Cathy and I have been test-driving for the manufacturers for nearly 15 years and reporting on them on radio, in print as well as videos. We have the opportunity to travel and get first looks and drives for new product to report on.
So, when Toyota invited us to Big Sky Montana, we were excited about the opportunity we had to spend some serious off-road time in the brand new
2008 Toyota Land Cruiser.
I was amazed at the capabilities offered by this very cool SUV. Check out this video and let us know
what you think.
YouTube - Off road with the 2008 Toyota Land Cruiser
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Sunday, September 23, 2007
MARIO ANDRETTI ON TWO FOR THE ROAD RADIO SHOW
Thursday, October 13th 2007
KKNT 960AM Phoenix, Arizona
Autograph Signing at Community Tire
October l7-18 2007
KKNT 960AM Phoenix, Arizona
Autograph Signing at Community Tire
October l7-18 2007
TWO FOR THE ROAD USA
PHOENIX AUTOMOTIVE JOURNALISTS CAN HELP YOU CAPTURE THE BOOMER MARKET
See why Manufacturers and Dealers are looking to these two
automotive journalists to seduce their over 50 market.
Go to, http://www.ebroadcastmedia.com/ for sample video.
See why Manufacturers and Dealers are looking to these two
automotive journalists to seduce their over 50 market.
Go to, http://www.ebroadcastmedia.com/ for sample video.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
Chrysler Visits Phoenix Automotive Press Association
September l8, 2007 – Hermosa Inn – Scottsdale, AZ. Cathy D's take on the all new Jeep Liberty.
Scott Brown, from Chrysler Corporation of the Southwest region, invited 15 top Phoenix press writers to preview three new products from Chrysler. The Town and Country Mini Van ( a movie theater on wheels without a popcorn maker), Dodge Dakota Truck (for the day to day truck lover and urban cowboy) and the 2008 Jeep Liberty (giving a whole new meaning to topless). All three models have some distinct changes in power, appearance and technology, but I was most excited about the 2008 Jeep Liberty.
Over the years my family has had two Jeep Wranglers and two Jeep Cherokees; none of which had any female input for the purchase. We’re not big off road people but before SUV’s became as common as reality shows, it gave me an elevated feeling in traffic and the men in my family felt rugged, cool and able to relate to a scene from the TV show MASH.
The 3.7 liter V-6 (210 horsepower/237 lb-ft torque) hasn’t changed along with its two transmissions but the rest is new and exciting and priced well. Jeep Liberty, no longer Jeep’s entry level model, has a longer wheelbase, width and overall length. It has kind of a Jeep Commander looking style with a little Wrangler-ness butt; less the rear-mounted spare tire on the outside of the cargo door. The spare now stores under the load floor where I would have liked it from the get go.
Okay, here is the cool part… the cloth, roman shade look roof (Sky Slider) opens from front to rear to give that open road look one might imagine on a safari. Chrysler has constructed this jeep continue to appeal to jeep lovers and then added some extras like stain resistant seats, center-stack infotainment, navigation system with MP3 capabilities, touch screen 20 gig hard drive and all the other technology that consumers want in a vehicle along with an off-road experience they can journal.
It is easy to see how you would take this one off road in the mountains or around town for food shopping or transporting kids. I think Chrysler/Jeep has taken the best of all their Jeep models, added a totally open roof, and priced it to make affordable for a younger buyer. The 2008 Jeep Liberty starts at $20,990 for the 4X2 and goes upward from there. The Sky Slider is an optional $1,200.00 but makes the new model attention-grabbing and makes star gazing possible without getting out of your vehicle.
Is Jeep thinking outside the box or did they just make the ’08 jeep look like a box?
In photo
Chrysler VP Steve Bartoli, Mark Kudla/Dodge Dakota, Kim Adams House/Jeep Liberty Bill Zervakos and Cathy Droz, Two for the Road USA in front of the New 2008 Jeep Liberty.
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Size really does Matter!!
