RICH CEPPOS ON THE LOGIC OF TRUCKS
Speedzzter typed comments, infra, on the image problems of FoMoCo's minivans without the benefit of reading Rich Ceppos's recent column at Autoweek.com. See, If Logic Only Prevailed, http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060710/FREE/60629018/1025/FREE
Ceppos, under winnowing fire from Autoweek's legion of light-truck-hating automobile purists, counterattacked, arguing:
"If only logic prevailed, most of us would be making do with cars the size of Focuses equipped with tiny diesel or hybrid powertrains, and renting trailers from U-Haul when we needed to move our stuff—and liking it. . . ."
Of course a lot of folks in the Red States, and even in much of the Blue States, would need to keep U-Haul on a daily retainer if that were the case. But then Ceppos extends his argument with an even more grandiose conclusion:
" But would there be a Beethoven’s Fifth? A Mount Rushmore? (Talk about a nutty idea.) How about an Empire State Building? Or a character named King Kong that climbed it in a movie? Oops. Probably wouldn’t be any movies. Or ice cream bars. Or MySpace. Or Lotuses. No Lotuses?"
One could certainly argue that each of the "illogical" art forms Ceppos cites are quite logical in their proper contexts. Just as are trucks and SUVs.
Ceppos, however, hits the bulls-eye when he observes:
"Trucks and SUVs speak in secret code to a big slice of the population. 'Hey, I’m no soccer mom,' they call out. Or 'Middle age doesn’t mean you’re dead!' Or 'I’m a big, bad bling thing.'"
This is hardly an earthshattering conclusion.
Harley Earl understood it back in the days when he established the "Art & Colour" department at GM, promising a bit of style and Hollywood glamour in a utilitarian product Henry Ford had tried to reduce to a commodity.
Edsel Ford understood it when he infused Ford's mass market cars with as much advanced Lincoln style as his domineering father would permit.
Semon "Bunkie" Knudsen understood it when he opined the central theme for the turnaround of Pontiac in the mid-1950s: "You can't sell a old-man's car to an young man, but you can sell a young man's car to an old man . . . ."
Lee Iacocca even understood it when he championed the "sporty Falcon," which we know as the 1964 1/2 Mustang and when he helped concoct other parts-bin gimmicks, such as the neo-classic Lincoln Mark III, the boxy Grenada, the Pep-Boys-look-conversion of the Grenada into the discount, Seville-fighting Lincoln Versalles, or the vast majority of the K-car variations that sustained Chrysler in the 1980s.
And when FoMoCo bean-counter Red Poling and others selected development of UN46, a 50% derivative of the Bronco II now known as Explorer, over a proposed mid-engine sports car advocated by SVO, it was not a rejection of the "secret code" principle followed by Earl, Edsel, Iacocca and many others before. It was merely an adaptation of it to the new reality of the regulated automobile and the regulatory inability to competitively produce exciting and functional large cars in a "minivan" world.
A central thrust of the "Bold Moves" campaign, even as illustrated by impractical dream cars, is that FoMoCo must create products that are more than just transportation appliances. Milestone vehicles in the American ideom generally declare in "secret code" something special about their owners.
Moreover, even those who don't care a whit about anything other than a Ceppos-logical transportation appliance now seem to require such esoteric features as stylish aluminum wheels (when simple aerodynamic plastic wheel covers would do), loads of electrical gadgets, and peppy sub-10 second zero-to-sixty times.
Some of the transportation appliance lovers want even more, though . . . . www.fordboldmoves.com reader Josh Stout requested:
"Go out and build a car that we don’t have to think about. Build a car that works with us and not against us. Build a car that never needs maintenance. Build a car with incredible gas mileage. . . . Make windshield washer blades that don’t streak or wear out. Make chip proof windshields. Install 2 gallons of washer fluid so I never run out. . . . We don’t want to think about our cars. Toyota gets it. Why don't you?" http://www.fordboldmoves.com/Article.aspx?episode=2&id=98039e56-4f6a-4f24-b07f-31600b8a3e6a
Who knew Toyota had "chip-proof windshields", lifetime wiper blades and two Gallons of washer fluid . . . .
But for most buyers, a vehicle must fit some attractive persona (that the buyers may not even be able to vocalize) AND be practical, economical, reliable, exciting, idiot-proof . . . .
MONTOYA TO NASCAR?
He said he wanted to return to "racing . . . ." Hmm? Perhaps he'll rethink that after watching a fiasco like Chicago . . . .
TOYOTA MISSES DEADLINE ON COROLLA REDESIGN
. . . the excuse . . . too much engineering load and market pressure to be less "bland" . . . it's not easy being so huge.
