TWO WAYS OF MAKING AUTOMOTIVE NOISE
By Cammie

The Toyota way:

Home market Prius to be fitted with a whirring under-hood speaker.

That's hardly a new idea.

(I wonder if 'Yoda's new speaker could reproduce the sounds of John Force's AA/FC?)

The Ford way:
440 h.p. 2012 Mustang Boss 302 Laguna Seca!

Ford Racing’s emissions-legal 2.3 liter supercharger kit for 2011 5.0-liter 4V TiVCT V8 Mustangs!


2011 F150: 360 horsepower 5.0-liter 4V TiVCT V8 and 411horsepower 6.2-liter SOHC Boss V8!


You already know which way we prefer . . . . Varoom, Varoom!

FORD EXPLORER AND THE DEATH OF HOT RODDING
By Cammie
The automotive world is abuzz with the formal debut of Ford’s Taurus-based Explorer.The old truck-based Explorer was the vehicle that made SUVs mainstream. It was the antidote to mini-van-induced soccer-mom boredom.

To Ford dealers, the "truck" Explorer was a "cash cow." A profit machine.

To trial lawyers salivating over the Firestone tire debacle, the truck-based Explorer facilitated adding a new wing to their McMansions.

To sports car enthusiasts, the Explorer was often a moving chicane or a luxury crew vehicle.

And to hot rodders, V8 Explorers were another source of inexpensive junkyard parts.

To environmentalists and other "car haters," the Explorer was only exceeded by larger SUVs as an emblem of automobility and consumption gone amuck.

Although the "truck" Explorer was never a hard-core 4x4 off-roader, consumers often perceived it as a having more than a little "macho" swagger under a preppy, Eddie Bauer veneer.

Now Explorer is basically a Volvo car distilled through Alan Mulally’s style shop. So what does it really mean?

1. PAY MORE, GET LESS: It’s a given that the future of anything above the commodity level of motoring in this "green-obsessed" world is going to be smaller and more expensive. The new "car" Explorer is no exception.

Repackaging a Taurus X into some semblance of an SUV means slashing towing capacity, killing off the V8 option, and plugging in a tiny EcoBoost four-cylinder engine. Because Ford can’t make a turbo mill – even a direct-injected one – hold up using pot-metal internals, turbocharged engines will certainly be more expensive. Likewise, as Nash discovered decades ago, unitized construction tends to increase costs and hamper design updates in the long run. All of that extra cost will be passed on to the consumers.

Ford’s PR machine is crowing (almost ad nauseam) about how the new micro-mills are pounding out more power than the previous V8. But Ford’s pre-Coyote modulars (at least in non-SVT form) were such underachievers that it doesn’t take much to beat them. And it’s unlikely the new powerplants will produce the torque and delicious sounds of a proper V8.

2. IT’S WORTHLESS FOR HOT RODDERS: Ford has built millions of "Tauri" since 1985. After they’ve wheezed into America’s junkyards, they’ve provided virtually nothing of value for hot rodding. In contrast, whole drivelines of "truck" Explorers have attracted hot-rodding "love." And somebody someday might just figure out how to rebody "truck" Explorers into something more sporting.

While some lust after the near-microscopic turbochargers used in the EcoBoost system, the new "car" Explorer likely will provide nothing useful for building hot rods. And it probably won’t be very attractive as a hot rod platform. Like most other transverse-engine FWD-based vehicles, it will be hard to work on and too complex for the average hot rodder.

As Ford has systematically killed off traditional RWD vehicles, the supply of inexpensive "raw material" for hot rodding has almost dried up. The "car" Explorer is another huge "chip from the edifice."

3. IT’S PROBABLY EVEN MORE WORTHLESS FOR SERIOUS OFF-ROADING: While nobody expected the new "car" Explorer to be a five-door, seven passenger SVT Raptor, it now joins the pretentious "CUV" class of fakes. Too bad someone like "Top Gear’s" Jeremy Clarkson probably will not expose what a wretched off-roader a tall, tarted-up Taurus station wagon with cartoonish all-terrain tires makes. Not much real exploring will likely be possible with this one.

4. IT’S A POSTER CHILD FOR THE NANNY STATE: The Explorer "brand" was savaged by the Firestone rollover mess. Its forgotten progenitor – the narrow, tippy Bronco II – flipped over with even more verve and regularity. While the later IRS Explorers apparently have tamed down the tip-over risk, for some "Explorer" is probably still a synonym for unwanted adventures with the shiny side down. Sales are currently down to only a fraction of their pre-Firestone crashfest peak.

The new "car" Explorer will be so packed with electronic nannies and passive safety do-dads (such as inflatable seat belts) that it might almost repeal the laws of physics. Of course enterprising drivers and texting teens will still be able to rotate the "car" Explorer around its roll axis. But most drivers will be reigned in by all of the expensive techno-nannies.

5. IT DULLS THE EDGE AND PERPLEXES THE FLEX: The early photos make the new "car" Explorer make it look like a bloated Edge with a Taurus-inspired grille. And how exactly is the "car" Explorer functionally any different from the boxy Flex? At first glance, it appears some of the "Cars-splorer’s" biggest competition will be in Ford’s own showrooms.

6. IT WILL LIKELY GUARANTEE NO FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF A REAL MIDSIZED SUV: Just as the 1986 Taurus that the Mulally-ites worship killed development of any future RWD midsize sedans, the "TAURUS-PLORER" will stymie any future development of a real midsized SUV. The reason is that those who "bet it all" on the "crossover" plan won’t want to be shown up by a cheaper and tougher truck-style SUV. So if you want to bash the Rubicon or tow a real load someday, you probably won’t be doing it in a smallish Ford SUV.

I can’t get very excited about the new "car" Explorer. Whether all of the not-so-rugged "individualists" (posers) who buy SUVs to "profile" on America’s boulevards will now flock to it remains to be seen.

THE FORD IN SHORTEST SUPPLY IS LINCOLN'S TOWN CAR

By Cammie.

According to Forbes.com America's Hardest-to-Get Ford is a Panther on death row: Lincoln's RWD Town Car The average day supply of Town Cars in inventory is 26.

While I find it hard to believe that the Town Car is in shorter supply than SVT's Raptor and Shelby GT500, I'm not surprised that there's still life left in the last of the "real" Lincolns. To many, there is simply no substitute for a properly-refined, anvil-tough RWD, body-on-frame (BOF) vehicle. Lincoln Town Car has long been the preferred vehicle for the urban "black car" commercial trade, as well as the only choice for fans of traditional "American" luxury cars.

Alan Mulally and Billy Ford's CAFE-driven "green" makeover of Ford has been hard to take for lovers of traditional cars. Mulally and Ford have denied Lincoln's "Townie" any advertising. They've refused to offer Marauder DOHC or Coyote engines. They've kept the same styling for what seems like eons. And after starving it, they've slated it for extinction.

Ford seems to have learned nothing from GM's mid-1980s debacle. Back in the Reagan years, GM decided to kill off almost all of its RWD BOF cruisers in search of profits and CAFE efficiencies. This myopic mistake drove thousands of customers to Lincoln-Mercury.

Ford's mismanagement of the Panther is soon to pay analogous dividends. The irony is that the Volvo-derived six-cylinder D3s that are replacing the storied Panther really don't yield much better economy or performance than could be achieved with a properly set-up RWD BOF. The Taurus-derived replacements are too heavy, too complex, and much more diffcult to repair. Even as RWD remains the preferred standard in the luxury class and among many fleet buyers, Ford is moving head-over-heels away from it. That's just stupid.

The last of the "real" V8 Lincolns is in short supply. Get one while you still can.

WHERE IS SPEEDZZTER? REQUIEM FOR A FOMOCO BLOGGER

By Cammie of the Lifter Sisterz

Some of you may be expecting to see another commentary on Ford Motor Company by Speedzzter in this space.

So was I.

Yet weeks went by without anything new from Speedzzter. Even Speedy’s occasional gig over at Bangshift.com has fallen silent.

I wondered why. So in a few moments when I wasn’t covering for or trying to find my goldbricking sister, I decided to look into Speedzzter’s mysterious disappearance.

I ended up with Speedy “pitching me the keys” (so to speak) to this site. I watched Speedy’s V8 Mercury roar off into the West. The last thing Speedy mumbled was something about writing a proper sequel to “Two-Lane Blacktop.”

I don’t really know why Speedy quit. Maybe Speedy realized the meaninglessness of vanity blogging. Maybe Speedy realized that Ford’s “Glass House Gang” could care less about what old V8/RWD-loving hot rodders wanted. Most likely, Speedy just gave up on the future.

So how did it all begin?

Best I can tell, Speedy started musing on the internet about automotive topics on Car Craft’s massive “So were not rich but we arent stupid” [sic] message board thread. That thread was mostly about “politically incorrect” grassroots turbocharging of big V8 engines.

In actually, Speedy was one of several “personas” written by the same person on the CC Board. Speedy once explained all of this to CC’s head honcho Douglas Glad a couple of years ago:

[David] Freiburger triggered "our" "turbo-project-in-CC" campaign when he quipped in his first editorial as CC's Editor-in-Chief that "turbos were for diesels." I read that closed-minded slam in the mid 1990s as [a] cash-strapped . . . student who couldn't even afford a set of spark plugs, much less the V8 turbo project I'd been studying, engineering, and planning since high school.
When the CC forum started in 2003, . . . I still didn't have the time, place, or financial resources to build that V8 turbo.

Writing on the forum became a way to escape . . . stress, drudgery, and disappointment . . . . At times, it was a Walter Mitty-esqe exercise in "playing" a hot rod journalist.