Okay, this isn’t going to be as titillating as you may have thought the subject matter was, but the truth is, there’s been a lot of ink lately about the Insurance Institute’s recent announcement that there are more traffic fatalities when a small car is involved in an accident than there are when large cars or SUV’s are. Now if that isn’t a case of stating the obvious I don’t know what is. The statistics I’ve seen show a ratio of about two to one between SUV’s and cars, and to that end, here are some thoughts I have about that.
My wife and I have always been fans of roadsters and over the last 30 odd years we’ve always owned a small two-seater of one kind of another. We’ve been asked countless times about driving a small car and the dangers we face because of the overabundance of huge SUV’s on the highway today.
Both of us are what I call aggressive defensive drivers, and by that I mean, if at all possible we do not stay behind vehicles we can’t see around, and we never stay in anyone’s blind spot and more importantly, because we drive cars that have a degree of performance, we have the ability to move quickly to avoid dangers on the road. I have to add that there is not any statistical data that I’m aware of the validates my claim of maneuverability keeping smaller cars out of harms way, but non-the-less, I know that I feel better about my odds of staying out of trouble with the quickness and agility of smaller cars.
Okay all that said it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that the law of physics is immutable and therefore cannot be denied. So clearly we understand that if there is a collision between a 6000 pound Hummer and my wife’s Z4, the BMW will lose. Yes, smaller cars are indeed more dangerous but my question is, how big is big enough?
A Taurus will likely be safer than a Honda Civic in a collision, as will a Crown Victoria in a collision with the same Taurus, and the same goes for a GMC Denali if it collides with the Crown Vic and on and on. So, it begs the question. How big is big enough? Life is full of risks so what are the issues to take into consideration to help abate this ever growing problem caused by consumers wanting to drive smaller more fuel efficient cars.
The issue is that small cars are here to stay now, and with the Smart car coming to America, there will be even more deaths because no matter how well a vehicle meets safety standards, the aforementioned law of physics holds sway. I recently read that GM is cutting production at six plants that build pickups and SUV’s because of falling sales so it will be interesting to see how the balance of size shifts over the next few years.
The absolute truth of the matter is that each of us is responsible for how safely or unsafely we drive. Unfortunately people in big cars and SUV’s sometimes appear to throw their weight around which causes problems, and sometimes people in smaller cars try to squeeze in where there simply isn’t room because they think they can. We all have to remember that size does in fact matter when it comes to our vehicles.
Your thoughts? visit http://www.twofortheroadusa.com and let us know.
My wife and I have always been fans of roadsters and over the last 30 odd years we’ve always owned a small two-seater of one kind of another. We’ve been asked countless times about driving a small car and the dangers we face because of the overabundance of huge SUV’s on the highway today.
Both of us are what I call aggressive defensive drivers, and by that I mean, if at all possible we do not stay behind vehicles we can’t see around, and we never stay in anyone’s blind spot and more importantly, because we drive cars that have a degree of performance, we have the ability to move quickly to avoid dangers on the road. I have to add that there is not any statistical data that I’m aware of the validates my claim of maneuverability keeping smaller cars out of harms way, but non-the-less, I know that I feel better about my odds of staying out of trouble with the quickness and agility of smaller cars.
Okay all that said it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that the law of physics is immutable and therefore cannot be denied. So clearly we understand that if there is a collision between a 6000 pound Hummer and my wife’s Z4, the BMW will lose. Yes, smaller cars are indeed more dangerous but my question is, how big is big enough?
A Taurus will likely be safer than a Honda Civic in a collision, as will a Crown Victoria in a collision with the same Taurus, and the same goes for a GMC Denali if it collides with the Crown Vic and on and on. So, it begs the question. How big is big enough? Life is full of risks so what are the issues to take into consideration to help abate this ever growing problem caused by consumers wanting to drive smaller more fuel efficient cars.
