Autoextremist's Enemies List

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago

Peter Delorenzo has spent the last year or so castigating anyone within earshot for their failure to support, coddle, subsidize and appreciate his beloved American automakers. Given his website’s increasingly strident tone, that description excludes no one. This week, the self-styled Autoextremist gives a shout-out to President-elect Obama– while ratcheting-up the rhetoric for the usual antagonists. “Yes, President-elect Obama will bring a different perspective to Washington – and the challenges facing the auto industry – but that alone won’t save Detroit. Not when there are southern senators and members of Congress who are hell-bent on destroying the Detroit Three in their quest to ultimately replace the nation’s homegrown auto industry with a loose network of imported auto manufacturing facilities based in the Southern Corridor. Not when there are members of the new establishment in Washington who are rabidly pushing for a huge green directional shift for industry and manufacturing in this country, with little concern about what the realities or the ramifications of that kind of massive shift on America’s manufacturing base or immediate economic future. Not when our leaders in Washington continue to give a free ride to countries and manufacturers who want to do business here, at the expense of our own industries and manufacturing base. And especially not when the nation’s consumers are locked in this painful reduced-credit or no-credit holding cell that has paralyzed commerce across the country.” So, Pete, what will save your hometown heroes?

“The majority of American consumers, even when presented with the facts and reams of evidence to the contrary, still don’t believe that Detroit builds desirable or fuel-efficient vehicles, and that must change if Detroit is to survive in some way, shape or form.”

Advertising, marketing and PR. (Three areas from which the AE happens to draw a paycheck.) Check. Anything else?

“…without a coordinated and comprehensive economic stimulus program that not only restores consumer confidence and gets people spending again (while restoring order to the national banking system), but lays the groundwork for a sustainable, supportive and reinvigorated future for the U.S. manufacturing base, then the U.S. automobile industry will be left reeling indefinitely.”

I’ll take that as a no, then.

Robert Farago
Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 70 comments
  • U mad scientist U mad scientist on Jan 09, 2009
    Ronnie Schreiber : I’ve already posted what I think Chrysler should do: .... dumb plan. You can easily figure out why this plan wouldn't work by adding up the sales numbers of the cars you want to keep. Large corps with high fixed cost can't magically shrink to a fraction of their size.
  • Joeaverage Joeaverage on Jan 13, 2009

    Listen there is no way we need to keep the American auto industry alive if they can't adapt to the new markets. There are far too many greedy people ready to stand up to intercept money thrown by the gov't to keep the company on life support. How many times must the history books explain why this won't work long term? So the automakers dry up and whither to a fraction of what they are today and alot of their supply chain does the same. Maybe the management will finally take a hint and decide they need to build GOOD desireable quality products. Not some version of two of those three. As for outsourcing parts - there are plenty of auto parts manufacturers around the world that can step up if the domestic guys fall on their noses. Harley-Davidson is buying parts for their "American" motorcycle from all over including CHINA. Not that I'm happy about that but it is entertaining when I meet some Harley dude with a big opinion of his American bike while he looks down on whatever rice-burner I'm riding then. I think it is time for the leadership of the car manufacturers and the unions both to do some serious re-evaluation of their priorities. Maybe this is something that America as a whole needs to re-evaluate. Does Detroit want to demand high wages now or do they want to have a job in five years? I hope they choose a longer outlook than what works for the next 6 months. I get the feeling though that they think if they can out last the recession that life will be rich and easy all over again. No it won't because with each passing year of my entire life they have slipped further and further towards the edge. Let's get it over with and let them go broke and rise from the ashes.

  • 28-Cars-Later 2018 Toyota Auris: Pads front and back, K&N air filter and four tires @ 30K, US made Goodyears already seem inferior to JDM spec tires it came with. 36K on the clock.2004 Volvo C70: Somewhere between $6,5 to $8 in it all told, car was $3500 but with a wrecked fender, damaged hood, cracked glass headlight, and broken power window motor. Headlight was $80 from a yard, we bought a $100 door literally for the power window assembly, bodywork with fender was roughly a grand, brakes/pads, timing belt/coolant and pre-inspection was a grand. Roof later broke, parts/labor after two repair trips was probably about $1200-1500 my cost. Four 16in Cooper tires $62 apiece in 2022 from Wal Mart of all places, battery in 2021 $200, 6qts tranny fluid @ 20 is $120, maybe $200 in labor last year for tranny fluid change, oil change, and tire install. Car otherwise perfect, 43K on the clock found at 38.5K.1993 Volvo 244: Battery $65, four 15in Cooper tires @ $55 apiece, 4 alum 940 wheels @ roughly $45 apiece with shipping. Fixes for random leaks in power steering and fuel lines, don't remember. Needs rear door and further body work, rear door from yard in Gettysburg was $250 in 2022 (runs and drives fine, looks OK, I'm just a perfectionist). TMU, driven maybe 500 miles since re-acquisition in 2021.
  • 1995 SC I never hated these. Typical GM though. They put the wrong engine in it to start with, fixed it, and then killed it. I say that as a big fan of the aluminum 5.3, but for how they were marketing this it should have gotten the Corvette Motor at the start. Would be a nice cruiser though even with the little motor. The 5.3 without the convertible in a package meant to be used as a truck would have been great in my mind, but I suspect they'd have sold about 7 of them.
  • Rochester I'd rather have a slow-as-mud Plymouth Prowler than this thing. At least the Prowler looked cool.
  • Kcflyer Don't understand the appeal of this engine combo at all.
  • Dave M. This and the HHR were GM's "retro" failures. Not sure what they were smoking....
Next