Weekly Top 3: Signs Of Life From Detroit
I'm not a fan of the way the GM and Chrysler bankruptcies went down. The case of GM is particularly vexing: billions of taxpayer dollars later, we've still got members of the old guard calling the shots. Maybe we should have saved our money and let 'em go bankrupt the hard way, eh?
Nonetheless, there are some signs that Detroit is finally getting it. Well, GM and Ford, at any rate; the most notable news out of Chrysler lately has been the removal of the hood strakes from the 2010 Sebring, a godsend for car-renting aesthetes across the country. Seriously, though, GM and Ford have been making moves. Here's three encouraging signs of life.
3. GM's 60-Day Money-Back Guarantee.
This one's bound to draw flack from naysayers, but I'm a believer. Hyundai did something very much like this with its introduction of the 10 year/100,000-mile factory warranty, and not only did it expedite the company's rise to respectability, but other automakers also followed suit. GM finds itself in a very Hyundai-like position these days: its brand image has been tarnished by years of mediocrity, so it needs to be innovative and wow consumers with its confidence and initiative. Thumbs up for this initial step in that direction.
2. Practically Ford's Whole Dang Lineup.
Hey, these guys mean business, and they've got the critical acclaim to prove it. A Fusion Sport absolutely trounced the competition in our recent family sedan shootout, we can't get enough of the Flex, and the revamped Mustang GT looks great and has been winning plaudits left and right from drivers who appreciate its just-right size, sounds and maneuverability. With the European-spec Fiesta and Focus due to arrive next year, Ford will have pole position in the premium compact car market, too. All in all, a stunning turnaround for a company that appeared moribund at the turn of the millennium -- and a shining example for its Detroit brethren to follow.
1. The Chevrolet Camaro.
Hopefully the fact that this thing is selling like hotcakes won't be lost on the bean-counters at GM. Hey, look what happens when you build a car with passion -- people flock to it, even in a recessionary climate. The Camaro looks like a concept car and drives like a world-class performance coupe, and lo and behold, America's in love. That's a lesson in regaining respectability right there.
Josh Sadlier, Associate Editor
- Posted by
- Josh Sadlier September 11, 2009, 3:00 AM
- Permalink
- Categories:
- Chrysler, Ford, General Motors, Weekly Top 3
Regarding #2, if you meant "Ford" as in the brand then I'm inclined to agree. If "Ford" as in the company, then I disagree somewhat about Mercury and Lincoln .
#3, Chrysler played that strategy and judging by their track record, it can be a dangerous game. For example, the 300C and Viper played it successfully, the Prowler and Magnum not so much.
Everyone is piling on Chrysler as the "failing American car company". Where were you people when daimler ran the company into the ground for 9 years? Guess you missed that part. Of course they are a mess, they have been run by entities that cared less about the company for 11 years. Daimler was a joke and deprived them of new cars. Cerberus only wanted to strip it and sell it for a profit.
"Hopefully the fact that this thing is selling like hotcakes won't be lost on the bean-counters at GM. Hey, look what happens when you build a car with passion -- people flock to it, even in a recessionary climate. "
The future lineup has been exposed. They wont be going back to boring- this isn't a question any more. Can't say the same for Honda though.
@1487,
Honda isn't going for Boring either! More like Scary with all that hood & the Grosstour
7driver, I suspect Ford is focusing on getting one brand straightened out and then moving to the next. We're seeing it to a small degree with Lincoln. It's still unclear what's really going to happen with Mercury, but I suspect they've got something up their sleeve.
@7driver,
(1) Yes, I meant the brand, not the company. Mercurys are only good insofar as they're rebadged versions of good Fords, and Lincolns are generally not competitive at their higher price points. But we can agree that the Ford brand has got something going on.
(2) The Prowler was a pure styling exercise -- I'd liken it to something like the Pontiac Solstice, which looks great and drives unpleasantly. The Magnum was a good and even sensible car that ran up against the irrational American disdain for wagons. As long as GM builds cars with Camaro-like passion while avoiding these two pitfalls (hmmmm, disdain for wagons...CTS Sport Wagon...um...), they're good.
@1487,
"Of course [Chrysler is] a mess, they have been run by entities that cared less about the company for 11 years"
Chrysler wasn't exactly the industry standard before Daimler came in; also, some of its best current offerings (300/Charger, Challenger, Sprinter) owe much to that merger.
-JS
I approve. Even though the Camaro's ugly, even I can see that they have a hit.
"Chrysler wasn't exactly the industry standard before Daimler came in; also, some of its best current offerings (300/Charger, Challenger, Sprinter) owe much to that merger."
common myth my anti Dettoir crowd. Do you know what MB actually contributed? Steering, auto transmisison and some suspension components. The LX platform is NOT an MB platform and the cars were not designed or engineere by Daimler. Chrysler was profitable and innovative before the merger. To suggest that Daimler left them no worse than they found them is ridiculous.
Chrysler's best current offering is the Ram. That has no MB parts and was obviously designed in American 100%. I see you failed to mention all the small and midsize models that the press hates were developed under the watchful eye of the Germans. What about that?
^It's certainly true that the Daimler era was a negative one for Chrysler. But my point was that even before that era, Chrysler wasn't a leading light in the automotive industry. There were some innovative and bold ideas for sure (LH cars, Viper, Prowler, minivans), but there was also some garbage (Neon, cloud cars). Still, fair enough, the Chrysler of the mid-late 1990s was making some interesting and daring vehicles.
Put it this way: under Daimler rule, Chrysler's product line went from promising-but-flawed to largely uncompetitive, with some notable exceptions (LX platform, Ram, JGC perhaps). Hopefully they'll reclaim that old spirit of innovation under Fiat.
-JS
Here is the bottom line, they would've been better off staying independent and their cars actually got worse (relative to the competition) while controlled by Daimler. That says it all. If Germans are so smart they should've figured out how to make competitive Chrysler vehicles.