Ours is a global economy. Like water cascading downhill, carmaking naturally flows to those countries providing the optimal combination of exchange rates, natural resources, transportation infrastructure and, of course, inexpensive labor. As a result, the U.S. auto industry now stuffs its cars with Chinese parts and assembles them in South Korea, Mexico, Brussels, Australia and more. While pundits bemoan outsourcing’s effect on America’s blue collar jobs, this internationalization exacts a hidden toll near and dear to pistonheads’ hearts: it erases product personality.
Once upon a time, cars had national personalities. American cars were comfy. German cars were robust. Japanese cars were inexpensive (reliability came later). Swedish cars were safe. British cars were a pleasure to drive. Nowadays, everyone does everything. An American car must be robust, comfortable, inexpensive, safe and a pleasure to drive. As must a German, Japanese, Swedish and British car. That’s great as far as it goes; but it doesn’t go far enough.
In their feverish desire to meet regulatory standards and internationalize production– to create a “global car” that appeals to everyone everywhere– manufacturers have eliminated their vehicles’ culturally-derived quirks. In fact, today’s cars feel as though they’ve gone through an automotive spell checker, making sure that the car has been completely cleansed of error. The result: tremendous overall quality bereft of genuinely distinctive character.
More specifically, GM owns (part or whole) thirteen automakers spread throughout the U.S., Korea, Australia, Sweden, England and Germany. As The General rushes towards epic cross-border cross-fertilization, shuffling cars like a Las Vegas dealer, we can already see the loss of national character. Saabilac? Caddibu? Holdeniac? GM’s willingness to ignore regional character is quickly draining any remaining life from their once vibrant portfolio of car brands.
To see the failure of the “global car” logic, consider Saturn. Justin Berkowitz’ review of the Saturn Astra praises its German-ness (e.g. handling, hatch configuration). Fair enough. But what happened to Saturn’s Tennessee roots? Where’s the straight-shooting all-American ethos that informed both the product and its dealers? Gone. And with it, Saturn as a coherent, indeed appealing automotive brand. Just like Saab. And Volvo.
Call me a recidivist, but I reckon a Saab is/was/should be a Swedish hatch– not a German-built sedan or modified American SUV. By the same token, a Volvo is/was/should be a sturdy sedan or wagon– not an inherently dangerous, frivolous convertible. Sure, you could dismiss these objections as senseless carping born of pistonhead preconceptions. But I view our brotherhood as an early warning system. Enthusiasts everywhere are signaling that something important is getting lost in translation, and we’re not wrong.
On the mainstream side, it’s become increasingly clear to observers both inside and outside Toyota that their rapid expansion of American production has eroded vehicle quality. To protect their brand, ToMoCo is launching various initiatives AND quietly scaling-back plans to expand U.S. production. Not to diss American workers, it’s a sure sign that the Japanese automaker “gets it;” they understand importance of location, location, location. Or, if you prefer, culture, culture, culture.
In this, they are not alone.
Volkswagen has recently learned the perils of international outsourcing– and the importance of national character– the hard way. After years of producing truly dreadful North American-bound Golfs in Brazil, VW finally realized that protecting the model’s rep mandated moving production back to its ancestral home. The reborn GTI looks, feels and drives like a “proper” German car. It’s been rewarded with a well-deserved spike in U.S. sales, and a welcome return to street credibility.
Vee Dub’s decision has paid off in all aspects… except financially. Industry analysts report that they’re losing money on their award winner, an inevitable result of exchange rates and financially onerous German labor contracts. Still, which is better: building a singular, world-class product domestically that forces you to address your cost basis at home, or building a meh car abroad that offers the chances of greater profits but doesn’t deliver them and, worse, eventually destroys the brand?
Of course, this raises another question: for a car to embody its national character, does it have to be owned by a local corporation? Maybe. On one hand, BMW’s MINI and VW’s Bentley say no. On the other, Daimler’s Chrysler and Ford’s Jaguar say Hell yes. The key differential: top management must be slaves to the brand, and recognize that the brand is deeply, profoundly, fundamentally national in origin.
When it comes to car design and quality, all but the most blinkered beancounter can see that ignoring the importance of national history and culture leads to machines devoid of personality. And in the current hypercompetitive car market, REAL personality is vital to any automotive brand’s long-term success. In this case, those who do not learn from history are condemned not to repeat it, and, inevitably, suffer the consequences.
Car makers definitely need to look at the DNA that brought them to where they are (BMW – I’m looking at you and your FSM-forsaken iDrive in the “Ultimate Driving Machine”).
Speaking of loosing brand identity, your new Subaru Impreza 2.5i Review shows this perfectly. My Lease on my 2004 WRX Was up this Nov. I ended up buying it because the new Impreza was, well, not an Impreza. It was some boring hatchback.
