Sparkle, shimmer and shine!

I've posted up reviews for the Spark to two outlets. Obviously, different target markets, but it's interesting to see the differences:

http://bigbigcar.com/boards/default.aspx?g=posts&t=4563

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/08/review-2011-chevrolet-spark-1-2-global-spec/

To the American market, the Spark is just another rubbish small car. Too slow, too small, too cheap. In a more global sense, in emerging markets like the Philippines, it's spacious enough, it's more than cheap enough, and the fuel economy benefits are more than worth the sacrifices in size.

A fundamental difference in requirements... one that reflects the reasons why manufacturers struggle to have a relevant line-up wihtout having a huge variety of models, and also why "Carmageddon" hit the US harder than us.

Hyundai Accent: Domination!

Now tell me... why do we need compact cars, again?

The Deadly Consequences of The Lack of Consequences

More precisely, it's when the consequences of one act outweigh the consequences of not doing it. It's a gamble that many bus drivers make... but you can play Russian Roulette for only so long before your luck runs out. As it did for one unfortunate driver last Tuesday as he lost control of his bus in the rain, flew off the Skyway and fell four stories to the ground below.

Much has been said about the "boundary system", which requires the drivers to do more trips than humanly possible simply to break even on a day's worth of work.

While there's nothing inherently immoral with a quota system for service jobs... the level of the boundary is of much debate. Simply: the number of trips a driver can make is constrained by traffic. Hence, drivers try to make up for lost time by driving faster once out of traffic.

Drivers are always aware of the consequences of not making their boundary. It weighs on their every thought as they go home bone-weary and hungry, and as they wake up in the morning, even hungrier. But do they ever think of the consequences of their actions on the road?

I firmly believe that these drivers' inability to properly weigh the pros and cons of their actions stems from a lack of proper driver's education and training. Doing 130 km/h (the bus's estimated speed) on a crowded freeway in a bus is reckless. Doing the same in the rain is insane.

But drivers never really think about it. They think of it as allowing them to do just one more trip on the day, to earn more money.

How much time do you save? Over the 10 kilometer length of the Skyway, overspeeding by 50 km/h nets you a three minute saving. That's six minutes per round trip. Given the traffic and terminal time, and that a driver might be able to do only four or five round trips in an entire day working double-shifts (depending on the length of the route, if it's Manila to Batangas, make it three to four), that's a total of half-an-hour saved. Not even enough to complete half a trip. To make one extra trip a day, drivers have to maintain at least 140-160 km/h on both the regular highway and the Skyway. And some actually do.

All to earn a little more money. And since there are no consequences for overspeeding except a small fine and a confiscated license, drivers have little reason not to try and hit that golden turn-around time.

It's obvious that bigger disincentives than confiscated licenses are required. How about impounding? A driver breaks the limit by over 40 km/h, the entire fleet gets grounded for a day and the bus in question gets impounded for a week, and the driver's license gets revoked for a month. The driver loses out, but the operator loses out even worse. This then creates consequences for the operator, which forces them to review their policies and boundaries. Because if the only incentive for companies to change policy is the one-in-a-thousand accident rather than the one-in-ten overspeeding incident, then there will still be a thousand overspeeding, swerving and racing buses plying the roads for every bus taken off of it.

LTO Emissions Center Quota?

Heard a rumor today, that certain emissions centers have instituted a daily quota. One is limiting itself to 160 cars.

Yes... they are only allowed to do tests on 160 cars a day. Apparently, they're too efficient.

How efficient?

A customer complained that he passed by after lunch, and they were closed for the day.

Let's recap: You open at 8:00 am. You manage to drive a car into the booth, attach the testing equipment, get the probes warmed up, do the emissions test (which requires the car to be revved through a simulated driving cycle... instead of idling for a few seconds), take a picture, detach the probes, drive the car out of the booth, print out the test results and collect payment in just two minutes? Either LTO testing centers have managed to breed a new class of supermen who can catch speeding bullets with their teeth, or there's something scwewy going on.

A time-motion study has convinced embattled LTO Secretary Virginia Torres that there's something fishy about all of this, and she's been closing down centers that process cars way too fast.

Unfortunately, the testers have found a way to not trigger alarm bells. Just get it all over with in the morning and take the rest of the day off.

Makes sense, right?

Commonwealth... common sense...

It saddens me no end to see report after report of death and dismemberment on the most useless road in the country, Commonwealth Avenue.

It makes no sense... not here... to have a road that's sixteen lanes wide with no clear lane-segregation markers and no safety.

Simply put... for pedestrians and small vehicle users, this vast sea of concrete is a deadly place. It's impossible to cross on foot, and the pedestrian bridges are few and far between. Public utility vehicles, private cars and scooters, zip across several lanes to enter a U-turn slot, then merge right several lanes on the other side, all in one motion. Buses weave in and out of lane with impunity... the wide expanse of concrete encouraging drivers to push a little faster than they would on the narrower roads of the metro.

Let's face it... we don't have the manpower for active enforcement... what we need are better designed roads, with clear lane demarcation and maybe even islands separating the inner and outer lanes. No... not the "pop-up-in-the-middle-of-nowhere" islands and fences that Bayani Fernando tried to institute on EDSA, but honest-to-goodness continuous islands down the length of the avenue.

Not only for this road, but also for the Quezon Circle, which is also a very difficult place for pedestrians, cyclists and small vehicle operators to navigate.

All it takes is political will. Or maybe more well-known personages dying. But you and I know that the latter is the more likely trigger...

Is 2 liters 2 much?

Yes, I started updating again. Yes, it's been a loooong time. So sue me... it's easy to lose photos in the morass of data I have stuffed into my laptop, and with the magazine starting up and BBC undergoing a change of status, it's hard to know where to start.

I know most people won't find two liters excessive. In fact, for some, it's probably a bare minimum requirement for interesting cars... others might even see it as inadequate.

But your basic commuter... the person most likely to buy cars like these... doesn't really need the power to overtake semis on the highway. Or to hit 200 km/h. Or the ability to do scandinavian flicks...

Okay... so WE like cars that'll swing wide under trail-braking, but then people like us don't buy gray cars, right? Right?

There's sometimes a deep-seated disconnect between what car manufacturers sell and what buyers want. In this case, I think both shots are pretty wide off the mark.