The die is cast. Robert Farago, the man who founded this site nearly a decade ago and nursed it into relevance and notoriety, has left the building. Those of us who remain behind take his burden onto our willing shoulders, dedicated to realizing his dream of a car blog that covers the most relevant industry news and delivers the most unflinchingly honest reviews, commentary and analysis. Though much has changed since TTAC’s founding, the need for the truth about cars has not diminished. The automotive media remains a haven for craven cowardice, mutual back-scratching and unquestioning obsequiousness, and our inviolable mission is to provide consumers and observers with perspectives that stand in stark contrast to the industry business-as-usual. Though no site can remain unchanged after the loss of such a prolific founder, Robert’s work over the past decade is the blueprint for our future. The truth must be told, and we’re forever grateful to Robert for showing us the way and, in the process, building up an outlet that is irrevocably dedicated to these ideals.

On a personal note, I’m humbled by the task of filling Robert’s prolific, principled and notorious shoes. I’m also eternally grateful to Robert for his faith in me over the past 18 months. Thanks to his trust, generosity and patience, I have the honor of replacing him in what may well be one of the best jobs in the world. Thanks to his high standards, tough criticism and brutal honesty, I feel capable of doing some justice to his vision. Thank you Robert, for creating this site, for mentoring me, and for making an indelible mark on the autoblogosphere. It’s been a true honor.

You know how terrorism experts talk about increased “internet chatter” as foretelling some kind of attack? On Monday, GM will release its post-C11 financial results which, thanks to dubious accounting, could very well mean nothing. Even so, I’m getting the feeling that there’s some bad news a brewin’, ’cause the MSM is kissing some major GM butt today. First, the Freep shows GM’s Chairman of the Board the love that dare not grant it an interview. Now the Times’ Bill Vlasic, late of the Detroit News, shows up with a piece that supposedly reveals the depth and breadth of GM’s much ballyhooed “cultural change.” Mea culpa comes in the form of “After bankruptcy, G.M. Struggles to Shed a Legacy of Bureaucracy.” While I’m a firm believer that cultural change starts at the top—such as, I dunno, firing the ancien regime that led to GM’s nationalization—I’m all ears, Bill. Where’s the evidence that la plus ca change, la plus ce n’est pas la même chose?

Read More >

In four day’s time, my byline will appear on this website for the last time. During the previous nine-and-a-half years, I’ve watched the mainstream automotive press slowly evolve from paid cheerleader to . . . nope that’s it. No progress there. Despite having written literally thousands of diatribes against the media’s willful ignorance on the auto industry, I’m still galled that people who call themselves professional journalists have such little moral fiber and testicular fortitude. Only more so, now that GM and Chrysler’s endless turnaround promises have been revealed as a combination of epic self-delusion, outright lying and near-as-dammit criminal conduct (e.g. we never got the bottom of that SEC accounting case). This morning’s Detroit Free Press continues the tradition. “GM Chairman Ed Whitacre clear he’s in driver’s seat” is the worst kind of non-journalism—the kind that enables the rape of the American taxpayer by a bunch of egocentric incompetents.

Read More >

While reading through some of our analysis of Chrysler’s five-year plan, you may have found yourself wondering “what did the Pentastar boyz do to convince you of their company’s viability plan besides flash PowerPoint slides at you for seven hours?” To fully comply with TTAC’s stringent disclosure standards, we present Chrysler’s material compensation for the seven hours that auto journalists most wish they had back.

Read More >

Gag. And sigh. I’d kinda hoped that New York Times would stay away from the FoMoCo-flavored Kool-Aid long enough to see the potential drawbacks to the automaker’s inflatable seat belt idea. Or at least provide a reasonably coherent and comprehensive argument for the overarching supposition that the brand’s dedication to passenger safety supersedes that of its rivals. But no. The original PR-release-based article in the Business section raises but one red flag: “Just 6 percent of respondents chose safety as their top priority.” And then the Freakonomics column—an endlessly self-aggrandizing advertisement masquerading as editorial—dumps a pound of sugar on the proceedings. “In SuperFreakonomics, we tell the story of how Robert Strange McNamara, an outsider at the Ford Motor Co., led the charge the put seat belts in automobiles at Ford. It was not a popular decision within the company nor with the public; pushing for a safety device in a car did a bit too good of a job of reminding people that cars could be quite unsafe. But McNamara got his way. Over time (a long time, it turned out), the seat belt won widespread adoption, saving roughly 250,000 lives in the U.S. alone since 1975 . . . Back in the day, Henry Ford II wasn’t crazy about McNamara’s seat-belt obsession. ‘McNamara is selling safety,’ he said, “but Chevrolet is selling cars.'” What does that tell you? The media’s hidden love affair with Ford continues apace.

