The first time I saw Scott Burgess’s review of the Chrysler 200, I very nearly posted a screengrab of the headline to TTAC as a conversation-starter. Why? Because when a Detroit automaker re-launches a worked-over vehicle in a crucial segment and then hypes it with a Detroit-boosting Super Bowl ad, the local paper just doesn’t go and slam the car in question. In fact, it’s rare to ever see a negative review of a Detroit-made vehicle in either the Detroit News or its sister paper the Detroit Free Press. Ultimately I decided against pointing out the DetN’s slam, as one headline does not a story make… unless, of course, it does. Jalopnik.com reports that Burgess has resigned from the Detroit News, and that a number of his bon mots have been excised from the online version of his 200 review. Lines like “regrettably, the 200 is a dog,” as well as his conclusion that

It’s vastly improved, but that’s only because it was so horrendous before. Hopefully, this car is a placeholder until the real redesigned 200 arrives – eventually.

The only thing this 200 proves is that good enough is never going to be good enough.

The Detroit News hasn’t yet commented on the story, but Jalopnik’s investigation creates a pretty damning case against the paper [Ed: for all we knock ’em, we have to acknowledge El Jalop’s fine work here]. The DetN may have lost a huge amount of credibility by forcing out Burgess for daring to tell the truth, but this story will only help draw more awareness to the ugly reality that still defines too much of the automotive media. Painful incidents like this one will ultimately leave the automotive media more healthy for having forced writers to stand up for the truth.

Yes, Lotus certainly made a “splash” in 2010, but to say that the brand’s abrupt metamorphosis was universally applauded would be a severe overstatement. For one thing, the move away from Lotus’s light-weight, low-volume philosophy brought howls from the Chapmaniacs. For another, launching five cars at once may be good for publicity, but it’s not great for ones credibility. Especially when your CEO is something of a supercilious jerk, and even your “advisor” only gives you 60-40 odds. And now that Mama Proton is starting to take a hit as Lotus builds up to reinvent the luxury sportscar (complete with its own engines), you have to imagine that at least a few of the Malaysian money men are wondering if they bit off more than their former Ferrari exec CEO can chew. But at this point there’s nothing to do but burn cash, build cars and hope Porsche and Ferrari fall off a cliff.

Wondering why CR picked the cars it did for its recent “Top Picks”? Are you curious where it got reliability data for brand new cars like the new Elantra? Do you wonder how a “classic” like the Avalanche won top pick for trucks? Get the truth from the horses mouth, by checking out CR’s VYou page, where you can submit your burning questions and receive video responses. Accountability, here we come!

“Kyo no asa nikkei wo yomimashitaka?” – did you read this morning’s Nikkei?

Today, this is the most uttered sentence in the Japanese auto industry. Under the headline “fast action needed to revamp carmakers”, Japan’s leading business daily rips its own carmakers several new orifices. The editorial doesn’t mince words:

“Japanese automakers lack the momentum of their South Korean and German rivals and may find themselves losing out big on the global stage unless they rethink their strategies.”

As far as the Nikkei is concerned, Japanese carmakers messed up big-time. Let’s start where it counts, at the bottom line: (Read More…)

TTAC’s march towards media domination continues, as Bertel Schmitt’s excellent piece on Toyota’s factory of the future has been picked up for syndication by Fortune Magazine online. Read it here, read it there… just read it!

EVO Magazine’s Chris Harris was recently taken to task here at TTAC for daring to diss the Mazda MX-5, a move that had many of our readers bemoaning the out-of-touchness that seems to come with access to the world’s fastest, hottest cars. Now, however, Harris is lashing out the ultimate sacred cow of the performance car world: Ferrari. In a lengthy rant over at Jalopnik, hotshoe Harris lays into Ferrari’s “bullshit-control-edifice,” revealing that Maranello custom-tunes its cars for track tests, fitted non-stock rubber for a 430 Scuderia dyno test, and “turn[s] up at any of the big European magazines’ end-of-year-shindig-tests with two cars. One for straight line work, the other for handling exercises.” Ferrari even prevents its “approved” journalists from borrowing private Ferraris. And, concludes Harris,

The control freakery is getting worse: for the FF launch in March journalists have to say which outlets they are writing it for and those have to be approved by Maranello. Honestly, we’re perilously close to having the words and verdicts vetted by the Ferrari press office before they’re released, which of course has always been the way in some markets.

