The auto industry's $50b bailout plan should, by all  accounts, be a fairly controversial issue. Detroit wants a re-do after chasing SUV profits off a cliff, but can't even guarantee that $50b will be enough. So why are industry pundits so unified in their support for the industry plan? To be fair, there is some opposition to the bailout plan among the chattering classes. Curiously it seems to be limited to John McCain, SUV-haters and everyone on Wall Street. Oh yeah, and TTAC. Meanwhile  every buff-book columnist and "car-guy" commentator worth his junket airfare is parroting the same two basic arguments. First: it's not a bailout. Second: America, Fuck Yeah.

The "it's not a bailout" meme began when Jalopnik's Ray Wert went on CNBC's Street Signs and argued that the proposed plan was "just" loan guarantees. As in "not exactly the same as Bear Stearns." Within days of Wert's Clintonian parsing, Danny Howess of the Detroit News penned a column titled "Big 3's $50b Plea Is No Bailout".

Howes even lets an unnamed "industry executive with intimate knowledge of the policy discussions" make the crux of his argument. "We're not saying give us money. We're saying give us a reasonable cost of capital to invest in the United States. This is not a bailout."

In reality, the distinctions between Bear's "emergency line of credit," and the low-interest loans that Detroit is requesting are largely academic. Detroit is joining Bear, Fanny and Freddie in requesting that American taxpayers invest in their future when Wall Street won't.

Wall Street makes decisions on dollars and cents, but Washington runs on emotion and spectacle. A day late and several credit-ratings short, Detroit and its apologists fled for the last refuge of the scoundrel: blind Patriotism.

For Angus MacKenzie of Motor Trend, propping-up Detroit is nothing short of a matter of national security. "Think about it," writes MacKenzie. "If you know how to make a car, you know how to make a lot of other stuff — everything from air-conditioners to aircraft carriers." Later he dedicates an entire paragraph to straight-out assertion that "Manufacturing — auto manufacturing — is a strategically important business." In short, Detroit must be sheltered from competition, whatever the cost.

And with that, MacKenzie weaves Detroit's woes into the fabric of American economic decline. Like the subprime mortgage crisis, the downfall of America's "manufacturing– auto manufacturing" sector was the result of an economic "imbalance" he argues. Besides encouraging a blind investment in auto builders, this narrative also conveniently absolves Motown's CEOs of all responsibility for their situation.

This isn't overly surprising, as MacKenzie tends to side with Detroit wherever possible. After all, when times are bad, ad budgets get cut first. When Detroit does well, Motor Trend does well. But there's a big difference from reading MT fawning over sub-par Detroit iron and reading MT suggesting that taxpayers hand over $50b to the sub-prime auto business. Especially when we're told that if "even one" of the once-big three make it, "it will have been worth the investment. For America's sake."

Peter DeLorenzo of Autoextremist notoriety isn't afraid to call Detroit's predicament like it is. But when he's done admitting that even $40b worth of bailout is "mind numbing" and undeserved, he can't help but cop out.

Like MacKenzie, the specter of a general malaise– this time as a cultural decline– takes center stage in DeLorenzo's analysis. "We cannot come to the table in this new global economy only as… a people who have completely lost the ability to create or manufacture things… because once we lose that, then the day we lose touch with the basic fabric of our nation won't be far behind. "

But clearly we haven't lost our ability to create or manufacture things. After all, auto factories in America build competitive products for profitable companies every day. They just happen to have names like Toyota, Honda and BMW.

It's easy to equate giving Detroit money with helping America, but what exactly are we trying to save? These three companies which have struggled to make competitive products or turn a profit for decades. A $70m lobby gorging on federal pork, from the $1b PNGV boondoggle to the ethanol lunacy. The Chrysler Sebring.

The American "automotive sector" has not failed. Nor have Americans forgotten how to make stuff. The Big 2.8's plight is the simple, inevitable result of tragic mismanagement. Using tax money to enable them, promoting this policy, is not patriotic. It's a complete betrayal of the principles of hard work and fair competition, and the necessary balance of risk and reward, that made this country great. 

One of the cornerstones of TTAC's existence is reminding the auto industry that "those who don't learn from the mistakes of the past are destined to repeat them."  As a corollary we can say that learning from history's successes forms part of the recipe for a flat-out victory in today's highly segmented, price sensitive market.  We have seen almost two decades since the boring sheetmetal of the Lexus LS400 hit our shores, forever changing the way we think about luxury cars. Fast forwarding along that school of thought brings us to the new, V8-powered, Hyundai Genesis 4.6.