“Call me a recidivist, but I reckon a Saab is/was/should be a Swedish hatch– not a German-built sedan or modified American SUV. By the same token, a Volvo is/was/should be a sturdy sedan or wagon– not an inherently dangerous, frivolous convertible.”
RIGHT ON!
Funny how cars that stay true to their roots seem to be successes. Chrysler’s 300 was anabashadly American, any was successful for it. Same with the Wrangler. While the “Euro” inspired Ford 500 was a dud, as is the Nissan Titan.
Cross pollination with loss of clear national “boundaries” has been ongoing in the auto biz for decades. Datsun 240Z is one that comes to mind, German stylist + Japanese mechanicals, and successful to boot. One could argue that the Camry is the American sedan reincarnated – sizable, quiet, comfortable, and can’t handle for squat.
I’m sure folks here older than me can help fill in with plenty more examples, including Detroit’s unsuccessful attempts to ape the Europeans such as the Ford Granada/Mercury Monarch.
In some respects, I agree with this editorial. It’s nice to have a car with some soul and character.
I love (and still do)the old style Volvos. Yes, they were boxy behemoths. But I loved that “Swedish logic” character about it. They were different. It was what made Volvos Volvos. But nowadays, all we have are Ford platformed bland sedans. Nothing distinctive about it.
I loved British cars. I loved their designs and that “backgarden” engineering spirit.
The other day I was sooooo close to buying a VW Golf Plus diesel sport, but didn’t go through with it. I liked the car, it had a quality feel to the interior and was economical for its class, but I couldn’t justify it when I could buy the Toyota Auris for £5K less.
Which brings me onto my reason as to why I disgaree with this editorial.
Society has changed. People now need cars as a necessity. They need an appliance to shuttle them from A to B reliably and comfortably. I, myself, need my car to get me to work and back on time, carry my shopping (shoes don’t buy themselves!) and help me ferry friends and family around. You just can’t do that in a 2 seater convertible (Well, unless you can get them to balance on each others shoulders). The market has spoken, appliances are what people want.
Also corporate culture has changed too. We now live in a global economy and companies need to think globally in order to survive. “Quirkiness” and “soul” just no longer cut it in the mass market. That’s why platforms are shared, parts are swapped and cheaper materials are used. That regional focus has now become a profit driven focus. Nowhere is this more apparent, than in Jaguar. Jaguar cars are well built, drive well and are pretty reliable. But if only they could get their creative juices flowing, then Jaguar could beat the other luxury makers. Jaguar could have the toys of a BMW, the heritage of a Mercedes-Benz and the reliablity of a Lexus, but also have FLAIR in their cars! Once Jaguar can harness that, they’ll get people interested in their cars again.
In conclusion, I love cars with soul, flair and character. But when you need to carry 20 pairs of shoes and get to work on time, I’ll stick with a reliable appliance for the time being……
Is there any inherent reason why VW can’t build a decent Golf in Brazil? Or is there something endemic to their corporate culture that causes quality problems at non-German plants?
Anyone sit in both a Mercedes ML and Mercedes S-Class? One’s built in USA, one’s built in Germany. Without telling you which is which, I’m sure you could figure it out with about 10 minutes of seat time combined.
That’s just the way it is.
As one who has driven and ridden in both countless number of times (I learned to drive on a pre bug eyes S), Samir speaks the truth.
Katie makes an excellent point. Before I picked up my curent car, I was on the fence with an excellent condition, low miliage FD. I had the money in hand and was at the owners house when that little nagging voice known as common sense said “sure, its nice, and its what you want, but can it do what you want?” and I had to walk. I wanted that RX7 sooooo bad, but it couldn’t get me to and from work, haul my groceries, cart around friends who needed rides, etc. Maybe next time I see one that is in such good condition for low cost on the market I’ll grab one, but this time it was a no go.
“Personality” work well for niche products and high-end products, it generally does not work very well as a means of designing and selling mainstream products.
Honda and Toyota have built a great deal of their success by following the “keep it simple” philolosphy of car building. On the otherhand I have watched the traditional domestics continuously flounder while they chased after “style”, personality, and flash.
Unless an automobile is going to command a high price going for style in the design process usually leads to a cheesy looking finished product. Just look at the endless stream of half-assed domestic cars from GM, Ford, and Chysler that where based on beautiful but outrageous concept cars full of design elements that are obviously too expensive to make it into general production. Once the twenty two inch chrome wheels are replaced by the now undersized production 16″ plastic wheel covers you end up with what now amounts to an ugly car.
Call Camrys and Accords boring appliances all you want but understand why so many Americans buy these things over Grand Prixs and Sebrings. People prefer to look boring rather than SILLY!
