Hemi vs. Hybrid! Japan goes Tech, US goes ICE! Who's really winning??

6thbeatle · February 2004

as a long-time motorcyclist, i prefer the sound and feel of a V-twin engine over the "modern" sound and feel of an inline-4. a 90 degree V-twin gives off a throaty baritone growl and has lots of torque low down on the powerband, whereas an inline-4 emits a higher pitched whine and must be wound up to get into the meatiest part of the powerband.

while all harleys use V-twins, so do some japanese street bikes such as the popular honda VTR1000/NT650, and suzuki SV1000/SV650/TL1000, instead of the ubiquitous 4-cylinder powerplant so common on many japanese sportbikes. many sophisticated motorcyclists like myself (!) prefer to ride the V-twin bikes because of their deep, gutsy sound and feel. for those V-twin riders who covet style and substance, there is always ducati, aprilia, bmw, triumph, and moto guzzi as well, which are all V-twins, singles, or triples.

my point is that not only are V-twin bikes quieter in the real sense of the word, being low and rumbly instead of high-pitched and screechy, they are also more often the engine of choice on truly upscale bikes. many of the "noisiest" motorcycles on the street are in fact japanese inline-4 sportbikes, not american v-twin cruisers.

those harley davidson motorcycles which are obnoxiously loud, are obnoxiously loud because the owners have deliberately tuned them so, or have installed louder pipes. this is a reflection of the belief (which i happen to disagree with) that "loud pipes save lives."

one should not assume that all american bikes are noisy. low-tech maybe, but not necessarily noisy.

jimveta · February 2004

simpler yes, but as was previously mentioned a lot of technology is old .. and either invented or heavily developed here. i mean, the average consumer seems to associate ohc, multivalve heads, fuel injection, turbochargers, rotory engines, etc. as umm.. not american?!!?

in any case, there's still a *whole lot* of potential left in the internal combustion engine .. so much so that i would rather stick with that route or at least a hybrid of that route than a complete or heavily relied upon electric motor.

here's an interesting new ice technology:
http://www.ox2engine.com/
.. run by carrol shelby, mr. v8 himself

Mr_Shiftright · February 2004

Technologically, Harley is in the same position as the American car companies, isn't it? I mean by that, in the process of playing catch-up. It's kind of a marketing miracle, Harley, and rather proves the point, that you don't have to make a great or modern or top-performing product to be successful. All you need is the right niche and a loyal clientele and a keen marketing strategy. Harley is at best mediocre as a bike, but unsurpassed as a marketing concern. Marketing is what saved them from certain death in the 80s, and they are currently brilliant at it. The Big 2.5 could learn from Harley on that score. They, Detroit, don't always know how to present their product, stress their strong points and hide the weak ones. Exceptions are visible, of course. Corvette for one, and the pickups for another.

I never rode a Harley much because I didn't want to carry a crane to pick my bike up if I ditched it. Not that I was enamored of Japanese bikes either, with their garish styling and that kind of Formula I screeching exhaust note; my preference was for very (and I mean VERY) low-tech British (great handling bikes!) and the BMW, which was a much better long distance cruiser than a Harley and way more reliable. The bad boy thing didn't appeal because....well, never mind. BMW marketed to the long long distance endurance rider, which was me at the time.

PS: I am a Harley stock-holder, so my admiration for their profit-making skills is not filled with empty words!

varmint · February 2004

Like the Harley example, I think the Hemi's strongest attribute is the history of the name. It has strength through marketing. This will work (it IS working). But a good marketing campaign is like good fashion; even the best fades over time.

The hybrids can be tuned to compete with the Hemi's (relative) output. Toyota is using their's to provide V8-esque performance in the RX and Highlander. Honda is boasting more than the already capable 240 hp when they bring the hybrid/VCM Accord to market later this year. Both the Honda and Toyotas will get better fuel economy than the V6-only versions.

So, I expect the hybrid will win this one. Hybrid designs offer more flexibility. They can meet the market demand for power or economy, whichever becomes more dominant. It appears that the Hemi can only operate in one dimension.

rctennis3811 · February 2004

Exactly!

drfill · February 2004

I generally agree, but some American concepts, like Hemi engines, are bankable, like Levi jeans.

   The hybrid engine has a ton of upside, and is quite fascinating to a new car buyer that wants more value from a $30k purchase, a buyer disillusioned by the quality of a perceived simpler domestic product.

   But a Vette will always be sexy. Hemi engines will always represent power and performance. The Hemi will be a pillar for Chrysler for many many years to come, assuming they don't explode like a GM truck on impact, or an Explorer tire.

   The point is the japanese have nailed the basic car concept, and they are moving on to raising the standards in automotive power, technology, and perfomance.

   The Americans are still working on just building cars properly. That's the perception that counts.

   DrFill

6thbeatle · February 2004

if american stuff is so low rent and no longer of any "modern" significance, then why do french people want to be seen smoking marlboros, and japanese people dream of riding a harley, and russian people treat a trip to mcdonalds like a gourmet holiday, and korean people plop down hundreds for levis and air jordans, and lil munchkins rap to hip hop around the world?