At some point, various on-line "personas" developed to add divergent voices and perspectives . . . to spice up the discussions and potentially make them more entertaining (and to make bumping the "were not rich" thread less repetitive):

--Turbo Ted -- the sarcastic humorist with a reserve of technical knowledge about turbocharging;

--MrFoMoCo -- the old-fashioned brand advocate (based on growing up in the 1960s brand rivalries and my . . . experience as a . . . parts counterman/tire salesman)

--Chevysxz -- a failed experiment with urbanized hip-hop-based dialogue and extreme anti-Chevy partisanship based in imaginary street racer trash talk.

--Speedzzter -- the voice of legislative concerns and warning of the impending end of the Second Supercar Era (based on the horrible, pretentious "Truth With Speedzzter" blog).

I came to enjoy writing some of these characters as much as many novelists enjoy writing various "voices" in works of fiction. When I'd sit down to post, I often wondered which character might best voice a thought I'd had. . . .

Perhaps this has all been nothing more than "talking to . . . [my]self" in a series of vanity posts, but I suspect that many other readers have been entertained and, perhaps, even informed by these characters. After all, the "Were not rich" thread has more than 50,000 hits (and they couldn't all be from my IP address).

And after all these years, I still haven't gotten that turbo big block project much past the design phase. Too few resources, too little time.

A Google search shows that Speedy was also a sometimes prolific commentator on other blogs and news sites. Mostly, Speedy’s comments were about politics, religion or automobiles. That’s a much broader range of interests than I expected to find. In fact, the earliest posts on this blog from 2005 are about confirmation of a U.S. Supreme Court justice (a subject Speedy’s been surprisingly silent about this time around).

But Speedy’s wheelhouse during the past five years was mostly occupied by commentary on Ford Motor Company. It is obvious that Speedy loved FoMoCo. But Speedy didn’t shrink from criticizing Ford’s mistakes (see sidebar). Speedy blogged with the naive and pretentious hope that Ford would learn something from its storied past. Speedy was an unabashed advocate of motorsports, rear wheel drive and V8 power.

In a world where more than half of American consumers buy imports and believe that Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards should be raised to more than 50 miles per gallon, Speedy was clearly an anachronism.

Speedy was a nostalgic throwback to a distant era of American industrial hegemony – a time when ordinary blue-collar workers could realistically expect to move up into the middle class and to buy on credit powerful V8 Fords with supercar acceleration . . . a time when average Americans fixed their own cars in their driveways and even bolted on speed equipment . . . a time when people actually cared who won the Indianapolis 500 . . . a time when there was some “stock” left in “stock cars” . . . a time when “real men” shifted manual transmissions and even wore neckties. And it was a time when Ford’s “Total Performance” factory racing program dominated everything it touched.

That America is apparently dead.

Next year, the only V8 Ford car left will be Mustang. And with 35+ M.P.G. C.A.F.E. on the near horizon, the Coyote may be an endangered species.

Next year, Ford will offer no RWD sedans or traditional full-framed passenger cars.

There will be no manual transmissions in Ford’s 2011 Super Duty. And Ford’s lone V8-strength manual transmission is reportedly assembled in Communist China.

New Fords are increasingly “tamper resistant.” and working on them is mostly beyond the skill set of weekend home mechanics.

Ford cannot seem to buy a win in the non-stock, common-template abortion that NASCAR has become. Ford continues its lengthy absence from Formula One and Indianapolis. Before too long, the Glass House Greeniacs and bean counters will likely plunge Ford back into the post November 1970 “dark ages” of factory motorsports abandonment.

And now the gigabite-wasting, text-messaging, Twittering, know-it-all “Autoblog experts” say that Mercury must go the way of Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Plymouth.

It’s not that Speedy left FoMoCo. FoMoCo (and America) left Speedy.

And now it seems that after 489 posts Speedy’s left blogging.

I’m not sure what Hydra and I are going to do with this blog. Well, actually I’m sure that Hydra probably won’t do much of anything. But I suppose there probably still some bandwidth out there for commentary on Ford and the declining state of America’s automotive liberty.

Godspeed, Speedzzter.

THE THREAT WORSENS: GM PERFORMANCE PARTS ANNOUNCES MANUAL TRANSMISSION E-ROD PACKAGE
(Get the latest “Truth With Speedzzter” here)




Comment: FoMoCo simply must address the E-Rod threat more vigorously. If it does not, Ford’s reputation in grassroots motorsports and on the streets will suffer the indignity of an increasing number of pre-OBD II Fords repowered with GM engines. That’s simply unacceptable on many levels.

While Ford Racing Performance Parts’ Windsor-based Boss program and its modular V8 offerings are slowly improving, Truth With Speedzzter is unaware of a factory Ford systems approach to emissions-legal retrofits. Ford should not concede the emissions-legal repower battleground to Chevrolet.

GM TO INVEST $890 MILLION TO BUILD CLEANER, MORE FUEL-EFFICIENT ENGINES

Five plants receive work: Tonawanda, N.Y.; Defiance, Ohio; Bedford, Ind.; Bay City, Mich. and St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada

Investment creates or retains about 1,600 jobs

New engines to save more fuel through direct injection technology and advanced combustion system design

DETROIT – General Motors will invest more than $890 million which will create or retain more than 1,600 jobs in five North American plants to produce a new generation of fuel efficient small block truck and car engines. The investment consists of the following:

Two plants will support the engine production:
Tonawanda, N.Y. – an investment of $400 million resulting in more than 710 jobs
St. Catharines, Ontario – an investment of $235 million resulting in approximately 400 jobs (click here for Canada release)
Three plants will support engine casting and component production:
Defiance, Ohio – an investment of $115 million resulting in up to 189 jobs
Bedford, Ind. – an investment of $111 million resulting in about 245 jobs
Bay City, Mich. – an investment of $32 million resulting in over 80 jobs

The investments include facility renovation and installation of new, highly flexible engine machining and assembly equipment and special tooling designed for manufacturing efficiency and engine quality. At the casting facilities, investments include expansion of semi-permanent mold and precision sand casting technologies that result in a high degree of dimensional accuracy and material strength properties needed to support the newer, more efficient engines in GM’s product portfolio. . . .The next generation small block engine family will have unprecedented fuel efficiency through direct injection and an all-new advanced combustion system design. The new engine family will rely exclusively on aluminum engine blocks, which are lighter and contribute to the improved fuel efficiency. In addition to being E85 ethanol capable, these engines are being designed with the capability to meet increasingly stringent criteria emissions standards expected throughout this decade.

Comment: What exactly GM will be getting for the taxpayers’ $890 million remains to be seen. That’s not really enough money to make huge changes.

Presumably, the “next generation” small block will retain pushrod-operated overhead valves and wide bore centers. Bore center width is the principal technical advantage GM’s LS-series engines have over Ford’s modular family. While a wide-bore-center DOHC Ford (i.e. DOHC Boss) would decimate GM’s antediluvian two-valve OHVs, Ford has not seen fit to match GM cube-for-cube in high performance applications.

However, GM’s apparent commitment to a new generation of “small blocks” probably means that Ford must up its game beyond the quick Coyote V8 “fix.” Direct injection, on-demand ethanol boosting, cylinder deactivation and forced induction will be necessary to balance government-mandated fuel efficiency with competitive size, torque and horsepower. Just relying on EcoBoost V6s and fours won’t be enough.

ADVERTISING FROM FOMOCO’S 1980S RESURGENCE

A video at Bangshift.com of a television ad showing a former Ford ally whipping a fox-body LTD around a road course prompted a quick trip down memory lane . . . back to the days of Phillip Caldwell and Donald Petersen’s commands in the Glass House. Back when “Have you driven a Ford lately” introduced America to a new type of lithe, aerodynamic Ford. (And yes, we’ve spared you the ad of Sir Jackie Stewart pounding out laps in a Tempo)

FLASHBACK: SIR JACKIE STEWART WHIPS A 1984 TURBO COUPE AROUND MONACO


FLASHBACK: TV AD SERIES: 1987 FORD MUSTANG GT , THUNDERBIRD TURBO COUPE



FLASHBACK:1987 FORD THUNDERBIRD TURBO COUPE COMMERCIAL

THE HISTORY CHANNEL MUTILATES THE LEGENDARY “TOP GEAR” FRANCHISE WITH “TOP GEAR AMERICA” NEXT FALL

Comment: “Supercars Exposed” drifter Tanner Foust, internet comedian Adam Ferrara, and the hopelessly annoying “NASCAR TV” weirdo Rutledge Wood could not hope to carry the helmet bags of Jeremy Clarkson, James May and Richard Hammond.

Mr. Clarkson is right: Americans (at least at the History Channel) don’t understand “Top Gear.” If there was any truth in labeling, the History Channel would name this emerging mess “Stripped Gear America.”

“Top Gear America” is likely to make the History Channel’s atrocious “Full Throttle” (which starred “Twins Turbo” dweebs Marc and Eric Kozeluh) look like Emmy Award-winning fare.

(Get the latest "Truth With Speedzzter" here)

“GOVERNMENT MOTORS” PAYS BACK TAXPAYER-FUNDED LOANS FIVE YEARS EARLY

“[S]ales of newer models have improved GM's cash flow and allowed it to make the remaining $5.8 billion in payments early.”

Comment: Whether this is simply election-year politics or “Dial Tone” Ed Whitacre ripping a page from Lee Iacocca’s dusty 1980s “New Chrysler” playbook remains to be seen. But considering the taxpayers still own more than half of the “New” GM, any repayment of the billions borrowed to fix that mostly government-caused mess is good news.

