Worth reading.
Backseat Driver Auto Quality, Reliability, Identity Jerry Flint, 12.02.03, 11:00 AM ET
*Consumer Reports' "New Car Preview 2004" issue is out. These reviews aren't the Bible or the last word, but they are good. One can learn a lot about the state of the auto industry by reading this issue.More From Jerry Flint
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Of the 81 "Recommended Models" in the latest Consumer Reports roundup, Toyota (nyse: TM - news - people ) and its luxury Lexus division have
20 vehicles, Honda (nyse: HMC - news - people ) and its luxury Acura division have ten and Nissan (nasd: nsany - news - people ) and its luxury division Infiniti have eight. So 38 of the 81 recommended vehicles--nearly half the total--are from Japan's big three, with Toyota taking the lion's share.What about the United States? General Motors (nyse: GM - news - people ) has ten vehicles with the seal of approval; Ford Motor (nyse: F - news - people ), eight; and DaimlerChrysler AG (nyse: DCX - news - people ), five. So all the GM domestic divisions match Honda, while Ford (based on Ford, Lincoln and Mercury) also comes close to Honda. This is pretty good for Detroit.
Hyundai, Subaru, Saab and Mazda all have a handful of recommended vehicles. BMW, Suzuki, Porsche and Volkswagen have one each. In short, most everyone is building good stuff.
Among the surprises: three Buicks--the old LeSabre and Park Avenue sedans and Rendezvous sport utility--are in the recommended category. We used to have this joke: it's not that the Buicks are so good, but the owners are so old they can't remember their cars' problems. Forget the kidding; this is a plus for Buick.
The Chevrolet Impala sedan also passes muster with Consumer Reports, and is one of the year's success stories, as its sales are now approaching those of the Ford Taurus, which along with the Thunderbird and Lincoln LS entry luxury model are also recommended. Interestingly enough, not a single Mercedes-Benz model makes this list.
Consumer Reports has separate rankings on reliability. The tabulations for these rankings are based on surveys of Consumer Reports readers, who are asked how well their older models are performing. It is here where the American manufacturers still need to do more work--lots more work. All but one of the 32 "Most Reliable" vehicles are foreign nameplates.
Once again, Toyota and Lexus grab nearly half (15) of the top spots. The only U.S. car to gain recognition here is the Buick Regal.
What about the "Least Reliable" category? Of the 35 of vehicles on this list, 17 carry foreign nameplates including four Volkswagen Audi models and four from Mercedes. There was even one Toyota, the 4Runner sport utility vehicle. Nobody is perfect.
It is clear that many consumers pay attention to these ratings when shopping for a new car. But what also sells vehicles is the DNA--the characteristics and heritage of the nameplate.
What do I mean? Take BMW for example. Spend a few minutes in any BMW and you know what makes the brand so special. Great cars, even good cars, have their DNA. Hondas, Toyotas, Mercedes and Jeeps, for example, have it.
Such DNA can be lost. I remember decades ago when the Chrysler brand stood for powerful, well-engineered, cars. The cars also had an image of being a little stodgy--tall when others were low--but they had that Chrysler DNA. Then the company destroyed it by slapping the Chrysler name on almost anything--cheaper cars, cars from Mitsubishi and even four-cylinder cars that should have been Plymouths.
Eventually the Chrysler DNA was gone. Today the Chrysler people are trying to restore that image with cars such as the rear-wheel drive sedans that will be here next spring. But it's a tough job.
A few weeks ago I wrote about the resurgence of Cadillac. But something still is missing: Cadillac DNA.
I recently drove the new Cadillac SRX, a $50,000 sport utility vehicle and station wagon. It was fine and will be successful. But it didn't have enough Cadillac DNA. Little things weren't right:
The glove box didn't have a light. It had fake wood trim in the interior. The doorsill didn't have a shiny metal protective plate (all the fancy cars have this now). The problem is the people working on Cadillac don't have Cadillac DNA. I'm not saying that Cadillac's designers and engineers just transferred in from GM's Korean Daewoo subsidiary, but GM has been through so many reorganizations that there doesn't seem to be enough people who know what a Cadillac should be.
It's not just Cadillac. I'm convinced that this is one of the problems at Chevrolet.
At least General Motors has someone--Vice Chairman Robert Lutz--who understands what makes a Pontiac a Pontiac. The new Pontiac GTO, with a big throaty V-8, coming next spring is the first Pontiac in a long time that is true to the division's old slogan: "We Build Excitement."
GM isn't the only company struggling with its genetics. Some Chrysler executives want to breed out Jeep's DNA with cheaper "sissy" models. Ford's Mustang has its DNA intact, but Ford people clearly forgot what Mercury was and even tried to kill the line until Bill Ford (now chairman) took over the company and stopped them.
Recognizing the DNA, understanding what it is and returning it to the brands, must be a part of any Detroit revival.
Thoughts, anyone...?
Patrick '93 Cobra '83 LTD