C'mon! I'm not even american, and i can assure you that America is home to the original pioneering spirit. other nations may be great automotive innovators, but americans are the originators (phooey on mercedes' claim). let's exercise our freedom to think and act independently, for through the ages <music> it is this fearless american vision to "go for it" which has created the personal computer, jazz, hot dogs, baseball, and the 1969 dodge hemi charger.

with all of its resources and talented hard-working people, if the US wants to compete and win at this automotive game, who's gonna stop them? no one!

i have faith. you should be proud

6thbeatle · February 2004

btw that was not a paid announcement.

jimveta · February 2004

6thbeatle, haha, awesome! you should be a speech writer! (.. or are you?

with regards to hemi engines, i agree that it's strength is in its marketing, but it IS a sound principle. in fact, most ohc engines use partially hemi heads anyways. and ford really created a commotion in the 60's when they introduced their hemi ohc 427.

and as for the hybrids competing with the dodge hemi engines on output.. i'm sorry, but i think that's just wishful or deluded thinking. the *currently BEST* solution for *both* output and economy is diesel: 710+ hp @ 3200rpm, 1300 lbft, 22 mpg, no smoke and clean burning.

jimveta · February 2004

is also a distinctly american invention and likewise are their quality control methods.
cycle seems to be americans invent, others refine, u.s. ignores invention, public see others products, u.s. realizes it missed out on own invention, then gets back into ballgame.

edwards deming (if you're in industrial engineering, software engineering, certain business studies, you may have heard of him), a physicist and statician, who:

"After World War II, Deming was involved in early planning for the 1951 Japanese Census..
..In 1950, Deming gave the first of a dozen or so lectures on SQC. Unlike his previous lectures, he aimed this message at Japan's chief executives: improving quality will reduce expenses while increasing productivity and market share.
..
n 1960, Deming became the first American to receive the Second Order of the Sacred Treasure from Prime Minister Kishi. An accompanying citation stated that the people of Japan attributed the rebirth and success of their industry to his work."

".. At Toyota Motor Company, Taichii Ohno and his right hand man, Shigeo Shingo, began to incorporate Ford production, Statistical Process Control and other techniques into an approach called Toyota Production System or Just In Time
..
..Shingo, at Ohno's suggestion, went to work on the setup and changeover problem. Reducing setups to minutes and seconds allowed small batches and an almost continuous flow like the original Ford concept. It introduced a flexibility that Henry Ford thought he did not need."

varmint · February 2004

"I generally agree, but some American concepts, like Hemi engines, are bankable, like Levi jeans."

I fully agree that hemi name is a bankable icon. But I'll bet that many thought the same was true of the retro T-bird and the VW Beetle. If the only thing that is exceptional about the design is the icon status, it doesn't last.

6thbeatle - America is the most successful exporter of culture in the world. But bragging rights for selling Britany, Mike Meyers, and Tiger Woods have not helped our agriculture, manufacturing, and automotive industries.

With regard to this discussion, the hemi (while very popular here) will not have an impact on foreign markets. The hybrids will.

Jimveta - True. No one has built a hybrid in that class of engine. But I think as the technology progresses, we'll start to see things like the 400 hp, 40 mpg hybrid Acura DNX. Actually, we already have hybrid-powered uber dump trucks used for mining.

It may become very hard to find any gas or diesel engine that can better a hybrid of the same class. All they have to do is take the same engine and supplement it with electric power. I expect it will actually be the small engines for small cars that give the hybrids a run for their money. In vehicles like that, weight is a more significant factor.

6thbeatle · February 2004

thank you for your interesting and well-informed posts.

Mr_Shiftright · February 2004

Ideas in industry are cheap and patriotism is too often just empty words. Any idea, without without development and implementation, is only *potentially* powerful, isn't it?. Deming didn't "invent" anything if you think about it a bit. He gave people the principles to succeed, but the Japanese figured out how to do it. Often with paniful and costly and lengthy experimentation. They didn't take a Deming textbook and build the 1965 Corona. No, they built lots of bad cars first. Mazda didn't take the engine out of a German NSU and put it into an RX2. No, they had to make the damn thing work first, and ate lots of dirt until they got it right.

History offers interesting parallels as long as we don't stretch ithe comparisons too far. The ancient Greeks were full of ideas but the rather unimaginative and thoroughly practical Romans rolled right over them in less than 50 years because they were a) determined b) flexible in tactics and c) they had a plan.

I think the problems facing the American auto industry are similar, but of course perhaps not with the world-shattering consequences of Roman conquest. Detroit is still too insular, inflexible and without a coherent strategy. Only lately have they switched now and then from reactive to proactive, if I may use those thoroughly overused words--lol!

Detroit talks a great line but as a top mechanic once told an interviewer when he was asked for his resume---"My resume is at the end of my wrenches". (or tools, or computer, or.....assembly line).

It's what rolls off the assembly line that decides how good your ideas were.

Personally, a year 2004 American car parked beside a 2004 japanese or German car looks a LOT better to me than a 1984 or 1994 version of these three.