I don’t think the author is arguing that automotive personality should come at the expense of what we now consider standard competencies: reliability, safety, mpgs, etc. But maybe he is.. The appliance-like nature of Japanese manufacturers’ products is their “thing.” Is it really necessary for non-Japanese makes to chase after this aspect, to focus all their energies on building a more reliable Camry or Lexus? I mean, VWs and Audis are notoriously prone to mechanical and electrical failure, yet both brands are selling increasingly well in the U.S. Obviously, they have SOMETHING else to offer. That "something" is, as Wentz suggests, uniquely Germanic. The brand is all. The second it turns its back on its national heritage, bad things happen.
Katie nailed it – cars have changed because the vast majority of consumer demands are driven by utilitarian and economic principles. While car ownership does have a strong element of emotion and more than a hint of self expression, the overriding demands of our daily existence are winning the war of consumer choice. I love RWD sports cars as much as the next automotive addict but I spend 90% of my driving time in heavy traffic moving at less than 40MPH and I also have an occasional need to haul friends and equipment. So when it came time to trade I bid farewell to my BMW coupe and said hello to a 5 door hatch with much less personality but which is a much better fit for the realities of my current circumstance.
Katie and others make a valiant point, “Society has changed. People now need cars as a necessity,” though some would argue even back in “the-day” when brands were contained to their respected nations, 20-30 years ago, there was still a very substantial need for these “appliances”. Sure we may travel more each year, and further distances at that, but the case is that there are/have been and will always be “point A to point B’ers”.
(and there’ll be plenty at that) It’s calling into question whether this tradition and sense of culture has to be loss in the process.
We have ample resources, demand and desire, and yet the world is so small today that there’s no reason why we can’t all have our cake and eat it too. I understand that in today’s world it’s easiest and most profiting to go global and build the world car, I’d never argue that; the yesteryears are just that: yester. I’m merely questioning, is this because we can’t have it the other way? Or because it’s just the path we’re already gone down?
E.g. GM has taken so much on their plate that it begs the question, IF they wanted to nationalize Saab, making it back into a five-door hatch again, on their own sovereign platforms; could they not do it safely, affordably, efficiently, reliably, practically so that you could still run your errands and carry your shoes? They absolutely could, and can they not still do it so the proud Swedish people build these “appliances”? Absolutely, and could it be built to the benchmark of their past: that is a Saab, being a Saab? I would hope.
This is impossible to do because of heavier concerns in GM-HQ at the moment. If more attention could these cars be held to the standards they are made to today, yes and no patriotism would have to be foregone. Pay a little tribute, give your market an “appliance”, but make it one that knows where it came from. The history doomed to be unrepeated is the entire world populated by one gray-blob car in which everyone drives. Sure it’s a gray-blob, but it gets incredible fuel economy, seats eight, can go off-road, can run to 60 in five-seconds, hell it can fly for all I care; but it’s a gray-blob, and for that? I’ll trade in my appliance for a car.
While I agree with some of this piece, and bemoan the loss of distinctive national car industries with lots of character, the world is a very changed place. Everything has changed due to a globalized market: the food we eat, clothes, entertainment,etc.. Turning back the clock is not realistic. And most folks seem happy enough with that.
Take MINI, for example. Does it speak “Britishness” in any authentic way? No. It’s a new, synthesized global brand, based on cuteness and chic. The MINI is the future, for better of for worse.
The only hope I see is in the resurgent movement to grow and eat local foods from small local farmers (usually organic). It’s still very small on a global scale, but growing quickly. Who’s to say that sometime in the future we can’t figure out how to assemble regionally-focused vehicles using modular components? The requirements here in the North West are very different than say, Florida. Northern Italy is more like Austria.
The EU is becoming more homogenous, nationalism is weakening, but regions are the thing. Folks now go to Tuscany, or Provence for vacation. There’e the future for branding and distinctiveness.
I think we are missing the point here!
While some of us may call Camrys and Accords appliances I do not believe the majority of owners feel the same way. I think that most people when confronted with a new Camry SE or Accord EX-L will say “nice car” as opposed to “what a boring appliance”. Outside of exeptionally sporty driving dynamics these cars do have 98% of the magic of a BMW 3 series.
Yes the Germans still have an edge in terms of chic styling but the current crop of family sedans are quite nice and do drive rather well.
A $30,000 (top of the line) Camry or Accord are fitted with very powerful engines (they are fast!), Decent suspension tuning and tires, large stylish rims, nice leather interiors, very good sound systems, NAV systems, power everything, and although debatable, are wrapped up in nice reasonably conservative exteriors that do not offend! On top of all of that they are extremely reliable and built out of some very durable materials.
For the majority of folks about to write a check at the dealer it is a no-brainer! Yeap that BMW might be a bit more fun for those very rare moments the owner might find him/ herself without the family on a fun road with no traffic. Like I said RARE moment!
Another reason why these “boring” FWD family sedans do so well is because those BMWs and other RWD cars like them have considerable less of a driving dynamic advantage once you remove the sports suspension and summer tires. Today the world is full of AWD version of RWD cars because of the inherent disadvantage of RWD in everyday use (yes, bad weather days). So to make a 3 series truly useable all year long they have added AWD weight and complexity, altering the vehicle balance therefore reducing said superior dynamics.