Speaking of Chrysler, the unwanted assets that Fiat didn’t buy were left in the old company, now called Old Carco, L.L.C. The bankruptcy court has approved their liquidation in a plan that reportedly will recover little for the taxpayers.

GEICO VOICE ACTOR FIRED AFTER INSULTING TEA PARTIES
Comment: It’s apparently not the guy who does the gekko or the caveman. And we’re still angry with GEICO for opposing repeal of the 55 m.p.h. national speed limit and its alleged past refusal to insure high-performance cars. But this story is mildly interesting as a barometer of how unhinged some liberals are becoming about the Tea Party movement.

JOE OLDHAM ON THE 2011 MUSTANG: SAVE YOUR MONEY FOR THE V8

Comment: Legendary journalist Joe “Muscle Car Confidential” Oldham knows muscle. After all he was once the original owner of a 1969 427 Motion Phase III Camaro. And he’s smoked the tires on nearly every OEM muscle car of the past four decades. So when he says that serious revheads will bypass the “hype” and pay extra for the Coyote V8, you’d better believe him.

EDMUNDS INSIDE LINE: SUPERCREW SVT RAPTOR COMING!

Comment: Another brilliant move by FoMoCo! Just be sure to get your SVT Raptor before 2016 Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards kill all high-performance fun. By the way, Mr. Mulally, where is the DOHC version of the 6.2 Boss?

AUTOWEEK: 2011 SMS 302 MUSTANG: STEVE SALEEN’S BACK (BUT HOW MANY WILL CARE?)

Comment: 440 hp and 400 ft-lb of torque “all motor” and “more than” 535 hp and 450 lbs/ft of torque supercharged is serious Coyote V8 power. But will SMS Mustangs, starting at $54,990 (unsupercharged) be price-competitive with Ford’s revised Shelby GT500 and a host of other tuner ‘Stangs? And some old Saleen customers will probably wonder where all of the “wretched excess” vents and “cheese grater” scoops have gone.

Here’s a photo montage of the SMS 302:


CHINA AUTO SHOW: DID MERCEDES-BENZ MISSPELL “SHOOTING BREAK” ON A CONCEPT CAR

Comment: A “shooting brake” in “Queen’s English” is often viewed as the same as a station wagon or SUV in America. (However, purists cringe when “Shooting Brake” is applied to wagons with more than two doors). Some question Mercedes-Benz’s use of the term “Shooting Break” on its new Chinese Auto Show concept car. But the etymology of the “Shooting break/brake” moniker is far more tortured than it first appears. We say: Give ‘em a break . . .

TASCA’S 2010 FORD COBRA JET MUSTANG RUNS 8.97 AT153 M.P.H.

Comment: Another milestone for the Tasca family and Ford Racing. But when (if ever) is Ford going to “take it to the streets” with a “blue collar” supercharged or EcoBoost (tm) Coyote V8?

Of course, TASCA doesn’t have the only Cobra Jet Mustang. Here’s new video of some Cobra Jets rocking Milan in testing:

And earlier this year, John Rains ripped the inaugural Mojave Mile event with a 182.9 M.P.H. pass in FR500CJ Mustang.

Also at the Mojave Mile event, Jim Hahn made a proud (and oversized) display of Ford’s blue oval on his 1968 Mustang race car.


ROUSH FENWAY AND RICHARD PETTY MOTORSPORTS TO RUN FR9 ENGINES AT TALLADEGA
Comment: We can’t get too excited about the idea of non-production “stock car” engines (or common-template “car of tomorrow” “stock cars” for that matter). But as long as everybody else has them, Ford must have them too. The slow FR9 roll-out continues at Talladega in the Aaron’s 499, with a “majority” of Fords in the field scheduled to use the new NASCAR-only mill. Maybe it will improve Ford’s results.


CARS SPEEDZZTER LIKES (SORT OF): CHUCKLES GARAGE "STRANGE BIRD" 1962 FORD FALCON FUTURA GASSER
Comment: While we can’t approve of a GM powerplant (Buick Nailhead) in a Ford, this video of the under-construction “Strange Bird” gasser shows promise. Of course it’d be better with a wicked FE or Cammer recessed into the firewall and a bit more wheelbase alteration. Still this video shows that McNamara’s Falcon can be built into a wild hot rod.

WAR ON V8s: VOLVO TO KILL V8 OPTION?

[Get the latest "Truth With Speedzzter" here]

Jalopnik is reporting that soon to be ex-Ford Volvo is canning all sorts of appealing hardware, including the V8 option for the S80.

For the time being, the Volvo V8 will remain available in the XC90 because a turbo six is not available.

While this move may seem to some as merely consolidation, in the bigger picture, it's a harbinger of what's likely to be a recurring story during the model years leading up to the draconian 35.5 m.p.g. Corporate Average Fuel Economy standard in 2016.

As Truth With Speedzzter wrote on Bangshift.com regarding GM's development of an EcoBoost-fighting 3.0 twin-turbo V6:

But the overwhelming concern is probably future compliance with CAFE standards. These turbo V6s are clearly aimed at V8 territory. And some experts predict that even V6s aren't going to be very common by 2016. http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100322/OEM06/303229994/1186 & http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100322/OEM06/303229992/1186

To be sure, CAFE and the confluence of lazy marketing (the entire basis of the current EcoBoost "economy of a six with the power of a V8" campaign) and rabid beancounting is shaping up to be a "war on V8s." Just the "Cash For Clunkers" giveaway amounted to a war on vintage V8s (and a backdoor attack on hot rodding and other forms of grassroots motorsports), the current pressures against new V8s amounts to a "second front" in the Anti-V8 war.

As Truth With Speedzzter further explained at Bangshift:

If GM obtains about the same horsepower-per-liter as the EcoTec turbo/DI 2.0 (~130 hp/l), the GM 3.0 will produce around 390 h.p.

Of course Ford's initial EcoBoost engine is tuned more for quick response and a flat torque curve than maximum h.p. And reportedly FoMoCo is working on "Project Bobcat" (supplemental direct ethanol injection), which would easily crest 130 hp/l. Former FoMoCo exec Dr. Neil Ressler is involved in Ethanol Boosting Systems, L.L.C., the holder of key patents on the EBS process. http://www.ethanolboost.com/

[UPDATE: "Project Bobcat" has primarily been a government-grant subsidized research project aimed at light truck powerplants. Mike Harrison, FoMoCo's chief engineer on 5.0-liter and 6.2-liter "Boss" truck V8s, who told Autoblog Green "the 5.0-liter Bobcat was actually derived from the old 5.4-liter V8 currently used in the F150 and the Shelby GT500."

Autoblog Green further reported "For Bobcat use, the longer-stroke 5.4 was used in combination with a smaller bore giving thicker cylinder walls needed to withstand the high internal pressures of the boosted 750 pound-foot engine. According to Harrison, the Bobcat was part of a Department of Energy-funded research project and there are no current plans for a production engine based on the technology. Harrison tells us that the extra cost of the dual injection systems and more robust block and heads negates much of the savings from not needing a diesel after-treatment system."

It would appear that the Modular's FWD-oriented narrow bore centers may have scuttled another promising development. Moreover, Ford may have decided to focus more on turbo-diesels, which will not pay as many "trickle-down" dividends to hot rodders and grassroots motorsports enthusiasts as a "full-throttle" development of a "Bobcat" EBS system would]

It's unlikely that the current regime at Ford is going to get beat in a horsepower war. For example, a recent chassis dyno test of the Coyote-Powered 2011 Mustang GT yielded the following:


Quote:
"Inside Line's tester reliably belted out 395 horsepower at 6,600 RPM and 365 pound-feet of torque at 4,350 rpm. That's at the wheel, natch, and since IL estimates the 'Stang sees only an 11% to 13% driveline loss thanks to its stick axle, the car is likely making somewhere between 438 and 446 horsepower at the crank -- far more than the advertised 412.

This should come as no surprise to anyone, especially Inside Line. After all, last year they did the same thing with a 2010 GT500 only to learn that - surprise! - it was underrated. (Their tester put down 511 horsepower at the wheel. The guys figured the number at the crank to be around 570 horses, not the 540 advertised)."

IS THE COYOTE V8 THE LAST HURRAH FOR MASS-MARKET V8 POWER?

Regardless of how incredible the new DOHC Coyote V8 is (or could be in supercharged, EcoBoost or Twincharged form), the pressure of CAFE will force engine downsizing.

Uwe Grebe, General Motors executive director for global advanced engineering, told Automotive News that meeting CAFE will be costly because "everyone is done picking the low-hanging fruit." He suggests the improvements to conventional engines and drivelines will "include turbocharging, gasoline direct injection, variable valve timing, cylinder deactivation and dual-clutch transmissions. Grebe estimates that 15 to 20 percent more fuel economy can be squeezed out of conventional gasoline powertrains."

Cutting the number of cylinders will be a quick and lazy method to reduce cubic inches.

Certainly, smaller V8s that are scaled-down to equivalent cubic-inch displacement of current sixes and even fours could produce striking fuel economy along with the sounds, driving feel, and aesthetics of traditional V8. But the marketers are simply too lazy to make the sales case for up-to-date "right-sized" DOHC turbo V8s and the green-eye-shade gang is probably too cheap to fund them.

Sadly, V8s are increasingly likely to become an endangered species. They will be sacrificed for no legitimate reason on the altars of uninformed public opinion, cost cutting, and regulatory compliance.

Volvo's decision is just an early warning of this.