6thbeatle · February 2004

things are definitely looking better for all parties concerned. i believe that research, design, experimentation, and real-time experience under the most gruelling conditions thin out the herd in the most elementary fashion.

take, for example, war machinery.
ford, GM, chrysler, mercedes, bmw, opel, mitsubishi have all made or continue to make military engines, parts, tanks, planes, jeeps, humvees, etc. if these vehicles do not fulfil their intended purpose in the field in battle situations, the consequences are fatal.

take the World Rally Championship for example.
peugeot, citroen, ford, subaru, mitsubishi, hyundai, and skoda have all benefitted from all the data and experience they have gleaned from this gruelling series, making their street cars that much better.

therefore, i propose that all the top executives at the various automotive concerns be dropped off in the wild somewhere like on the show survivor, and left to fend for themselves. each member of this adventure will be given only one exclusive item, for example a GPS device, a cell phone (with no battery), a battery (natch), a water canteen, a lighter, a box of chocolate bars, a box of dried fruit, a box of beef jerky, a box of cond-- ha! ha!, an axe, a medical kit, or a spear.

there's no reason why the various auto manufacturers can't learn to share their wealth and expertise with each other.

i think i woke up too early today. why is my bed spinning?

badtoy · February 2004

that domestics brands are intrinsically better because they have the moral authority that comes from having invented many of the technologies and processes that others use to defeat them, I think it is actually an indictment of their lack of courage and foresight.

To paraphrase the Bible, of him who has much, much will be expected. And when all is said and done, it's the final product (as well as price and service) that counts -- not the great minds who may have conceptualized it.

joey2brix · February 2004

Have we forgot the gas price spikes that came about the last 2 summer starts? Between the increase world demand (China), no output from Iraq, and OPEC realizing the end is near (20-30 years) we are going to see a rapid rise in fuel prices. OPEC is very happy to maintain $30/barrel pricing by just cutting output. I see the torque need for towing, but let's face it, how many of these moster SUV/trucks tow? $2+/gal gas will slow big SUV sales quickly. Someone better start miking up bio-diesel/cell fuels quick or we're gonna have another '72 shortage on our hands with Japan's offerings putting the big 2 1/2 close to bankrupcy.

Mr_Shiftright · February 2004

Honda just scored big in "green car" ratings, so maybe they know something we don't (gulp!)

www.greenercars.com

jimveta · February 2004

one shouldn't buy a product just out of patriotism; nor should patriotism even be a factor! NEITHER should prejudices and biases from heresay to the contrary be as well. And alot of this i feel, comes from taking things for granted--the attitude that "nothing good can ever come out of detroit (or the US for some extremists)". maybe i'm just assuming, but highlighting the past, giving credit where credit's due, can show potential so that folks just don't blindly write off anything from "the opposite camp".

i for one, can speak from experience after knowing how crappy caprice's and granada's decades ago can be

and then using toyotas from then on (and becoming one of those extremists myself!).. then trying domestic once again (parent's chevys and my own fords), and am convinced they have made significant improvements. if they never get support for their good products, or any recognition, how can they continue to change? how much psycology really is involved, such that those who complain actually would not want to see such improvements (in other words, getting "religion on cars")? now, of course, i'm not talking about blind support, because that just leads to complacency, but honest, blank-slate evaluation of products i.e. like the study highlighting perceived quality vs actual quality--without opinions that lead to blanket statements i see shouted like newspaper headlines here (good marketing by the posters

it's like comparing sony and rca. lots of consumers just scoff or laugh at "rca", and yes, i myself will not hesitate to buy sony over rca for the most types of goods. but i'll still consider rca as an option, usually niche products though, because i *know* they can make good stuff. it's just that their consumer grade products or stuff that gets more distribution/wider attention have not faired well leading to their low-quality perception.. which they do deserve for certain products and NOT for others.

rctennis3811 · February 2004

Yea, but it's usually those BIG 2 1/2 die-hards that will always continue to tell you that GM, FoMoCo, and DC are far better than the imports and the reason to buy them is for patriotism. I'll buy a car based on features, safety, price, and reliability...not just because it's "MADE IN AMERICA". It's sad really that GM can only sell car through incentives though...(excluding their luxury cars)

6thbeatle · February 2004

i think all your comments just go to show how big-minded and big-hearted american people really are. in countries like japan and korea, there is still a lot of patriotism towards buying their own domestic automotive products, but i think a lot of that has to do with high tariffs on foreign imports and the resultant high prices of these foreign products.

if a japanese person can afford to buy a porsche 911, bmw M5, harley fatboy, or aprilia rs250, i'm sure they would, it's just that it's verrry expensive, so of course only the wealthy can afford to buy them.

i find that sometimes americans are a little too hard on themselves and their own domestic vehicles because they are relatively open and democratic in the way they compare and scrutinize vehicles of different types.

my own parents were part of an older immigrant generation that could hardly believe the level of refinement, power, luxury and sheer size of an american car. let's face it, if you're used to seeing at best tiny fiats or coronas or army jeeps in your mother country, the first time you laid eyes on a gleaming chrome '59 cadillac with rocket ship tail fins and power everything is something you would never forget.

i suppose i'm the product of my parent's experience, because i have tremendous faith in american know-how and ingenuity, and in a way i'm very biased in this regard because i have always valued originators over innovators, and the US has always been at the forefront of medical research breakthroughs, dominant popular culture exports including music, fashion, and sports, as well as ground breaking science and technology.