And here’s how the Wall Street Journal wraps sensationalistic video in the mantle of investigative journalism. [Thanks to clutchcargo for the link.]

It’s not every day that our friends over at Autoblog rip someone, anyone, a new NSFW. In fact, have they ever done it? Well, now they have. “SEMA 2009 Worst of Show: This Car Stinks” tears into a modded Dodge Charger with scissor doors like nothing I’ve ever read on the Gray Lady of autoblogs. “The why and the how of this particular example of aftermarket hubris and wretched, mindless – and let’s not forget pointless – excess don’t really matter now, as the poor thing will spend the next 15 years quietly rotting in the side yard of some shop in Joliet, Illinois waiting to either shrug off this mortal coil or get turned into a fine LeMons car right around 2025 – whichever comes first.” Looks like Mr. Lieberman is channeling his inner TTAC. Oh wait; he cut his teeth on this very website. So, to thine own TTAC be true? Yes, BUT—who built the cat piss special? On this point, Mr. Lieberman and/or his editors are not-so-surprisingly silent. So I turn to our Best and Brightest to answer two simple questions. First, why is this car any worse than the other abominations cluttering the SEMA ho’ down? Second, who done done it?

Inside baseball alert. If you’re more interested in Metamucil than meta memes, this post’s not for you (I recommend any of the 1,345,483 website dedicated to bowel health). Otherwise, check out Alex Taylor III’s “Readers revolt over Ford.” Fortune‘s carmudgeon apologizes for the grievous sin of suggesting that Ford’s product quality may be middling. “As I should have explained more fully in the [previous] column, the 2010 rankings averaged reports from CR readers on all the cars in a given company’s lineup. Ford’s results were pulled down by the poor performance of the F-250 pickup truck and the troubled all-wheel-drive systems on Ford passenger cars.” And that information should be excluded because . . . ? “While my column was technically accurate, it didn’t pass the smell test with readers who thought I showed bias against American cars.” Question: what the hell is going on here?

Read More >

I read the Autoblog headline—“Make it stop: Bad landau tops“—and I just knew Alex Nunez was the man responsible. Mr. Nunez earned my eternal admiration with his Knight Rider live blogging posts. I certainly don’t agree with his assertion that some Landau tops are acceptable. The phrase “a bad Landau top” is about as redundant/repetitive as you/one can get/be. Still, I’m getting the feeling that Alex has finally found a blog genre worthy of his dry-as-a-vermouthaphobic-martini humor. Here’s a taste of his Question of the Day thang: “Show us, say, a mid-to-late ’70s Olds Cutlass or Lincoln Town Coupe gussied up accordingly from the factory, and we’re liable to nod in approval and make one of those, ‘Ehh, not bad at all!’ facial expressions in appreciation of the old barge. That said, most modern landau roof applications are dealer-installed, and commensurately disastrous and stupid . . . Will anything ever stop these people?” Alex’s request for more examples of lame Landaus finds favor with Autoblog’s unmoderated mob. My favorite response after the jump.

Read More >

In yesterday’s housekeeping post, more than a few readers took TTAC to task for writing flame bait, and then expecting readers not to flame the site, its authors or fellow commentators. A commentator compared us to a seedy bar that expects its patrons to behave like ladies and gentlemen. Compliments on the metaphor, mate, but there’s a reason why TTAC has a ‘tude. It’s the same reason I started this site some nine years ago: the mainstream automotive press are, in the main, craven toadies living in the pocket of the industry that they cover. As a trained journalist, I can see it in the questions my colleagues don’t ask. The obsequious way they timidly point out slight flaws in vehicles, marketing or executives—-and the scurry back to the party line, hoping not to get swatted by the objects of their non-ire for daring to point out that not everything is sunshine and roses, really. With me or without me, this site’s raison d’etre: tell the the no-holds-barred truth about cars. If TTAC’s boisterous or (yes) bombastic in its editorial content, please, look what we’re up against. I present to you Automotive News publisher and editorial director Keith Crain’s revelatory masterpiece: “Whatever Happened to Ethical Behavior” [sub].

