The Detroit News' Daniel Howes reports that FoMoCo is following Chrysler's lead, hoping top Toyota talent can right their sinking ship. James D. Farley, group vice president of Toyota Motor Co.'s Lexus Division, is set to join The Blue Oval Boyz as their first head of global marketing and communications. Howes sings hosannas to Farley's new boss Alan Mulally, sees no downside to the deal and singularly fails to mention the astronomical pay packet involved. "That a rising Toyota star, the head of Lexus and a founder of its Scion youth brand would bolt the Japanese juggernaut for the struggling Blue Oval is a testament to Mulally's leadership, the strength of Ford's current lineup, the promise of its future products and the upside in it all." And once again we feel compelled to point out that Farley, like Chrysler's Jim Press, is the product of a consensus management system, rather than its originator. In other words, one wonders how he fares in the ass-kicking department. Watch this space, and all of Ford's advertising.

The American automotive market offers just three inline six (I6) engines. First and foremost: BMW's 3.0-liter unit. Devotees will find the propeller people's sublime I6 in the 328i and 528i, and in turbocharged form, in the 335i and 535i. Otherwise, there's GM's excellent 4.2-liter I6 found in the Trailblazer, Envoy and Saablazer 9-7x. And don’t forget Volvo’s new 3.2 and 3.0L I6 engines, used in the 2008 V70/XC70/S80/XC90 and the baby Land Rover. These sweet, smooth, silky engines are all that's left of a once-proud breed. The GM engine will probably die along with its host SUV in a few years, just as Jeep dropped its 4.0-liter inline six with the passing of the Wrangler. Mercedes ditched its straight six over a decade ago. Jaguar used to sell a six cylinder inline engine in the classical XJ6. And of course there were three outrageous examples from Toyota: the 4.5-liter straight six in the Land Cruiser and two different 3.0- liter six pots holstered by the Cressida, Supra, Lexus SC300 and IS300. Why has the I6 gone by the wayside? Lots of reasons. A V6 is a lot more compact, and most manufacturers use engines across their entire brand lineups. That means a modern V6 engine has to fit both transverse and longitudinal applications; Nissan, Toyota, GM, VW/Audi twist their V6s by 90 degrees. Hopefully the future will hold more I6 engines, if only because they tend to be so full of character, well balanced and smooth. Until then, you can pick up your own straight six on the cheap in a used Suzuki Verona (which even mounted it transversely).

[Click here for the technical differences between I6 and V6 engines]

Echoing a sentiment expressed by many TTAC readers, Advertising Age [sub] wonders if Jeep faces death by line extension. The mag suggests that Jeep's move from three models to seven in less than three years is ill-advised. Chrysler's excuse rationale: Jeep is the only of their three brands showing a sales increase; they need to capitalize on that momentum. And, lest we forget, most Americans don't drive off-road. As one Chrysler exec stated, "Now we have something for everybody." Consultant Gary Topolewski, formerly Jeep's top creative, says the brand is losing its toughness. He thinks the current "Have Fun Out There" ad campaign is too "cute" to jibe with Jeep's longtime image as the tough, go-anywhere vehicle. Jeep just doesn't seem to realize that once you lose an iconic image, you can never get it back. Just ask Cadillac.

There may be those amongst you who believe that Cadillac should offer an entry-level model below the CTS. There may even be readers who give the ailing brand a better-than-even chance of creating a car that can compete with one of the most highly evolved models on planet Earth (BMW's 3-Series). But there's another group of car folk who consider the introduction of a [more] affordable model for Cadillac a form of brand suicide (Catera anyone?). In this camp, count GM's main marketing maven and former Cadillac GM Mark LeNeve, and current Caddy GM Jim Taylor. On the pro-how-low-can-you-go side, stands GM Car Czar Bob Lutz (like a Colossus), whose delusions of grandeur aren't all that grand, apparently. Automotive News [sub] reports– surprise, surprise– Lutz wins. His argument? A baby Caddy will help the brand in overseas markets– even though the Saabillac (BLS) has been a dismal failure. So, in 2011, General Motors will launch its baby Caddy on a "modified" version of its forthcoming rear wheel-drive Alpha platform. Caddy Jr. will be built in GM's Lordstown, Ohio factory; the same assembly plant that currently produces, wait for it, the Pontiac G5 and Chevrolet Cobalt. 