As you might expect, with Toyota nipping on GM's heels sales-wise, the two companies' financial arms have also been neck-and-neck. Automotive News [sub] reports for the first half of 2008, though, Toyota Financial Services pulled ahead of GMAC as the biggest U.S. auto lender. Research done by AutoCount estimates TFS had a 6.35 percent share the lending market, while GMAC held 6.2 percent. With GMAC's cuts in leasing, they expect TFS to stay ahead for the rest of the year. In the first six months of this year, 58 percent of Toyota, Lexus and Scion vehicles sold in the U.S. were financed in-house. About 46 percent of GM vehicles in North America were financed by GMAC. Other captive finance companies in the top ten were: American Honda Finance at fourth overall with 4.95 percent of market share; Ford Credit at fifth with 4.77 percent; Chrysler Financial holds seventh place with 3.15 percent and Nissan Infiniti Financial is eighth with 1.87 percent market share. The other four spaces are held by various banks. Perhaps a more interest and relevant stat would be the total lost in over-estimated residuals and bad credit risks.  Anyone want to guess who'd be most likely to top that list?

The Forester XT is living, breathing proof that Subaru has lost its way.  The Toyota-fication of the brand has now reached its pinnacle in the redesigned Forester, and it stands tall (really, really tall) as the perfect example of how to alienate the hippies and hoons that bought Subaru after Subaru.  To put it succinctly, driving the new Forester XT is like answering the door expecting Ed McMahon with a check for a million dollars and finding your mother-in-law standing there instead.  At least the MIL eventually goes home.  The Forester XT just hangs around and keeps disappointing.

Hyundai's U.S. niche is just below the the Toyondissan's offerings. Nowhere is that role more valuable than in the burgeoning hybrid segment. Considering the forthcoming Honda hybrid is set to be priced several thousand dollars less than the industry-standard Toyota Prius, Hyundai's pressed to deliver the hybrid Sonata at an even lower price point. And so they have. Li-on-powered, no less. Reuters reports that Hyundai could release a lithium-ion hybrid version of its Sonata as early as (you guessed it) 2010. Unlike other li-ion hybrids set to launch in that most magical of automotive years, the Sonata will not be a plug-in model. With Korean hybrids deliveries beginning next year, any early-adopter glitches should be resolved before sales ramp up stateside. Meanwhile, liquid-petroleum-gas-hybrid versions of Hyundai's Avante hatchback are also set to go on sale soon in Korea, although its chances of coming stateside are almost nil. Similarly, Hyundai VP for Product Development John Krafcik rates the possibility that they'll sell their Indian-built i10 city car stateside as "very unlikely."

With Chrysler’s slide well underway, it’s only a matter of time before Honda becomes America’s fourth largest automaker (behind Toyota, GM and Ford). Honda will then hold the same rank stateside as it occupies in Japan– behind Toyota, Nissan, and Suzuki. While Honda’s relative success in its home territory may surprise some American industry watchers, the automaker’s contrasting strategy in the Japanese Domestic Market (JDM) reveals a hidden “secret” to their U.S. success.

The outlines of the Japanese car market are simple enough. Toyota OWNS the JDM, with a 50 percent market share (GM at its 1960 level). Many automakers have tried to go head-to-head with ToMoCo. Mazda tried; Ford had to take over to bail them out. Nissan has been chasing ToMoCo for over 50 years. It almost killed them. Honda was Japan’s number two at that point. But once Renault got Nissan back in shape, Honda faded back to third (and recently fourth).

It should be remembered that Honda is Japan’s new kid on the block. Taking the top slot at home simply doesn’t hold the same thrill for them as it does for their older rivals (the motorcycle market is another matter.) Considering what has happened to the challengers, it’s probably a sensible decision. 

At the moment, the total Japanese market accounts for 3.2m units a year, equivalent to around 20 percent of total U.S. production. Honda's share: somewhere between 500k and 1m. It’s the breadth of Honda’s JDM lineup that's the most interesting aspect of its home market. Honda sells three sizes of Minivan, Kei-cars with engines that would embarrass motorcycles, station wagons, sedans, compacts, crossovers, you name it. 