(maybe they're working on that two-gallon wiper fluid feature)
Speedzzter typed comments, infra, on the image problems of FoMoCo's minivans without the benefit of reading Rich Ceppos's recent column at Autoweek.com. See, If Logic Only Prevailed, http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060710/FREE/60629018/1025/FREE
Ceppos, under winnowing fire from Autoweek's legion of light-truck-hating automobile purists, counterattacked, arguing:
"If only logic prevailed, most of us would be making do with cars the size of Focuses equipped with tiny diesel or hybrid powertrains, and renting trailers from U-Haul when we needed to move our stuff—and liking it. . . ."
Of course a lot of folks in the Red States, and even in much of the Blue States, would need to keep U-Haul on a daily retainer if that were the case. But then Ceppos extends his argument with an even more grandiose conclusion:
" But would there be a Beethoven’s Fifth? A Mount Rushmore? (Talk about a nutty idea.) How about an Empire State Building? Or a character named King Kong that climbed it in a movie? Oops. Probably wouldn’t be any movies. Or ice cream bars. Or MySpace. Or Lotuses. No Lotuses?"
One could certainly argue that each of the "illogical" art forms Ceppos cites are quite logical in their proper contexts. Just as are trucks and SUVs.
Ceppos, however, hits the bulls-eye when he observes:
"Trucks and SUVs speak in secret code to a big slice of the population. 'Hey, I’m no soccer mom,' they call out. Or 'Middle age doesn’t mean you’re dead!' Or 'I’m a big, bad bling thing.'"
This is hardly an earthshattering conclusion.
Harley Earl understood it back in the days when he established the "Art & Colour" department at GM, promising a bit of style and Hollywood glamour in a utilitarian product Henry Ford had tried to reduce to a commodity.
Edsel Ford understood it when he infused Ford's mass market cars with as much advanced Lincoln style as his domineering father would permit.
Semon "Bunkie" Knudsen understood it when he opined the central theme for the turnaround of Pontiac in the mid-1950s: "You can't sell a old-man's car to an young man, but you can sell a young man's car to an old man . . . ."
Lee Iacocca even understood it when he championed the "sporty Falcon," which we know as the 1964 1/2 Mustang and when he helped concoct other parts-bin gimmicks, such as the neo-classic Lincoln Mark III, the boxy Grenada, the Pep-Boys-look-conversion of the Grenada into the discount, Seville-fighting Lincoln Versalles, or the vast majority of the K-car variations that sustained Chrysler in the 1980s.
And when FoMoCo bean-counter Red Poling and others selected development of UN46, a 50% derivative of the Bronco II now known as Explorer, over a proposed mid-engine sports car advocated by SVO, it was not a rejection of the "secret code" principle followed by Earl, Edsel, Iacocca and many others before. It was merely an adaptation of it to the new reality of the regulated automobile and the regulatory inability to competitively produce exciting and functional large cars in a "minivan" world.
A central thrust of the "Bold Moves" campaign, even as illustrated by impractical dream cars, is that FoMoCo must create products that are more than just transportation appliances. Milestone vehicles in the American ideom generally declare in "secret code" something special about their owners.
Moreover, even those who don't care a whit about anything other than a Ceppos-logical transportation appliance now seem to require such esoteric features as stylish aluminum wheels (when simple aerodynamic plastic wheel covers would do), loads of electrical gadgets, and peppy sub-10 second zero-to-sixty times.
Some of the transportation appliance lovers want even more, though . . . . www.fordboldmoves.com reader Josh Stout requested:
"Go out and build a car that we don’t have to think about. Build a car that works with us and not against us. Build a car that never needs maintenance. Build a car with incredible gas mileage. . . . Make windshield washer blades that don’t streak or wear out. Make chip proof windshields. Install 2 gallons of washer fluid so I never run out. . . . We don’t want to think about our cars. Toyota gets it. Why don't you?" http://www.fordboldmoves.com/Article.aspx?episode=2&id=98039e56-4f6a-4f24-b07f-31600b8a3e6a
Who knew Toyota had "chip-proof windshields", lifetime wiper blades and two Gallons of washer fluid . . . .
But for most buyers, a vehicle must fit some attractive persona (that the buyers may not even be able to vocalize) AND be practical, economical, reliable, exciting, idiot-proof . . . .
MONTOYA TO NASCAR?
He said he wanted to return to "racing . . . ." Hmm? Perhaps he'll rethink that after watching a fiasco like Chicago . . . .
TOYOTA MISSES DEADLINE ON COROLLA REDESIGN
. . . the excuse . . . too much engineering load and market pressure to be less "bland" . . . it's not easy being so huge.
(maybe they're working on that two-gallon wiper fluid feature)
posted by Editor at 12:47
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home