Sounds like, especially after reading the summary, that the Big 3 have once again been blindsided and are two steps behind trying to catch up to market wants or scrambling to find an answer. I hope I’m wrong but looking at past history…..
GM seems pretty together here. Ford is the interesting one. They, like GM and Chrysler, clearly are impacted by the long-term decision of the Detroit 3 to exit the premium segment. If all your cars are cheap, then what is the funding mechanism and purpose of expensive technology?
The Stig,
GM seems to have a pretty comprehensive plan. Ford is right behind them and seems to be a bit more realistic about the future. I don’t think they’re necessarily blindsided as they all have product waiting. But they are definitely concerned about whether any of this will be accepted by the American consumer. The automakers can build all the cars they want. Someone’s gotta buy them. That’s where WE come in.
We have to do our part here. It’s not just up to them. All you guys screaming small cars and fuel efficiency better have your friggin wallets ready. Talk is cheap.
PS - What the hell are the Japanese and Germans doing?
“We have to do our part here. It’s not just up to them. All you guys screaming small cars and fuel efficiency better have your friggin wallets ready. Talk is cheap.” - Mena
A-friggin-men. Well said, man. Well said.
My wallet is ready.
“they are definitely concerned about whether any of this will be accepted by the American consumer. The automakers can build all the cars they want. Someone’s gotta buy them. That’s where WE come in.”
Mena, you’re dead on. Preach on brother! 
In that light it makes more sense that they would want to allocate already scarce resources into whatever technology is a) going to work and b) sell. The ones that get it right will reap the rewards. The other ones…. well……
How funny–I was reading an issue of Motor Trend from 1977 and it said the same thing with an interview with GM and Ford’s top engineers.
The “finally got it” part. That’s what I mean.
BTW, I will be in the market for a new truck in a couple of years and am really interested in the Ford DI twin-turbo V6 and possibly the diesel V8 for the 1/2 tons. What I’m really interested in is whether or not the towing capacity will increase. 12k lbs on a 1/2 ton would be perfect. If not, then I’ll have to pony up the cash for a 3/4 ton and that will definitely be a diesel UNLESS the DI TT V6 makes it into the 3/4 ton AND the aftermarket has its way with the motor.
Stephens, on diesel engines: In 2010 for the U.S., I’ll have the new 4.5-liter.
Translation: Only diesels for full sized trucks, not passenger cars.
Nope, he doesn’t get it.
The stuck bit (and this is true for a lot of companies, not just Detroit) may be that their brains want things to fit in neat little boxes. In many OEM minds, diesel purpose = economy and diesel technology = expensive, therefore diesel doesn’t go in passenger cars since there are cheaper ways to acheive economy gains (and CO2 gains). But, if your brain can handle diesel purpose = performance + economy (relative), then diesel technology = expensive isn’t such a problem, since most performance cars sell at a premium.
Diesel with Attitude: The Audi A3 TDI Clubsport Quattro
Report: Volkswagen Working on Driverless Self-Parking System for Production
More Spied Images of New Camaro Interior
Early Scoop on Volkswagen Tiguan's U.S. Launch, Diesel Delayed? Not Coming? 
Report: Mercedes-Benz to Leverage Aluminum for Next E-class
Send to a friend
HTML Formatting Tips
- To make something bold: <strong>Text to bold</strong>
- To make something italic: <em>Text to italicize</em>
- To make a hyperlink: <a href="URL">Text to link</a>
- To quote something previously said, you can use <blockquote>text</blockquote>
Markdown Formatting Tips (advanced)This site also allows use of Markdown formatting in the comment section. This accomplishes the same formatting as HTML but is typically easy to use.
my code* Second item
• Second item
1. Second item
2. Second item
<email@add.com>