Once you let your “desire” and “impulse” subside a little and allow a bit of commonsense to guide your purchase decision you will end up making a practical choice.
RF, I have to disagree with you completely on Audi, and agree completely with you on Volkswagen. My VW Jetta already (at 47K) has electrical and mechanical “glitches”. However, based upon personal experience, TrueDelta, and Consumer Reports (in all thier appliance loving-boring car mentality) have shown modern Audi’s to be very reliable, and Porsches on par with Toyota (pre-expansion glitches).
As for Katie, I see your point. However, as long as I have a choice, and as long as I am able, I will never again buy a car merely as an appliance. I did that once with a plain-jane used Honda Accord. Did it do everything I needed it to? Yes. It demanded nothing from me during my commute, went reliably, was mildly entertaining, and held my shoes, boots, bikes, uniforms, and my chemical/nuclear/biological/enviro suit (while keeping the carbon mess it leaves behind out of the cabin) with ease.
However…
I felt my sanity slowly draining every time I drove it. It felt so mundane, as if I had surrendered my fate to living in a cookie-cutter suburban house with 2.5 kids, a dog, and an equally boring SUV so I could take an occasional trip to the lake on the weekends. I felt like a walking commercial for Amway.
So I ejected it after only 6 months for a Jeep Wrangler (with horrible, horrible reliability). I LOVED it! But due to its reliability, I traded it after a Ford F-150, thinking I needed (again) something mundane, reliable, and fits most of my needs. Again, I wanted to shoot myself. So I bought a Porsche Boxster S. Best decision ever. I also had at the same time as the Ford a Jetta TDI commuter, and although it is more entertaining than the Accord, it will soon be sold, and a Cayman/911/Maserati/something fun will be joining the stable.
The Porsche has all the storage room, reliability, etc… that I need, while not sucking the soul right out of my body. If my friends need a ride from the airport? Taxi! Need more room for luggage? Roofrack!
And whatdoiknow? I see your point very clearly, and those cars are fine for those people who never want to venture past, “It so NICE. I like nice. Nice, nice, nice… not too extreme, not to ‘out there’, I look like a responsible, practical, productive member of society…. when is my next PTA meeting?” And I don’t mean to be condesending, because there is nothing wrong with those cars at all, and I recommend them to many people who seek practical transpo, however, I am not one of those people. I LIVE for those RARE moments, however rare they are. Don’t you live for those rare moments that aren’t automotive related? For me, settling for a “nice” car would be like living in a “nice” place, where everything is safe, and nothing too exciting will ever happen… like the suburbs in Omaha.
I refuse to submit myself to driving an appliance ever again, and I feel that once people realize that, cars with soul, passion, and character will once again emerge while still retaining all those assets you think you need.
Gary Vasilash, in this months “Automotive Design and Production” had a good take on this topic:
http://www.autofieldguide.com/columns/1207mar.html
It’s a balancing act, meeting the demands of todays customers (and governments), while still maintaining the essence of the brands history.
It’s not unique to VW’s corporate culture so much as the geographic cultures. Also you have the suppliers that have set up in the different locales producing parts that may not be identical.
We may indeed have a global economy but we do not have a global culture and many multi-national companies have had to find this out the hard way.
“Is there any inherent reason why VW can’t build a decent Golf in Brazil? Or is there something endemic to their corporate culture that causes quality problems at non-German plants?”
And on a side note, (and getting back to the primary focus of this article), I do agree that location seems to be everything with a car’s personality, however washed out it might be. Why do the Wolfsburg built Golfs always seem to last longer than the Brazilian/Mexican built ones? They are the same company, but the endemic culture at the factory and the people building them seems to be different enough to where the goals from home office don’t seem to be translated or embraced.
VW in thier European-ness (and if you ask the British, the Germans don’t communicate with other cultures very well at all), don’t seem to disseminate thier plans to thier remote locations in a consistent manner. Thier Czech plants seem to do well (because of a similar culture), however thier South American ones don’t have that “germanic” quality, but they sure do build them with cheaply and quickly.
Toyota seems to do better, as they communicate better with thier remote locations. Toyotas built here seem to be everybit as reliable as the Japan-built ones.
Maybe its in how they instill thier Japanese culture in thier American holdings, and VW’s failure to do the same. Maybe its the inherent design, and Europeans maintain thier cars better. Maybe its magic. But whatever it is, location does seem to have a huge impact on most companies build quality and feel.
When a company begins to move production oversea it is mainly due to cost-cutting. Think about it, if VW is making Golfs in Mexico because they are too expensive to build in Germany it is a given that at the new location the VW will try to eliminate any of the building technics that they feel are “expensive”.
