GM'S LIMITED RETURN TO RWD PUTS FORD & LINCOLN FURTHER BEHIND
By Cammie


As Ford is killing off its only remaining North American RWD sedan platform (the beloved Panther . . . Just imagine how awesome a Coyote V8-powered Panther would have been) and moving everything but the Mustang and F/E-Series into too-small-for-V8s FWD platforms, "Government Motors" is apparently regaining a little "mojo."

According to the Automotive News:

GM revives rear-wheel sedans for Chevy, Cadillac
DETROIT -- Plans for a sporty, rear-wheel drive Chevrolet sedan have been revived at General Motors Co., Motor Trend reports in its upcoming November issue. The program had been mothballed over a year ago as GM was heading into bankruptcy.
Additionally, a low volume, rear-wheel sedan planned for Cadillac is expected to carry a price of around $130,000 . . . .

That's bad news for Ford. For a time in the 1990s, Ford was the only Detroiter to offer RWD in anything other than sporty cars and trucks. And Ford has been the only American OEM to continuously offer RWD.

But after the idiotic decision to kill off Ford's Panther takes effect in 2011, Ford will be the only American company NOT to offer a RWD sedan in America. Even Hyundai is going to have more RWD competitiveness than Ford!

That's just bone-headed.

In light of Cadillac's agressive moves (including the incredible the 556 h.p. CTS-V, with a blistering 0-60 time of 3.9 seconds and a Nürburgring laptime of 7:59.32) Lincoln is becoming less and less relevant as a luxury marque.

How long will Ford sit back and let GM steal the American RWD market?

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.

CARS ACT: THE DEMOCRAT-RINO WAR AGAINST V8s

[Get the latest Truth With Speedzzter here]

It reads like an endangered species list . . . Mustangs, Cougars, Jaguars, Panthers,Thunderbirds.

These are just a few of the collectable cars caught up in the insane greeniac dragnet of the so-called “Ca$h for Clunker$” bill passed by 298 automotive free-market haters in the U.S. House of Representatives.

These vandals of our American automotive history, led by Freedom-hating, green-welfare-sugar-mama Representative Betty Sutton (D-OH) and encouraged by Supreme Enviro-Socialist Commander Barack Hussein Obama (when he’s not groveling at the feet of Islamic Mullahs or calling the shots for “Government Motors”) have declared war against the V8 engine, auto collecting and grassroots motorsports.

Aided by 58 Republican-In-Name-Only (RINO) collaborators (each of which who ought to be immediately ejected from the GOP), the power-mad “Greenazis” are poised to borrow up to $4,000,000,000.00 from the Communist Chinese and the Fed (e.g. the printing press) to buy up V8-powered collector cars and destroy them.

Here’s how HR2751, the so-called “Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Act” works (in its own words):

WHAT COLLECTABLE VEHICLES ARE TARGETED FOR DESTRUCTION?

(

7) the term `eligible trade-in vehicle' means an automobile or a work truck (as such terms are defined in section 32901(a) of title 49, United States Code) that, at the time it is presented for trade-in under this Act--
1. (A) is in drivable condition; [NOTE THAT IT DOESN’T SAY COMPLETE, SO THEORETICALLY A GUTTED, INSURED ROLLING SHELL THAT MOVES UNDER ITS OWN POWER WOULD BE “DRIVEABLE”]
(B) has been continuously insured consistent with the applicable State law and registered to the same owner for a period of not less than 1 year immediately prior to such trade-in;
(C) was manufactured in model year 1984 or later [WHICH IS CONTRADICTED IN ANOTHER SECTION OF THE BILL]; and
(D) in the case of an automobile, has a combined fuel economy value of 18 miles per gallon or less [NOTE THAT THIS IS THE NEW, LOWER EPA RATINGS, AND IS BASED ON THE VIN CODE. THE CARS BILL APPARENTLY OMITS ANY REQUIREMENT OF AN ORIGINAL ENGINE, WHICH MAY LEAVE OPEN THE DOOR FOR CREATIVE PRE-TRADE ENGINE SWAPS];

HOW DOES "BIG BROTHER" DEFINE FUEL ECONOMY?