and of course, the personal computer you're using right now was invented in the US, so really all the digital engine management systems, programmed fuel injection, compact disc players, and memory seat settings in your car, wherever they're made, owe a heck of a lot to the US. but of course, no mention is made of this because it's all been forgotten or dismissed as a piece of dusty trivia in one's buying decisions.

in any case, i can appreciate an SC430 or a Ferrari 360, but i honestly would feel a lot happier supporting a competitive domestic product like a Cadillac XLR or a Ford GT. As a Canadian, if i were shopping for a snowmobile or personal watercraft, with all things being relatively equal, i would definitely choose a ski doo or sea doo made by Bombardier of Canada over a Yamaha or Polaris. But that's just me.

grbeck · February 2004

The downfall of the Americans - particularly GM - was their success. Well into the 1970s, GM had half of the total market. When a company captures 50 percent share of the market without trying too hard, why change? Add Ford into the mix (which usually garnered between 22-25 percent), and you have just two companies controlling over 70 percent of the American market!

In Europe, at least, one or two companies could not dominate the market to this extent.

6thbeatle · February 2004

but that is the nature of competition. i wouldn't hold it against GM or Ford that they were able to corner the american market. given half a chance, you can be sure toyota would also move to gain world domination of the automotive market.

the natural ebb and flow of the economic tide will dictate that GM and Ford pull up their pants and roll up their sleeves, but i think they'll respond in a scary way if they're seriously threatened. great for us as car enthusiasts and discriminating consumers though!

grbeck · February 2004

But GM and Ford are already seriously threatened, and, in GM's case, I don't see it introducing anything - except for the new Cadillacs - that will make real headway against the competition.

I hold more hope out for Ford (it has the upcoming Freestyle, an all-new Mustang and a solid F-150 launch. Plus, the Focus is on track).

6thbeatle · February 2004

yeah, i like the new ford stuff coming out, especially their new found attention to interior design. you can't tell me that they're not near the head of the class. the f-150's interior smokes the titan's in my opinion. someone said that we wn't be getting the all-new focus that's coming out in wurope, but just a freshened up reskin. is that true? i like the focus, but the interior needs some improving to compete with the mazda3 which is excellent.

I think GM will slowly (the key word here is slowly) improve pontiac and buick. i hope it's not too little too late. even though some people dislike it, i fing the lacrosse rather appealing in a middle age mindset kinda way. i don't think anyone under 30 would look at it though, but that's probably not buick's demographic anyhow.

Mr_Shiftright · February 2004

The continual loss of market share, year after year, to imports is very troubling. It tells me that many Americans still have no surging confidence in American cars. And the generally mediocre grades American cars get in long term testing is also disturbing. They cannot seem to excel, or if they do occasionally, then they cannot dominate, and if they do occasionally, then they can't hold onto domination (how ELSE do you win something?) So many false starts and false hopes and backslides and half-efforts!

Until we start putting up some good numbers year and year, it's all talk and "vision" and "plans" and "combacks" and "revitalization"---but no proof that anything has really changed in the last 25 years.

Sure, sure, American cars have gotten better, but you know what?..........so has everybody else.

I just don't see any unified effort toward excellence. It all seems hit and miss to me.

badtoy · February 2004

for mediocrity, unless you're a rank beginner. And unless there is constant and measurable improvement year after year, it means you have no motivation or desire for excellence.

The American car industry has no excuse for being anything less than the best. That is MY patriotism. Too bad the executives in Detroit do not share it with me.

6thbeatle · February 2004

i dunno, i don't think it's quite that bad yet. yes, there's hardly anything in the chevy line-up i would want to buy except for the beautiful new corvette, but that's GM's particular problem--they're so mammoth that they can't get up and move quickly. perhaps a restructuring of the way management, engineering, and designers work together would help, but like the laws of physics, when something as big as GM gets moving they'll be hard to stop, unless of course they become like the titanic, in which case i don't really think i can stand to see leonardo dicaprio dance another jig on a table.

badtoy · February 2004

can be excused for getting a little complacent back in the glory days -- that's just human nature. (Also, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.) But after the 70s, there was no excuse not to wake up and smell the coffee. I think it's pitiful that this subject gets constantly rehashed, with bombs thrown from both sides, when the facts are as clear as they are. Sure, there's been improvement -- significant improvement. But the competition isn't standing still, folks, and it takes a burning desire to be the best in order to become number one. And it certainly isn't due to a lack of resources -- financial, political or otherwise.

6thbeatle · February 2004

hey, i'm just following the topic guidelines like a good little elf. someone at edmunds must like rehashing this topic. anyhow, do you realy think amercian cars like the ford GT, the Cadillac CTS-V, the Chrysler pacifica. the ford f-150, the Chevy corvette are really all that bad, even compared to the best in their class?

personally, i think we're in the middle of a renaissance period in the domestic automotive scene, but we're so stuck in a mental set now that we have trouble seeing the incipient changes taking place.

if you have the chance, i strongly suggest that you have a look at a book (sounds like dr seuss!) from your public library called (i'm not sure now exactly) something like comparitive management styles of Japan, Korea, and the US. i found it very interesting, as it explains how the underlying philosophy at work in japanese companies is one of continual perfection, or "the guiding light principle", which is based in shintoism.

anyhow, i liked the book. it gives an insight into the way historical events shape a nation's business philosophy. i can tell you from my own experience in japan that attention ot tiny details is amazingly obsessive.
packaging and product designs are very carefully presented like little origami pieces, and food is laid out iwth great attention to detail.

but even japan is having huge problems. this is what people might not be aware of. the traditional attention to detail is getting lost in corruption and waste all the way up to the govt heads. we only focus on the domestic problems because we're closer to them. believe me, japan has got just as many problems as the US does to work out, and SOON.

grbeck · February 2004

I'd like to believe the American automobile industry is in the middle of a renaissance, but...GM, at least, it doesn't look as though it is trying very hard. The new Cadillacs are nice, as is the new Corvette.