Read More >

If we’re learning anything from the twists and turns leading into GM’s Cadillac V-Series Challenge, it’s that a good stunt is hard to stage these days [unless you have access to China’s rich reserves of stunt drivers, as shown above]. Jaguar’s US PR boss Stuart Schorr has informed us that his firm’s legal and safety advisers have put the kibosh on the XF-R’s planned entry into the event. Because Jaguar was previously the only manufacturer to enter the race, the pullout leaves TTAC, Jalopnik and the New York Times’ Lawrence Ullrich without an OEM-backed ride. As a result, the media challengers (as we’re being called) will go mano-a-mano with Bob Lutz in… a CTS-V. Which makes the event a bit more of “may the best man win” than “may the best car win,” but then that’s not exactly our problem, is it? [Don’t miss the literal Chinese fire drill at 1:56]

Read More >

Edmunds Editor-in-Chief Karl Brauer apparently shares our ambivalence about GM’s in-car nanny, Onstar. And not for paranoid reasons either. He explains:

See, I like to think of myself as relatively self-sufficient. Sure, I’ll ask for help but I have to really need it first. However, on a semi-regular basis, when I’m in an OnStar-equipped car I find myself unintentionally activating the system, which in turn causes tremendous guilt because I feel I’m bothering an OnStar employee who could be helping another driver, maybe even someone with a true emergency.

Read More >

Mickey Kaus and TheBigMoney’s Matthew DeBord joined in the recent kerfluffle over GM’s market share predictions, Kaus on the side of TTAC’s pessimism, and DeBord on the audacity of hope against hope side. DeBord grabs his spade and starts digging, and it only takes a paragraph before he strikes a vast reserve of bubbling… excuses.

declining market share has been a GM reality for decades—the company at one time had so much share that it really had nowhere to go but down or into anti-trust prosecution. The Old GM was so preoccupied with holding share that it neglected what was obviously more important, profits. New GM has a reasonable opportunity to take its smaller portfolio of brands, several relatively successful new products, and given a recovery in the truck market in 2010, book some profits ahead of an anticipated pre-midterm-elections IPO.

Still, there are plenty of critics who have it in for GM, notably The Truth About Cars, which has been heralding GM’s demise since gas was 30 cents a gallon and Sinatra was headlining the Sands. (And yet … GM lives! This has to be something like being Cuba, grimly eyeing the United States across that brief expanse of ocean, waiting decade after decade for the imperial giant to finally fall.)

So grab a Pina Colada and pull up a chaise lounge, comrades… the glorious revolution waits just behind the jump!
Read More >

The public plan is 19 percent and change. That is what everything is being based on

GM board member Steven Girsky repeats Fritz Henderson’s assumption that GM’s market share will be stable and predictable . Of course, if that’s the case, someone’s got some ‘splainin to do about the last 30 years. Luckily though, we’ve got some good news for Messrs Girsky and Henderson. According to Autoobserver:

Edmunds.com, the premier online resource for automotive information, has preliminarily forecast General Motors (GM) retail market share for October to rise to 22.4 percent from the third-quarter retail average of 19.1 percent

Wait, Edmunds’ forecast is based on unique pageviews for GM models at Edmunds.com? Never mind then. Let’s go instead to TTAC’s unique sales forecasting and analysis department and see  if GM will hit 22.4 percent market share in October. Forecasters? Shakes vigorously. What’s that? “Signs point to no?” Aw, too bad.

Yesterday’s New York Times published an article dissing Detroit in the Breakingviews.com bit of their Business Section. In a stunning if perhaps singular piece of journalism, the Gray Lady affirms TTAC’s nine-year rant record of castigating Chrysler, Ford and GM for refusing to remove their rose-colored glasses. In fact, Anthony Currie calls Motown’s mavens a bunch of deluded, delusional and/or deluding dunces—albeit in that gently chiding, hugely condescending, entirely arch way that typifies the Times. To wit: “It did not take long for Detroit’s carmakers to return to one of their favorite pastimes. As General Motors approaches 100 days since emerging from bankruptcy, each of the Big Three’s bosses has been indulging in painting rosy scenarios for their firms. But like pronouncements past, they’re a tad premature.” I used to play tennis with Tad Premature. Smashing fellow. A bit too cocky. Anywho, Currie starts his diatribe by taking Ford’s semi-canonized CEO to task for predicting a phantom sales revival for the end of 2009 (who saw that one not coming?). Followed by the usual FoMoCo fellating. Still, point taken. As for Chrysler and GM . . .

Read More >