When Pontiac’s infamously retina-searing Aztek pops up in popular auto industry analysis, it’s usually as little more than a throwaway punchline. So credit Thebigmoney.com’s Matthew DeBord for trying to leave the Thesaurus entry for “ugly” out of a recent piece dedicated entirely to one of the great modern styling miscalculations. Unfortunately, his admirable restraint serves only to further a wholly unsupportable thesis:

GM needs to remember the Aztek, because it represents the kind of risk-taking design that the post-bankruptcy firm will need to go forward. The temptation for the New General will be to copy successful market formulas, rather than try to define new market segments.

(Read More…)

“U.S. encouraged by Fiat plan for Chrysler,” runs Reuters‘ headline, attributed to car czarlet Ron Bloom. After commenting extensively about GM, in which Bloom controls a 60 percent taxpayer stake, he had only this to say about the eight percent government owned Chrysler and its recent plans:

We see management with a huge sense of urgency. We see a huge dedication and commitment, working extremely hard. It’s an ambitious plan.

But did Bloom see the 7 hours of Powerpoint presentations? “Encouraged” wasn’t exactly the description being flung around at the line for porta-potties. Hell, even Detroit’s cheerleader-in-chief and Automotive News [sub] publisher Keith Crain beats Bloom’s take hollow with his headline “This Year The Math Adds Up To 110%.”

(Read More…)

The Ford Fusion is a perfectly competent yet utterly bland vehicle. It’s proof that American firms can compete in the mass-market vanilla sedan segment, but not because it does anything particularly well. Its strength is nothing more than an absence of the glaring issues that kept Detroit out of the Accord/Camry sweepstakes. Which is why Motor Trend doesn’t get overly carried away with the credibility-straining praise of the vehicle itself (with the requisite glaring exceptions, to wit: “the Fusion SE goes from mild-mannered commuter to worthy canyon charger”). So instead, the praise gets spread to the lineup as a whole: “the 2010 Ford Fusion’s impressive bandwidth as a model range was one of the many factors that helped it earn the 2010 Motor Trend Car of the Year award,” we’re told. What this boils down to: you can get a hybrid powertrain in addition to four-pot and six-pot engines. In short, MT gave the Fusion COTY because it does everything a Camry does, but, crucially, it’s from Detroit. Well, Hermosillo, Mexico, actually. Still, its advertising budget still comes from Detroit, and that makes all the difference.

The die is cast. Robert Farago, the man who founded this site nearly a decade ago and nursed it into relevance and notoriety, has left the building. Those of us who remain behind take his burden onto our willing shoulders, dedicated to realizing his dream of a car blog that covers the most relevant industry news and delivers the most unflinchingly honest reviews, commentary and analysis. Though much has changed since TTAC’s founding, the need for the truth about cars has not diminished. The automotive media remains a haven for craven cowardice, mutual back-scratching and unquestioning obsequiousness, and our inviolable mission is to provide consumers and observers with perspectives that stand in stark contrast to the industry business-as-usual. Though no site can remain unchanged after the loss of such a prolific founder, Robert’s work over the past decade is the blueprint for our future. The truth must be told, and we’re forever grateful to Robert for showing us the way and, in the process, building up an outlet that is irrevocably dedicated to these ideals.

On a personal note, I’m humbled by the task of filling Robert’s prolific, principled and notorious shoes. I’m also eternally grateful to Robert for his faith in me over the past 18 months. Thanks to his trust, generosity and patience, I have the honor of replacing him in what may well be one of the best jobs in the world. Thanks to his high standards, tough criticism and brutal honesty, I feel capable of doing some justice to his vision. Thank you Robert, for creating this site, for mentoring me, and for making an indelible mark on the autoblogosphere. It’s been a true honor.