But the Saturn Ion is awful (I test drove one), and the new Buick LaCrosse doesn't look as though it will set the world on fire. I'm sure it will be perfectly acceptable, but when you're coming from behind, "perfectly acceptable" isn't going to cut it. Buick has experienced double-digit sales declines the last two years - that looks like a death spiral. The LaCrosse smells like the Olds Intrigue to me - it may be exciting to Buick dealers, but the general public will yawn, because it has seen it all before.

The Cobalt is also perfectly acceptable, but it already looks tired next to the Focus, let alone the Mazda 3.

I hate to pick on GM, but it symbolizes what is wrong with the American auto industry. It hypes each new product as the next big thing and the start of a turnaround, and when this new product hits the street, it turns out to be either:
a. a warmed over version of the GM vehicle that preceded it;
b. a copy of a model Honda or Toyota is about to discontinue; or
c. an answer to a question no one asked (Aztek, SSR).

Plus, GM's structure is dragging it down...it must support five American divisions with product, even though the distinctions between these divisions (except for Cadillac) are largely lost on the American public. While GM focuses on reviving one division, the others languish. In this business, a brand can't wait 3-4 years for new product while the parent company tries to shore up another faltering marque.

I don't know what the solution is...fire everyone above a certain level, and move GM headquarters to Los Angeles? Or will GM just sputter along, until it gives in to the inevitable and begins to downsize by phasing out another division or two?

Is that scenario "the inevitable"?

6thbeatle · February 2004

okay. i see your point. maybe GM is just trying to play their tired old game of rewrapping old presents and sticking them under our tree. maybe GM is just too big to be manageable anymore. it must be even worse now because they've also got to think about saab, and subaru, and opel, and daewoo... sigh. well at least ford is trying to fight back! ha ha!

Mr_Shiftright · February 2004

Seems to me if market share goes down year after year, things pretty much have to be "as bad as they seem".

I mean, do the math. Less market share each year X next ten years = ???

A real "renaissance", as opposed to a PR hack's view of it, has to include some mind-bending new ideas, don't you think?

So what's a "mind-bending" new idea look like?

Let's look at the past ten years (not the drawing boards or future cars, but only cars with rubber on the road).

The Audi TT--what can you say? The style everyone copied. Highly influential car even if you don't like it.

The new AWD pocket rockets from Evo and Subaru--Wow. I can buy $80K worth of performance (but not quality) for $30K!

The hybrids-- a niche, true, but look at the PR!

The $30K super coupes from Mazda and Infiniti--great values and no skimping on comfort either. What has America got to match these cars? Nada.

And what has GM, Ford and DC put on the table lately?

XLR---great effort, interesting car but the numbers? Insignificant. The influence on the industry? Probably none. Can't see this car as the new "style". Mostly it wins back some respect for Cadillac. Possibly a platform for better things in the "bread and butter" end of GM's lineup? At least now auto magazines are writing about American cars without sarcasm!

Crossfire? An 80% re-badge. Nice car, but too expensive for a Chrysler coupe. Mixed marketplace reviews. Kind of a "neutral" effort. What are we to make of it? Will all cars have that butt end? Doubt it.

PT Cruiser---good effort here. Best new thing out of Detroit in ten years. Imaginative at least and functional, although hardly beautiful or exciting.

Corvette--great car but basically a continuing refinement of an old idea.

And so where is the renaissance coming from? Where are the cars that will knock the press's socks off and elicit comments a bit more exciting that "interesting effort" or "this may indicate changes in Detroit" or " a respectable entry in this field". Where's the WOW!!??

Maybe next year?

varmint · February 2004

Where did the Hemi vs Hybrid thread go?

I think Shifty summed up something I've had rattling around in the back of my brain.

The hybrids do introduce something "mind-bending" to the industry and public. They are radical and they introduce a new way to be enthusiastic about cars. They've connected with a group of people that have been anti-enthusiast in the past.

At its core, the hemi is just another big engine for big cars. We already have those.

badtoy · February 2004

I went thru cross-cultural training while working at Toyota HQ, and it was a real eye-opener. Among other things, they graphed out the management styles of different countries, compared to the US. Very enlightening, and quite startling in some respects. The US is farthest away from the rest (big surprise), and VERY far away from the Japanese business culture. One of the major differences is that Americans use meetings to brainstorm, whereas the Japanese use them to formalize a decision that has already been fully vetted by all of the relevant departments and personnel.

shifty: right on! And of all the cars you mentioned, the PTCruiser is, as you say, the only really groundbreaking car. Unfortunately, it is considered a "boomer car" by most of the young folks (which is why Toyota decided to bring over the xB), and is not doing very well. They hope that a convertible version will bring back some excitement, but it is not a very appealing car in the photos, and I seriously doubt there are enough people who want a convertible to affect the numbers much -- even if they loved it.

