AD #2533 – Fastest Production EV Hypercar, Tesla Introduces New Features, Audi Teases Q4 E-Tron Concept

February 15th, 2019 at 11:43am

Audio-only version:

Listen to “AD #2533 – Fastest Production EV Hypercar, Tesla Introduces New Features, Audi Teases Q4 E-Tron Concept” on Spreaker.

Follow us on social media:

Instagram Twitter Facebook

Runtime: 8:30

0:15 OEMs Exempted from Steel Tariffs
1:15 Electric Kia Soul Range Revealed
1:41 Fastest Production EV Hypercar
3:06 GM Names eBike Brand
3:47 Tenneco Splits in Two
4:19 Audi Teases Q4 E-Tron Concept
4:55 Tesla Introduces New Features
6:01 Auto Industry Struggling to Fill Jobs

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

»Subscribe to Podcast |

5661 rss-logo-png-image-68050 stitcher-icon youtube-logo-icon-65475

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

27 Comments to “AD #2533 – Fastest Production EV Hypercar, Tesla Introduces New Features, Audi Teases Q4 E-Tron Concept”

  1. GEORGE RICCI Says:

    I have seen this many times. A large company will be laying off employees in one group and hiring in another group at the same time. You would think they would try finding jobs for their employees in the hiring group even if some training was required, but they don’t. Some of it is getting rid of older employees and replacing them with younger employees and so they can pay them less, some of it is getting rid of low performers, and some of it is to transitioning to new technology/products faster at the expensive of current employees.

    My recommendation to employees is to keep your skills and resume current and “Follow The MONEY”. Watch for the groups that have growing budgets and are getting majority of the company’s focus. These are the groups you have to move to. Staying in your comfort zone in a group that is on the out will lead to unemployment.

  2. Buzzerd Says:

    I’ll have to watch the show but the first thing that comes to mind is , are they having trouble finding talent at least partly because so much auto manufacturing has migrated to Mexico taking the talent with it?
    Apple has stated that is one of the things stopping them from manufacturing more in the North America- there just isn’t the talent here like there is in China.

  3. Ziggy Says:

    Why would anyone with choices want to work in an industry that will kick you to the curb if they think they can make 10 cents more on their bottom line? I think today’s workers have seen the lack of respect and little regard the auto companies and their suppliers have for keeping people around when the going gets a little rough, I worked at GM for 12 years and as soon as they hit a rough patch me and the group I was in was terminated instead of transferring us to a new group that was starting up. I think today’s workers are too smart to fall for all the worthless promises the car companies come up with for employment knowing they will cut you loose as soon as their profit sharing is even the least bit threatened. I have no pity for their sob story of not having enough workers, they did it to themselves with the way they treated their workers in the past. And people wonder why unions still exist…..

  4. w l simpson Says:

    Ziggy—–Greed rules the world!

  5. Kit Gerhart Says:

    3 I was in on the tail end of cars companies being good places to work, both for production and salary people. Those days are gone.

  6. BobD Says:

    I worked in the automotive industry for 33 years (for the same company). I think it is a little bit of chicken and egg with employer/employee loyalty. While the industry was less loyal to the employees, I also think the employees were less loyal to the employer. In the later years, most new hires from day one had no expectations or desire to be “lifers”. The job was just an experience and stepping stone to next, hopefully better job for more pay or perks. We had some talented young people and they often got recognized and “fast tracked” with promotions and groomed for management, yet that only made them more marketable to a competitor or other industry, and off they went.

  7. ChuckGrenci Says:

    6 Bob,
    I think you are pretty much on the right path as to your evaluation of the general workforce of today. Even the very high muckity, mucks trade positions where (they think) the grass is greener. Funny when you hear the ‘heads of state’ describe their company and how it’s the best of the best. Then they move and their new company takes that accolade over. I don’t blame them (too much) but miss some loyalty that should sometimes be shown (especially if that head of state was given a great opportunity that they might not have naturally gained from some other). Just some ramblings (in my head); I know this doesn’t hold true for every situation as there can be so many permutations in employment scenarios.

  8. FSTFWRD Says:

    @6, Bob. What you describe seems to be in most industries now, young workers are not interested in long term employment, and I think you are spot on. I am retired now but was an “Old School” long term employee in the retail car industry. this just seems to be the way it is. Oh well.

  9. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Back when companies had defined pensions, there was more incentive to stay the same place. Also, the amount of paid vacation increased with time at the company.