If a jobbing journo discovers a glaring deficiency on a pre-production test car, they usually ask the automaker if they're gonna sort this shit out (I'm paraphrasing), mention the PR person's solemn oath and move on. If the car's been on the showroom floor for, oh, eight months, like, say, the Dodge Avenger, it's time for the excuses to stop– unless you're James Healey of USA Today. In that case, you let Chrysler answer each and every complaint. Healey: "Suspension: Lots of clunk-thunk and rumble delivered directly from the road outside to your ears inside as well as rippling through your hands on the steering wheel." Chrysler" "Shock absorber bushings were changed beginning with Sept. 27 production. Shock and strut tuning is to be changed beginning with Oct. 15 production. Dealers will perform the upgrades free for any customer whose vehicle has the suspension issues." Healey: "The four-speed automatic… shuddered, shook and stuttered trying to change gears, up or down, under light and moderate throttle." Chrysler: "The problem was fixed beginning with July production…. Dealers should update vehicles free for customers who complain." I'm not sure who should be more embarrassed by this "He said, they promised" exchange. And is that the sound of ripping paper I hear from disgruntled customers heading for their local dealer with clip in hand?

Chris Bangle isn't the only one in the auto industry who could use some sensitivity training. Adweek's Marketing y Medios reports that a Georgetown, Texas Ford Lincoln-Mercury dealership stepped in it big time. Mac Haik Ford Lincoln-Mercury emailed an ad to 1200 customers with the headline "Tired of Wet Backs?" The ad was a promotion for vehicles with air-conditioned seats. Geddit? Suffice it to say, the pun didn't go over too well with the area's Hispanic population. The dealership issued an apology for the incident and fired the general sales manager who produced the ad. Their general manager promises that no ads will go out until they've been reviewed by several managers, including himself. I guess he took the old Spanish saying "A palabras necias, oidos sordos" a bit too literally. 

Is Toyota trying to piss off the NRDC or prevent Michael Karesh at TrueDelta from expanding his exhaustively excellent vehicle spec data set to pickups? Anyway, Bloomberg reports ToMoCo's hoping to pick up even more pickup sales by offering the '08 Tundra in 44 different flavors. (Triskaidekaphobics note: that's 13 more versions than the '07 model offered.) Their main push: the work truck market. The Japanese automaker (by way of Texas) hopes that offering "Tundra Grade" (decontented) versions of the DoubleCab and CrewMax will help it carve a slice of the $23 – 28K full-size pickup pie, which accounts for 25 percent of the overall market. But you have to wonder if the lower-priced Tundra will eat into Tacoma territory. Meanwhile, Tundra sales are up 58 percent so far in 2007, getting them within striking range of their goal of a 60 percent increase this year.

American pistonheads, tree-huggers and pistonhead tree-huggers have been clamoring for Euro-diesels long before California passed regulations making them legally untenable. WardsAuto reports that The Boffins of Bavaria will add a urea-injection system to their 3.0-liter variable twin-turbo diesel and bring that bad boy stateside. In the Eurozone, Bimmer's six cylinder oil burner cranks-out 286 hp and stumps-up 427 lb-ft. of torque– which, it must be said, is one Hell of a lot of torque. (Satch Carlson, editor of Roundel, the official magazine of the BMW Car Club of America: "It feels and sounds something like a big-block Chevy when you put your foot down.") The not-smelly, non-clattering 3.0-liter inline six currently serves duty in BMW's European 335d, 535d and 635d models. There's no word on which US models will be blessed with the oil burner, or what they'll cost stateside. 

CARkeys reports that French automaker Citroen has taken the wraps off a “carbon drawing down” cash-back offer. Under the terms of “GO LO CO2,” UK motorists who purchase a new Citroen with a lower CO2 emissions rating than their current ride receive £500 discounts on Citroen’s C-series of mini cars and the Berlingo Multispace MPV, or £1000 cash back Xsara Picasso compact MPV. You might consider this a cynical ploy capitalizing on political correctness to move moribund metal, but we couldn’t possibly comment. Meanwhile, despite having the lowest CO2 average of any European automaker, The Wall Street Journal reports that PSA Peugeot-Citroëns registrations in France were virtually flat in September, up just .4% over the first nine months of the year.   

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (AAM) represents a strange agglomeration: BMW, Chrysler, Ford, General Motors, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Porsche, Toyota and Volkswagen. Getting all nine members to agree to any given PR plan must be Hell on Earth. And yet, as any Star Wars fan will tell you, you can't be a proper Alliance if you just hang around waiting for the Death Star to appear. For Death Star, read the federal government, which has emerged as the single most important force in the American auto industry. Anyway, someone at the AAM got their members to fund a new website called YourMileageMayVary.com. The site tells consumers all about the new EPA fuel economy stickers. It's a terrific little corner of cyberspace: concise, user-friendly and useful. There's nothing controversial here– other than the fact that the tax-payer funded EPA couldn't do it nearly as well. But it's definitely geared towards the intellectually challenged. In the Q & A bit: "How effect will the new labels have on the cost of a fill-up?" Answer: "These updated estimates are about updated information for American drivers, not worse fuel economy." Glad we got that straightened out.

Regular readers will know that we're big fans of painfully obvious press releases. Although it's been a while since a really stupid obvious PR shout-out has crossed our e-transom, it was worth the wait. Honestly, I can't do justice to this one. So, at the risk of seeming as lazy as a newspaper automotive supplement editor, here's the text: "Peanut butter and jelly, chips and salsa, vegetables and … oil changes? They really do have something in common — they both promote good health. Just like your mother told you to eat your vegetables so you could be strong and healthy, you have probably been told that you are supposed to change the oil in your car regularly, according to the guidelines in your car's owner's manual. Your driving habits, the climate you live in, and the conditions you drive in will determine whether you are on a regular or severe schedule. But like you may skip the broccoli and opt for fries instead, you may let your oil change slip, thinking it really doesn't make that big of a difference. But regular oil changes and maintenance can have a big impact on how long your car lasts… So the next time you're tempted to skip that oil change, remember the price you and your car may pay in the long run. As for skipping the vegetables … well, you know what mom said." Podcast with Steve Christie, Executive Director of the Automotive Oil Change Association below. 

J.D. Power and Associates has just released their 2007 Escaped Shopper Study (an APB has been issued). After surveying 31,355 new-vehicle buyers between May and July 2007, J.D.'s mob says that 80 percent of US new car buyers won't cross-shop an import (if they're domestically inclined) or a domestic (if they're a import inclined). That's bad news for The Big 2.8. But it gets worse. The 20 percent of buyers up for grabs "frequently decide against import brands for financial reasons, most often citing that the import didn't offer aggressive rebates or other incentives." In other words, Detroit's fire sales have caught up with them but good; they're high cost producers appealing to a price-focused audience. At the same time, the study says import buyers who reject a domestic model cite "perceived vehicle attribute deficiencies:" concerns for reliability, gas mileage or poor resale value. J.D.'s automotive retail research manager connects the dots. "To win back market share, domestics are faced with two alternatives," Kara Steslicki opines. "Either continue outspending imports on incentives, or find vehicle specific opportunities, such as styling or promoting a positive dealer experience, that can have an immediate impact on consumer perceptions of the brand." Not bloody likely then.

Now that Tesla's delayed the delivery of their $100k lithium-ion-powered Roadster for the third time, and lowered production expectations again, you'd think that the automotive media would begin to share TTAC's skepticism about this Silicon Valley venture. Not so. Perhaps that's because A) The media really want it to happen and B) Tesla's wrapped the delay in [increasingly familiar] hyperbole. In a letter to Tesla Club Members ($50k and you're in!), Tesla's freshly-minted CEO apologizes for the delay and resets customers' expectations. "While we expect to produce a limited number of production cars in the fourth quarter," Michael E. Marks writes. "I have set a production goal of shipping fifty cars in the first quarter of 2008, with an additional 600 cars in the 2008 model year." (In case you're not a lawyer, "expect" and "goal" are not legally binding terms.) And then the really good news: "Range: 245 miles on the EPA combined cycle, confirmed!" Confirmed by… Tesla! Although the company feels free to use the term "EPA" in their claims, nothing about the Roadster is government certfied. And there is still no independent confirmation of the Roadster's safety, range or recharge time. Yet the press continue to repeat Tesla's claims as if they were gospel. Rest assured, the Devil's Advocate will keep you posted.

Those finance guys trying to pressure you into buying an overpriced extended warranty with your new car are just the tip of the iceberg. PRNewswire brings information about a new (dis)service from Auto Service Agreement: "a new online product application that allows auto dealerships to sell an extended warranty to their customers after the car has been sold." That's right folks, even if you manage to escape the dealership without buying a needless warranty, they can now hound you by email to buy one. The service "will help auto dealerships offer service agreements to their customers, with no additional work on the dealers' part" and "without having to communicate directly with the buyer." It also "eliminates the middleman, saving their clients time and energy and offering users the convenience of buying auto warranties online." What's worse, "the new application can also be sold directly to consumers, banks, credit card companies, repair facilities, and online auto dealers such as eBay." You can run, but you can't hide!

Who'd a thunk a car insurance company would have the stones to challenge the value of tomorrow's ever-so-PC International Car Free Day? And get this: the company in question is ibuyeco, the "eco-friendly UK car insurance company" [Customers' premiums include a carbon offsetting fee donated to The CarbonNeutral Company for eco-friendly projects]. The insurer's survey of 1500 Brits reveals that the anti-car (or pro non-automotive) event is flying well beneath the radar of the average UK motorist. Only 12 percent were aware of International Car Free Day (although they jolly well will be if and when they face the resulting traffic jams). When told of the global initiative, 72 percent of respondents said they wouldn't even "consider" taking part. When the survey takers asked recalcitrant motorists why they wouldn't give up their cars, work, shopping and visiting family topped the list. Three quarters of all respondents said public transport was not a viable alternative to using the car, citing time implications, delays, cost and lack of convenience.  

[Interview with Jim Hawker of ibuyeco below.]