(

5) the term `combined fuel economy value' means--
1. (A) with respect to a new fuel efficient automobile, the number, expressed in miles per gallon, centered below the words `Combined Fuel Economy' on the label required to be affixed or caused to be affixed on a new automobile pursuant to subpart D of part 600 of title 40 Code of Federal Regulations;
(B) with respect to an eligible trade-in vehicle, the equivalent of the number described in subparagraph (A), and posted under the words `Estimated New EPA MPG' and above the word `Combined' for vehicles of model year 1985 through 2007, or posted under the words `New EPA MPG' and above the word `Combined' for vehicles of model year 2008 or later on the fueleconomy.gov website of the Environmental Protection Agency for the make, model, and year of such vehicle; or
(C) with respect to an eligible trade-in vehicle manufactured between model years 1978 through 1984, [HERE’S A DEAD GIVEAWAY THAT THEY’LL BE BACK AFTER PRE-1984 MODELS] the equivalent of the number described in subparagraph (A) as determined by the Secretary (and posted on the website of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) using data maintained by the Environmental Protection Agency for the make, model, and year of such vehicle;

SO WHAT SORT OF POTENTIAL COLLECTOR CARS ARE ON DEATH ROW?

Virtually any vehicle with a V8 engine built after 1984 and before 2000 is potentially at risk of being crushed if its been in the hands of the same greedy, welfare-loving owner for a year and has insurance. Most certainly, the few V8-powered vehicles built after 2000 probably have enough “trade in” value left to exceed the $3,500-$4,500 government bid.

But scores of collectable and donor vehicles built during the Clinton and Reagan Administrations are at risk.

For example, Every Mustang GT (except the super-rare turbo 4) and all SVT Cobras with trade-in values of less than $4,500 are potential victims of the Congressional vandals, as well as competitors, such as Pontiac Trans Ams and Chevrolet Camaros. The Kelly Blue Book values suggest that V8 Mustangs built before 1996 are most significantly at risk.

Any vintage Jaguar built after 1984, including the exotic V12 XJS and the legendary six-cylinder XJ6 will qualify for crushing.

Every V8-powered Lincoln built after 1984 qualifies for the senseless slaughter, including such collector standouts as the Mark VII LSC, the 32-Valve Continental, and the Mark VIII (each of which represent types of milestone cars that will NEVER BE BUILT AGAIN UNDER THE DRACONIAN 2012-2016 OBAMA CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY REGULATIONS)

No Panther-platform Ford, Lincoln, or Mercury escapes. Crown Victorias, Grand Marquis, Police Interceptors, Town Cars and even Marauders fall below the arbitrary “clunker” line set in the CARS Act.

Even a few rare FWD models are targeted, such as the 1989 Pontiac Grand Prix Turbo, the Oldsmobile Aurora, and the Cadillac Allante.

But most mass-produced, smoking junkpile FWDs are ineligible. In other words the kid with the oil-burning Honda ricer (a true anti-American clunker that will never be collectable anywhere) can’t trade in his beat-down, primered, unsafe-at-any-speed heap for some quick ObamaCa$h. But he can trade in his Grandma’s pristine, seldom-driven Crown Victoria on a new KIA . . . .

SO HOW MUCH ARE THE WELFARE PAYMENTS?

1) $3,500 VALUE- The voucher [A NEWSPEAK WORD FOR WELFARE] may be used to offset the purchase price or lease price of the new fuel efficient automobile by $3,500 if--

(A) the new fuel efficient automobile is a passenger automobile and the combined fuel economy value of such automobile is at least 4 miles per gallon higher than the combined fuel economy value of the eligible trade-in vehicle;

(B) the new fuel efficient automobile is a category 1 truck and the combined fuel economy value of such truck is at least 2 miles per gallon higher than the combined fuel economy value of the eligible trade-in vehicle;

(C) the new fuel efficient automobile is a category 2 truck that has a combined fuel economy value of at least 15 miles per gallon and--

(i) the eligible trade-in vehicle is a category 2 truck and the combined fuel economy value of the new fuel efficient automobile is at least 1 mile per gallon higher than the combined fuel economy value of the eligible trade-in vehicle; or

(ii) the eligible trade-in vehicle is a category 3 truck of model year 2001 or earlier; or

(D) the new fuel efficient automobile is a category 3 truck and the eligible trade-in vehicle is a category 3 truck of model year of 2001 or earlier and is of similar size or larger than the new fuel efficient automobile as determined in a manner prescribed by the Secretary.