Honda Japan offers most of the models familiar to North American buyers, but often in strange configurations (e.g. all-wheel drive Odyssey minivans and Civic sedans and hatchbacks). Only the Pilot is notable by its absence; the boxier and cheaper (than the CR-V) three-row “Crossroad” serves in its stead. 

In stark contrast, the most interesting thing about Honda’s North American offerings is what the brand doesn’t offer. Compared to most of its competition, Honda is missing several sizes of vehicle. Other car companies moving the metal in The Land of the Free sell four sizes of car. Honda has three. Other makers have two kinds of two-row S/CUVs. Honda has one (in three varieties). Even little Mazda has three different mini-vans. Honda NA has one.

A glance at Honda’s oversea website shows that the Japanese automaker produces the vehicles it needs to match the competition, model-for-model. So why hasn’t Honda they brought reinforcements from the land of the horse chestnuts? The answer lies within Honda NA’s option lists.

As far as conventional options go, Honda follows the classic “Japanese import” option path. Every model has two or three basic trims that differ mostly in terms of cosmetic and “convenience” items (CD-changers, moon roofs, alloy wheels etc.). Electronic Stability Control (ESC) is standard across most of the range. Honda's only real “factory” options are satellite navigation and driven wheels (2WD/AWD for the S/CUVs). 

The CR-V, Honda’s perennially popular CUV slash wagon, is available in two-and-a-half trims, plus a pair of “niche-y” cousins. They all come with the same four-cylinder engine (Acura gets a turbo-charger) and two rows of seats. Almost all its rivals offer a V6 engine; several (including Toyota), and provide an optional third row. Despite this supposed deficit, the Honda CR-V has outsold the Toyota RAV-4 for a decade, and looks to be thriving in a bad market (sales on target for 200k).

Minivans? Same deal. Toyota will sell you an AWD mini-van, Honda NA doesn’t. And yet the Odyssey out-sells the Sienna.

This lack of choice is the "secret" key to Honda's success. And it's aimed– rightly– at Honda dealers, rather than the brand’s U.S. customers. By limiting options, Honda keeps it dealers focused on making volume sales, rather than gorging on limited editions. Keeping the models distinct also prevents new vehicles from eating the old. Witness what the Nissan Rogue is doing to the Murano.

Honda’s policy points up its strength (premium prices) and weakness (lack of capacity) in the NA market. Honda sells vehicles that use either 80 to 90 percent or 10 to 20 percent of their production line’s capacity. There is little “sharing.”  Filtering in additional models and variants would increase sales, but it would take a larger percentage of capacity (flexible manufacturing or no).

Honda’s is not the only formula for success in NA. BMW makes plenty of profits by selling dozens of variants of a handful of platforms, with expensive options aplenty. But then, the Bavarians play at a different price point. Selling generic (if loaded) vehicles works well in the American mass market. And no one seems quite as focused on that task as Honda, regardless of their market share here, or at home.

Starting with 2009 models, the California Air Resources Board will require all new vehicles sold in the Golden State to carry a sticker which shows a CARB-determined "Smog Score" and "Global Warming Score." The Toyota Open Road Blog's editor Jon Thompson is all excited over this "because our Prius Hybrid is listed by CARB as one of its top 10 cleanest cars" and "Camry and Camry Hybrid are right behind Prius with scores of 9, and Highlander Hybrid follows closely along with a score of 8." Funny thing, though, he doesn't mention where Land Cruiser, Sequoia, Tundra, Tacoma or any of their other large trucks fall in those ratings. And all he says about the Global Warming score is that it's "based in part on the vehicle's greenhouse gas emissions." The part he doesn't mention, according to the CARB EP Label Fact Sheet (click here to view): the greenhouse gases resulting from "fuel production." So when the Prius PHEV hits the market, will the score reflect the coal and other fuels burned to produce the electricity to recharge it? That could be an eye-opening addition to what Thompson terms the "growing amount of information that's available to help you make a studied automotive choice." So I put Thompson's closing question to our Best and Brightest: "Should this sort of labeling be adopted by all the states?"

First, this post dovetails nicely with the Ask the B&B question on homoerotic truck ads. I mean, if the testosterone-laden Torque.tv's announcer's tongue isn't firmly in his cheek, well… Anyway, the video also suggest a click on over to Paul Niedermeyer's excellent editorial on the coming showdown between the 2010 Prius and the 2010 Honda Hybrid. Personally, I find the producer's choice of cartoon clown xylophone background music a bit OTT. But I'm glad the torque team pointed out that a properly-flogged Prius can suck more unleaded than a 'Vette. It brings back fond memories of the time I tried to discover how much gas I could use in a Prius. I never got it below 17mpg. Guess I wasn't trying hard enough.