You know how terrorism experts talk about increased “internet chatter” as foretelling some kind of attack? On Monday, GM will release its post-C11 financial results which, thanks to dubious accounting, could very well mean nothing. Even so, I’m getting the feeling that there’s some bad news a brewin’, ’cause the MSM is kissing some major GM butt today. First, the Freep shows GM’s Chairman of the Board the love that dare not grant it an interview. Now the Times’ Bill Vlasic, late of the Detroit News, shows up with a piece that supposedly reveals the depth and breadth of GM’s much ballyhooed “cultural change.” Mea culpa comes in the form of “After bankruptcy, G.M. Struggles to Shed a Legacy of Bureaucracy.” While I’m a firm believer that cultural change starts at the top—such as, I dunno, firing the ancien regime that led to GM’s nationalization—I’m all ears, Bill. Where’s the evidence that la plus ca change, la plus ce n’est pas la même chose?

(Read More…)

In four day’s time, my byline will appear on this website for the last time. During the previous nine-and-a-half years, I’ve watched the mainstream automotive press slowly evolve from paid cheerleader to . . . nope that’s it. No progress there. Despite having written literally thousands of diatribes against the media’s willful ignorance on the auto industry, I’m still galled that people who call themselves professional journalists have such little moral fiber and testicular fortitude. Only more so, now that GM and Chrysler’s endless turnaround promises have been revealed as a combination of epic self-delusion, outright lying and near-as-dammit criminal conduct (e.g. we never got the bottom of that SEC accounting case). This morning’s Detroit Free Press continues the tradition. “GM Chairman Ed Whitacre clear he’s in driver’s seat” is the worst kind of non-journalism—the kind that enables the rape of the American taxpayer by a bunch of egocentric incompetents.

(Read More…)

While reading through some of our analysis of Chrysler’s five-year plan, you may have found yourself wondering “what did the Pentastar boyz do to convince you of their company’s viability plan besides flash PowerPoint slides at you for seven hours?” To fully comply with TTAC’s stringent disclosure standards, we present Chrysler’s material compensation for the seven hours that auto journalists most wish they had back.

(Read More…)

Gag. And sigh. I’d kinda hoped that New York Times would stay away from the FoMoCo-flavored Kool-Aid long enough to see the potential drawbacks to the automaker’s inflatable seat belt idea. Or at least provide a reasonably coherent and comprehensive argument for the overarching supposition that the brand’s dedication to passenger safety supersedes that of its rivals. But no. The original PR-release-based article in the Business section raises but one red flag: “Just 6 percent of respondents chose safety as their top priority.” And then the Freakonomics column—an endlessly self-aggrandizing advertisement masquerading as editorial—dumps a pound of sugar on the proceedings. “In SuperFreakonomics, we tell the story of how Robert Strange McNamara, an outsider at the Ford Motor Co., led the charge the put seat belts in automobiles at Ford. It was not a popular decision within the company nor with the public; pushing for a safety device in a car did a bit too good of a job of reminding people that cars could be quite unsafe. But McNamara got his way. Over time (a long time, it turned out), the seat belt won widespread adoption, saving roughly 250,000 lives in the U.S. alone since 1975 . . . Back in the day, Henry Ford II wasn’t crazy about McNamara’s seat-belt obsession. ‘McNamara is selling safety,’ he said, “but Chevrolet is selling cars.’” What does that tell you? The media’s hidden love affair with Ford continues apace.

And here’s how the Wall Street Journal wraps sensationalistic video in the mantle of investigative journalism. [Thanks to clutchcargo for the link.]

It’s not every day that our friends over at Autoblog rip someone, anyone, a new NSFW. In fact, have they ever done it? Well, now they have. “SEMA 2009 Worst of Show: This Car Stinks” tears into a modded Dodge Charger with scissor doors like nothing I’ve ever read on the Gray Lady of autoblogs. “The why and the how of this particular example of aftermarket hubris and wretched, mindless – and let’s not forget pointless – excess don’t really matter now, as the poor thing will spend the next 15 years quietly rotting in the side yard of some shop in Joliet, Illinois waiting to either shrug off this mortal coil or get turned into a fine LeMons car right around 2025 – whichever comes first.” Looks like Mr. Lieberman is channeling his inner TTAC. Oh wait; he cut his teeth on this very website. So, to thine own TTAC be true? Yes, BUT—who built the cat piss special? On this point, Mr. Lieberman and/or his editors are not-so-surprisingly silent. So I turn to our Best and Brightest to answer two simple questions. First, why is this car any worse than the other abominations cluttering the SEMA ho’ down? Second, who done done it?