Should I give a shit about this stuff? Probably not. It’s not like it’s a life-and-death situation; supercars are pretty unserious tackle. But the best thing about car nuts is that they let you drive their cars, and Ferrari has absolutely no chance stopping people like me driving what they want to drive. Of course their attempts to stop me makes it an even better sport and merely hardens my resolve, but the sad thing is its cars are so good it doesn’t need all this shite. I’ll repeat that for the benefit of any vestige of a chance I might have of ever driving a Ferrari press car ever again (which is virtually none). “Its cars are so good it doesn’t need this shite.”

Obviously, this is exactly the kind of media manipulation that has been tolerated by the motoring press for too long. And, based on the fact that a number of online reviews of the new Mclaren MP4-12C have been written without attribution, the pressure put on testers of high-po metal comes from more than just Ferrari. Kudos to Harris for calling out the spin, and here’s hoping these poor practices continue to be brought to light.

One of TTAC’s headlines yesterday asked a provocative question: Does Speed Save? The question came from a “study” by High Road Automotive Research, which posited a common-sense thesis: higher speeds inspire higher reaction times, theoretically keeping drivers safer. The unique approach to the relationship between speed and safety is what caught our eye… but what we should have been looking at were the numerous clues hidden in the report that show the whole thing was a big joke. The Sydney Morning Herald reports High Road isn’t an actual group, and that

The paper – penned by a bogus research team including authors Jeremy James, Clark Hammond and Richard Mayson – suggests that encouraging speeding on our roads makes for better drivers.

Going back through the report is more than a little embarrassing. The report acknowledges the support of researchers with names like

Mr. Brian Vitara, Mr. Gary Benz, Mr. Garuda Matraman, Mr. Grant Dodge, Mr. Gary Alpha  and Professor James Romeo

Oy vey. Our apologies to our readers for presenting the “report” as at all legitimate (at least we weren’t the only ones), and raspberries to the jokesters behind High Road (Top Gear Australia denies involvement). Thanks to commenter Kiwi_Mark_In_Aussie for bringing the spoof to our attention.

[Ed: With today’s news of NHTSA’s investigation results, we thought we’d look back at TTAC’s coverage of the Toyota Unintended Acceleration scandal.]

The Toyota Unintended Acceleration Scandal of 2010 was a curious beastie of a media phenomenon. Shortly after I started writing for TTAC, NHTSA opened an investigation into Toyota Tacomas because, as the Center for Auto Safety’s Clarence Ditlow put it,

If there were truly human error, there would be a proportional distribution across models. It’s very difficult to explain how some makes and models have higher numbers of complaints than others absent some flaw in the vehicle.

Fresh as I was to writing about the world of cars, I was sure I had the story dead to rights. I had seen this movie before, when my father told me his epic Parnelli Jones Unintended Acceleration story. Dad had even killed the the family pickup’s engine at a traffic light to prove it… and I knew how bad the brakes in the old Ford were (but that’s another story). Absent a better explanation than mere statistical likelihood, I knew there was only one cause for this problem. With a level of confidence that seems totally at odds with subsequent events, I concluded by suggesting that

the Detroit Free Press and Motor Trend blog, are trying to resuscitate the [Audi 5000] media frenzy, only this time Toyota’s to blame for people mistaking the accelerator for their brake pedal… If a TTAC reader out there has a Tacoma, perhaps they would do us the honor of standing on the brakes while mashing the accelerator for a few seconds. This should prove fairly simply that “unintended acceleration” is possible only when you are not actually on the brakes.

It was that simple… wasn’t it?

