The Nissan name was first used in 1933, but the company's history goes back much further. Originally known as Kwaishinsha Motorcar Works, the company produced its first automobile, the DAT, in 1914. DAT later became Datsun (son of DAT) in 1931 and Datsuns went on to become the first mass-produced vehicles in Japan. Americans got their first look at the Datsun in 1958 - the 1200 Sedan. The Datsun 240Z was released as a 1970 model and it became the best selling sports car in the world, selling 500,000 units in less than 10 years.
While Ford and GM consider building their mid- and full-size cars on a single platform, Toyota and Nissan are already doing it. The Avalon has been based on the Camry platform since its inception and now Nissan is giving us an Altima-based Maxima. The key to pulling this trick off successfully is differentiating the resultant cars visually and dynamically, and preferably aiming them at different market segments. Did Nissan succeed at this mission, or did they just give us an Altimus Maximus?
Review: 2009 Nissan Maxima 3.5 SV, Take Two Car Review Rating
Toyota is the top automaker in the world and has grown to this point by using methods put into place by one lone individual crying in the American post-war industrial wilderness. His name was Deming, and his message was (paraphrasing) “make it right the first time and it’ll be less expensive, better for the customer and more profitable for the manufacturer.” He also laid out how best to continually improve. The Japanese took this message and ran with it, patiently decimating the competition over half a century.
Toyota supplanted GM as the world’s largest automaker—just as the world economy collapsed. Specifically, the US economy is tanked, kaput, flushed. For a long time to come. The Great Depression lasted from 1929-1942, after all; and that was when the nation was not trillions of dollars in debt (and adding $1.8 trillion more in 2009 debts alone).
Then, too, you have the Canadian and US governments tilting the playing field dramatically towards their domestic carmakers, by owning and supporting GM and Chrysler, as well as writing law and rebate language specifically for their benefits at the expense of free-market competitors. Toyota’s displeasure with the state of affairs recently surfaced when the Premier of Ontario aimed rebates at GM’s future hybrids—after Toyota have put thousands of new jobs into Ontario (while GM pulls jobs and sends them to China and Mexico).
In addition, multiple Chinese automakers stand ready to enter the US market with the tacit financial support of their government. How many US market “goods” are currently made in China that used to be made in Japan thirty years ago?
What if Toyota executives believe that the US economy is going to entirely collapse? Pulling out of a market temporarily is not unheard of, specifically for the on-again/off-again South American nations which have seen hyperinflation first hand over the past couple of decades.
Toyota as a company is, first of all, not used to losses. Where are their losses right now? Exclusively in North America. So says Toyota’s CEO in North America in the Detroit News. In plain English, Toyota says, “no level playing field, no profits, no prospect for profits; time to leave North America?”
I don’t just mean close down all of the plants and simply import cars. I mean, depart—as did Isuzu, Daewoo, Peugeot, Citroën, and many others.
Obviously, that’s an extreme scenario. If, in twenty or thirty years, the North American economy recovers sufficiently to again profitably export cars here, the company would no doubt wish to return under the guise of Daihatsu (50% owned by Toyota). A small remnant, Subaru, could stay if it is profitable in North America; Toyota just increased their ownership level of Fuji Heavy Industries (owner of the Subaru brand).
A Toyota withdrawal would be an enormous PR disaster for the current North American regime, in terms of showing a total lack of confidence in the US dollar, literally astronomical deficits and the NAFTA tied-economy (i.e. the lack of future economic health prospects for Canada and Mexico).
Backing off from the nuclear option, Toyota seems certain to pull the plug on NUMMI and close it down (having already been left to hold the bag by their “partner” GM), mothball the Mississippi factory indefinitely, consolidate production and use US plants for the US market, reduce hours of the workforce to match requirements, severely restrict the number and types of vehicle available to only the profitable and better selling lines, and massively lay off Ontario workers by curtailing exports to the USA.
The alternative (total pull-out) would be very damaging for the United States; therefore perhaps the US, Canadian and Ontario Governments should sit down with Toyota executives and have a frank conversation, starting with a great big “thank you” for first investing so much into North America, a second big “thank you” for investing so much into hybrid technology and finally by confirming that the playing field will be left level for everyone at the earliest possible timeframe.
Because if Toyota leaves North America, the only companies which would gain market share would be Honda, Hyundai/Kia, Nissan and Ford in that order (IMHO), as Toyota intenders would rarely, if ever, even consider GM or Chrysler products. Whether these companies could be profitable in North America even with Toyota out of the market is another matter entirely.
