This week’s “Haggler” column in the Sunday New York Times was ripped from the pages of TTAC’s beloved Piston Slap series, with a Wendy Marek writing in to complain that

In July 2008, I made a huge mistake: I bought a Ford Explorer. It was a 2006 model with 40,000 miles, and it cost $17,000. At first I thought I got a great deal, but after a few weeks of driving, the radiator started leaking. Then the replacement radiator started leaking. Then the radiator that replaced the replacement started leaking. To date, six new radiators have been installed in this vehicle. Six.

After some research, The Haggler found that both carcomplaints.com and Consumer Reports showed a record of radiator problems in 2006 Explorers. Furthermore, Ford issued a TSB on 2006 Explorer radiators in 2009, which the automaker insists covers its liability. Since the Explorer in question is a used car, Ms Marek’s only real recourse would have been to file a breach of warranty claim, but the statue of limitations had already run out. Since so few protections exist for used-car buyers, one has to assume that the moral of the story is that buying used Explorers is a risky business… but is that the truth? Or is the outgoing Explorer a good value that’s getting a bum rap?

There seems to be an appetite debate about this issue, not just here at TTAC but in the industry as a whole. Just look the philosophical divide between the “One Ford” strategy and Volkswagen’s 2011 Jetta strategy. So instead of filling up the Jetta review comments with this debate, let’s have it out… right here, right now.

The Fiat brand returns to the US later this year, spearheaded by the Mexican-built 500 minicar and followed next year by Abarth and convertible versions of the A-segment hatchback. With some 200 Chrysler dealers in major urban centers preparing to add the Fiat brand to their portfolios, Automotive News [sub] reports that the brand hopes to reach at least 50k units and as many as 100k units by next year. For comparison, the MINI brand sold 45,293 units in the last 12 months (ending in June) and 48,562 in the previous 12 months.
(Read More…)

More to the point, is it better to acknowledge that regrets might be common among Chrysler buyers and address the problem with an ad like this one… or does this campaign feed the perception that it’s trying to address?

24/7 Wall Street seems to believe that Hyundai’s junior brand could go away in the next year and a half, as it named Kia to its “Ten Brands That Will Disappear in 2011” list. This despite the fact that Kia’s first-half sales were up 15 percent over the first half of 2009, and Kia’s rolling 12-month sales are over 22 percent higher than its performance in the previous 12 months. So, why does 24/7 Wall Street see Kia disappearing?

Kia Motors Corporation is one of the two car brands of Hyundai of South Korea. It has always been a marginal brand. Its stable mate, Hyundai USA, has a reputation for high quality cars like the Sonata and Genesis. Kia sells “low rent” cars and SUV nameplates like the Sorento and Rio. As GM and Ford have already discovered, it is expensive to maintain multiple brands and storied car names, including Pontiac, Saturn, and Mercury, are disappearing. Most Kia cars sell for $14,000 to $25,000. Hyundai has several cars in the same price range. Hyundai’s Sonata has quickly become one of the best-selling cars in America, and its Genesis flagship model competes with mid-sized BMWs and Mercedes. The parent company will take a page from several other global car companies and dump its weakest brand.

(Read More…)

What did the hippie say to the horse? Woooaahh. What the figurative hippie said to the car is an entirely more ambiguous matter…
(Read More…)

In this day and age, it’s nothing short of a minor miracle that giant multinationals still build cars that are as ridiculously potent and expensive as the LF-A. Especially giant multinationals which have made good headway in recent years with a green-friendly, Prius-powered image. The LFA is rare enough that few non-car-nuts know it exist, let alone associate it with their new ES350. It costs $375k a pop and Toyota still loses money on each one built. In fact, thus far, only this video (a promotional shoot by Lexus Europe at the 2010 Goodwood Festival Of Speed) comes close to properly explaining why this car was built (starting at around the 1:10 mark). In fact, I challenge anyone to come up with a more concise argument for the continued existence of hugely expensive, hugely fast cars.

Just yesterday, I noted in my write-up on Mazda’s June sales performance that

with a Nagare-saddled Mazda5 replacement waiting in the wings, Mazda isn’t even well positioned to defend the segment it helped define in the US market, just as GM finally starts taking it seriously

Well, today Mazda announced to Automotive News [sub] that it would be targeting 30k annual sales of the Mazda5’s “Nagare-saddled” replacement. Last year’s 18,488 units was the second-best sales year on record for the 5, as sales fell from 2008’s all-time high of 22,021. In short, Mazda’s compact CUV has always been at least 8k units away from its new Mazda5 sales goal. On the other hand, Mazda never properly marketed the 5, and both GM and Ford are moving into the segment with the GMC Granite and Ford C-Max. Will Detroit’s move into this otherwise-ignored segment (currently contested by only the 5 and the Kia Rondo) bring buyers in, or force already-marginalized players like Mazda out? The fate of the 5 seems to hang on the answer to that one question.

According to BusinessWeek‘s David Welch, GM’s New York market share has slipped below ten percent for the first time, prompting The General to consider a 5th Avenue GM “salon” showcasing the company’s products. Now, the arguments against the idea are too easy: spending government money on some of the world’s most expensive real estate isn’t great PR-wise. Besides, isn’t GM trying to emphasize the individuality of its brands, and break down the monolithic image of GM as the all-seeing, all-rebadging automaker? Wouldn’t a GM “salon” go against the alleged independence of, say, Cadillac? On the other hand, GM does finally have some good products, and can’t afford further erosion in market share in America’s affluent coastal cities. Would it really hurt to showcase them in a prominent setting? It’s a debate that’s surely racking the RenCen at the moment, so why not weigh in before a decision is made. Is this a plain bad idea? Should a variation of the idea move forward, possibly highlighting individual brands in a more targeted manner? Or does GM need a world-class flagship retail outlet in order to manifest itself as a world-class automaker?