2011 FORD MUSTANG "COYOTE" 5.0 SPANKS CAMARO SS . . . IN FUEL ECONOMY?

(Get the latest "Truth With Speedzzter" here)

The more advanced dual-overhead-cam, four-valve 5.0 liter Coyote V8, standard in the 2011 Ford Mustang GT, is widely expected to more than make up for the lost years of being down on power to Chevrolet's pushrod two-valve V8 Camaro.

But the Environmental Protection Agency has proven Ford's Coyote V8 wins in another, perhaps unexpected area: fuel economy. "Government Motors'" antiquated pushrod engine design and portly "Holden" Camaro are no match for the lighter, more efficient 2011 Mustang. And that's without even adding start-stop, electric hybrid assist, or cylinder deactivation! So theoretically, there's even more part-throttle efficiency that Ford left on the table (for now).

While "Truth With Speedzzter" is troubled by developments such as the ridiculous, V8-less Volvo-Taurus-based 2012 "Police Interceptor," (a Coyote V8 in the Panther chassis would likely "intercept" the 2012 PI in cost, reduced complexity, performance, serviceability, and durability), at least FoMoCo still has one RWD V8 with a bright future.

Here's FoMoCo's glowing press release:

DEARBORN, Mich., March 16, 2010 – The 2011 Ford Mustang GT, powered by a new 412-hp 5.0-liter V-8 engine, adds yet another notch to its belt: an EPA rating of 26 mpg highway when equipped with the six-speed manual transmission, giving it the best fuel economy in its class.

"The 2011 Mustang continues to exceed expectations in every category, and these fuel economy numbers are another chapter in an incredible story," said Derrick Kuzak, Ford's group vice president, Global Product Development. "To offer this kind of horsepower and class-leading fuel economy in a comfortable, beautiful, tech-savvy and affordable package – it's really unprecedented."

With the six-speed manual transmission, Mustang GT coupe is rated at 17 mpg city and
26 highway, while models with the available six-speed automatic achieve 18 mpg city and
25 highway.

The GT's best in class fuel numbers come on the heels of the Mustang V-6, which just last week cracked the record books as not only the most fuel-efficient Mustang ever, but also the first production car in history to produce 305 horsepower and 31 mpg highway.

Mustang GT is powered by an all-new 5.0-liter double-overhead-camshaft (DOHC) V-8 with a host of advanced features to deliver the combination of power and class-leading fuel economy.

Twin Independent Variable Camshaft Timing (Ti-VCT) adjusts the valvetrain in microseconds depending on driver inputs. A carefully tuned intake and exhaust system ensures free breathing at all engine speeds. And all-aluminum construction results in a lightweight yet durable powerplant.

A pair of new transmissions, both with six forward ratios, also play a large part in making the 2011 Mustang a breakthrough car. Regardless of whether drivers want to shift for themselves or let the car shift for them, they're treated to carefully chosen gear ratios to maximize fuel economy while still delivering high-horsepower performance

"Mustang powertrain development has reached a point where customers don't have to choose between fuel efficiency and performance," says Barb Samardzich, Ford vice president of Global Powertrain Engineering. "Thanks to technologies like Ti-VCT and our six-speed gearboxes, a Mustang driver has the best of both worlds."

Fuel economy improvements on all Mustang models
Mustang GT shares fuel economy accolades with the new 3.7-liter Mustang V-6 – the first production car ever to offer both 300-plus horsepower and 31 mpg on the highway. Official 2011 EPA fuel economy ratings for the Mustang product line are:

Mustang V-6

*19 mpg city and 31 highway (automatic coupe)
*19 mpg city and 29 highway (manual coupe)

Mustang GT

*18 mpg city and 25 highway (automatic coupe)
*17 mpg city and 26 highway (manual coupe)


In addition to powertrain improvements, upgrades to Mustang's body and chassis design contribute to its 2011 performance. Examples include:

*New EPAS eliminates the drag of an engine-operated hydraulic power steering pump
*Combined with the new six-speed transmissions, standard 3.31 (manual) and 3.15 (automatic) rear axle ratios provide an ideal blend of relaxed cruising rpm and all-out acceleration
*Aerodynamic improvements include a new front fascia on the Mustang GT, tire spats on the rear wheels, modified underbody shields, a taller air dam and an added rear decklid seal

The 2011 Mustang is built at the AutoAlliance International Plant in Flat Rock, Mich., and goes on sale this spring.

MULALLY TO AUSTRALIA: YOU’LL GET THE TAURUS AND LIKE IT

[Get the latest “Truth With Speedzzter” here]

Ford Motor Company boss Alan Mulally’s penny-pinching obsession with “One Ford” (i.e. ending home market models and selling only “global” platforms) has broadsided the legendary RWD Australian Ford Falcon at Detroit’s 2010 International Auto Show.

According to Australia’s “Drive” website, Mulally intends to kill off the home-market RWD Falcon and cram some future derivative of the wimpy, V8-less, Volvo-derived FWD Taurus down the throats of Australia’s motorists. The story reports:

Ford's large car is likely to be based on the American-designed and built front-wheel-drive Taurus, which was unsuccessfully imported into Australia in the 1990s

.

As one sagacious commenter on Bangshift.com observed:

Mr. M has that bass-ackward, he needs to bring the Falcon to the states. So there. Bet 1/2 billion Falcon owners back me on that one. Taurus my assus.

Another RWD V8 fan on Bangshift.com blasted back:

Memo to Alan M.:

Sir

Cranial-Rectal Inversion has hit. Remove head and try again. Use supplied crowbar.

Seemingly only Mulally and a room-full of idiotic accountants are enamored with sending the wrong-wheel-drive “Chicago Bull” to the Land Down Under.

The short-sightedness at the heart of this “One Ford” decision is the same sort of “penny-wise, pound-foolish” thinking that saddled what’s probably “the last of the V8s – Ford’s Coyote V8 -- with the same 100mm bore centers and similar spindly powdered metal rods as the “Gen I” modulars.

(Ford’s loyal, GM LS-fighting hot rodders really only wanted three main problems fixed with the DOHC modular: (1) displacement-limiting narrow bore centers, (2) glass-jawed hypereutectic pistons, (3) spindly cracked cap rods. And Ford’s Coyote V8 apparently fails to deliver any of these. 5.0 Mustang & Super Fords reports that the Coyote’s flimsy stock internals (save the forged crank) WILL NOT WITHSTAND SUPERCHARGING IN STOCK FORM!

Ford has apparently learned little in the past twenty years about how their customers tend to modify their Mustangs or what made the original 5.0 such a phenomenon.

But it’s at least better than the “buzzin’ half-dozen” V6s that are mandatory in Ford’s large FWD/AWD vehicles.)

The ever coy Mulally reportedly told the press that the decision to make the next global large car FWD, AWD or RWD doesn’t have to be made until 2011. But it should already be obvious that a fairly important group of Ford’s customer base still wants RWD and optional V8s.

Perhaps to pacify the critics, Mulally blew a little “imaginary” smoke the way of the RWD advocates:

"We also have some really good RWDs, like the Mustang. You can imagine another new platform, just like the Falcon, that's going to be RWD for Mustang, so you can imagine driving the One Ford we're going to have every one of those, and so there's no reason why we can't have it in Australia."

What we really imagine, Alan, is that “One Ford” is going to combine with CO2 and Corporate Average Fuel Economy jitters, myopic beancounting, and bureaucratic “appliance motoring” sensibilities to justify the “business case” for killing V8s and RWD. And that would be a mistake of Roger Smithian proportions.

BOSS 302R, FORD'S NEW Ti-VCT SYSTEM, AND CAR CRAFT FINALLY "ROCKS THE SHOP"

[Get the latest "Truth With Speedzzter" here]

Today's Truth With Speedzzter is a potpourri of stories that should interest Ford-o-philes:

CELEBRATING THE BOSS 302

[This is where Ford's photo would have gone if Blogger would have loaded it]

Ford's social media outreach program is highlighting Ford Racing's release of the awesome Boss 302R Mustang. Are the 50 track-ready Boss 302Rs a prelude to a future EPA/DOT-legal Boss 302?

Here's a few highlights from the press release:

In honor of the 40th anniversary of Parnelli Jones’ 1970 Trans-Am championship in a Mustang BOSS 302 prepared by Bud Moore Engineering, Ford Racing is introducing the BOSS 302R, a factory-built race car ready for track days and road racing in a number of Grand-Am, SCCA and NASA classes.

Ready to race

The Mustang BOSS 302R is a serialized off-road-only vehicle ready to race. Each base model will come with a 5.0-liter four-valve engine and a six-speed manual transmission with a roll cage, race seats, safety harness, data acquisition and race dampers/springs, and a Brembo brake and tire package, starting at an MSRP of $79,000.

And, with a special Grand-Am Homologation Package (M-FR500-BOSS R1), it will also be ready to compete in the Grand-Am Continental Tire Sports Car Challenge series (formerly known as KONI Challenge), starting with the season-opening race in Daytona on Jan. 29, 2010. As of today, five BOSS 302R race cars will be delivered to customers ready to race in Daytona. MSRP of the BOSS 302R1 is $129,000.

The Grand-Am Continental Tire Sports Car Challenge-ready Mustang BOSS 302R will feature a sealed high-output race engine with an upgraded cooling system, a close-ratio six-speed transmission with integral shifter, a seam-welded body, race suspension/KONI dampers and ABS brake tuning, race performance exhaust and a high-speed balance one-piece driveshaft.

A winning track record

The BOSS 302R follows in the very successful footsteps of its most recent road racing predecessor – the Mustang FR500C from Ford Racing. In 2005, when the Mustang FR500C debuted at Daytona, the first car was delivered on Wednesday of that week and won the KONI Challenge race on Friday.