If the most profitable and efficient automaker cannot make a profit here, what of the lesser companies? Is North America a cesspit of money-loss for the automotive industry? The current regime believes they have forestalled a cataclysmic auto industry collapse. That market forces cannot overcome their magical thinking. History proves them entirely wrong.
An Automotive News [sub] piece on Toyota’s efforts to rethink its North American manufacturing strategy reveals Toyota NA President Yoshimi Inaba’s potential willingness to apply for US retooling loans. Though Inaba states that the Obama administration would not play a “material” role in Toyota’s return to profitability, he refused to rule out applying for Department of Energy retooling loans. Nissan has already secured $1.6b worth of the so-called “136 loans,” and is moving away from its current strategy of sourcing hybrid components from Toyota, according to Reuters. And whether it takes money from the government or not, Toyota is sounding the same PR notes as its recently-rescued competitors. “Our sense has been always that we listen to the market, we listen to customers, we listen to the dealer. That element is a little bit lost,” admits Inaba in the WSJ. Inaba also concedes that Ford is better positioned to exploit GM and Chrysler’s bankruptcy-bailouts, adding that “we certainly want a good chunk of it. As the dust settles down a little bit we would also like to go after any incremental volume.”
This is a moment too powerful to be taken lightly, too special to be considered ironically, too vital to examine with any pretense of journalistic impartiality. I am seated behind the wheel of an absolutely perfect, fully-loaded, brand-new Porsche GT2, unwinding the wheel at the exit of Nelson Ledges Road Course’s Carousel turn. Next to me, the car’s owner, entrepreneur and bon vivant David Kim, has planted himself squarely into the GT2’s fixed-back passenger-side bucket, rigid with anticipation. There is traffic ahead, several cars varying from Improved Touring racers to tuned-up street Hondas. It’s time to accelerate, so I press the right pedal into the carpet.
Bank Of America-Merrill Lynch have released their annual “Car Wars” report, and it predicts slumping sales for GM and Chrysler. GM’s market share of 22 percent last year is seen shrinking to a mere 15 percent, which is significantly lower than the 18 percent number that GM admits to. The real butt-clencher? Merrill Lynch based its calculations on a 14m unit SAAR, which is much higher than the 10m SAAR that we’ve been seeing through the first half of the year. Which means GM’s losses could be even worse if we don’t see a return to those sales numbers soon. Even at a 14m SAAR though, the three percent discrepancy between GM’s numbers and Merrill’s would amount to GM selling half a million fewer autos than expected. The report places blame on weakness in GM’s new-product pipeline for the projected drops. GM’s Tom Wilkinson fires back at the Freep, arguing “we understand that analysts get paid to try to predict the future… but that doesn’t necessarily mean they are going to be right.” Gosh, can’t anyone just trust GM?
Glenn sent us a link to this list on oddee.com. And the winners are:
10. AMC Gremlin – Wikipedia: “Gremlin is an English folkloric creature, commonly depicted as mischievous and mechanically oriented, with a specific interest in aircraft. Although their origin is found in myths among airmen, claiming that the gremlins were responsible for sabotaging aircraft, John W. Hazen states that ‘some people’ derive the name from the Old English word gremian, ‘to vex’. Since World War II, different fantastical creatures have been referred to as gremlins, bearing varying degrees of resemblance to the originals.” Such as . . . Howie Mandel. The AMC Gremlin wasn’t known as much for mechanical malfunctions as its questionable styling. That said the name didn’t stop 671,475 American and Canadian customers from buying one. Well, I assume it was one.
9. Dodge Swinger – Actually, it was the Dodge Dart Swinger. Which, I suppose, adds to the sexual connotations. But what’s wrong with that? Especially as the Swinger had the stones for the job. “The Swinger 340 was the lowest-priced high-performance Dodge in ’69, and the 340 4-bbl. V8 delivering 275 hp with Rallye Suspension, wide tread tires, and Firm Ride shocks certainly delivered performance bang for the buck,” legacydiecast.com reports. “The heavy-duty Rallye Suspension, Firm Ride shocks, and Red Line wide tread tires completed the package . . . Both the Swinger 340 and GTS proudly wore the distinctive ‘bumblebee stripes’ to claim their places of honor in the Dodge Scat Pack.” While Ella Fitzgerald fans would be happy with that term, I’m so sure how zoologists would take it.