Perhaps the unionized workers in German are spending too much time installing parts correctly. The experinced workers know what to do and how to do it. They know the little nuances that will make or break a car, “dont turn that particular bolt more than 2 turns or it will cause an invisible crack in the in the nut”. Needless to say the worker in Mexico does not know these little facts nor are the German workers willing to share (they are losing Union jobs, right).
The catch is, does VW care?
As much as I loathe the ML and love the SL, you can buy 2 MLs for the price of 1 SL, so I’m not sure that any reasonable person would expect them to be of the same quality, regardless of country of origin
whatdoiknow, I think you nailed it. That’s VW’s problem right now. They don’t share/communicate how a VW should be built with thier over-seas counterparts, and for the longest time, I don’t think they cared either, as long as they sailed on in the North American market on thier “german” repuatation from the past, and somewhat given to them now by thier up-market bretheren. (a BMW is built in Germany, so there-fore the VW build quality should be just as good mentality).
I think they are starting to realize that VW buyers, i.e. ME, will move to a different company, no matter how much more fun to drive, or nice the interior is. I myself will move to Audi/Porsche, but the others in the US will more likely move to Nissan/Mazda, despite thier blandness (whether percieved or actual a matter of opinion).
I feel VW should teach thier overseas labor how to make a VW a VW, or move all manufacturing back to Europe. Otherwise, they are diluting what the brand stands for in the first place (more expensive, but more fun to drive and higher quality), and the brand identity remains the utmost in priority. Only Audi seems to have the most coherent brand identity (and Aston Martin), and for Audi and VW to be related, yet not on the same level of coherence seems to be disturbing.
whatdoiknow1,
Yes the decision to replace domestic production with foreign production is usually for cost cutting, but additional production doesn’t always mean cost cutting. Sometimes it allows you to rationalize the process with a blank slate. Such was the case at a former emplyer where an existing plant in Boston produced by far worse quality parts then the new plant in Mexico.
One thing that I’ve noticed about manufacturing in Mexico over the years is that the gender roles are very important. The women are responsible for steady employment and providing for the family. Among the men, turnover is staggering and workforces are not that stable. Light manufacturing is predominantly an all women work force, while the men are in the heavy industries. For electronic components, Mexico has been great. For cars, maybe not so good. You can draw your own conclusions.
LtSolo,
I’m willing to bet that VW has put forth the effort in teaching production techniques and providing technology but they have taken hold with the Brazilian work force. I’ve seen the exact same thing occur due to transient labor at a tractor plant. If you think of training your own staff or co-workers, it’s just very difficult to gain traction when they all turnover every 4 to 6 months. You should see all the incentives of subsidized housing, home loans that are forgiven if employed for X years, meals, etc that US companies dangle in latin america to keep the work force going.
From Andrew’s article it sounds like VW has begun to withdraw some production to protect the brand as you suggest.
I think that everyone’s points, including those for or against this character chaos, are doing a wonderful job of making the case all together. As Cpt. Tungsten touched on, this is largely dependent on balance, not only within one car’s entity but in the auto market as a whole.
If you’re arguing that Honda and Toyota got it right…you’re right. Their mundane sedans are simple transportation devices, yet at the same time can be optioned to be as amenity-stuffed as a Lexus. But as that straightforward “get me to work, get me to the kids’ game, and get me homer,” they’re trying to do what they were conceived to do. They come from a history of making sensible cars, (albeit more primitive in the past). No one said that evolution could only exist without initial passion.
You’re all uncovering the premise for branding: “we build sports cars”, “we build practical family vehicles”, “we build affordable German cars”. (And as all have demonstraighted there’s a demand for all segments.) There’s no sense in coming into any field or market with the exact same mission and philosophy as a preexisting company, and that’s what’s breaking down: the boundaries between the “appliances” and the inception.
Surprise, surprise, there are differences of interests between enthusiasts and non-enthusiasts. Whether it be age, gender, occupation or whatever demographic that creates the divide it doesn’t matter; both extremes will have their respected cars. However it doesn’t mean that either’s culture should be lost in rendering.
In my world is your world, and likewise; there is nothing that says the creature of humdrum automobiles, which are common-sensible and practical, and the earthly passions of a historic car company cannot co-exist. There are 60, (or so) mainstream car manufacturers in the world, why wouldn’t it?
Virtual Insanity :
December 17th, 2007 at 11:10 am
Katie makes an excellent point. Before I picked up my curent car, I was on the fence with an excellent condition, low miliage FD. I had the money in hand and was at the owners house when that little nagging voice known as common sense said “sure, its nice, and its what you want, but can it do what you want?” and I had to walk. I wanted that RX7 sooooo bad, but it couldn’t get me to and from work, haul my groceries, cart around friends who needed rides, etc. Maybe next time I see one that is in such good condition for low cost on the market I’ll grab one, but this time it was a no go.