Cars are rarely built for very long. This is, after all, the industry that invented the concept of planned obsolescence, and ever since GM surpassed Ford in the first half of the 20th Century cars have come and cars have gone. Of course there are a few exceptions. South Africa’s Citi Golf was a 25-year run of slowly-evolved Mk1 VW Golfs. And here’s news of another Volkswagen Methuselah: ChinaCarTimes reports that FAW will build the same Mk2 Jetta it’s been pumping out since 1991 until… 2015. If you could (given the hypothetical resources and market necessary for such a foolhardy venture) start with one car and slowly evolve it for 25 years, what would you start with and why? Are there any modern cars you could see being built for a 25 year run? Me, I’d do for the Lotus Elise what several small British companies did for that other great Lotus, the 7. Not because it would necessarily be easy, cheap or popular, but because it’s a vehicle that will likely never be replicated again, especially with Lotus now aiming for the Ferraris of the world. In 25 years, I’d be shocked if it had any real competition. Or if I ever got bored with it. What about you?

From Formula One to Nascar, racing series the world over are coming under pressure from automakers to make their action more relevant to the vehicles available on the market. Meanwhile, these same manufacturers are increasingly challenging each other to obvious marketing set-ups posing as races, the latest example of which is the laughable MINI vs Porsche challenge [above]. With cars becoming increasingly homogenized, racing and motorsport are some of the only ways for marketers to restore some of the automobile’s lost romance… but neither modern race series nor corporate challenges seem to resonate much with consumers. What (if anything) can make racing and performance prowess relevant in the post-Prius marketplace?

To be perfectly honest, I wrote about half a post on GM’s decision to give Detroit Tigers pitcher Armando Galarraga a new Corvette after he was robbed of a perfect game by a bad call, before deciding not to run it. Why? Well, the story is classic Detroit: Galarraga’s victimhood is exactly the image GM would like to associate itself with (remember, everything was going fine before the credit markets collapsed), and The General owed the Tigers anyway because of owner Mike Ilitch’s decision to not charge GM for ad space on the stadium’s fountain when it was in bankruptcy (Ilitch added free Ford and Chrysler ads in the interest of fairness). In short, there was plenty of room for some trademark TTAC cynicism… and yet I couldn’t quite bring myself to twist the knife.

(Read More…)

At this risk of stating the supremely obvious, we’re not enjoying a lighter-than-usual workload today in order to remember cars. The sacrifices of America’s warriors are the reason for remembrance today, as we reflect on the wrenching experiences that allow our flawed-but-wonderful experiment in democracy and capitalism to persist. But memory is a funny thing. Once you start looking back at through the jumbled scrapbook of past experience, unexpected artifacts come looming out of the fog.

My earliest memories of America at war, during Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, remain strong: the yellow ribbons sprouting up like weeds, the menacing strangeness of terms like “Scud Missile,” the wail of Israeli air raid sirens broadcast into my family’s bastion of suburban privilege. Still a young child at the time, these memories mark a growing awareness of the world around me, and yet the memories that feature most prominently in my mind from that period are the comfortingly familiar ones. The smell of pine trees baking in the hot sun at summer camp. The taste of blackberries. The creak of swing axles, and the bucolic brumm of a straight six as the old yellow Ford pickup made its sedate progress towards the dump. Straddling the Hurst shifter and leaning into the curves, goading Dad to make the poor thing backfire while my sister and I screamed in delight.

To this day, nothing in this world reminds me of that or any other period of my life the way sitting in “Old Yellow” does, inhaling the smells of gas and manure, and absorbing every squeak and grumble. It’s a rolling memory machine, a warp-speed express to a world where war was a foreign presence, an atavism of history intruding on our perfect future. Somewhere in everyone’s past there’s a time and place that we can remember only in innocence. If we’re truly lucky, there’s still a vehicle that can take us there. What’s yours?

With the autoblogosphere abuzz over Peter Cheney’s “unintended acceleration event,” Jill McIntosh has made a fascinating connection between one auto-journo’s son’s voyage of manual transmission discovery, and a former Ontario Attorney General’s killing of a cyclist back in September. Linking to a Toronto Star report on the trial of Michael Bryant, who killed cyclist Darcy Allan Shephard, McIntosh notes a strange similarity between that fatal incident and Cheney Junior’s garage door tango:

According to a statement read in court, reprinted in the Toronto Star today: Bryant hits the brakes. His vehicle stalls. Bryant tries to start his car, but it stalls again, lurching forward … Bryant tries to start the car again. He’s concentrating on the Saab’s sensitive clutch with his head down. He succeeds at restarting the engine and the Saab accelerates into Sheppard, who lands on the hood.

Obviously, two incidents do not a crisis make, but this is hardly the only evidence suggesting that manual gear-swapping is fast becoming a lost art. But do we really want to further stigmatize manual transmissions by mandating special licenses for manual-equipped cars, as McIntosh suggests?

(Read More…)