The issue is that small cars are here to stay now, and with the Smart car coming to America, there will be even more deaths because no matter how well a vehicle meets safety standards, the aforementioned law of physics holds sway. I recently read that GM is cutting production at six plants that build pickups and SUV’s because of falling sales so it will be interesting to see how the balance of size shifts over the next few years.
The absolute truth of the matter is that each of us is responsible for how safely or unsafely we drive. Unfortunately people in big cars and SUV’s sometimes appear to throw their weight around which causes problems, and sometimes people in smaller cars try to squeeze in where there simply isn’t room because they think they can. We all have to remember that size does in fact matter when it comes to our vehicles.
Your thoughts? visit http://www.twofortheroadusa.com and let us know.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
How many people will have to die???
I find it hard to believe that less then a month after hearing about the five young girls killed in New York because the driver was texting while driving, we hear about two more people killed here in Phoenix because allegedly a young lady was texting while driving. Even more disheartening is the fact that we just dedicated an entire radio show to the problem of driving while texting.
Now I know that everyone doesn't listen to the show, but I'm sure you get my drift. There simply isn't enough outcry about this ever growing problem. Clearly it's always a tragedy when anyone dies in a car accident, but when someone dies because another driver was texting is virtually criminal.
It begs the age old question of whether or not there should be stronger limits on teenage driving because of the distractions presented to them with today's hi-tech information systems in cars, as well as the multi-tasking that teens seem to need to do. I have to be quick to point out that I am well aware of the fact that many adults use their blackberry's while driving, dial phone numbers and so on. But the truth is, teens are much more likely to have a problem with it than more experienced drivers.
Another part of the equation is how docile cars are today. I'm sure there are quite of few of us old enough to remember when steering components were linked together by rods and bushings that wore out, making it necessary to move the steering wheel all the time to keep the car in our lane. Today's cars are so well built that they appear to be able to drive themselves and in fact, some almost do. Key word being "almost." Maybe if all vehicles were required to have a lane departure warning system like some high end cars do, who know, maybe the seven people now dead would in fact still be with us.
So, the question is, who is accountable, and what can each of us do to make driving on today's very crowded highways, with vehicles traveling at a pretty high rate speed, safer. I know that I worked with my sons for two to three years teaching them "about" driving as well as driving. I know there are no guarantees, but there has to be a way to cut down on the senseless tragedy of people dieing because someone can't wait to text a friend instead of calling, which in and of itself is dangerous.
Let us hear from you. You can reach us at http://www.twofortheroadusa.com/
Now I know that everyone doesn't listen to the show, but I'm sure you get my drift. There simply isn't enough outcry about this ever growing problem. Clearly it's always a tragedy when anyone dies in a car accident, but when someone dies because another driver was texting is virtually criminal.
It begs the age old question of whether or not there should be stronger limits on teenage driving because of the distractions presented to them with today's hi-tech information systems in cars, as well as the multi-tasking that teens seem to need to do. I have to be quick to point out that I am well aware of the fact that many adults use their blackberry's while driving, dial phone numbers and so on. But the truth is, teens are much more likely to have a problem with it than more experienced drivers.
Another part of the equation is how docile cars are today. I'm sure there are quite of few of us old enough to remember when steering components were linked together by rods and bushings that wore out, making it necessary to move the steering wheel all the time to keep the car in our lane. Today's cars are so well built that they appear to be able to drive themselves and in fact, some almost do. Key word being "almost." Maybe if all vehicles were required to have a lane departure warning system like some high end cars do, who know, maybe the seven people now dead would in fact still be with us.
So, the question is, who is accountable, and what can each of us do to make driving on today's very crowded highways, with vehicles traveling at a pretty high rate speed, safer. I know that I worked with my sons for two to three years teaching them "about" driving as well as driving. I know there are no guarantees, but there has to be a way to cut down on the senseless tragedy of people dieing because someone can't wait to text a friend instead of calling, which in and of itself is dangerous.