In five years of competition since then, the Mustang FR500C has won three Triple Crown championships of driver, team and manufacturer’s titles in KONI competition including back-to-back (2008 and 2009). The FR500C has also seen success in FIA GT4 competition winning the 2007 and 2008 driver’s championships.

Each Ford Racing factory-built production-based turnkey race car has won its competition debut.

Available through Ford dealers, a total of 50 BOSS 302R Mustangs will be built by Ford Racing. Delivery is anticipated in the third quarter of 2010.

For more information on Ford Racing Performance Parts, please visit www.fordracingparts.com.

FOMOCO EXPLAINS COYOTE V8'S TWIN INDEPENDENT VARIABLE CAMSHAFT TIMING (TI-VCT)

Another smokin' hot social media press release from the Glass House Gang is about the 2011 5.0 liter Coyote V8's not-so-secret weapon: Dual overhead camshafts (DOHC) with independently vairable camshaft timing. Ford calls its new camshaft timing system "Ti-VCT."

Truth With Speedzzter call it "ABOUT TIME!"

While Truth With Speedzzter worries that bore spacing will quell interest in the Coyote as a hot rod 'plant and frets that the Coyote's purported stratospheric compression ratio will make fitting superchargers and other power-adders more costly, Ford's use of DOHC with Ti-VCT means that Ford is now competitive with most state-of-the-art foreign V8s!

That's real progress!

Here's the scoop from the press release:

“Ti-VCT is a win-win-win technology. It helps our new range of engines to deliver high performance with unsurpassed projected highway fuel economy of 25 miles per gallon and reduced emissions.”
– Barb Samardzich, Vice President, Global Powertrain Development

“Ti-VCT technology will continue to proliferate across the Ford powertrain portfolio. By 2013, you can expect to see this advancement available on 90 percent of our nameplates.”
– Barb Samardzich, Vice President, Global Powertrain Development

* * * *

Ti-VCT provides extremely precise variable – yet independent – control of timing for intake and exhaust valves. Drivers of the 2011 Mustang GT will notice abundant torque and class-leading fuel economy. An additional benefit of Ti-VCT is a reduction of emissions, especially in situations when the throttle is partially open.

Independent adjustment of intake and exhaust valve timing allows maximum fuel economy at part-throttle, while delivering optimized power in full-throttle situations. An added benefit is improved drivability and responsiveness across the torque curve.

How Ti-VCT works

The new 5.0-liter V-8 in the 2011 Mustang GT is a double-overhead-camshaft configuration that employs two camshafts per cylinder bank – one camshaft to operate the intake valves and one camshaft to operate the exhaust valves. Ti-VCT rotates the camshafts to advance or retard the cam timing, based on several measures including throttle opening.

An element unique to the Mustang GT 5.0-liter V-8 application is that Ti-VCT is actuated by camshaft torque, with assistance from pressurized oil. Using camshaft torque energy provides faster throttle response and maximizes use of existing energy, to aid fuel economy. Camshaft torque energy Ti-VCT actuation is a Ford innovation, introduced first on the 3.0-liter V-6.

Working like a ratchet, the one-way valves allow precise timing of camshaft events, continually optimizing timing to provide maximum thrust or fuel economy, based on driver input.

Truth With Speedzzter can't wait to test a Coyote-powered 2011 and report on how Ti-VCT works in the "real world."

CAR CRAFT MAGAZINE FINALLY "ROCKS THE SHOP"

Car Craft Magazine is often accused of being "Camaro Craft," "Chevy Craft" or "Chevelle Craft."

Part of that stereotype comes from greybeard Senior Editor Jeff Smith's apparent, undying devotion to Chevrolet and shilling for GM's "Less-V8" (the LS-series V8 engine that replaced the venerated "small block Chevy")

CC's readers regularly complain about CC's lack of balance among the American performance brands.

Source Interlink Media, CC's corporate parent, recently moved out of the Petersen Tower to new offices in what looks in photos like a nondescript low-rise office/warehouse. In an apparent sarcastic reference to the move, CC called its March 2010 issue "The cubicle farm issue."

Maybe Source Interlink should move editorial offices more often.

Why?

Because the March 2010 issue of Car Craft detours from the "LesS-V8" love-fest of the last few issues. (Maybe the GM bankruptcy is finally having a positive effect?) And it's way better than the "Camaro Craft" or "Super Chevy Lite" that CC's often accused of being.

Here's a few highlights:

COVER: All the photos are Chevy (except for a couple of easily-overlooked 302 Windsors) , but the blurbs mention . . . Cadillac (!) . . . "Junkyard 318" (MOPAR!) . . . "450HP 4.6 Mod" (Ford) . . . .

FRONT MAN: A fuzzy photo of a DODGE DART!

READERS' PAGES: '69 Plymouth Baracuda . . . '85 Oldsmobile Cutlass (with a real OLDS ROCKET V8 under the hood!)

"BURNOUT!!"page: '81 Ford F150 . . . 40th Anniversary Edition Shelby GT500 . . . '70 Ford Econoline E-350 Van Ambulance (with the "rollers" lit and turning!)

STRAIGHT SCOOP: "Plum Crazy" SRT-8 Challenger . . . Ford Kent engine . . . Dodge Dakota-look "WaterCar Python" amphibious roadster pickup (okay, that one's a little weird) . . . 2010 Mustang GT drop-top . . . Iacocca Mustang . . . a quotation from Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne . . .

THIS GUY'S GARAGE: A real world, non-million dollar shop (12'x22')owned by an NYC Transit System Maintenance Super (a guy that works for a living) with an in-progress '68 Mustang!

SPEEDSHOP: A wild twin turbo kit (alas on a Chevy) and a Eaton/Magnuson TVS blower kit for 2V Modulars! (NOTE TO CC: BUILD THE 500+ HP ex-cop Crown Victoria! Do it! Do it!)

HORSEPOWER: 1,000 h.p. twin turbo real Cadillac V8 (not a Chevy!)

GARAGE BUILT STROKER: A 347-cube Ford 302!

500HP CHRYSLER FOR $5,000*: A build on a "Junkyard 318!" and a sidebar on a 662 h.p. blown 318! (how 'bout hanging a couple of turbos and intercoolers on it?)

BUY A USED ENGINE: 455 Oldsmobile (with a few token "Less-V8" shots mixed in)

CC QUICKIES: AMC HORNET, '51 Ford Gasser & F100, Ford GT piston oil squirter (and a blurb about more Mod Motor tech next month!)

CAR FEATURES: 460-powered, Thunderbolt-style '64 Fairlane! . . . Paxton-supercharged, Mod Motor in a wicked '92 Crown Victoria! . . . RSE-winning Dodge Viper!

ON THE RACK: Only 2/3 of a page wasted . . . .

JUNKYARD CRAWL: Bullet-riddled 1951 Cadillac POLICE TRUCK!?!

BEHIND THE SCENES: KAASE BOSS! . . . CC/Rambler 401 AMC . . . .44 Magnum!

You'd better buy two, because you'll wear the first one out, pronto!

COYOTE 5.0 WEIGHS 430 lbs; RIPS 7,000 R.P.M.; MAKES 412 H.P.

[Get the latest "Truth With Speedzzter" here]

Chevrolet's nightmare is now official. The 2011 Mustang GT will feature a lightweight, high-reving DOHC five-liter V8!

FoMoCo's official announcement of the 2011 Coyote 5.0 does not answer the critical "bore & stroke" or bore spacing questions (the biggest mistake in the design of the Gen I modular V8 was tight, FWD-ready bore centers that prevented aftermarket enlargments to be cube-for-cube competitive with the low-tech Gen III Chrysler Hemi and the antediluvian GM LS V8). But the announcement confirms many rumored advances:

-- Engine weight is reportedly a flyweight 430 pounds!

-- Redline 7,000 (It's not just an old Howard Hawkes movie anymore)!

-- Factory delivered horsepower is 412 (although less than Camaro SS, Mustang's weight advantage should make it a smashmouth competitior straight off the showroom floor.

--"cam-torque-actuated variable camshaft timing."

-- aluminum four-valve-per-cylinder heads featuring compact roller finger followers ("more room for high-flow ports for free-breathing performance")

-- 10,000-mile oil change intervals.

-- Piston-cooling jets.

-- tubular exhaust headers.

Now if we can just have those bore center numbers and more details on the short block . . . .

MAJOR BUZZ KILL UPDATE: Goauto.com.au is reporting that the Coyote will share the too-narrow bore centers of the Gen I modular: "While that's slightly up on the 4.6, with which the 5.0 shares its bore centres and deck height . . . ." Goauto reports the bore is 92.2mm and the stroke is 92.7mm.

If these reports are true, it means that Ford has again ceded the bulk of "hot rod" and re-power aftermarket to GM and missed a once-in-a-generation opportunity to unseat GM as the default engine choice for aftermarket performance builds.

HOW SHOULD FORD INTRODUCE THE COYOTE V8?

[Get the latest “Truth With Speedzzter” here]

The biggest news in Ford Performance for 2010 is the introduction of the Coyote V8 in the 2011 Mustang.

The Coyote reportedly corrects the narrow bore center problem of the 1992-Present Modular V8 and should make Ford more than competitive with GM’s LS and Chrysler’s Gen III Hemi.

But how should Ford hammer this point home?


Heads up racing.

Nothing will get potential customers talking up the Coyote better than shutting down the current popularity king of the late model V8s – GM’s LS.

And no better place for such an assault exists than the Car Craft Magazine Engine Swap Drags on Sunday March 28, 2010, at SpeedWorld Dragstrip in Arizona.