  10. Larry D. Says:

    The onetime “big 3″ had lots of power over their suppliers and squeezed them dry. Supplier companies had fewer complaints about Honda, Toyota and other imports, who treated them more humanely and decently than the greedy beancounters of the big 3 did. Of course, one consequence of asking the suppliers to offer lower and lower prices, was lower and lower quality, and after a few decades, guess who went bankrupt, the Greedsters or the Import Makers?

  11. Larry D. Says:

    Before i did my weekly groceries shopping this afternoon I dropped by the public library to get 4 DVDs I had reserved, and took a look at the mags, the new Consumer Reports issue was there and had lots of interesting tests and data. Unfortunately I was not able to read them slowly and carefully and what I write is from memory anyway, because as soon as I sat down to read them, a colleague who is in his second semester of paid sick leave (has early Alzheimers and also liguid in the brain that they cannot operate to remove due to some ventricle problems) showed up and we had a rather long talk instead.

    Surprising CR opinions and results:

    The darling of the auto press, the Genesis G 70, was tested and found rather deficient, scores at 70, and got only 23 MPG, the same 23 MPG the far bigger, far more powerful BMW x5 tested on the RHS of the same page got (only diff, the 70 runs on regular and they put premium on the X5). The G 70 had a lousy 2.0 lt 4 and the X5 the great 3.0 BMW 6.

    The G 70 was deficient in several areas, incl. long stopping distances. In sharp contrast, the testers at CR pronounced the X5 the best SUV they EVER tested, gave it a test drive score of a 98 (!) and an overall score of 88.

    Then they had a long list of how much owners are happy with their own vehicles, admittedly a subjective number, but very important too. They had a summary graphic of the best and the worst models.

    The very top ones were, not surprisingly, the Porsche 911, which, surprisingly, tied for 1st place at 92 with the little rookie the Tesla 3!!! The Tesla S and X were also high up there.

    The Corvette, the Prius, 86 the Avalon, 88 were also high.

    The worst losers were, not surprisingly, the Dodge Journey with 46 and, more surprisingly, the Acura ILX (what the hell is that? A civic clone? an HR-V clone?) with an equally dismal, failing score. The complete list evaluates over 100 models.

  12. Kit Gerhart Says:

    11. I saw that CR a few days ago, and yeah, the so-so review of the G70 was, well, interesting.

    The ILX is Civic-based. It may even be one generation behind the current Civic, but not sure.

  13. Kit Gerhart Says:

    11 Challenger and Wrangler are always high in CR’s owner satisfaction survey. Neither is a great vehicle in some ways, but the people who buy them know what they are getting, and that’s what they wanted.

  14. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Also, among cars that people would buy again, according to CR’s owner satisfaction survey:

    Charger
    Bolt
    Stinger
    5 Series
    G80
    G90
    Camaro
    GTi
    Cayman
    Boxter
    Ridgeline
    Model X
    Ram 1500
    Macan
    X3
    Q7

    and others. Those stood out.

  15. ChuckGrenci Says:

    I’ve always bought what I wanted despite recommendations (and a lot of times warnings from C.R.) and have been generally happy with my picks. Two notables that I’ve had probably the most mechanical troubles with were an ’80 Chevy Citation X-11 and an ’84 Jeep Cherokee; loved them both (despite some repair woes).

  16. ChuckGrenci Says:

    Correction to my #15post; not that important but to be correct, it was a 1988 Jeep Cherokee (oh, and it was the Pioneer model).

  17. Larry D. Says:

    12 I think the results are more than just interesting, they are also very surprising, and, despite all the “employee of the month” awards, show that the Koreans failed yet (for the tenth time) to come up with a decent luxury performance car. This one the G 70 was supposed to be a 3 series fighter, and they are indeed fighting the last war, since the Model 3 is now eating the 3 series Lunch, and everybody and his mother-in-law are developing Model 3 fighters.

    For a 3 series fighter, having long braking distances is inexcusable and dangerous. And for an almost Honda Civic sized car, the 23 mpg is really lousy, when a 5,000 lb behemoth with a 355 HP 3 lt 6 like the X5 also gets the exact same 23 MPG in the CR test. Utter failure for G 70, and if you disagree, watch its sales for the proof.

  18. Larry D. Says:

    12 if indeed the ILX is one model older than the current much improved and best selling (despite sedans and hatches being out of fashion) Civic, this obviously is inexcusable, and the consumers have punished Acura severely for it.

    Buying a car, especially a new car, is an emotional decision. Buyers want to have fun with their vehicles, which explains the popularity of the iconic Wrangler and even the potent Challenger.

  19. Larry D. Says:

    14 These scores are owner reported scores and one would expect them all to be high or very high, since the buyers chose the vehicle because they liked it. I liked all the cars I owned, even the alleged 46 MPG Pontiac 2000 83, which would only get 42 MPG and that at 55 MPH and had a crude 5 sp manual transmission. When I would get the next, and usually better one, I would see the weaknesses of the previous one more vividly.

    So except if the car is a total lemon, I would not expect any owner, even those who bought the Elantra or the Soul or esp the Versa, to give them low points.

    We have plenty of examples of posters here who are very happy with cars the rest of us would not be. Including the guy with the Fusion Lincoln which he claimed he takes to the .. track because it has 400 HP, the other with the Mitsu bargain priced SUV etc.

    So for buyers to give the Journey or the Acura ILX a 46, they would have to be dismally bad, unless their parents forced them on them to drive.

  20. Larry D. Says:

    15 The useful part of the CR car reports are the actual data and their convenient tabulation. Their MPG numbers were always more meaningful than the lab-based EPA numbers. Their opinions about how the car handled were subjective, and the owner reported reliability data could be shot down by academic statisticians all day long, especially those for top end six figure models for which they have tiny (if at all) samples.

  21. DonWagner1239 Says:

    I have a 2017 Journey. I like it fine. Lots of room in the back with the 3rd row down, AWD, great looking (Blacktop edition), first of the current vehicles with the 8.4″ infotainment system. Has a CD/DVD player included in-dash along with the other available tech. Has the 287 HP 3.6 V-6 and the reliable 6-speed trans. Don’t expect 30 mpg, 20 is fine. Has a nice size gas tank. Filler is on the left where it’s supposed to be. Ride might be stiff, but that’s expected with the “performance” suspension. Very popular around the SE Michigan region. I rarely accept the Consumer Reports ratings. A 26 for the Wrangler? Get serious. It’s a specialty vehicle! Got off CR when they called the ’78 Omni and Horizons as dangerous when they did a test of sudden steering that didn’t return as they thought it should. I had four over the years and never had a problem, the best being a 1985 GLH turbo.

  22. Kit Gerhart Says:

    21 I remember the CR report on the OmniRison in ’78. I, too, though it was silly, because the thing they didn’t like, was that the car/steering would go into an oscillation if you turned the wheel half a turn, getting the car cornering and leaning, and then let go of the wheel. No one would do that in normal driving.

    As far as CR now, I find it to be interesting, and useful. As Larry said, their mpg numbers are much more useful than the EPA numbers. Also, the road tests themselves are useful, if you read them and look at the charts, not just the numbers. A Wrangler ranked low because of ride, noise, seat comfort, ease of access, on-road handling, braking, lack of some of the latest safety gadgets, etc. You can find out what they do, and don’t like about a vehicle by, and buy accordingly. Most Wrangler buyers don’t care much about those things, since they bought the vehicle, and most of them say they would buy it again, if they could re-make the buying decision.

    As far as the Journey, a basic, FWD one would make a reasonable replacement for my 30 year old minivan, if you can easily remove the rear seats, or if they fold down to make a flat floor.

  23. Kit Gerhart Says:

    20 The CR reliability data is better than it once was. A few years ago, they quit publishing data if they had fewer than 100 responses for a car model. Yeah, I’m sure a statistician could poke holes in the way the data is reported, and its statistical significance. I figure it is better than no data at all, not that it affects what cars I buy.

  24. Kit Gerhart Says:

    19 Only two vehicles were in the very lowest “would you buy it if you could do over” category, Sentra and ILX. A majority of vehicles seem to be in the 61-80% category.

  25. Kit Gerhart Says:

    17 I know one person who has a Genesis, a base G80, and it fits what he wanted perfectly. It has a non-turbo V6, simple displays and controls, comfortable leather seats, a long warranty, and lots of standard safety gadgets. To him, it was an E-Class at a $20K discount. It will probably depreciate more quickly than an E-Class, but he’ll probably keep it long enough that it won’t matter.

    The G80 and E300 (2.0 turbo) are nearly identical in acceleration. The Benz got 20% better mpg than the G80 in CR’s tests, 24 vs 20, but the Benz is supposed to get premium, which costs about 30% more than regular in my area. I don’t know if the E300 really needs premium, or if premium is “recommended but not required,” as with some cars I have, and have had.

  26. w l simpson Says:

    Mr Buzzerd, china’s main talent is in shoddy merchandise –across the board

  27. Dave Foley Says:

    Gee. Maybe that imported steel and aluminum wasn’t such a “SECURITY THREAT” after all. Go Figger…..

    If all OEM’s had to do was wait a while, and ask for an exemption, maybe there was just the ‘tiny hands’ guy, having a tantrum.

    What a bozo.