H2H Ep12, Honda Civic Hybrid Vs. Toyota Prius

We recently pitted the next gen Toyota Prius against the forthcoming Chevrolet Volt. The contest was theoretical, predicated on the arrival of the Volt in 2010 (and performing as advertised). Meanwhile, there’s no question about the reality (and viability) of Honda’s new hybrid sedan. It’s set to hit the showroom floor in April 2009, around the same time as the new Prius. While the Volt waits in the wings, the Toyota – Honda gas – electric rivalry will be an epic showdown.

Honda has stumbled around trying to find the right hybrid formula since 1999 when it introduced the gas – electric Insight. The ultra-light two-seater scored a record-breaking 70mpg on the [old] EPA highway test, but broke no sales records. The ensuing Accord hybrid was D.O.A. The follow-up Civic hybrid sells reasonably well, but it’s a wallflower compared to segment-buster Prius.

It looks like Honda’s finally found the right formula. Spy shots reveal a distinctly familiar shape: a combination of Prius flattery, Honda’s fuel-cell Clarity and the relentless pursuit of aerodynamics. Equally important, Richard Colliver, exec Veep of American Honda recently revealed that a base Honda hybrid will sticker at $18,500. If true, it will undercut its Toyota competitor by a healthy $3k.

Honda’s hybrid (“Hh”) is based on the Fit platform, stretched a few inches. Since the Fit already offers excellent space utilization, the Hh may give the Prius a run for the money in terms of interior volume. But what’s going on under the hood is more intriguing.

For now, Honda is stuck with its IMA (Integrated Motor Assist) “mild-hybrid” technology. The system essentially negates electric-only drive, except for 26 seconds every fifth Tuesday of the month. Further tweaks may increase that slightly, but forget about silently sneaking-up on unsuspecting blind pedestrians.

Honda’s trump card is rationalizing IMA production, bringing the hybrid premium of the system, batteries and all, down to about $1500 (as compared to a conventional drive-train). That makes the target $18.5k price look a bit less of a bargain, compared to a $14k Fit. What, a profitable hybrid right out of the starting gate (I’m looking at you, Volt)?

As usual, Honda achieves much with little. The technically-similar Civic hybrid’s 42mpg EPA combined rating is only eight percent less than the (current) Prius’ 46mpg. That wasn’t close enough to overcome the $22.6k Civic hybrid’s cloak of invisibility. But I’m guessing the lighter/more aerodynamic Fit-based hybrid will yield a (current) Prius-like 46 mpg EPA combined rating. Meanwhile, the new Prius will be deemed a flop if it’s combined rating doesn’t break the half-century mark.

Let’s put those numbers in perspective. Incremental efficiency gains at these sippy-cup levels become increasingly insignificant– unless gas prices really explode. At four-bucks a gallon, a 51mpg Prius saves $119/year (@14k miles). Even at six dollars, the annual fuel savings would be all of $180. It would take 25 (or 17) years to amortize the Prius’ higher price. You’d have to be a committed Peak-Oiler to justify the Prius’ premium on fuel savings.

So what will the latest Prius have going for it above the upstart Hh? It might still be a bit roomier, and have a smoother ride. But if four adults and their luggage can be comfortably accommodated in the Honda, that may be good enough for many hybrid intenders.

The Prius’ presumed higher EPA numbers might offer a smidgeon of green bragging rights, but the Honda’s shape has “hybrid” written all over it, so who cares? The Honda guarantees hyper-mileage and Green-creds, all at a lower price point.

What the Honda hybrid lacks is any viable upgrade/expansion into the plug-in future. Its IMA system is not socket friendly. Toyota will offer a Li-ion plug-in Prius to fleets in 2010, and to the public in 2011.

It would be a mistake to under-estimate the importance of plug-ability for the serious eco-road-warriors. For green halo seekers, nobody’s going to know whether your Prius is a plug-in or not, except for the port and attending badges. An aftermarket in fake plug-in ports (and badges) is as assured as the current market for fake Buick Lucerne portholes.