This new event will be for heads-up racing of 1991-1955 model American street cars (no tube frames, decals or imports). Only two classes will run (power adder and naturally aspirated), although other classes will be running at the track that day (a good back-up plan if Ford wanted to run some Ford Racing Cobra Jet Mustangs on the track the same day for "comparison purposes.")

The winner gets an ocean of free publicity in Car Craft Magazine, and likely in other Source Interlink Media publications, as well as on YouTube and the internet.

The timing of the event perfectly coincides with the expected launch of the Coyote V8.

The early buzz suggests that Mustangs defaced with GM LS V8s are the hot set up. That should make the blood of guys like Ford Racing’s Brian Wolfe and Jack Roush boil.

It would likely take operating outside normal corporate channels, but entering a few old Mustangs powered by hopped-up naturally-aspirated and supercharged/turbocharged Coyote test engines could yield a public relations bonanza for Ford.

As a hedge, some Modular Cobra Jet engines could be swapped into back-up cars.

A modest effort with 3 or 4 cars ought to be enough to guarantee a ton of favorable magazine coverage. If Ford were to use trusted contractors and existing eligible cars, the cost could be literally peanuts!

And a Coyote win would put the engine on the gearheads’ map better than $1 million dollars worth of advertising.

Some guys, such as Paul Svinicki of Paul’s High Performance Inc. say that the Modular is on par with the LS. But that’s not the popular perception. And if the Ford powers-that-be miss this opportunity to “represent,” the LS-is-Best perception will be reinforced in the minds of hundreds of thousands of Car Craft readers.

Some naysayers will claim that running Coyotes in old Mustangs will do nothing to spark 2011 Mustang sales. Nothing could be further from the truth. V8 buyers will want to know early if the Coyote has got the chops to beat the LS. And they’re smart enough to figure out that if a built Coyote runs hard in a Fox-Body, then it can be made to run hard in a new 2011 Mustang.

Come on Ford Racing . . . Just do it!

IS GEORGE PIPAS “ON THE PIPE” ABOUT THE MUSTANG-CAMARO SALES WAR? (Or, where are the "Coyote" and "Road Runner" V8s when we need them?)

[Get the latest “Truth With Speedzzter” here]

The Detroit Free Press is reporting that “Camaro is muscling in on top spot of Mustang” and is now less than 10,000 units behind in the annual sales race.

For the past five months, Government Motors’ pavement-pounding Camaro has been slamming the underpowered 2010 Mustang in retail deliveries. Camaro closed the gap by a whopping 3,000 units in October, according to the FREEP’s Tim Higgins and Brent Snavely.



CUSTOMIZED CAMAROS BEING PREPARED FOR DISPLAY AT THE 2009 SEMA SHOW

FoMoCo’s top sales genius George Pipas valiantly tried to spin what’s shaping up to be an epic, clearly foreseeable retailing disaster, quipping to the FREEP "I don't think Mustang sales would have been much different one way or another."

Pipas further rationalized that "What we are seeing right now is 10 years of pent-up demand ... rather than some positive indicator about the economy."

Right next to Pipas’ musings in the internet version of the FREEP’s story is graphic a showing Mustang’s sales nose-diving after March 2009. To anyone with an elementary school familiarity with charts and graphs, the data unmistakably shows Camaro and Dodge’s Challenger are tearing through Mustang’s market share like famished termites on a rotten two-by-four. Only the Mustang is trending downward. It’s not “pent-up demand” so much as a good, old-fashioned drubbing by products that seem to have a bigger “rep” and more buzz on the streets.

Some long-suffering Mustang advocates should be forgiven for thinking that Pipas must be “on the pipe” if he really believes what he’s shoveling . . . .

Pipas may be right insofar as the current Mustangs (excluding the hyper-expensive, limited-production dealer gougefest known at the Shelby GT500) are so down on advertised power in both V8 and V6 forms to their rivals that nothing short of a biblical miracle could save this sales year.

It doesn’t do much good to “Win on Sunday” if what you’re selling on Monday is going to get mercilessly whipped in countless bench racing sessions and stoplight grand prixs on the weekdays.

How anyone from the Glass House Gang could wade into any multi-brand automotive forum or chat room and be remotely pleased with current brand perceptions of the weak-sister production Mustangs is a mystery. If the Ford “suits” really believe that sales wouldn’t be “much different one way or another,” someone must be making container-load deliveries of Prozac to 1 American Road, Dearborn, Michigan.

And even if the lithe Mustangs had a better power-to-weight ratio (which in the ordinary blue-collar forms they surely don’t) than the portly Camaros and Challengers, bragging rights on the streets are based on “fan-boy” statistics like cubic inches, horsepower, and reported quarter mile times. In every one of these emotionally-charged measures, the 2010 Mustang comes up lame.

How anyone thought that Ford could sell a V8 Mustang GT that’s on virtual horsepower parity with the base Camaro’s V6 and gets slaughtered in market and aftermarket perception by GM’s antediluvian pushrod V8 is self-delusion of the highest order.

This website has been calling on Ford to quit fooling around for almost half a decade, yet Ford still hasn’t built an affordable V8 Mustang that can credibly take on even a slightly modified $4,000 LT or LS-powered USED Camaro, much less one of the smashmouth 426 horsepower new ones!

It’s almost as if a clueless bunch of Robert McNamara clones are micro-managing the storied Mustang into extinction.

Where are the swashbucklers who will not stand for Mustang to be second or third best in BOTH stock and customer-modified forms? Where are the clued-in “street rats” who understand the logical and emotional essentials to winning the Pony Car war? Where are the champions who can defeat the paralysis of Ford’s bureaucracy and actually offer a car that Mustangers want?

In virtually every important measure other than quality, fit and finish, Mustang is getting pummeled in public perception:

1. Bang for the buck – How many people would pay in the mid-30s for a “track pack” Mustang that’s 100 horsepower down on its competitively-priced rivals? Apparently not enough.

2. Power-to-weight – It’s closer than some folks think, but this arcane engineering measure is evidenced by M.P.H. in standing quarter mile testing. And the Mustangs are coming up short again.

3. The “Look”– Pony cars are a fashion-based segment. A pony car has to be tastefully and purposefully communicative of speed and power. It must be properly accessorized as well.

Both Camaro and Challenger have done a better job at capturing the essence of the boulevard bruiser than the mildly redesigned 2010 Mustang. And given the lack of steam under the average Mustang’s hood, the Mustang’s mild looks have become linked with a perception of milktoast performance.

4. The “Sound” – Mustangs still sound hot . . . even more so with the new “piped-in” induction sound tube. But in the buzzin’ half-dozen segment of the Pony Car market, some say Chevy’s high-reving direct-injection DOHC has got better "pipes."

5. Image – Pony Cars need to posit a swaggering image of competition heritage, non-conformity/individuality, and adventurous spirit. This image must be wrapped up in a car that’s practical, useable and “bulletproof” reliable.

While Ford might have the edge in actual competition at the moment, the image isn’t successfully transferring down to the street.

6. Cake Mix – An apocryphal story from the early days of pre-packaged cake mixes is that millers discovered consumers wanted “mixes” that were easy to make, but required the addition of more than just water before baking. The perception was that a “just add water” cake mix didn’t allow for enough participation by the home baker.

Similarly, a successfully Pony Car has to have dominating “bang” out of the box, but it’s got to “leave enough on the table” to prompt “Day Two” or post-warranty modification. And it’s got to be easy to work on.

GM’s LS V8 is clobbering Ford’s cubic-inch limited Modular in these respects. Although Ford’s seldom-used DOHC design has much more cube-for-cube on-paper potential than an obsolete two-valve pushrod engine, GM is continuing to dominate the aftermarket – and aftermarket perceptions – with their big, crude sledgehammer of an engine.

What’s worse, Ford has seen fit to hamstring all of its “blue collar” V8 Mustangs with glass-weak hypereutectic pistons, spindly cracked-cap powdered-metal rods, cast cranks, and inadequate SOHC two-valve and three-valve heads. These light-duty cheapskate parts severely limit the “cake mix” potential of stock long-block Ford engines in the hands of opinion-leading hot rodders. Mustangers are forced to buy expensive aftermarket forged cranks, rods and pistons to withstand the necessary supercharger/turbocharger/nitrous oxide boosts just to stay competitive with the larger GM V8s. And as GM rodders also buy these heavy-duty components, the market perceptions of the “upside potential” of the bigger LS engine eclipses the Modular.

A wide-bore center DOHC modular (Coyote?) cannot arrive soon enough to stop the bleeding. And even then, Ford will be pumping against a half-century of prejudice and aftermarket investment favoring GM’s “small block.” So Ford’s DOHC engine must have significantly greater “cake mix” potential, as well as dominating showroom output. And it’s got to be priced at point where millions of ordinary wage-earning Mustangers can afford it.

[SOME INTERNET RUMORMONGERS ARE EVEN PUSHING THE THE IDEA OF A TURBOCHARGED GT500, CODE NAME "ROAD RUNNER," AS A RESPONSE TO THE LS/CAMARO PROBLEM FOR 2012 . . . . Public confirmation of the Coyote and Road Runner rumors could come as early as the 2009 Los Angeles Auto Show in December The Coyote Mustangs could be in showrooms as early as March 2010 . . . not a moment too soon]

7. Drivability – A successful Pony Car’s driveability has to be seamless and maneuverable. This is one of the few areas where the lighter Mustang shines.

