meet the laws.

Actually, this does not have to be a problem at all for European cars. The antiquated NHTSA is generally more lenient than the Euro NCAP and does not take several damages into account. Australia has recently adopted Euro NCAP (they previously used NHTSA testing procedures).


"So if you want to save the planet, feel free to drive your Hummer. Just avoid the drive thru line at McDonalds." -- Michael Asher











botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki