Yesterday, Automotive News reported that octogenarian GM investor Kirk Kerkorian is "frustrated with CEO Rick Wagoner's lack of enthusiasm for an alliance with Nissan-Renault." That's like the DEA saying it’s frustrated with Bolivia's inability to curtail its cocaine exports. Kirk knows that Rick would sooner pull the ripcord on his [bankruptcy proof] golden parachute than green light a hook-up with the French. Which is why the Lion of Las Vegas responded to Wagoner’s “no deal” comments to the Parisian press by threatening to buy up even more shares in the ailing automaker: to force Wagoner into a corner.

On April 3, 2005, this website began the General Motors Death Watch. Few industry or media types credited the possibility that the world’s largest automaker could be on the ropes. By this August, when the Ford Death Watch series began, it was clear to all and sundry that GM is in a fight for its life. And, of course, that Ford was in the same position. That left Chrysler as the sole domestic automaker whose fortunes weren’t in deep decline. And then, two weeks ago, Chrysler announced that it will lose $1.52b in the third financial quarter. Does that mean its time for a Chrysler Death Watch?  First, a little history…

Why? Why in the world would Chrysler release another gas-guzzling SUV into the domestic market? OK, sure, they probably pulled the trigger on the Aspen before gas crested three bucks a gallon and immolated SUV sales. But why bother? The official website proclaims the Aspen offers “Decadence without shame.” This from a vehicle that gets [an entirely theoretical] 14 mpg in the urban cycle? Whose shame are they referring to? Surely someone should be embarrassed.

After Germany’s unconditional surrender to Allied forces in 1945, the allies stripped the country of all its patents. Germany’s former Axis ally, Japan, eventually exploited this situation by plagiarizing and mass-producing legendary German cameras and lenses. Today, Japanese manufacturers continue to look to Germany for “inspiration.” Case in point: the 2007 Acura RDX. It couldn’t […]

This morning, I met with a management consultant who works for The Big Two Point Five. Back before the recent “unpleasantness,” Ford’s top brass engaged the consultant to tackle a marketing issue crucial to FoMoCo’s future. Department heads assembled. Despite overlapping fiefdoms and wildly different ideas for progress, the execs hammered out an innovative four-point strategic plan. Consensus was achieved. And then… nothing. Not one of the points was ever implemented. “These guys are scared to death of change,” he sighed. “Ford’s culture is always working against them.”

Germany was first, followed by France, England and Italy. Japan arrived a few years later, with Korea trailing by several decades. Since 1949, foreign car makers have mounted assaults on America’s automotive market. A few have flourished, others have had moderate success, but many have retreated after failing to establish a beachhead. And now another wave is forming, threatening to storm our shores. Entrepreneur Malcolm Bricklin is leading the charge, establishing Visionary Vehicles LLC to import a line of “aggressively priced, beautifully styled, high-quality vehicles” built in China.  Are we about to witness the next automotive revolution, or are we being asked to buy the Bricklin bridge?

Aside from the early, dainty-looking Mustangs and their Shelby siblings, I never really "got" the whole 'Stang cult. During my formative years, the mucho macho models cruising the mean streets of Providence were bloated Pony Car parodies; great honking beasts with about as much cornering prowess as a breeze block. The late '70's and '80's Mustangs were small, slow and stupid looking. In the '90's, the design started to come right and SVO made the model into a defensible choice for power mad pistonheads. But I still couldn't understand why anyone would lionize a car whose heyday lay almost forty years in the past. And then the "new" Mustang arrived. Now that I get: a Disney-style re-imagining of an idealized Mustang pulled from our collective unconscious. But the interior! And what's with the solid rear axle? Still, the GT sounds nice, goes OK and looks great. According to Jonny Lieberman, the Shelby GT-H sounds even better, goes even faster and looks like it sounds and goes. Listen to him preach the gospel to a former Mustang atheist turned agnostic.  

The new Shelby GT-H is not only one of the world’s most desirable cars, it’s also one of the rarest. Not rare in the Pagani Zonda F sense of the word (i.e. only the five wealthiest Kings of Europe can afford one). Rare because Ford’s limited total production to six hundred units, Hertz gets all of them, and at LAX at least, the GT-H is booked through October. Thanks to a manufacturer-sponsored press event (disclaimer done) your intrepid TTAC reviewer managed to get his mitts on the “Hertz rent-a-racer.” I don’t think I’m giving anything away to say that pistonheads’ wives can consider their husbands’ birthday present sorted.

Even as it struggles for its short term survival, GM has unleashed a cloud of hydrogen-powered publicity. A week ago last Sunday, GM announced that "Project Driveway” will deliver 100 Chevrolet Equinox Fuel Cell “test” vehicles to consumers in LA, Washington and New York City. The following Monday, GM unveiled their hydrogen fuel-cell powered Sequel. And last Thursday, The General delivered a fleet of fuel cell Chevys to the US Army. Does this mean that GM Car Czar Maximum Bob Lutz is finally right about something; that GM’s “moon shot” will put Toyota’s hybrids to shame and save GM?

It’s been many years since the media entertained spurious claims about the toxicity of automotive plastics. Guess what? They’re at it again; ready to alert the world to the “dangers” of the plasticizers that make dashboards supple and vinyl pliable. Both ABC’s The View and National Geographic Magazine (October 2006) took major shots at these chemicals, known collectively as phthalate esters. Without these plastics, every car interior would have all the allure and comfort of an up-armored military spec Humvee.

In 1984, an inebriated Henry Ford II met Victor Gauntlet in a London bar. Gauntlett controlled Aston Martin, a venerable British manufacturer of race cars and gentlemen’s sports sedans. Sales were in the tank, and there was no money to develop new models. “For a lousy $15 million, I’d sell the whole thing” Gauntlett said. Ford looked at his drinking buddy, Walter Hayes, and said, “Wouldn’t that shake ‘em up back in Dearborn?” In ’86, Ford bought 75% of Aston’s shares. In ’94, they bought the rest and continued to rehabilitate the ailing English brand. Despite the fact that FoMoCo’s investment has just come right, it’s auction hammer time. So what’s next for Aston?

A hypnotherapist once told me that he began every session by asking his subject to close the door, hand him a pen, move closer, etc. He said that the sooner his subjects learned to follow small commands, the sooner (and more likely) they’d follow the big ones. When I read that Michigan Representative Mike Rogers wants the federal government to guarantee $20b worth of loans to help domestic automakers develop alternative fuels, hybrids and other “energy saving technologies,” I knew it was the same deal. Rogers is training Uncle Sam to bail out the Big Two Point Five.

Jaguar is one heck of a brand. The company took the automotive world by storm, not once, but twice. The first revelation arrived just after WWII. England entered the conflict with an Empire and emerged an impoverished island nation in the North Sea with a few colonies and an Indian subcontinent to its name. Straight into Britannia's shell-shocked and austere enconomy came the Jaguar XK120. Jag's suprisingly inexpensive supercar looked like sin (and a German BMW) and went like Hell (out-performing Aston). The company's– and the nation's– future suddenly had a spring in its step. And then, eh. Until the sixties swung, and out popped another gestalt-capturing blockbuster: the E-type. Yeah baby! For those of us looking for a four-wheeled Hail Mary pass to save Ford's damaged brand, it's worth noting that both of these machines were sexier-than-Jill-Wagner-in-lingerie sports cars powered by superb six cylinder engines. And they were both reasonably affordable. What I'm trying to say is that a new Jaguar sedan ain't gonna cut it, no matter how beautiful, fast or keenly priced it may be. The forthcoming S-Type sedan sure ain't no oil spill– I mean, oil painting. Jag might've made most of its money in "saloons," but it's heart has always been in honest-to-God sports cars. 

Pop quiz. “What do a Chrysler Cirrus, Chevrolet Blazer, Plymouth Acclaim and Ford Expedition have in common?” Did you say “none of them would ever tempt a pistonhead?” True enough, but not correct. “None of them ever dented the US sales charts”? Another good guess, but still incorrect. And the answer is: all of these vehicles have received the “North American Car (or Truck) of the Year” award. Yes, it’s that time of year again. Time for the automotive media to prove that indiscretion is the worst part of valor. 

General Motors has a monkey on its back: another monkey. Actually, three point one monkeys. Writing in the August issue of The New Yorker magazine, Malcolm “Tipping Point” Gladwell explored the possibility that GM’s need to support an enormous population of retired workers is dragging the company into the abyss. Although it’s not exactly a new idea, Mr. “Blink” applied a new tool to the job: the dependency ratio.