Even then, the often clueless “buff books,” imported car shills, and internet “experts” repeatedly lambast Ford’s beam-style rear axle. Mustang’s rugged beam axle is clearly better for sportsman competition and serious “muscle car” use. It is highly competitive in stock-based competition as well. Too bad Ford hasn’t done a good enough job in explaining the unnecessary weight, expense and fragility of IRS for Pony Cars. Or in the alternative, offered an optional, bolt-in IRS similar to the 2003-2004 SVT Cobra’s system.

8. Practicality – The fastest, hottest-looking car in the world won't sell in sufficient numbers unless it also functions well as an automobile during the 95% of the time when looks and high-performance are irrelevant.

At the moment, this category may be a wash in the new Pony Car war. While the gunslit windows, tiny trunks and claustrophobic back seats of Mustang’s plus-sized domestic competitors should disadvantage them, Mustang does not seem to have any higher perceptions of practicality. Even Camaro’s weird ergonomics haven’t yet turned off customers intoxicated by the huge horsepower underfoot. All the practicality in the world doesn’t do enough if the Pony Car doesn’t deliver as a bench racing and track star as well.

GM also has an additional advantage in fuel economy perceptions. Camaro’s direct-injected V6 produces exceptional fuel economy in comparison to Ford’s lower-powered V6. And consumers believe the hulking LS V8s are more fuel-efficient than Ford’s smaller, weaker Mustang GT V8.

CONCLUSION: Ford knows better than probably anyone else that a Pony Car is a fashion statement purchased by thousands of individualistic “Walter Mittys” craving a sporting, high performance image and some tightly-coiled, objective and subjective performance to back it all up. At the moment, Mustang’s competitors are doing a better job at nurturing the dreams and expectations of these customers. And that’s why Mustang’s sales trend line is sinking like the Titanic.

IS THE RUMORED BOSS 302R A "COYOTE" PREVIEW?

[Get the latest "Truth With Speedzzter" here]

Multiple sources, including Bangshift.com, are reporting that Ford will build 50 "Boss 302R" Mustangs in 2010.

Students of recent Ford history will note that Ford has often released an "R model" Mustang or other "special" prior to selling a mass-produced street version with similar power:

300 h.p. 1995 Cobra R, which foreshadowed the 305 h.p. 1996 SVT Cobra;

390 h.p. 2000 Cobra R, which foreshadowed the 390 h.p. 2003 SVT Cobra;

540 h.p. 2008 Shelby GT500KR (as modified by Shelby in Las Vegas or Shelby mod shops) which foreshadowed the 540 h.p. 2010 Shelby GT500.

Now I'm not saying this "R" is a precursor to a street 5.0 "Coyote" Mustang, but it's something to think about . . . .

On the other hand, this move may suggest to some that Ford is going to fumble around and miss the limited window to build an affordable "ultimate" Mustang before Corporate Average Fuel Economy increases kill the party.

As it stands now, GM's 426-horsepower Camaro SS seems to be capturing all of the excitement in the below $45,000 supercar class.

Mustang's sales are reportedly being hurt by the horsepower deficit.

Ford needs to move quick in response to the GM threat. And 50 expensive, track-only cars won't cut it.

Just like the Bosses at the end of the First Supercar Era, the cars that Ford builds in the next couple of years will become legends over the next couple of decades. Let's hope that the bean-counting, appliance-motoring, "steady-Eddie" bureaucrats at Ford doesn't mess this up for all of us.

CAFE + CASH FOR CLUNKERS = FOMOCO'S "ONE-TWO PUNCH"

[Get the latest "Truth With Speedzzter here]

No doubt about it, William Clay Ford, Jr., Alan Mulally and the other radical greens at Ford Motor Company threw the automotive enthusiast and racing communities "under the bus" when they caved in to the infamous Obama-Schwarzenegger 42 m.p.g. Corporate Average Fuel Economy deal, and supported the disguised bailout/corporate welfare plan known as "Cash for Clunkers."

The company that's been gouging us for years on the overpriced Shelby GT500s, and which further plans to rip-off more of its most loyal customers with the bogus, V8-less Taurus SHO, is likely planning to use the OBAMA-nator's artificial market limitations to line its corporate pockets and kill off virtually all OEM rear wheel drive performance vehicles.

Under this fetid "deal" "Truth With Speedzzter" predicts that the vaporware "Coyote V8" will have one of the shortest careers for a mass-production engine ever.

Ford will wholly abandoned all pretense of serving the traditional RWD V8 enthusiast as it does backflips to cajole us into tiny, expensive Fiestas and other mini-cars that RWD V8 lovers will absolutely hate.

Whatever the OBAMA-Schwarzenegger-Eco era "Mustang" becomes, it's likely that current V8 ponycar customers will reject it as a worthy successor (even as Ford has done its dead level best to lag behind in the Second Supercar Era horsepower race with undersized V8s constructed with the weakest, cheapest, most worthless possible internal components). Of course, factory-paid journalists and propagandists will extol the virtues of the next generation wimpy, V8-less spiritual successor to the horrible 1974 Mustang II and the awful FWD Mazda-Probe-stang.

When that happens, there will be little if any reason for any Ford V8 traditionalists to darken the doors of a Ford dealership. The only thing that will be left of eighty years of affordable V8 performance tradtion at that point will be fading memories, and the dwendling number of collector Fords that somehow manage to escape the jaws of Billy Ford's "Cash-for-Clunkers" crushers.

Ford's "eco" politicking is simply a one-two punch to the guts and the wallets of its most loyal customers.

About the only other thing that's certain is that everything will cost a lot more.

Car Connection had this analysis:

The only reliable prediction, in fact, is that it will cost more--simply the cost of developing low-consumption new cars and advertising them to an uncertain public.

More involved is the dynamic for used cars. On the one hand, used-car prices are sure to rise as consumers can no longer buy a brand-new Chrysler 300C or Cadillac STS--as those companies get out of the big rear-drive-car business and shift their product mix heavily downward in size and engine output, some will opt instead to buy used and see how the new cars size up later. Since there will be a shortfall of new models as automakers spin on their heels to meet the new rules and to change American tastes roughly overnight, there will be a resulting shortfall in used cars as well. Shutting down production of bigger new cars now means fewer of them for sale later--and at the same time, more of you will want recent-model used cars that are bigger and safer on average, when compared to what you'll be offered in 2016.

Also pushing used-car prices higher: proposed cash-for-clunkers legislation. While some think it's yet another sop to the rich, giving a credit to people who can afford new cars, cash-for-clunkers deals also pull used cars with some value off the market. According to the Detroit News, under a plan still wending through Congress, drivers who turn in a car getting less than 18 mpg and purchasing one with fuel economy better than 22 mpg would get a voucher for $3,500 to $4,500 off a new car. Those incentives might very well take good used cars off the market for families that need low-cost used transportation.

Whatever the end result, the car of the future will look a lot less like today's Chrysler 300 and Ford Crown Victoria and a lot more like the 2011 Chevrolet Volt and the 2011 Ford Fiesta. Of the roughly 300 models sold in the U.S. today, about 130 meet a 30-mpg standard--not the nearly 40-mpg goal that will be required to blend with truck requirements and meet an overall goal of 35.5 miles per gallon

In other words, pay a lot more and get a lot less. Just like back in the 1970s.

FoMoCo and William Clay Ford, Jr. in particular, of course, apparently don't care about any of that. The Panther's dead. RWD is dead. V8s are dead. The Mustang as we know and love it is now on death row. Obama's plugging the wimpy hybrid Escape. And they're most likely giddy about all of that.

And they'd probably be happier if the Obama-Schwarzenegger assault on vehicular liberty destroys the "business case" for SVT, Ford Racing Performance Parts and Ford's support of motorsports. The appliance motorists in the Glass House will raise a toast with the liberal U.A.W. at the death of factory-built "American Muscle." The bean counters and "Steady Eddies" left in FoMoCo's bureaucracy will celebrate the "deproliferation" of high-performance options, just like they did in the 1970s.

As long as the per-widget profit margin is high enough, most of the hacks at Ford Motor Company would be happy building glacially-slow, one-cylinder plug-in hybrids. They simply just don't care about serving the wants, needs, and dreams of potential customers in the high-performance V8 market niche.

They will decry market-based oil imports as dangerous to "national security" even as they hypocritically become more beholden to cheap imported components and materials from Communist China and other places that categorically oppose America's national security.

And when the cookie-cutter, expensive new OBAMAmobile FWDs do not sell in sufficient volume to be profitable, William Clay Ford, Jr. and his paid public relations henchmen will undoubtedly be lobbying the Democrats for a draconian increase in the federal gas tax as a means of "re-educating" Ford customers to what Dearborn thinks is best for them.

The sad thing is that the thouands who would have enjoyed GT500-level RWD performance, had it been packaged in a more affordable form, will never have the opportunity.

ANOTHER REASON "TEAM MUSTANG" OUGHT TO FEAR THE 2010 CAMARO
(assuming GM hangs around long enough to build them, that is)

[Get the latest "Truth With Speedzzter" here]

According to the Los Angeles Times "Up To Speed" automotive blog:

Chevy originally suggested the EPA-rated highway gas mileage for the base-model Camaro with the V-6 engine and manual transmission would be 27 miles per gallon, but final EPA testing placed the highway number at 29 mpg -- not bad for a 304-horsepower, 3.6-liter engine. City mileage is EPA rated at 17 mpg.