8. Daihatsu Charade – For Americans, the name calls up images of a benefit to help pay for Cher’s cosmetic surgery. For Brits, it’s intellectual foreplay leading to a little late-night country house bed hopping. I take oddee’s point: “It’s not really a car, it’s just pretending!” But by 1977, most Americans were more familiar with the Talking Heads than . . . two words, first word, first two syllables, kill hat, stomp on hat, die hat! It could have been worse. Anyone remember the game Cootie? Kerplunk?
7. Honda Fitta – Yes, it’s true: “fitta” means “cunt” in Swedish and Norwegian. But Honda caught the mistake before launch and dropped the T&A for the U.S. market. Outside the U.S., Honda markets the car as the Jizz. I mean, Jazz. Under which the vocal technique scat falls. Spooky.
6. Opel Ascona – oddee says “ascona” means “female genitalia” in Northern Spain and parts of (I would have thought southern) Portugal. Is that an anatomical term, as opposed to, say, the aforementioned “cunt”? Online dictionaries aren’t much help here—an indication of electronic prurience rather than a gap in the hive’s collective knowledge. Perhaps the Best and Brightest would like to fill it—I mean us in.
5. Chevrolet Nova – Perhaps the most famous poorly named automobiles, meaning “doesn’t go” in Spanish. But oddee repeats a commonly held misconception: Chevy marketed the Nova as such in “Central and South America”. Not true. From ’62 to ’74, the model was called the “Chevy 400” in Agentina. Until it was rechristened the “Malibu.” During its last year of production, it was the “Opus 78.”
4. Buick LaCrosse – Also notorious, this time for meaning “masturbation” in Quebec. Yes, well, it’s a pretty obscure piece of slang. You don’t find tens of thousands of male and female lacrosse (small “c”) players sniggering about whackin’ off, despite the obvious, infantile possibilities presented by a lacrosse stick with an ascona-like shaped net. To my mind, the real problem here is that lacrosse was American Indian’s ritualized warfare (complete with dead players). With the Buick Wildcat confined to the scrapheap of history, and Maximum Bob talking about the brand as a soft-riding Lexus competitor, I’m not seeing the intersect between name and reality.
3. Nissan Moco – oddee tells us that “moco” is Spanish slang for booger (again, the e-dictionaries take a pass). As the Moco was marketed in Japan, it’s no biggie. I am, however, wondering what oddee’s opprobrium means for the lyrics to Lady Marmelade’s Voulez Vous Coucher Avec Moi. “Mocha chocalata ya ya?” Ew.
2. Mitsubishi Pajero – Wikipedia says the model was named after the “Leopardus pajeros, the Pampas Cat which inhabits the Patagonia plateau region in southern Argentina.” Yes, well, it’s the Spanish equivalent of LaCrosse. Again, the car was renamed for Spanish-speaking markets. In fact, “Thanks to their success, the Pajero, Montero and Shogun names were also applied to other, mechanically unrelated models, such as the Pajero Mini kei car, the Pajero Junior and Pajero iO/Pinin mini SUVs, and the Mitsubishi Pajero/Montero/Shogun Sport.”
1. Mazda LaPuta – oddee kind of messes this one up, by capitalizing the “p” (“LaPuta”). In fact, the vehicle was named after the flying island in Gulliver’s Travels, “a kingdom devoted to the arts of music and mathematics but utterly unable to use these for practical ends.” Not an auspicious name for car. And there’s no getting around this one: “puta” means whore in Spanish. Personally, I’m not so sure it’s an inappropriate name for a small Mazda. I called my Mazda GLC the english equivalent many times.
I’ve taken a lot of heat in these parts for predicting that Ford’s bankruptcy bound. Having watched GM and Chrysler’s long march to Chapter 11, the signs seem pretty obvious to me: lousy branding, excess nameplates, non-competitive models, a pegged BS meter and a proven inability to take in more money than they spend. Yes, there are differences; his name is Alan Mulally. But, as The Detroit Free Press finally reports, The Blue Oval Boyz are burning down the house. Or, to put it more politely, “Even if Ford Motor Co. reaches all of its targets by 2011, the Dearborn automaker’s growing debt load could end up weighing the company down.” As far as euphemisms go, that one just went.
A brand is a promise to a consumer. When a brand’s products fail to live up to the consumer’s expectations (i.e. the promise in THEIR mind), they are right never to trust it again. Why should a screwed customer give GM another chance? We’re not talking about sewing machines here. An automobile is the average consumer’s second most expensive purchase (after their house). They have every right—indeed an obligation to the people who depend on them—to err on the side of caution. To AVOID risking the money upon which their family relies. I repeat: if they’re satisfied with their current car company, they would do their family a disservice to put their money at risk.