(Read More…)

Chrysler’s Super Bowl ad starring the city of Detroit and its new 200 sedan may have captured the imagination of American industry-watchers, but its timing was highly inauspicious. As the ad was launched, Chrysler was being thrust into a kind of transnational custody battle between US taxpayers and the Italian government, a battle that underscores the ambiguous benefits of national bailouts of multinational companies. At the same time, Chrysler workers have once again made news by getting caught partaking in controlled substances during a lunch break, an awkward representation of the culture of the city that Chrysler is so desperate to re-inspire faith in. And even outside of the controversies swirling around America’s most challenged domestic automaker, there are signs that the phenomenon that can be termed “automotive nationalism” is outliving its usefulness. Chrysler may argue that “what we make makes us,” but appeals to the national or regional character of a car are not simply misleading… they’re downright dangerous.
(Read More…)

So, what really happened when two of the three hydrogen fuel-cell cars on Mercedes’s F-Cell World Tour ran out of fuel on an early leg? Previously we’d only heard the German perspective on events (not to mention Daimler’s non-telling of the story in the video above), but now TTAC Alum Jonny Lieberman has posted his extended take on the trip over at Motor Trend. Yes, you’ll have to give MT ten page-clicks to read the whole thing, but Lieberman goes into far more detail than any account of the mini PR fiasco yet published. Do give it a look.

As the world’s first commercially-available (ish) plug-in hybrid, the BYD F3DM is one of the few modern cars that can legitimately claim a piece of automotive history. In full knowledge of this fact, a younger, more innocent version of myself once sent a number of emails to every possible BYD PR contact I could find, in hopes of securing an early review of the car that ushered in the plug-in automotive age. Needless to say, I never heard back from BYD… but I expected that. What I didn’t expect is that, years later, I still wouldn’t be able to find a real in-depth review of this mysterious yet potentially groundbreaking vehicle. Apparently BYD is either extremely cautious about letting writers experience its vehicles outside of convention hall laps and round-the-block drives… or the automotive media has a very poor sense of history. Or, as is most likely the case, both.

Either way, this strange state of affairs just got stranger: thanks to plugincars.com, we now have the first report of the F3DM’s performance on American roads… from an LA Public Housing Authority inspector. Yes, really.

(Read More…)

It probably won’t come as too huge of a surprise to many of TTAC’s regular readers that the first car blog I ever read was Pete DeLorenzo’s Autoextremist.com. This was years ago, years before I ever imagined that I would get pulled into the crazy world of the auto industry, and at the time I was deeply impressed. Here was a guy who, having seen the Detroit machine from the inside, was documenting the self-destruction of an industry with an unmistakable bravado and flair for storytelling. In retrospect, it’s strange to realize that my tastes for automotive coverage were well-defined before I ever considered entering the profession.

In any case, writers are forever challenged when the stories they grow to love take a turn for the unexpected, and DeLorenzo seemingly abandoned his caustic style by the time the auto bailout hit. But cheerleading never quite sounded right coming from the man peddling “bare-knuckled, unvarnished, high-octane truth,” and TTAC took the Autoextremist to task for some of his more brazen pom-pomery during the fevered bailout debates. Still, when the bailout-era wagon-circling was over, DeLorenzo could no longer contain the angry spark that once inspired TTAC’s founder to offer to post Autoextremist rants on this very site. And after warming back up over the past year by using Ed Whitacre as his rhetorical punching bag, I’m pleased to say the Autoextremist is back to his bombastic pre-bailout form. His inspiration: the leadership (or lack thereof) of GM’s latest CEO, “Lt. Dan” Akerson…

(Read More…)

PBS Newshour looked at GM’s future, focusing on the Chevy Volt. TTAC editor Ed Niedermeyer was a featured guest. If you want to skip to Ed’s appearances, they’re at 4:19, 5:43, and 9:08 (Or, in the clip embedded above). Transcript below the jump.

I wonder if I’m the only person that found this ironic. Actually, I wonder if anyone at PBS Newshour even knows who Alfred P. Sloan was.

The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation provided funding for this project

(Read More…)

I will be appearing on the PBS Newshour’s report from the North American International Auto Show tomorrow evening (check local listings for times). The interview took place late last Monday, after some 11 hours of press conference goodness, so the end results will be a surprise even to me! I do seem to recall questions about the revival of the American auto industry and the Chevy’ Volt’s price-volume dilemma… but we’ll all have to tune in to find out exactly what I said.