Ford's relatively low-tech Mustang six lags far behind at the pump. (16 m.p.g. city/24 m.p.g highway)

Of course there's simply no techological reason why Ford couldn't match or beat the V6 Camaro's fuel efficiency with a properly outfitted V8 engine in a RWD Mustang. A smaller, high-tech EcoBoost V8 (or better yet, a "twincharged" DOHC V8 outfitted with Ethanol Boosting Systems' direct ethanol injection) would provide a traditional symphony of V8 sounds on demand (Fabulous sounds no "buzzin' half-dozen" or rough, raucous "weed whacker" four could ever hope to duplicate) yet deliver spectacular part-throttle fuel economy.

A high-tech EcoBoost V8 in the 2.0-3.5 liter range could be a legendary high-performance engine which would preserve Ford's V8 tradition during the coming "Automotive dark ages" and would have measurably more panache than a relatively boring EcoBoost 4 or 6.

(Competition-savvy readers will note that the legendary Ford Cosworth DFV V8 was a 3.0liter engine and the later turbocharged Ford Cosworth XB/XD/XF V8s were 2.65 liter engines.)

Additionally, such an engine would be a lock for nearly permanent status on Ward's Ten Best Engines.

Given the current sales tanking of low-performance electric hybrid cars, perhaps it's time to shift the hybrid niche more into the "high-performance hybrids."

A 30+ m.p.g. variable-displacement V8 Mustang with 500+ "on boost" horsepower could generate more excitement (and sell for a higher premium) than a boat-load of "low-po" 41 m.p.g. Fusions (which are slated to be no more than a paltry 1% of sales).

Moreover, such a car would send an even stronger message to Ford's loyal owners regarding Ford's committment to balance its recent "Green faith" with its storied racing and performance heritage.

If Ford adapted the clutched integrated-assist motor system of Porsche and backed up the powerplants (IC and electric) with a manual transmission, a hybrid-electric V8 Mustang could be a huge kick to drive. And during that 95% of driving when high performance is not used, the hybrid electric V8 Mustang could make room under the Corporate Average Fuel Economy cap for some cheaper models (i.e. Coyote V8-powered Mustangs).

Ford should note that the electric hybrid Mustang driving experience would not have to be as automatic or antiseptic as a "mainstream" hybrid, because drivers of sporting cars enjoy more driver interactivity and are more engaged in the experience. Thus, some of the transitional seamlessness current hybrids provide is unnecessary in a high-performance hybrid.

(Note: For simular reasons, "Truth With Speedzzter" believes that if variable displacement technology would have been introduced in sports and musclecars, instead of in the ill-fated 1981 Cadillac V4/6/8, it would have been successful years ago in the marketplace.

Moreover, "Truth With Speedzzter" is disappointed that Chrysler and GM have failed to pair up such technology with manual transmissions or in their highest-performance models.

Finally, "Truth With Speedzzter" expects retrofits of variable displacement technology to become an aftermarket modification (JSC Engineering already claims to have built a 21 M.P.G. SRT-10 "Viper" Truck with a "mild" injector-shutdown cylinder deactivation "Fuel Saver" system.

The JSC "Fuel Saver" is a "mild" deactivation strategy because it does not reduce pumping losses in the deactivated cylinders. Aggessive OEM-style cylinder deactivation disables the intake and exhaust valves in addition to cutting the fuel on the deactivated cylinders))

Besides, to have any hope of volume production of any traditional muscle under the Obama CAFE caps (and to any market after Obama's "cap and trade" scheme drives up the cost of fuel), Ford will need to adapt such technologies to their V8s.

So why not get started now?

MULALLY’S WAY: A BLUEPRINT FOR OBAMA’S AUTO CZARS?

[Get the latest “Truth With Speedzzter” here]

The recent BusinessWeek PR puff piece profile on Ford Motor Company Boss Alan Mulally ought to be informative to the inexperienced know-nothings President Obama selected for his Car Czar “Central Committee.”

Of course, General Motors and Chrysler might not hang on long enough to suffer – or in the longest of long-shots, benefit – from the collective wisdom of a group of political/environmental hacks (some of which do not even own cars, and none of which have ever built or tried to sell one).

But miracles may happen.

One or both of the “Beg 2" might make it into summertime without being totally bankrupted by the confluence of: (a) the traitorous Japanese invasion, (b) the insatiable greed of the United Auto Workers union,(c) the corrosive, anti-Detroit drum beat of the automotive press, (d) the virtual collapse of the American financial system, (e) the crush of Federal regulations that have bled the life out of the American automakers for nearly four decades (and which cede huge cost advantages to places like India, China, South Korea, and even Japan in some instances), (f) America’s “U.S.A. Last” trade polices; and (g) the twenty trillion dollar spending binge at the heart of Obamanomics.

If they hang on, Obama’s “Car Czars” “Central Committee" could actually influence the direction of the U.S. auto industry. And they could do worse in taking a few cues from Alan Mulally.

Mulally is an attractive example because he cannot be tagged with the claim that he’s one of the Detroit insiders that Senator Richard Shelby and the “let’em die/let the Japanese win” crowd claims caused the entire problem (ignoring Washington D.C.’s expensive interference in the free markets). He’s an “outsider,” just like the clueless rookies on the “Central Committee.”

Of course Mulally rolled into Dearborn as a seasoned manufacturing executive, and not some idealistic think-tank/academic/bean counter who knows more about “Earth Day” than the day-to-day operations of a Fortune 5 automaker. But Mulally was not a consumer of American automobiles or even an automobile enthusiast.

So how has he kept FoMoCo out of the hands of the bankruptcy court or the Obama “Car Czar” “Central Committee?”

1. He listened.

By the time Mulally took Ford's helm, he had met with every senior staffer and asked a trunkful of questions. "Alan said there was a lot he didn't know, but that he was a quick study," says [William Clay Ford, Jr.]. But once he settled in, Mulally began providing the answers, meeting with employees in groups ranging from 25 to several hundred. No speeches. Just off-the-cuff remarks followed by 45 minutes or so of Q&A.

2. He required realistic transparency.

The old Ford way rewarded the creation of fiefdoms, top-down decision making, rejection of outsiders, delayed responsiveness, me-first careerism over teamwork, frequent reassignments among leaders, and “CYA” hiding of problems.

Mulally has instead encouraged a constant data stream, reduced leadership shuffling, quick responses, collaboration, and transparency. In other words, Mulally is attempting to apply the same lean, realistic management methods used by successful motorsports teams for decades.

3. He appreciated the immediate problems and took decisive action.

Within three months of his arrival, Mulally sold Wall Street on a $23 billion recapitalization, one that Ford had been working on but about which investors had been lukewarm before Mulally's arrival. That has meant the difference between death and just being sick. Because he had no loyalty to Ford's luxury brands, Mulally overrode internal opposition and sold Jaguar, Land Rover, and Aston Martin before buyers became scarce.

He also recognized the obvious – that the Volvo-based, orthopaedic-shoe D3 cars were duds and reached back to what made the original Taurus a success (notwithstanding its boring, non-sporting specifications, the handicap of low-performance front wheel drive, and the lack of optional V8 power). While renaming, repowering, and ladling some chrome and a Fusion grill on the Taurus, nee Five Hundred couldn’t make steak out of Hamburger Helper (tm), Mulally has focused FoMoCo’s interior and exterior design efforts toward a more internationally competitive, high value language. The next Taurus, due out in the summer of 2009, bears the fruits of this handiwork. The improvements to the 2010 Mustang (excluding the major let-down in the engine room) are also evidence of this strategy.

4. He didn’t kill off motorsports or high-performance to save money.

Certainly “Truth With Speedzzter” has long been a critic of the Mustang’s mismanagement.

But for the near-death of Chrysler and GM and the cratering of the broader market, Mustang would be in a more uncompetitive position because of Ford’s under-the-hood penny pinching, Shelby price gouging, and virtual abandonment of the blue-collar high performance niche.

Nor has Ford hasn’t optimally managed its SVT brand.

And “Truth With Speedzzter” remains skeptical of Ford’s long-term commitment to serving its performance and racing customers.

However, new products such as the amazing SVT Raptor, the upcoming Boss 6.2 SOHC and Coyote DOHC V8s, improvements in the Ford Racing Performance Parts crate engine program, Ford’s investment in EcoBoost technology, Ford’s recognition of the value of Australia’s indigenous FPV line, and Ford’s continued commitment to motorsports (albeit at too low of a level to replicate the domination of the “Total Performance” era), all indicate that Mulally at least has some minimal appreciation for the essence of Ford.

Ford was founded on motorsports.

Ford’s 1908 Model T, segment-busting 1930s V8s, original Thunderbirds, 1960s Mustangs, and 1980s Mustang 5.0s all revolutionized their market niches through providing more “bang for the buck,” more driving excitement (relative to their competition), and attractive platforms for decades of individualization, hot rodding, and grassroots motorsports.

Ford’s involvement in professional motorsports over the past half century has benefitted virtually every form of racing, has trickled down to the products Ford has offered to consumers, and has kept the Ford brand vital as an international force, even after blowing the huge lead of the Model T era.

Mulally apparently understands that Ford’s most loyal customers are those who identify with Ford’s high-performance and motorsports traditions.

Given the precariousness of the auto market and Ford’s shrinking cash reserves, it may be premature to celebrate Mulally and his team as the ones who pulled FoMoCo out of the fire once again. Ford may still have to ask for the Feds to pony up some loan money to survive the crisis the Government mostly created. Ford still has lots of problems to solve and is still mismanaging much of its heritage and potential. And Ford must still fight into the regulatory, energy policy, and trade policy headwinds that are buffeting nearly every OEM.

But even so, Obama’s hapless and unqualified“Car Czars” would be well-served to put aside their political ideologies and wishful thinking to follow Alan Mulally’s thoughtful and realistic lead.