On October 31, 2006, Orange County teen Nikki Catsouras had an argument with her father. When Mr. Catsouras left for work, his daughter “borrowed” his Porsche 911. Approaching a tollbooth, Catsouras rear-ended a Honda at 70 mph. The California Highway Patrol took photographs of the gruesome results, the photos were leaked and went viral. Catsouras sued the police for invasion of privacy. Lost in the shuffle: why was Miss Catsouras–a young, inexperienced driver— legally entitled to drive the Porsche?
The issue is pretty easy to understand: should young, inexperienced motorists be allowed to drive high-powered cars? Australia says no. This despite a 2006 study by the University of Western Australia (funded by red light camera income) that concluded that only three percent of young driver crashes involved vehicles with a high power-to-weight ratio. The state of Victoria, for example, has instituted a power-to-weight related graduated license program for young drivers. Since July 2007, a probationary driver can’t drive a car which has:
an engine of eight or more cylinders;
a turbocharged or supercharged engine;
an engine that has been modified to improve the vehicle’s performance; nor
one of the nominated high performance six cylinder vehicles which include BMW M and M3, Honda NSX, Nissan 350Z, Porsche (all models) and Mercedes Benz SLK350
As a sign, perhaps, of the laws arbitrary nature, there are exceptions to the rules:
diesel powered turbocharged or supercharged vehicles (without engine performance modifications);
nominated vehicles with low powered turbocharged or supercharged engines including Suzuki Cappucino 2D Cabriolet Turbo 3 cylinder 698cc, Daihatsu Copen L880 2D Convertible 4 cylinder 659cc;
all models of the Smart car produced by Mercedes Benz; and
vehicles driven as a part of the driver’s employment and at the request of the employer
So, how did we get here? Back in the infancy of automobiles the “driving high-powered cars fast” concept was simple—you didn’t. “You” meaning the average driver. Throughout most of the twentieth century, fast cars were a specialty item created by and for professional racers, gentlemen racers, and a small (if geographically diverse) cult of hot rodders. Sure, there were plenty of accidents in low-speed cars, and not much in the way of passive safety, but there was a clear delineation between average schmoes in their “normal” mainstream cars and pistonheads in “high performance exotica.”
Then 1964 happened. Before his love of white lines brought him down, high-flying GM executive John DeLorean decided to plunk a 389 cubic inch motor into a $2751 Pontiac Tempest ($296 option). Suddenly, the pimply-faced nerd pumping gas at the corner Texaco station could own a car with 325 horsepower. The muscle car era was born. Engine power increased, to the point where the Tempest (a.k.a. GTO) offered 360hp @ 5200 rpm, 424 lb·ft of torque @ 3600 rpm and a zero to sixty sprint of just over six seconds. Ford and Chrysler quickly adopted the Tempest template.
The muscle car era peaked in 1968, with the 383 hp (pre-emissions) Plymouth Roadrunner—the limbo bar set at an all time low for affordability. While it’s impossible to break out all the variables which led to a dramatic drop in highway fatalities as the muscle car ended, the association of teens, high-powered cars and death was enshrined in popular culture. Dead Man’s Curve anyone?
Fast forward to 2009. If you think technology has made things better, you may be right. Today’s SRT-8, SS and SHO models have safety built in. They offer better brakes and more predictable handling. But the accessibility is a double-edged sword. That Corvette Z06, for example, offers just enough handling to allow an average driver to drive 120 mph off an exit ramp—but not enough to stop him from trying it at 121.
Motorcyclists are the canary in the power-to-weight safety campaigners’ coal mine. It’s now generally recognized that novice bikers shouldn’t be allowed to sit atop machines that can accelerate from zero to 60 mph in three seconds and top-out at 135 mph even if they can afford the price of admission. The UK has the most extensive motorcycle graduated license program: three stages of empowerment based on the bike’s horsepower and speed potential.
What makes a car any different? When you can buy a 400 horsepower motor the size of a sewing machine and put it in a street Honda Civic it’s time to evaluate the guy behind the wheel. When Ford dealers hand the keys to a 500 hp Mustang to a twenty-something enthusiast with a basic down payment, it’s time to ask if he should have a license proving the basic ability to handle the horses.
This is the Henry Ford ‘average guy’ concept of affordable cars gone rogue. Skip the Darwinian argument. Stop it now because the kid that eats a mailbox on the 150 mph donorcycle that he bought with his paper route money might be the next Nobel-winning nerd. If a mandatory performance-driving course makes a difference for bikes, then this bit of nanny state-ism makes sense.
Needless to say, YSE (Your Shitty Economy) Car of the week suffered cataclysmic depreciation, thanks to General Motors. The General bought into the Swedish brand in 1989. After spending $600 million for a half-share, the General proceeded to nickel and dime the automaker to death, mostly through a non-process we know as badge-engineering. Now, if you head over to Saab’s US website, you’ll see something called the 9-5 SportCombi. To channel Mandarkian mirth, enter your zip code and start configuratoring the Aero version at . . . $42,790. All done? Now check out its predecessor, the 9-5 Aero Wagon. This example includes two out of three TTAC tokens required for automotive Valhalla: wagon, yes; stick, yes; diesel, no. This week’s YSE selection is a middle of the road, 47k mile 2005 Aero Wagon for $12,999.For Nissan Versa money, you can put what is probably the last true Saab in your garage, and enjoy some enthusiast driving while hauling around your favorite cargo. Just make sure you have one of them quirky Saab repair shops nearby.
As evolutionary as the changes to Toyota’s third-generation Prius may seem on the surface, beneath the familiar sheetmetal lurks enough new technology to justify over 1,000 new patents. The Wall Street Journal reports that through three generations of the Prius, Toyota has generated over 2,000 patents on hybrid technology, half stemming from the latest generation alone. Toyota’s hybrid patent filing nearly doubles the number filed by Honda, its closest hybrid competitor. And the WSJ casts this “thicket of patents” as Toyota tightening its stranglehold on the hybrid market.
Once upon a time, way back in 1959, a company called Datsun imported a funny-looking pickup truck with a small bed and tiny engine, giving birth to the compact pickup market in the U.S. After a slow start, the market grew, as did the competition. The 70’s brought onslaughts from Isuzu, Mazda, Mitsubishi, and even VW. After the dust settled, the small truck market in the U.S. belongs basically to the Toyota Tacoma, Ford Ranger, Chevy/GMC Colorado/Canyon (for now, anyway) and Nissan Forester—the direct descendant of the Datsun that started it all. Fifty years later, what hath Nissan wrought?
Review: 2009 Nissan Frontier 4×2 Crew Cab SE Car Review Rating
A 2008 Suzuki Forenza. After reading the owner reviews, it pained me to even think about buying the car. I found a 2008 S model on eBay for $6700 (incl. bogus fees). Only 7500 miles? What a deal! But for whom? Since this car was sub-par for a multitude of ‘too cheap for their own good’ owners, I deep-sixed it. That left on eBay a Kia Rio LX, a Chevy Aveo LT, a Ford Focus SE (with about 15k more miles), and the ringer: a 2008 Toyota Yaris. Prices/mileage were $7100/16k, $8000/21k, $8500/33k and, ahem, $10,700 with 12k. All automatics. All with power windows/locks. None with sunroofs or any other high end stuff. Just good solid A to B transportation with a lot of good owner feedback. On second thought, screw it. I don’t believe a tightwad would be happy with real world fuel economy in the mid-20s so I’m nixing the Aveo. Begone! As for the other three . . .
Chrysler press release: “Overall industry figures for June 2009 are projected to come in at an estimated 9.7 million SAAR. ”
Expected around 10 million . . . depending on who was doing the expecting.
Automotive News:
BMW Group –20.3 percent
Chrysler –41.9 percent
Daimler AG –26.4 percent
Ford Motor Co. –10.7 percent
General Motors –33.4 percent
Honda –29.5 percent
Hyundai Group not reported yet
Jaguar Land Rover not reported yet
Maserati –47.9 percent
Mazda not reported yet
Mitsubishi not reported yet
Nissan –23.1 percent
Porsche –66.0 percent Subaru +3.4 percent
Suzuki –78.0 percent
Toyota –31.9 percent
VW -21.3 percent
Other –23.7 percent
TOTAL –28.4 percent
First six months 4,177,830 units sold, –37.2 percent
What demographics will win in the recent “Cash for Clunkers” legislation? Well let’s take a gander. In the cars section, all but the last two primarily appeal to folks that are north of the double nickel. Traditional Caddies, laid back Lincolns. Throw in some nasty old British hardware, a couple of misguided pseudo-imports (LS and Aurora), and the guido enriched pre-’92 F-body and you have the whole fleet. Also those who are into old-school Benzes and Q45s should definitely qualify, along with pre-1990s full-sized Detroit metal. But apparently Consumer Reports forgot about them. Oh well. So enthusiasts should get a couple of nods. For trucks?
4/5 Stars 
Recent Comments