Just do like me and get rid of the friends. ;-) Problem solved.
Is it really necessary for non-Japanese makes to chase after this aspect, to focus all their energies on building a more reliable Camry or Lexus?
In a word, yes. Why? Because the people demand it. If any of their vehicles have less than stellar reliability, they’re lambasted mercilessly for it. The Malibu and it’s transmission woes. The Mk V Golf/Jetta and reputation of past models hanging like a millstone around their neck. The list goes on.
Consider ‘quirkiness’ and ‘brand management’ a thing of the past, like carburetors, and the endangered manual transmission. These days, such an idea like brand management turns you into a one-trick pony that has limited applicability and even more limited appeal.
Welcome to the new world of Globalization.
Whatdoiknow1: On the otherhand I have watched the traditional domestics continuously flounder while they chased after “style”, personality, and flash.
Call Camrys and Accords boring appliances all you want but understand why so many Americans buy these things over Grand Prixs and Sebrings. People prefer to look boring rather than SILLY!
The problem with the American cars is that they don’t do a good job of chasing after style and personality, except in a few cases–the Corvette, the Camaro prototype, the first generation Saturn (I drove one the other night for the first time in several years, and remembered why I bought one in ’93), and arguably the Chrysler 300. The rest of the Americans have, for the most part, very superficial personality, or stupid personality (the Caliber–what the hell is that???!) over very appliance-like innards.
Regarding personality, I’m surprised at the failure to mention the French. From the Citroen DS-19s and Deux Cheveaux of 50 years ago to the modern Citroen Cactus, and the Renault Megane, there is personality galore. Of course, this trend towards appliance-dom has afflicted to the French, though to a much smaller degree than most of the rest of the world.
whatdoiknow1 :
While some of us may call Camrys and Accords appliances I do not believe the majority of owners feel the same way. I think that most people when confronted with a new Camry SE or Accord EX-L will say “nice car” as opposed to “what a boring appliance”. Outside of exeptionally sporty driving dynamics these cars do have 98% of the magic of a BMW 3 series.
He has a point. I have a ’99 Accord 4cyl with a clutch. I recently considered buying a 2002 325 that a neighbor was selling for a reasonable price. I drove it, and the engine was incredibly sweet. That was the biggest difference between that car and my accord, and I’m talking about how smooth the engine was, rather than how powerful. Yeah, it could blow the Honda away, but I’m not that into power, beyond a certain point. I do enjoy tossing my Honda around sharp curves, and in the end, I decided that the incremental marginal gain I would get in driving fun with the BWM was not worth the 11 grand I’d be out in order to own it. I still want a Boxster though.
I will say that as an Accord owner, I do look down on people who drive Camrys. And my best friend, one of those people, is slightly jealous of me. But his passion in life is astronomy, not cars, and that’s where his extra dough goes.
“Anyone sit in both a Mercedes ML and Mercedes S-Class? One’s built in USA, one’s built in Germany.”
True enough, but do the same exercise comparing an Ohio built Accord with a Japanese made one and you will have to search long and hard to spot any differences. These things mostly are due to management and only secondarily due to local culture where the thing is built.
That said, I much preferred the situation when many companies built cars which reflected a unique point of view. We have an old Volvo 240 as well as newer Acura and Honda models. Guess what, that old 240 is as interesting an entertaining to drive as anything we have. Sure you have to plan your acceleration runs carefully, but that is all part of the fun! After having owned several Volvos, in 2003 it was time for a new sedan. I test drove scores of vehicles (yes, including a number of ‘merican ones). In the end I couldn’t see any reason to pay $10k more for a new Volvo S60 than it cost for a fully loaded Accord EX-L w/navigation. The differences between the two vehicles were so minimal that I wonder how Volvo sells any S60s!
Now if Volvo had a robust rear wheel drive station wagon with a slick shifting 5 speed and 150hp under the hood I might have gone for the extra cash. But, when the Volvo is just another front wheel drive sedan with a too-small back seat there is very little reason to buy it. I couldn’t even bring myself to look in a BMW showroom because so many of the BMW drivers around here are obnoxious twits. Sure that is the wrong reason not to buy a car, but I am not alone. I seriously considered a Passat, but the horrible reliability problems VW was having at that time turned me off. Sometimes I wish I had lived with the problems and gone for that ’03 Passat because it certainly has more unique character than an Accord. Now, however, the latest Passat redesign managed to cheapen the interior and add gimmicks like an electric push button operated parking brake. Hmmm, I wonder how often that will need fixing! The prior generation Passats all had a clearly Germanic design aesthetic to them while the current one is a mish-mash of stuff from all over the place.
The manufacturers need to make products which are reliable AND have compelling character. Few are doing both.
I agree with Katie, and would only add this – today most of us have had an opportunity to drive a German, Swedish, French, Italian, American, Japanese ……car. In the past – at least here in flyover USA- see such exotic specimens was rare. Driving them was rarer still.
So, today I want a car with some Germanic taughtness, some Swedish safety, Japanese reliability, and an American ride.
whatdoiknow1 :
“While some of us may call Camrys and Accords appliances I do not believe the majority of owners feel the same way. I think that most people when confronted with a new Camry SE or Accord EX-L will say “nice car” as opposed to “what a boring appliance”. Outside of exeptionally sporty driving dynamics these cars do have 98% of the magic of a BMW 3 series.”
Likewise,apropos of the title of the article, humans share 98% of their DNA with apes.
there is one little, seemingly unimportant detail about japanese manufacturing. Guess what,japanese are running their asses off to protect their country from imigration. And they succeed. Population of Japan consists of 96% of japanese . And guess what , top -shelf products, whether TEAC, Fanuc, OR Lexus are never assembled off the mothership. Why Japanese are apprehensive about down spiraling quality in USA, but never in Japan?
If manufacturing goes where the cheap labour is, what the heck is Toyota and Honda doing in USA? Outsourcing automatically decreases expertize of the company. Imigration from countries that don`t have expertize in technologies , makes the due manufacturing country starving of innovation and quality standards.US doesn`t have their manufacturing spread worldwide because of cheaper labour or whatever. US manufacturing has died natural way of incompetetiveness. And just because Gm has bought a lot of brands doesn`t make them American brands. Is Bentley considered today german? As long as they use british engineered parts in those Bentleys above 51%, guess you can consider them pure brittons.
American car manufacturers are unable to fight globally, even locally, then in order to save statistics they buy shares of other companies faking their `participation in car manufacturing!.
There is nothing less american than an american car today, because they represent not only foreign engineered cars with barely-american designed tins on them. No wonder the only participation of Gm within Saturn engineeering is stacking a Japanese watch in the middle of Opel Astra hatch.I know, I know how desperate you are to have real American cars, not just vapourware. But unless you get up your asses and go to the drawing board, nothing will ever change!
TTAC is nothing compared to a humble man who takes a plunge into his garage to pursuit his dream of building a dream car to kick some butt to those obtrusive obiquitous japanese and german perfectionists.
P.S. -( I just opened up the Beltronics VectorFX2 accelerometer ,that was supposed to come from an NA based company. Gues what is inside there? Gentlemen, make your bets!)
“British cars were a pleasure to drive”
Balls
some british car were great: your jaguars and to a lesser exstent your Rover was ok and Bristols, when you could get your hands on one
but most were 80% cars, even at the time, hamstrung by costcutting, badge engineering,styling and/or mechanical ineptitude years past use by date, shoddy workmanship Etc. Think GM at its worst
Normally you could expect the brillant step forward to be balanced by 2 steps of stupidity backwards.
but a small percentage were crap ladies and gentlemen i give you the Austin bloody Princess,
http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/uploads/new/13958.jpg
the Austin Allegro ( the all agro – Short for aggravation)
http://www.austin-rover.co.uk/images/ado67story_02.jpg
You want to return the cars to their national identities? You want your country to be proud of the products she maketh, and not print in small letters somewhere in corner` built on japanese platform`? you have a choice. You have the man.
Walter from Toledo ( just someone, from middle of nowhere) for this case has said-
The reason we love(……..), is because this man loves his country more than he loves himself.
It finally dawned on me last night that “character” = “flaws,” only, it’s just enthusiast lingo for trying to downplay these flaws to non-enthusiast and nonpistonheads alike whou would find such flaws unacceptable in an automobile. Saab’s ignition key between the seats? An ergonomic flaw that will drive any non Saab person to madness at the absurdity of not having it in the dashboard or steering column. A Mazda rotary engine has character–until you realize that you have a 1.3 litre engine drinks oil and gas like a 350 on it’s last legs.
Manufacturers have begun to understand that, so when we complain about a Camry or Corolla with no character, it’s merely a backhanded compliment to Toyota that they’ve engineered a flaw-free vehicle that can be tolerated (even accepted) by the general population. It’s the new automotive world order.
Quasimondo: A Mazda rotary engine has character–until you realize that you have a 1.3 litre engine drinks oil and gas like a 350 on it’s last legs.
Yeah, but you have to admit, there is something fun about an oval, a few holes, and two very angry triangles.
“an oval, a few holes, and two very angry triangles.”
They all sound like euphemisms for a Lady’s…..you know what! Which makes the sentence “Yeah, but you have to admit, there is something fun about an oval, a few holes, and two very angry triangles” sound extremely obvious from a man’s point of view!
Sorry, I’m not normally this naughty! :O)
“an oval, a few holes, and two very angry triangles.”They all sound like euphemisms for a Lady’s…
Katie, have you hitting the romance novels again?
I suspect if you managed to coax the same amount of horsepower from a reciprocating 1.3 engine it would suck through oil & gas too.
Well, character can be built into some brands, but not all. Saab, Volvo, BMW, and a few other campanies have a type of character that can still be used. However, what is the ‘character’ of a chevy? Big, ill-handling sedan…they’ll just buy a camry. It is certainly possible to build character in this day, just look at the original scion xB. Granted you had to give up some safety, speed, etc, gut it was there. I think the problem is no one is willing to take a chance if they are not at the top.
Ya know Katie, until you brought it up, I never saw it like that, lol. Now it totally makes sense.
HEATHROI:
Mostly just the 13B-REWs. I’ve seen many a 3 and 4 rotor with a turbo or two (or in one case four) that was pushing out well over the 1400 mark at the crank. Of course, they were running on race gas (needed for that level of power), so I doub’t miliage was all that much of a concern.
I suspect if you managed to coax the same amount of horsepower from a reciprocating 1.3 engine it would suck through oil & gas too.
Oil, no. Gas, maybe. Rotaries burn oil by design, and even the naturally aspirated rotary engines with less than stellar horsepower numbers had poor fuel economy compared to piston engines of equivalent displacement.
In all fairness to the rotor motor, you can’t really take displacement into account. The 13B-REW, to continue our example, is called a 1.3L. However, if we are to compare it to a four stroke piston motor, and use a proper displacement formula to take into consideration the design of a rotory, its more like a 2.6L.
Great point and good article Andrew. It’s soooo nice to read well written, intelligent, opinion articles written by people that haven’t been brain washed into utter bland robotic politically correct ignorance… Which is why I read TTAC.
One of the neat things about buying old cars is that you’re buying an ‘authentic’ car.
A few Cliff Notes of recent purchases…
1987 Volvo 240 Wagon: Bought for $500. It was my third 240 wagon this year and as with the two others, it was absolutely perfect. The folks who bought it from me let me know this weekend that they spent ‘two and a half hours’ detailing it. It’s an absolute tank and yet, it feels surprisingly agile and safe on the road. Diligent maintenance and a good CD player is all that it truly needed to remain a well loved cult classic.
1992 Buick Roadmaster Estate Wagon: Bought for $1100 last Friday. It’s an absolutely beautiful highway riding car with rpm’s that hover only at around 1600 in crusing speed. The leather is still in great shape, the stereo system is awesome, and it has what can only described as a partial glass roof which helps give it a surprisingly open and airy feel. It was owned by a church in Tennessee. A perfect vehicle for long distance cruising or towing.
1995 Nissan 240SX: This one set me back a bit for $1900 but it has all the options that could be had for that time. Leather, Sunroof, ABS, Rear Wheel Drive, and a 4-banger that is simply a helluva lot of fun to drive. The only thing holding it back is the auto tranny (tuners always want a stick) which is fine with me because I’d rather sell it to someone who will take care of it for the long haul.
Most vehicles of contemporary times offer a lot less company specific DNA than in times past. The Ford Five Hundred to me should have been a Volvo 260, the 2003 Saab 9-3 that was on my driveway yesterday could have easily been a next gen Cadillac Catera, and the new Chrysler minivan seems to have virtually no lineage whatsoever to the prior generations. It could be sold as a GMC, a Saturn, or a Ford and I honestly wouldn’t have noticed any brand disconnect.
Talk to me about an Integra, a Crown Vic, or a 1st gen Passat TDI wagon and you’ll have my undivided attention. Tell me about a Freestyle, an Xd or a C-class and I probably will be thinking about the weather instead.
I said back in the 80s that Toyota and Honda will go down the tubes when building cars in the USA was just beginning to take off. 10 years later, it has happened to Toyota and now, I see it happening to Honda.
Now, I hear that UAW folks are getting mad because Toyota is slowly moving production back to Japan after their rep has been trashed when left in American hands…not factory line workers, I’m talking about product development, engineering standards, and quality standards. Americans just don’t get it when it comes to the small details that workers can’t be taught but rather imbred in them via their home culture. I wouldn’t shed a single tear for American workers, both white and blue collar if Toyota moved their production back to Japan…only a “good for them”. Who knows, Toyotas may gain a bit of sport for a change. After all, the sporty Honda Fit has just replaced the Toyota Corrola as the best selling car in Japan. The cachet of the good ol’ days would build brand rep, despite lowering profits.
Americans just don’t get it when it comes to the small details that workers can’t be taught but rather imbred in them via their home culture.
That is a reflection of direction from the top of their respective companies.
The upper management of European and Japanese based companies come from Technical and Engineering backgrounds. A math, science, and/or technology oriented way of thinking that is ingrained into the culture.
The upper management of U.S companies come from Marketing, Business and Finance backgrounds. The “How can we make things as cheaply as possible for maximum profit” philosophy eventually trickles down to the workers on the ground – and, unfortunately, it shows.