Mr_Shiftright · February 2004

The problem with cars like the PT Cruiser is that they are the type of "novelty vehicle" that can start to look very "yesterday" in a couple of years. Retro designs have no genetic longevity, so again they can't contribute to a long-term plan of excellence. To illustrate---the Audi TT lives on genetically in the entire Audi range (to lesser or greater extents depending on the model) and Mazda fields at least three "sporty" models---and Infiniti is definitely on a new image campaign for its lineup. So that's the "coherence" I was thinking about that I don't see yet in the Big 2.5.

Or to put it another way that fits better with this topic---Toyota and Honda can expand the hybrid concept into other models, but Chrysler is not about to put Hemis in all their cars.

6thbeatle · February 2004

although i see your point, how is a car like the audi tt, as beautifully designed as it is, a "mind-bending new idea", let alone a ground-breaking car in any significant way? yes, it has influenced styling of other cars in the audi line-up, but how is this any different than the CTS spearheading the arts and science styling for the rest of the cadillac line-up? do you see any other cars in the world that have this extremely linear look?

furthermore, i don't necessarliy want "coherence" throughout a line-up of cars! whose idea was it anyways to give all cars under one roof a family resemblance? do you all think this is a good thing?

advertising from the late sixties used to pair the '68 camaro with the '68 corvette, for example, two cars whose resemblance was perhaps visible only in their seductive curvy haunches and hidden headlights (in the case of the ss/rs camaro model), but it didn't matter that they were not genetically identical twins--they were both unique and attractive cars in their own right. that should be more important than jargon like new brand identity which is "a PR hack's view of it", to use your own words.

in my opinion the new STS and crossover vehicle look too much like the CTS in their proportions and lines. what's wrong with having a trademark element like a common grill pattern or insignia, but giving each vehicle distinctive styling? the thematic consistency you seem to be seeking in domestic vehicles is exactly the thing that i do NOT want. i do not equate this trend as being a positive goal.

i find that this whole society is unfortunately heading down the sneaky path of homogenization, where in our digital age everything will be reduced to the lowest common denominator of easily compartmentalized ones and zeroes, figuratively speaking, to facilitate comprehension. i prefer the words "zombification of personal style and living".

alfa romeo is a good example of a marque where each vehicle in ther line-up must first be a good-looking and distinctive car in its own right, and that is the common link, along with the alfa front opening.

it seems to me that different standards are being applied here to certain cars which are not consistent. i agree that the PT cruiser had an impact as the new beetle did on retro themes, but in the same way isn't the honda element also a borderline relevant vehicle then? i don't see it changing the way the rest of honda's line-up looks. maybe the new HUT will carry element's styling elements (kayak, eve, rotor...can you think of some more?), but i still think you may be devaluing the major changes taking place in the domestic automotice scene right now.

andre1969 · February 2004

than just bring in a little retro styling. It ushered in a whole new generation of taller, stubbier cars, which is the way the trends seem to be going.

And as for retro in general, I've said this before, but I'll say it again. If you're trying to ape a specific car, then you can only go so far with a retro style. For instance, if you wanted to make a car that harked back to a '57 Chevy, you could only take that so far, because a '57 Chevy, specifically, is the car you're trying to copy.

However, the PT Cruiser doesn't try to ape anything specific. It takes a modern body and throws on some retro touches. That's honestly something that can be done with any car. And true, sales are dropping off on the PT Cruiser, but whaddya expect? It's been out now for what? 4 years? Everybody that wanted one has one. I don't think Chrysler originally intended it to be the smash hit that it was when it first debuted, so it's actually done pretty well. It's just that now, sales are falling off to more normal levels.

As for advancing the retro theme though, when the Chrysler small car platform gets updated again, if the PT Cruiser is still worth making, it'll get put on the new small platform and get updated by default. It may share some styling heritage with the first PT Cruiser, but because it'll be on the new platform, it won't be a carbon copy.

It's been done before. Just look at the Dodge Ram and Durango, both retro themes. Dodge carried that retro look over to the new platform, and sales did even better. Same with the Durango, which had been lagging in sales these past few years and is now starting to rebound. Chances are, the same thing will happen when the Dakota gets redone.

Mr_Shiftright · February 2004

6thbeatle asks:

"how is a car like the audi tt, as beautifully designed as it is, a "mind-bending new idea", let alone a ground-breaking car in any significant way? yes, it has influenced styling of other cars in the audi line-up, but how is this any different than the CTS spearheading the arts and science styling for the rest of the cadillac line-up?"

The Audi TT completely changed the face of auto design in the 1990s. Its influence still goes on today, either in a major xerox copy, like the SC430, or in rooflines (practically everybody) and certainly in interior design (countless examples).

The XLR design isn't a "movement", it's a made up word "arts and science". It doesn't mean anything and nobody has shown the slightest interest in copying it. It's like Chrysler's old "cab forward" which nobody at Chrysler could ever explain.

