AD #1985 – NAFTA Important for Competitiveness, Audi Accused of Having Bad Gas, L.A. Eye Candy

November 10th, 2016 at 11:50am

Runtime: 7:59

To watch this episode on YouTube click here.

- NAFTA Important for Competitiveness
- Audi Accused of Defeat Device on Gas Engine
- New Long Wheelbase Porsche Panamera
- Refreshed Nissan Versa Note & Juke Black Pearl
- Kia Soul Gets a Turbo Engine
- VW Golf Family Refresh
- MG Jumps Into Hot Crossover Segment
- Bob Lutz Disses Continental’s Front End

Visit our sponsors to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: Bridgestone , Dow Automotive Systems and Lear Corporation

»Subscribe to Podcast | iTunes | RSS | Listen on Phone Stitcher | YouTube

Thanks to our partner for embedding Autoline Daily on its website:

18 Comments to “AD #1985 – NAFTA Important for Competitiveness, Audi Accused of Having Bad Gas, L.A. Eye Candy”

  1. Kit Gerhart Says:

    The latest Audi cheat sounds like what could be called “eco plus” on a car with multiple drive modes.

    This bring up something that you might know, Sean. On cars with multiple drive modes, like my Corvette, are the tests done in the mode that would give the best mpg, probably “eco” on my car, or the default, which is “touring” on the ‘Vette?

  2. XA351GT Says:

    Yeah I bet companies are nervous about NAFTA. They may have to bring jobs back and pay someone a decent wage instead paying a Mexican 2 Tacos and a tequila a day to build cars and then sell them here for big money. IMO NAFTA screwed the American worker ,but gave the corporations a huge ability to make tons of cash.

  3. Sean McElroy Says:

    @Kit – I don’t know for sure, but I would be willing to bet they are.

  4. RumNCoke Says:

    I agree with Maximum Bob about the Lincoln styling. There is something wrong with the proportions of that grille. Too bad. I recall another car that was a pretty good vehicle but had a weird grille which killed sales. I think its name was Edsel!

  5. Larry Murray Says:

    Manufacturers are required to test in all modes on multiple mode vehicles. If they recommend regular gas they also must show no change in fuel economy on regular gas verses the normal test fuel that is premium octane.

  6. MJB Says:

    I’ve seen that new Continental on the road several times over the past few weeks. Back when production photos had just been released, I criticized the rear for looking too much like a 2006 Hyundai Azera. Now that I’ve seen it in person, I no longer need to speculate. It wasn’t just the photos playing tricks on me.



    Don’t get me wrong though. I DO like the styling. If I never had the Azera visual reference floating around in my head, I’d be able to fully appreciate the Conti.

  7. Kate McLeod Says:

    In some ways, I am surprised that VW/Audi would further risk their reputation by continuing to cheat. In other ways, not so much. #don’ttrustanythinganymore

  8. RumNCoke Says:

    My understanding is that the President has veto power for all trade deals. So it is possible that President Trump could kill NAFTA. While this would cause all kinds of chaos in many industries, we in Canada might actually benefit from a bilateral trade deal with the USA. Unlike Mexico and China, our workers make a good wage so it is unlikely that vehicles and parts from Canada would negatively affect US jobs.

  9. Topper Says:

    John, There is more to NAFTA than tariff and competiveness. The car companies will remain competitive regardless of NAFTA or GAT. They are survivors. NAFTA is a disaster from the beginning. Between 1994 and 2010, the U.S. trade deficits with Mexico totaled $97.2 billion, displacing 682,900 U.S. jobs. Nearly 80% of the losses were in manufacturing. US wages were then suppressed. Those industries remaining in the US gave their workers a choices; relocate to Mexico or take a pay cut. And I haven’t even touched on the impact to Mexican workers.

  10. G.A.Branigan Says:

    NAFTA ushered in the demise of over 70k factories.By any standard for Americans,how can that be called good.

    @ John Mc: Please don’t invite any more political discussions here.

  11. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Mr. Trump’s promises to kill NAFTA and build a wall go together. If the Mexican factories close, the flow of people across the U.S/Mexican border would again be northbound, rather than southbound as it is now.

  12. Topper Says:

    #9. I was ready to agree with you, until I saw AAA headline. It can’t be done.

  13. Albemarle Says:

    Before NAFTA there was the autopac between Canada and the U.S. Much of the angst about NAFTA has little or nothing to do with automobiles. As I recall, (mainly because I am old), the old autopac which was free trade specifically about cars & trucks, was a success. Its success led the governments to want to expand it to everything.

    I agree with Mr. Lutz that the production Lincoln lost a lot in the looks over the concept. Too bad because I loved the concept. But, my goodness, it may just be me but I have never liked the Cadillac front end since ‘art & science’ and it’s getting worse.

  14. Henry Says:

    NAFTA helped cripple the UAW before it almost succeeded in wiping out the domestic auto industry(and itself). So, to a degree, NAFTA helped save the American manufacturers (and the jobs they provide). Does Mr. Trump understand this?

  15. Kit Gerhart Says:

    I liked the Continental concept better than the production car, but I don’t understand Lutz disliking the oroduction car THAT much. I think it looks ok, but generic. I like the Cadillacs better.

  16. Brett Says:


    There were people on both sides of the table when those union labor contracts were negotiated.

    Blaming the UAW for the ills of the auto industry is pretty shortsighted. The car companies could’ve negotiated better, perhaps?

  17. Kit Gerhart Says:

    The companies gave away a lot during the 50′s, 60′s, and 70′s, when they owned most of the U.S. market, and wanted to avoid strikes.

    From my perspective, in process support in a GM/Delphi facility, work rules were the biggest UAW-related problem. In some cases, the rules required three skilled trades people to do a job that any one of them could do in two minutes. Sometimes, hours of production were lost because of this. Of course, both sides signed the contract.

  18. David Sprowl Says:

    I’m not convinced that ripping up NAFTA will hurt much of anything long term. What that agreement ultimately provided more cash flow to the upper corp coffers and the expense of workers wages and to public coffers. A few guest (Hal Sperlich come to mind) have suggested modifying the manufacturing model to scale to smaller production plants. I find it interesting that the base price of a Buick Verno for example can be sold for 6K less in China than in the US. Having a “sell it here, make it here” policy has worked well for many countries. It then would put labor in each market the ability to earn higher wages without necessarily damaging corporate profits. It would also provide a greater volume of dollars into governmental coffers.