Is there a winner in this dual-mode duel? You bet: the consumer. Toyota’s plans to double Prius annual production to 480k, and Honda’s plans to sell 200k annually of its keenly-priced new entry, mean that street prices will be mean. Transaction prices of Priora historically have tracked gas prices. If the current pull-back in oil prices lasts into next year (my guess), expect to see the return of hybrid incentives, bigger than ever.

And then the real hybrid showdown begins, and history has a chance to repeat itself: GM’s latest Johnny-come-lately, technologically-ambitious, expensive/unprofitable, fully-fledged (one hopes) entry into the segment arrives (a.k.a. Volt). It will take on the well-established, low-cost, high-mileage competition from Japan– just like in the sixties, seventies, eighties, nineties, aughts…

Toyota put out a press release today, in the form of a Detroit News article, declaring their intention to conquer the globe's luxury car sales. In Europe, where Lexus is fighting uphill, sales have grown. And in Japan, where Lexus is also not-so-very-popular, sales have not. Nevertheless, the Toyota luxo brand is going to keep up the fight. And how are they going to accomplish this lofty goal of global domination? With Pebble Beach special editions, of course! For the first time EVER, Lexus will offer an LS600h L "with a Truffle Mica exterior paint combined with an exclusive two-tone Alabaster and Black leather trim interior with Dark Grey Bird's-eye maple wood trim." Sounds like a kitchen. Lexus is also doing a sixth annual Pebble Beach edition SC430 coupe. Having spent the day driving one yesterday, all I can say is that it needs a lot more than fancy paint. This coming year was supposed to be the end of the road for the SC430; Lexus was going to "replace" it with the LF-A sports car (don't ask – I know they are 100 percent different). But with the LF-A program being canceled or at least indefinitely paused, the SC430 may soldier on. The horror.

All car manufacturers would like you to believe they're turning their back on fleet sales. It simply doesn't pay to be known as a "pile 'em high and sell 'em cheap" automaker– even if that's exactly what you are. Hence manufacturers' quarterly reports that highlight models whose rental sales have fallen. I repeat, rental. Lest we forget, companies and government agencies are also significant bulk buyers. So, BS aside, who leads the pack in the fleet sales that all carmakers say they don't rely upon to drive up their numbers and keep the factories humming?

Surprise! Chrysler is the admiral of the fleet. Statistics for the first half of the year reveal that fleet sales make up 35.6 percent of their total 2008 sales. Of those, fully 75.1 percent went to the rental companies. Jeep's fleet sales are low, but if you look at the Dodge division, 39.4 percent of their production went to fleets, led by the lame duck Magnum (75.4 percent) and Avenger (65.5 percent). 

That's nothing compared to Chrysler Division, though. Just under half— 44.9 percent – of their '08 model year cars have gone to fleets, with 63.8 percent of PT Cruisers and 66.1 percent of Sebrings at the head of that line.

Ford claims decreased fleet sales is one of the main reasons their sales are down this year. Yet 32.7 percent of their ‘08 sales sailed with the fleets. As Crown Vic and Town Car sales are restricted to taxi and livery use, only 41.5% of Ford's fleet sales have been to rental companies. 

Breaking it down by division, the Crown Vic is the undisputed leader, with 94.2 percent of production serving fleet duty. Taurus and Taurus X are next, with 48.1 and 54.8 percent respectively, accounting for 34.1 percent of the nameplates' total sales. Bulk buyers scarfed 55.3 percent of Grand Marquis sales. And that helped drive 31.5 percent of Mercury's sales to the fleets. There is some good news for FoMoCo. Even with 59.9 percent of Town Car production sold for fleets, Lincoln's overall fleet share is only 23.4 percent of production

GM may have cut fleet sales, but over a quarter (26.4 percent) of their production found its way into fleets. Over half of those (57.8 percent) went to rental companies. Excluding models built specifically for commercial use, Chevy's Impala led the parade; 49.9 percent of total production sold to fleets. Trailblazer (39.6 percent) and Cobalt (38.7 percent) were next. Even though GM says the new Malibu is going great guns, 33 percent of the ‘08's went to fleets. Overall, 31.5 percent of Chevy's production ended-up in the fleets.

Pontiac is GM's hands-down fleet champion. Four out of every ten ‘08 Pontiacs ended up in the hands of fleet managers. They're loading the fleets with Grands Prix (64.6 percent of production), G6's (44.8 percent) and G5's (30.5 percent). The other GM divisions averaged less than 15 percent fleet sales.

Most of the imported nameplates also averaged below 15 percent total fleet sales. Kia led the imports, with 34.3 percent of U.S. cars going to fleets, the majority of which went to rental companies.  Sedona and Rondo are almost tied with 46.2 and 45.6 percent fleet sales respectively. 

Mitsubishi was the second most popular fleet queen amongst the import brands. A bit over one quarter (25.7 percent) of Mitsubishi's sales were to fleets, almost exclusively for rentals. The Galant the most popular (45.3 percent). Endeavor was a close second (42.6 percent). 

Mazda was close third, trailing Mitsu by 0.4 percent (25.3 percent). Like Mitsubishi, almost all of the fleet sales ended up in rental lots. The Mazda6 and Mazda5 were the most popular models, with 59.5 percent of 6's and 47.7 percent of 5's available for daily use at a nominal charge.

Hyundai used the fleet market to sell 23.9 percent of their vehicles, again with almost all going to rental companies. Forty percent of Sonatas and 25.3 percent of Azeras were fleetward bound. 

As for the other transplants, there were a few interesting data points– even if the manufactures didn't show anything surprising overall.

Toyota (who says they restrict sales to fleets) unloaded 25.6 percent of their Avalons in that manner, mostly to rental companies. Volvo found fleets to be a good dumping ground for S40 (48.9 percent) and S60 (45.5 percent). And although the overall sales numbers are low, 20.2 percent of Jag X-types joined them. 

There may be some real interesting results once July and August's figures are posted. For example, Nissan's inventory of Titans dropped from a 400+ day supply to just over 100 days in July. Toyota and other manufacturers have huge numbers of full-sized pickup trucks they also need to off-load, stat. Anyone fancy a Tundra for a company car?

For 33 years Jane Hoyt has been driving her baby blue 1975 VW Beetle. Is it love? Madness? A '70's thing? When I asked her about the appeal of her longtime automotive companion, it was none of the above. "It's a story of inertia. Really, it's a metaphor for my life. I always stay too long at the fair." That last word struck me as kinda funny. If a car ownership is a metaphorical "fair," can you get a lifetime of kicks from a four-wheeled Ferris Wheel? 

Yes, the Ferris Wheel. It's a nice, simple machine. Like the Model A, VW Beetle and 1960's Chevy Pickup. While reliability-crazed motorists tend to focus on things not going wrong, it's important to remember that simplicity means ease of repair, and that's the real key to longevity

Simply put, if a mechanic working on a vehicle can quickly figure out what fig-a-ma-jig needs to be replaced, the car in question can usually be repaired in matter of hours, rather than days or weeks. It's going to be easier for an aspiring lifer to tolerate the problems that come along. Because once you pass a certain point in a car's lifespan, come along they will. 

Thankfully (for you if not the manufacturer), that point of plenty of returns is stretching-out further and further. Six Sigma, lean production and a variety of manufacturing standards and practices that you've likely only heard in passing have enabled all carmakers to move towards incredible heights of build quality and mechanical robustness.

At the same time, there've been steady improvements on the repair front. For example, mechanics– be they shade-tree or franchised– now use an OBDII scanner and Alldata (the name says it all) to diagnose and repair vehicles. Identifying electrical problems has never been easier.

Well, at least post'95 or so. From the mid-90's back to time memoriam, each manufacturer had their own unique way of doing things. To wit: most pre-'96 Volvos had little plastic inserts that looked like a magic wand which went into little holes of a diagnosis system. Toyota's diagnostic system was completely different from GM's, and Honda had their own system. 

In fact, cars often had several unique "languages." A mid-1980's Jeep Cherokee may have been given a computer system from AMC, an engine from one of three automakers and a transmission from one of six completely different companies. Throw in a multitude of carburetors and a diagnosing system from a long-ago defunct AMC, and it's no wonder motorists longed for cars that never, ever broke.

It was an automotive Tower of Babel, that forced mechanics to specialize. Which kept both labor and parts prices high. So how come there are still "lifers" out there that stretch back to this pre-historic times? 

As I perused the web in search of lifer stories, I found that most of the cars were those made by companies that churned out the same powertrain for as long as possible. Mercedes and Volvo are the two mantle holders of many elderly lifers. Daimler offered very long model runs for the S, SL and E-Classes; the Swedes finished a 20-year run for the Volvo 200 series.

The thinking back then: if a car model made money and customers kept coming back for new ones, keep making the same thing. Only do it a little better every time. Improving the design, making the parts more durable and maintaining the language of diagnosis and repair kept more of these vehicles on the road past the average life expectancy of their rivals.

And then we have to consider the owner. Lifers tend to have what I call a 'blue jean' mentality when it comes to cars. That is, if the basic shape and design of the vehicle fits their needs, they just keep wearing it regardless of the current fashion. They realize that holes can always be sewn or patched, tastes change with time, and that in the end what really matters in most daily driving is that you're comfortable.

But they also don't "let things go"– as most owners do. If they sense a problem with the vehicle, they make sure it gets taken care of by someone who can be a good steward for that vehicle. That makes a huge difference in their overall happiness with that car. In the end, 'knowledge' and automotive excellence enable them to do what they want to do rather than what society, friends or the modern media encourages them to do.

So, if you're looking for a lifetime automotive companion, you're a lot better off now than at any time in the past. But the rules still apply: simple is best, mainstream is cheapest and regular maintenance is critical. With a bit of luck, you'll avoid the roller coaster of high monthly payments, rapid depreciation, repair and hassle. 

[The three best comments on this post (as chosen by the author)

will receive a free, topic-related CNN T-shirt]

Automotive News [AN, sub] brings news from the Traverse City auto-exec seminary. Only their headline news is not the real news. AN proclaims "Toyota exec says pickup market will recover." And indeed Robert Carter does just that, in a distinctly vague, Detroit-like way. "We are absolutely confident that the recovery will take place," the GM of ToMoCo USA says, confidently. "It's just arguable when." But the real money shot (or, in this case, not) arrives in Carter's set-up. Before pushing Pollyanna on stage, Carter said he "expects full-size pickup truck sales to total 1.45 million in 2008 — a significant drop from last year's sales of 2.14 million units." Significant is just a word (as is "word"). As for that eventual, arguably-timed pickup pickup, Carter's "not sure what will happen to what he calls the 'recreational user' of pickup trucks — the weekend warrior who uses his pickup to tow a boat or pickup a grill at Home Depot." Uh, if that "non-core" but still sizable demographic doesn't return, what kind of recovery is he talking about? Semi, demi or quasi? Make mine non-fat.  

If you live in Massachusetts, and you're among the roughly one in a million Americans that drives a hydrogen-powered car, you can refuel it without crossing state lines. The The Lowell Sun reports that PowerTap in Billerica, near Boston, is now open for biz, courtesy of Nuvera Fuel Cells. The hydrogen station opened just in time to replenish a parade of H-powered cars on a 13-day cross-country cavalcade from Portland, Maine to LA. The cross-country parade included a Honda Clarity, VW Tiguan, Toyota Fuel Cell Hybrid Vehicle, Nissan X-Trail, Merc S-Cell and BMW H7. Speaking to your intrepid reporter, the Director of Technology and Communications for the National Hydrogen Association revealed that these and other H-powered vehicles can fill-up at 62 stations nationwide (25 in California, 'natch). Serfass also proudly pointed out that the hydrogen provided by these stations is produced entirely via renewable energy or natural gas, although he doesn't know what percentage comes from which source.

Toyota's Senior VP for NA engineering and manufacturing is rooting for the D3. "Competition is good for us," Steve St. Angelo told The Detroit News. 'The customers are the big winners, because it makes all of us better." But there's more to Toyota's largesse than simple concern for consumer choice. "We share many of the same suppliers, so if one of our suppliers has difficulty with either Chrysler, GM or Ford, there's a good chance they are going to have difficulty for us." And because of this interconnectedness, Toyota is helping its American rivals however it can without breaking U.S. antitrust laws. "When any of our competitors want to come to our plants, we let them," says St. Angelo. "We really don't want anybody to go bankrupt." The ToMoCo honcho professes faith in the D3's current leadership. "If you really look at the leaders of the Detroit Three, they're some of the finest leaders that this business has ever had. I hope and I think that they'll come out of this. It would help our company. It would help America. It would help our suppliers. It would help everyone." Not to mention the fact that rooting for Detroit helps Toyota in its quest to morph from evil, America-destroying transplant to leader of the United States of Toyota (as examined by Automotive News [sub] columnist Edward Lapham).