However, Cadillac design does seem to influence some of the Cadillac lineup, so that is moving toward "coherent", you are right.

andre1969 · February 2004

was a bit of a sham because it really didn't work the way they said it did. All it really did was make the cars look sleek and futuristic, but it did nothing for interior room...unless the EPA counts the area over the dash and rear package shelf as interior volume, and I don't think they do!

Simply put, why does an Intrepid have as much interior room as it does? Because it's on a 113" wheelbase! Compare it to an Impala or a Taurus (or better yet, a Lumina or the older Taurus that were out when the Intrepid first came out) then sure, it feels like it has more legroom inside. But when you factor in the fact that a Taurus in '93 only had a 106" wb, while a Lumina was 107.5, the new Impala is 110.5", and I think the current Taurus is 108.7", then I would hope a car with a 113" wheelbase would have more interior room!! But honestly my '89 Gran Fury, which rides a similar wheelbase (112.7"), and is virtually similar to a 1976 Volare, has more legroom!

One thing Chrysler cars deserve credit for, however, is bringing beauty to aerodynamics, at least on the domestic front. Sure, Ford beat everybody out with the '83 T-bird, '84 Tempo, and '86 Taurus, and I'd consider them all to be major steps in the progression of automotive style, I don't find any of them to be very attractive. And GM really took baby-steps when it came to aerodynamics. The first domestic car to break the 0.40 coefficient of drag barrier was the actually the 1982 Firebird, but GM took more of an angular, wedge-shaped approach to aerodynamics. When they started to go all-out, such as the '88 Cutlass Supreme/Grand Prix/Regal coupes, the sedans that followed, the '90 Lumina, the Corscia/Beretta, '91 Caprice, etc, the end results were awkward at best.

Chrysler really had their act together when it came to aerodynamic style, though. I don't know how aerodynamic they really were, but when the wedge-shape was still in, the Cordoba/Mirada looked downright futuristic in comparison to their Ford/GM competition, at least until the '83 T-bird came out.

And then cars like the '85 LeBaron GTS/Dodge Lancer were good lookers for their time. I remember one rag calling them "What the Tempo and Topaz SHOULD have been!" The '87 LeBaron coupe/convertible was also a looker.

And when the Intrepid/Concorde bowed for 1993, it was obvious that Chrysler was back. The competition looked downright dumpy in comparison. In many ways, 1993 was a parallel of 1957 for Chrysler. They were once again out at the forefront in styling, making people wake up and take notice. Unfortunately, like 1957, the '93's missed a few steps in the quality process, and the beauty that was suddenly attracting people to Chrysler would backfire, as the quality couldn't back it up.

The LH cars did force other companies to push ahead in their styling, though. While maybe nobody copied them directly, no doubt they helped in pushing along the progression of automotive design, just as the groundbreaking 1957 models had.

6thbeatle · February 2004

first of all, i would argue that nissan already used the unbroken lines of a parabolic arch roof line in their last Z car. as for the ovoid stying, the renowned stying house rinspeed of switzerland has used this shape many times before, influencing young european designers with their ultra modern and often quirky designs.

secondly, the tall stubby car design has already been used for years in asia and europe in the smart car, mercedes a class, audi a2, fiat multipla, hyundai atoz, and numrous other nissns, daewoos, hondas etc. their groundbreaking style was the result of pushing the interior outwards towards the skin of the car, and minimizing extraneous exterior overhangs, thus pulling the outer skin inwards so the two should meet, creating an efficient new urban vehicle design with maximum space and utility inside and minimum footprint outside.

i think one's perception of major influences and directives in automotive styling is very subjective, just like asking who invented rock and roll? you could argue the brits, or the americans, or african-americans, or gospel choirs, or slaves, or continental africans, and on and on. i believe it's a continuum, and we are simply like the hands of a clock ticking along claiming to know the time.

badtoy · February 2004

is an organic outgrowth of a mid-engine chassis. It was never intended to be used on a front-engine vehicle, and as such was purely a styling gimmick.

shifty: there are significant differences between an SC430 and Audi TT -- the SC is far from a carbon copy. Put the two side by side, and you'll see what I mean. In fact, the entire concept of the cars is almost totally different, in that the SC is a luxo-barge, while the TT is a minimalist coupe.

The PT was a nice niche vehicle that outgrew its pants -- to the delight of its masters. Hoever, as has been noted, retro will only get you so far. And the problem with the PT is that it resonates primarily with those who remember the cars it was based upon -- the 30-40s Fords (in other words, baby boomers). The youth of the country remain unimpressed.

As 6th so cogently observes, stlying and engineering are both evolutionary in nature, and borrow from many different influences. Newton didn't invent gravity, nor did he really discover it -- he just coined a word for it.

Mr_Shiftright · February 2004

Well sure, granted, every "discovery" is already known in that it was always there but the point is....nobody SAW IT...There was gravity long before Newton I betcha.

Audi saw all the elements of a "new way" to be modern, and put them together into a smashing, highly influential design. It was THE boffo design of the 90s. Nothing but nothing got the media chattering like that car! The TT was (and still is) plastered on the covers of all kinds of architectural and Design trade publications. You won't see a Malibu or an Intrepid there. Not that they are BAD designs at all....but not ground-breaking.

Maybe an SC430 isn't quite a copy of a TT, but without the TT I doubt there would have been an SC430 (maybe a good thing, come to think of it--lol!).

