The Mazda malcontents - Alike in all but name...

My 1989 Lincoln Town Car is a pretty impressive chunk of car. It's not just eighteen feet long, with a five-liter engine and enough luggage space to stash a snowmobile in - it's also a museum.

Because the gubbins of my Lincoln - the engine, chassis and other automotive accessories - were practically antiques before they'd even rolled off the assembly line.

My Lincoln Town Car shared it's underpinnings with rear-wheel-drive Lincolns as far back as 1970.

In fact, the Hayne's manual for my car covers ALL rear-wheel drive Lincolns from 1970 to 2002 - basically meaning that the cars hadn't evolved mechanically at all in the course of 32 years.

That's even more remarkable when you think that the same mechanics were used for the long-running Ford Crown Victoria (most commonly recognized as the standard American 'Police Cruiser') and the identical, re-badged Mercury Grand Marquis. Funny to think that Ford owned three companies, marketing three different vehicles that were all, essentially, the same.

And this attitude hasn't changed. Just look at Ford's current lineup of vehicles. Their Ford Fusion sedan is built on Mazda's CD3 'platform.' The Ford Fusion, it turns out, is essentially the same car as the Mazda 6, just with a different face. And while the 2009 Mazda 6 is the only Japanese car to use this platform, Ford are up to their old tricks, using the same design for their other brands. The Mercury Milan, for example, is built on the same underpinnings as the Ford Fusion, along with both the Lincoln Zephyr MKZ and the Lincoln MKX.

The new and original Mazda 6

The Lincoln Zephyr / MKZ - basically, a Mazda 6 by any name...

The Mercury Milan - are we noticing a pattern here?

The Ford Fusion. Definitely a resemblance here, too!

You've got to wonder if all this redundancy is one of the reasons why Ford's sales are being hit so hard by the current recession. It's been bad for almost all motor manufacturers (Toyota's reported it's first loss in almost four decades.) Ford has weathered the storm comparatively well, but you do end up having to wondering about their marketing strategy.

What's crippled the American automotive industry is a total lack of understanding of the market. Consumer want smaller cars, with more reliability and better fuel economy. That's why Hyundai, for example, have actually increased sales during the economic crisis.

Ford, in common with GM and Chrysler, have just continued doing what they've always done - churned out the same cars (and, after the fact, wondered why nobody's buying them.)

This is especially relevant when it comes to their range of vehicles built on Mazda's CD3 platform. On offer are five similar vehicles - all with comparable engines and options. When a customer walks into a Ford or Mercury showroom, they want choice. Instead, they're offered five identical options, just with different badges.

It you look at the Mazda 6 reviews you'll see that they're generally better than the reviews of the Ford-family of cars. Perhaps this is because the Mazda 6 is one car, trying to do one thing (with a wide range of options, from different engines to manual or automatic transmissions.)

The Ford family, on the other hand, have one car trying to be five different cars. The Fusion, Marina and both Lincolns all have fairly restrictive options, with gearbox and engine combinations that are unique to each 'brand.' This means they waste a huge amount of effort in redundant marketing.

Whereas Mazda only need to market one car, Ford need to market five. If both Mazda and Ford had the same advertising budget overall, the Mazda 6 would end up five times more 'visible' because their message isn't diluted across three different brands.

Advertising is cumulative - like a snowball, the more of it there is, the more effective it becomes. Ford, on the other hand, is already shooting itself in the foot by dividing it's marketing assets before it's even hit the marketplace.

In the current climate, it's no way to sell cars. Ford need to pare down their range of vehicles and concentrate on single cars from single brands. If they could successfully manage to do that, perhaps they'd manage to weather the economic storm. History, however, suggests otherwise.

Should we save the American motor industry?

Mustang Sally. Pink Cadillac. Hot Rod Lincoln.

Famous American songs about famous American cars.

Bugger the BMWs. Stuff the Saabs. Take your Toyotas and stick 'em where the Land of the Rising Sun don't shine. As far as the automobile is concerned, it's an all-American ensemble with mere guest appearances from Germany and Japan.

Or, at least, it was...

But right now, the last three American motor giants are teetering on the edge of self-destruction and the American taxpayer is stuck wondering if they're going to have to foot the bill to keep these dinosaurs going - or even if those companies can last long enough for that decision to be made.

After all, Republicans hate bailouts, the Democrats hate the motor industry and American customers would apparently prefer to buy their cars and trucks from Toyota than Ford. Nobody's going to decide in a hurry.

Has the era of Detroit Steel finally come to a close?

Well, it would be a tragedy if it did.

Don't get me wrong. I'm the first to admit that the American motor industry has nobody but itself to blame for their current woes.

Back in the 1970's, Roger Moore (in the Man with the Golden Gun) was on a mission to track down a solar generator 'Because oil reserves are running low.' Yet forty years later - FORTY YEARS - the big motor companies are continuing to churn out big, gas-guzzling trucks that wouldn't have looked out of place in the era of disco and platform shoes.

Only Roger could make this 'look' look good.

There's a reason Toyota is the Number #1 motor manufacturer in America. They produce cars that customers want. Ford, General Motors and Chrysler/Dodge have been gleefully churning out the same old shit for years seemingly oblivious to the fact that nobody buys them any more.

But what kind of world would it be without American cars?

I remember learning about the decline and death of the British motor industry and it was alarmingly similar to what's happening in America.

Britain used to have a wonderful car industry, producing sexy sports cars (MG and Triumph) and luxurious saloons (Jaguar and Woolsey) while delivering affordable family cars (Morris and Austin) and world-class luxury tourers (Rolls Royce and Bentley.)

The British Motor Industry: Then

But one by one, they all died out.

Because socialism was all the rage back in the 1960's, the government stepped in, first with the British Motor Corporation, which scooped up marques like Morris, Austin and MG, and then the 1970's era British Leyland, which added the rest. But by the early eighties, the British 'motor industry' was flogging re badged Hondas as 'The Triumph Acclaim' or the 'Austin Metro' and within a decade, even that disappeared off.

Rolls Royce and Bentley, for the first time since the 1930's, were separated. Volkswagen now make Bentleys. BMW make Rolls Royce. Land Rover and Aston Martin are made by Ford [Not any more - Editorial Bear] and Rover is in semi-existence somewhere in China. The rest? Ghosts, of a time long passed.

The British Motor Industry: Now

It's a tragedy.

And I don't see how the American car industry can do anything except go in the same direction.

After all, it's not just a matter of money. GM, Ford and Chrysler are shedding billions of dollars of capital each month, so a government handout would postpone the inevitable, at the very best.

It's a matter of ideas.

In order to become viable, the three American giants need to come up with a viable product they can afford to produce and consumers will pay for.

And even if they manage that, they'll have to do it better than Honda and Kia and Toyota.

The American government can lend the 'big three' as much money and support as they want - but unless they can give them a future - an idea - than no bailout is going to work. The great legacy of the American Motor Industry will be utterly doomed.

So I say the government gives motor industry more than a bailout cheque. They give them an ultimatum.

Here is 'X' billion dollars. In return for this, within ten years, we want a lean, sexy, full-loaded electric car for under $20,000 retail and with a 200 mile range available in motor dealerships nationwide. We want the new Model T. The new VW Beetle. The new Mini. The new it.

And if you fail to deliver, every board member will find themselves in jail until they've paid the taxpayer back. Bam!

Is anybody up to that challenge?

This is America. Scratch the surface and it's still cowboy country out here. Surely somebody has the guts to attempt the impossible.

After all, it's set to enter the marketplace in 2011 (if we're brave enough to let it...)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Volt

When Copy Writers Attack (spell check hates me when I write things like this)

Behold, the new Ford Kuga.

Yes, I said 'Kuga.' As in 'cougar.'

There is already a Ford car named after North America's native mountain lion, so when Ford executives decided on the name of their new quasi-crossover-concept, they decided to keep the macho sounding 'big cat' name, but give it an edgy 'text-generation' spin by spelling it wrong.

Kuga.

Good grief.

I mean, I do realise that naming cars isn't exactly an easy thing (what does it involve? Open dictionary, randomly insert push-pin, email marketing department...) but this one really takes the cake.

And that's even by Ford standards (who's Car Focus Group managed to come up with the highly original car names 'Ka' and 'Focus.' Wait for the Ford 'Group' in 2009. But they'll probably spell it 'groop.')

I mean, seriously, people.

I know I'm a writer. I know I'm in marketing. I know I once dumped a girl because she pronounced the 'd' in Wednesday. But doesn't anybody else think that 'Kuga' is just the most ridiculously stupid name since Nissan produced the 'Qashqai'? Or am I just being anally retentive.

In any event, when it's announced in five years time that Ford downsized their marketing department to a bunch of chain-smoking chimpanzees with typewriters (they knock out romance novels in their spare time) don't say I didn't warn you.

Ford! In fact, car manufacturers around the world - we need REAL car names.

Like Mustang, Firebird, Blaze, Roadster, Bulldog, Hirondell, Furillac... Names that sound big and gruff and rough and tough and CAR-LIKE.

Kuga is just DUMB.

Although, in retrospect, it's less dumb than car manufacturers who just name their cars with numbers. BMW 318. Peugeot 407. Come on, people! At least make an effort!

End of rant.

Big Truck Little Truck

In America, they make things big...

On the right is a good old Toyota Hi-Lux - the builder's workhorse over in the UK. A big, powerful pick up, it does the job whether you're building a house or landscaping a garden.

But in America, that's just not big enough.

So on the left, you've got my brother in law's truck. A REAL American pick up - the Ford F250. It's basically a locomotive that doesn't run on rails.

Ford Orion

Way back in the early eighties, the marketing bods at Ford Motor Company in Dagenham, Essex, had a meeting.

"We need a new car," said the Chairman. "Something to replace the Cortina. Something truly representative of Ford's company motto."

"Found On Road Dead?"

"The other company motto."

The result of this brief meeting was the Ford Orion, an upmarket saloon aimed at the fleet market and company buyers.

The name was randomly picked out of the dictionary.

"Orion!" Said one marketing bod. "That sounds coooool! Let's call it that."

The body was carefully designed by the Ford bodymakers after a particularly long and boozy lunch.

"Shall we spend time and effort creating a truly beautiful car?" Asked one designer.

"Naah," said the boss. "Let's just wodge a big old boot onto the back of the Ford Escort. Then we can all bugger off home early."

A few months later, Dagenham factory workers started welding wheels to a ton and a half of low grade pig iron and the cack-handed product was wheeled off the assembly line. They euphemistically labelled the result of their labours a "car" despite breaching the Trade Descriptions Act.

For ten years the Ford Orion was driven (or more often pushed) off the forecourts of Ford dealerships across the country, leaving nothing but a trickle of oil (and occasionally clutch components) behind.

Much like scientists can't figure out exactly how a bumblebee flies (it's apparently impossible) the 534,239 Ford Orions produced by Ford during the car's ten year production span continued to shuffle around Britain's roads. One of them even found it's way into my possession.

However, much like dying elephants trudge to their ancestral graveyard, all Ford Orions eventually wind up in the same place. On the hard shoulder of the M3.

This is where our Ford Orion ended up yesterday evening.

Rest in Pieces.