Let us hear from you. You can reach us at http://www.twofortheroadusa.com/
Thursday, August 9, 2007
News and Notes from Two for the Road USA
With Cerberus Capitol Management as the new owner of Chrysler, one of the first things they did was bring back the Pentastar logo originally created in 1962 when Chrysler Corporation President Lynn Townsend decided the company needed a new symbol to represent all of the corporation’s brands. Townsend wanted a symbol with a strong, classic look that would be instantly recognizable, but was universal—without written words, so apparently Cerberus feels the logo will hearken back to the heyday of Chrysler while ironically referring to the company as “The New Chrysler.” The name change will take effect on October 4th.
Clearly it will take a lot more than a name change to reverse the $680 million dollar losses in 2006 and more than $2 billion in losses in the first quarter of 2007. The future of vehicles built on Mercedes platforms like the 300 and Crossfire will have a lot to do with the turn around, as will new product development. But perhaps the most interesting thing will be to see what having private ownership of a major manufacturer for the first time in half a century will bring to the market.
It’s interesting to know that in Greek mythology, Cerberus is the three-headed dog that guarded the gates of Hades, so I suppose one can infer a lot from that, or maybe nothing. The question is how well Cerberus will guard the gates of Chrysler now that they have control.
From Toyota comes news of a three-pronged sales strategy focusing on attracting young people to the brand, stressing green technology and trying to make the buying process more pleasant. That seems to exemplify the Toyota mantra of their “customer first” philosophy and the never ending pursuit of leading the market by listening to consumers.
Another area that Toyota is working on is making available in their vehicles the technology that the younger demographic is so enamored with. With products like the Scion xB, which offers customers myriad levels of accessorizing their vehicles, Toyota has taken a giant step towards garnering more that their fair share of the 2.3 billion dollar 35 year old and under market. The also realize that this demographic has very little patience to sit around a showroom for 3 to 5 hours to buy a car, and they certainly want the experience to be fun rather than stressful.
Having spent a lot of time with Toyota testing and evaluating their vehicles, I was, if not surprised, interested in a comment from Toyota Executive who was the moving force behind the development of the Scion brand Jim Lentz saying, “it’s time to change our image from an industry that drags its feet to one that runs on innovation.”
I’ve always seen Toyota as a leader in the industry, and with a philosophy like that, maybe that’s why and something the American Manufacturers can learn from.
Clearly it will take a lot more than a name change to reverse the $680 million dollar losses in 2006 and more than $2 billion in losses in the first quarter of 2007. The future of vehicles built on Mercedes platforms like the 300 and Crossfire will have a lot to do with the turn around, as will new product development. But perhaps the most interesting thing will be to see what having private ownership of a major manufacturer for the first time in half a century will bring to the market.
It’s interesting to know that in Greek mythology, Cerberus is the three-headed dog that guarded the gates of Hades, so I suppose one can infer a lot from that, or maybe nothing. The question is how well Cerberus will guard the gates of Chrysler now that they have control.
From Toyota comes news of a three-pronged sales strategy focusing on attracting young people to the brand, stressing green technology and trying to make the buying process more pleasant. That seems to exemplify the Toyota mantra of their “customer first” philosophy and the never ending pursuit of leading the market by listening to consumers.
Another area that Toyota is working on is making available in their vehicles the technology that the younger demographic is so enamored with. With products like the Scion xB, which offers customers myriad levels of accessorizing their vehicles, Toyota has taken a giant step towards garnering more that their fair share of the 2.3 billion dollar 35 year old and under market. The also realize that this demographic has very little patience to sit around a showroom for 3 to 5 hours to buy a car, and they certainly want the experience to be fun rather than stressful.
Having spent a lot of time with Toyota testing and evaluating their vehicles, I was, if not surprised, interested in a comment from Toyota Executive who was the moving force behind the development of the Scion brand Jim Lentz saying, “it’s time to change our image from an industry that drags its feet to one that runs on innovation.”
I’ve always seen Toyota as a leader in the industry, and with a philosophy like that, maybe that’s why and something the American Manufacturers can learn from.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)