But since we are talking in this topic about "winning" something in a BIG WAY, I don't think a pretty car here or a nice thingie over there is quite what it takes to dominate the 21st Century in car design and engineering. Audi f'rinstance is pushing on all fronts---styling, engineering (AWD and turbo systems)and driving experience. This company is not presenting the typical Big 2.5 "one trick pony' approach. Probably the closest American marque to an "all fronts" approach is Cadillac right now, with a great engine and magna-ride. It's not a TOTALLY impressive car but by American standards it is VERY impressive.

tyrone · February 2004

I went to the Toronto auto show last week and saw Honda's cool display of their fuel cell car that can be bought and driven in Japan right now. Right after that, I went to the Chyrsler display. What did they have to challenge this technology? TRUCKS TRUCKS TRUCKS! GM and Ford weren't any better. If there is a fuel crisis in the near future, the big three will be done like dinner!

vcjumper · February 2004

Too bad the replacement A6, interior style especially, seems like a letdown.

6thbeatle · February 2004

to see Chrysler build that 1999 concept Charger RT with its 400+HP supercharged hybrid engine and Mazda RX-8-like four doors. Apparently the design was nixed because it was based on the outgoing LH platform, but word on the grapevine is that a new Charger concept will be unveiled soon. Who knows, this car may nicely incorporate the two technologies discussed in this forum in the form of a supercharged hybrid hemi powerplant! who can argue with that? yay! we're gonna save the world and burn rubber at the same time! yippee!!

badtoy · February 2004

one of the real attractions of hybrid technology -- it can be used to push fuel economy to its further limits, or as a power additive.

I'm not worried about the Detroit3 keeping up with hybrid or fuel cell technology -- they just won't jump on the bandwagon until their boards decide it's a good business decision. Very far-sighted, those people, dontcha know....

grbeck · February 2004

Ford will have the hybrid Escape out later this year, and, if I recall correctly, GM is selling hybrid pickups to fleet customers. But, at Ford's auto show displays, it never plays up the upcoming Escape hybrid, as it does the Mustang, Freestyle and Five Hundred, whereas both Honda and Toyota feature their hybrids front and center. Granted, Toyota hopes "green" customers will ignore all of those gas-guzzling V8 4Runners, Tundras, Sequoias and Land Cruisers as they make their way to the Prius. Judging by what I read in the papers, that strategy is apparently working.

drfill · February 2004

Shift

   I don't see the connection between a SC430/TT. Looks like quite a reach.

   Grbeck

   You said oilier that Ford is staging some comeback or other? That the Ford Focus is "on track"? That it maybe moving forward in the market faster than GM? Here are some facts you should be aware of:

   - The Ford T-Bird is dead!

   - The Freestyle will bomb!

   - The Ford GT is outstanding! Better than a 360 Modena! But in the end, irrelevant to any "Turnaround".

   - The F-150 is a solid, if conservative, redo that will sell well for years. It too should be held seperate from any corporate turnaround.

   - The Mazda 3 is what a redesigned Ford Focus would be (Just MUCH better-looking!)! And the Ford Focus (as we know it) won't be redesigned until at least 2006!
     Any dynamic improvements over the Escort have been more than cancelled out by the negative PR of the cars infamously poor quality. So much for it being on track.

   - Ford is three companies:

   1. The F-150 and Explorer

   2. The "Time Bombs" (anything else they make, give the "Exploder" a pass)!

   3. The thoroughly derivative knock-offs at the Lincoln/Mercury dealers

   GM is re-hashing it's "Hip to be Square" styling, which has always been indigenous to Cadillac since forever anyway. If Cadillac EVER made a flowing beautiful design, I'd give them a dollar! But they can't so......

   Both companies are sinking into the abyss!
Ford is just falling faster than GM at this particular point in time, burning market share like gas in a Triton V8!

   Whoever said earlier that GM can't manage itself and it's growing number of marques is paying attention!

   GM can't knock itself off fast enough! Buick and Saturn are dying. Olds is dead. Many current Chevys are seriously outdated (Impala, Silverado, Colorado is obsolete after 3-4 months?)

   The Big 3 are falling, and falling fast. It's just a matter of when we'll admit it.

   DrFill (DIG)

6thbeatle · February 2004

dat wuz me hoo sed dat about GM, but do i reely wanna agree wid yoo? hoo ha! jus kiddin!

GM and Ford can't be in as bad shape as you make them out to be! Who's buying all those GM and Ford vehicles out there? I still have faith.

sphinx99 · February 2004

Count me in as another who thinks the TT's import has been a bit overstated. When I see a TT I think of a sleeker VW Bug from decades ago, hardly original. If Audi has enjoyed a saving grace, it's not the look of the TT but the overall package and value of the A4.

IMO what the U.S. industry needs isn't high tech, it needs its own 1991 Lexus LS400. Something that is just flat-out confidence-inspiring. The CTS probably is the closest hit yet to such a vehicle but there's still quite a bit of room for improvement. The bottom line is that people don't want to pay big premiums for surface "innovation." Niches always will, the wealthy always will, but most others would rather that their $x go into quality engineering than advanced or showy engineering or styling.

Hemi vs. Hybrid! Japan goes Tech, US goes ICE! Who's really winning??

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles