Temple

That "MR2" makes 400hp from a hybrid V6 and weighs 2866 pounds (that's a 100hp more power and 100 lbs less weight then Porsche Boxster S); it also has an e-AWD.

This car is a continuation of the Toyota Volta sportscar they designed with Italdesign Giugiaro. In concept its closer to the Porsche 918 Hybrid supercar then a CR-Z or Prius.

It wouldn't be fitting. Aston has engine supplies from older Ford engines and Mercedes, the V12s in particular are very heavy.

The LFA V10 is smaller then a V8 and weighs less the Lexus' 3.5L V6. Its an insanely light weight engine and more fitting for Lotus light-weight philosophy.

"Abandon their heritage"? You seem to know nothing about Lotus history.

The Lotus Elite, one of the most well-recognized and beloved of Chapman's cars, had a 75hp Conventry Climax FW engine. A company best known for making fork-lifts (the company still makes fork lifts under Kalmar Climax brand), and the FW engine has a heritage with fire pumps.

They can get it out before the FT86, and Naruse has been testing a fully running version for quite awhile. This isn't out of the blue.

Here is an interview with Naruse about this car:
http://gazoo.com/racing/english/grmn/lineup/frhh.asp

More interesting is that he wanted to get this car out for around $15k. Its the KP61 Starlet reborn.

@ John H.

We shouldn't expect this car to be comparable to size of the Malibu. Space utilization is not a forte of these PHEVs, this car needs to carry around a 4-cylinder engine, electric motors, 400lbs of batteries, as well as a standard gas tank. Which is why the Volt has a puny trunk space that is a mere 10 cubic feet large, smaller then even a Chevy Aveo (which has 12.4). Also the Volt can't seat 5-people, so in interior volume its even less then a Cruze, much less a Malibu. The reason this is that the massive T-shaped 16kwh li-ion battery that stands as the centerpiece of the Volt intrudes on rear passenger seat leaving only room for 4 people. This is not going to be a roomy car.

http://www.motortrend.com/auto_shows/los_angeles/2009/2011_chevrolet_volt/photo_17.html

Again, that's not a bad thing. For those that need space GM is expected to launch a Volt MPV5, which as the name suggests will be able to seat 5 people:

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/04/22/beijing-2010-chevrolet-volt-mpv5-crossover-revealed/

@John H.

The car is actually closer to the Cruze in size then the Malibu since it uses the Cruze Delta II platform. The Volt has the same 105.7 in wheelbase, same width (70.8 in) and is a little smaller then the Cruze in length due to shorter overhangs (177 in for the Volt, versus 181 in for the Cruze). The Malibu is over a foot longer and is generally a larger car.

But it doesn't really matter. GM is expected to produce only 10,000 cars in the first year. Even at $40k without subsidies they will easily sell out of that volume. Until they ramp up in volume, as they plan for following years, there should be a very long waiting list for the Volt even at a healthy price premium. I wouldn't be surprised to hear dealers marking the cars up due to high initial demand.

The obvious reason they would greenlight the FT86/FR-S over the Supra is simple. If you walk into a Toyota dealership you could either buy yourself a Camry or for similar money buy a sub-3,000lb RWD FT86 with a boxer engine.

The turbocharged Supra cost close to $40k when it was discontinued. For the return of their sporty-side it'd be preferable to release a vehicle that can reach the most possible consumers.

If in the future Toyota wanted to revive the Supra, they could stick in a Subaru flat-6 engine in this FT86 RWD chassis (possibly turbocharge it), and release it with a new design. 400-500hp should be easy turbocharged. It would take them minimal investment.

I'm a huge Ferrari fan (look at my avatar), but Ferrari's action today is hard to defend. F1 is suppose to be a sport and a spectacle, today's actions were detrimental to both those principles.

$100k fine to Alonso or Ferrari is nothing. A win is worth far more points monetarily to both them. Considering the heat Ferrari has gotten with team orders in the past (e.g Barrichello in Brazil), and the fact is that its against the rules now, team orders is cheating. Period.

The problem for the FIA is enforcement. As you say its prevalent in F1. But its hard to prove, there is nothing on the radio that would concretely prove team orders were given, however today's display was hugely blatant.

The FIA need to make it so that the stakes of getting caught for team orders outweighs the risk of using it. $100k isn't enough. Cheating is cheating, teams caught using team orders should be stripped of points for the race, second offense the team should be stripped of points for the season. Third, 1-year ban for the team. Harsh, but no team would risk it.

Too early for GM, but its about politics. The 2010 midterm elections are coming up and politically the democrats need to show they know what they are doing with the bailouts.

This is why the Americredit deal was rushed and sealed for $3.5B this week, there is rush to get out an IPO and lower the US government stake of GM below the 50% mark. Its expected the IPO will only allow 20% of the company to go public, and the Canadian government and UAW will sell of its shares as well. So there won't be a lot of the company public, but without an oversupply of stocks GM's stock price should stay fairly healthy and politicians can claim that big government knows how to handle private industry.

If these politicians really cared about GM they would wait until the economy was better, the job situation was better, and the company had the wind to its back before they released an IPO.

Its not that expensive,

A similar system was on Japanese market Nissans like the Micra and Cube.
http://www.nissan-global.com/EN/TECHNOLOGY/INTRODUCTION/DETAILS/E-4WD/

Nissan's version, and I'm presuming Ford's implementation, won't even require a battery. The engine will generate electricity that will be immediately used in the rear-mounted motors. So while it won't capture energy like a hybrid, it will also not require a heavy battery which will save weight and cost. Moreover, compared to a normal 4WD it won't require a central driveshaft and can be engaged/disengaged more efficiently.