(2) $4,500 VALUE- The voucher may be used to offset the purchase price or lease price of the new fuel efficient automobile by $4,500 if--

(A) the new fuel efficient automobile is a passenger automobile and the combined fuel economy value of such automobile is at least 10 miles per gallon higher than the combined fuel economy value of the eligible trade-in vehicle;

(B) the new fuel efficient automobile is a category 1 truck and the combined fuel economy value of such truck is at least 5 miles per gallon higher than the combined fuel economy value of the eligible trade-in vehicle; or

(C) the new fuel efficient automobile is a category 2 truck that has a combined fuel economy value of at least 15 miles per gallon and the combined fuel economy value of such truck is at least 2 miles per gallon higher than the combined fuel economy value of the eligible trade-in vehicle and the eligible trade-in vehicle is a category 2 truck.

Nothing in the bill seems to limit the WELFARE VOUCHERS to American vehicles, so plenty of collectable American milestone vehicles will be “replaced” by soulless, boring FWD imports of dubious future collectability (and minimal grassroots motorsports potential).

Destruction of ONE MILLION VINTAGE VEHICLES will decimate many small businesses involved in used car sales, auto repair, customizing and grassroots motorsports.

The Senate can still stop this madness. Call and write your senators today.

If the idiotic vandals get their way and the CARS WELFARE/BAILOUT ACT becomes law, perhaps the best resistance is to buy a 1984-1999 V8-powered potential collectable (while you still can afford to) and DRIVE IT. And be sure to send photos to President Obama!

And at the mid-term elections, be sure to tell Obama, Sutton, Pelosi and the other Democrats and RINOS to keep their FILTHY HANDS OFF OF OUR VINTAGE V8s!

MERCURY GRAND MARQUIS -- MOST DEPENDABLE LARGE CAR IN AMERICA

[Get the latest "Truth With Speedzzter” here]

Sure there are plenty of Panther haters out there: Technophiles who have never driven a recent Panther platform vehicle and who reflexively think that a large, body-on-frame RWD car with a beam rear axle and its genesis in the late 1970s is unworthy of continued refinement and production.

They, of course, are wrong.

And the latest J.D. Power quality survey proves it.

Mercury Grand Marquis is the most dependable large car sold in the U.S.

Panther owners didn't need a survey to tell them this.

Too bad Ford's unconscionable neglect of this worthy platform is letting the Panthers rot and die before their time.

FEBRUARY SLUMP DEMONSTRATES FORD’S WEAKNESS IN CARS

It could have been worse.

General Motors (GM) took a 12.9% dive in February 2008, down to 268,737 units sold in the United States of America market(But GM is only down 6% for calendar 2008 to date in the U.S.A.).

Cerberus’ Chrysler L.L.C. plummeted 14%, to 150,093 and the MoPar brands have fallen 13.1% in calendar 2008 in the U.S. market.

According to Business Week:

“Ford Motor [Company](F) sales, including Jaguar, Land Rover, and Volvo, dropped 6.6% from the year-ago month, to 196,060 [in the U.S. market]. Year to date, Ford dropped 5.4%, to 355,336. Ford, like GM, has been intentionally cutting back on low-margin sales to daily rental fleets; that business was down 20% in February, accounting for about 60% of the company's decline. But the result wasn't much different for retail sales: Not counting fleets, sales were down 6%, the company said.

"What we're seeing today is definitely the downside of a business cycle, whether or not it's ultimately designated a recession," says Emily Kolinski Morris, Ford senior economist for North America.

However, Toyota, which has a better mix of small cars than FoMoCo, only fell 2.8% in the U.S. market.

All of the blame cannot be laid on the faltering U.S. economy.

Nor can all of the blame be placed on the assumed nexus between the liberal environmental/consumer movement (e.g. Consumer Reports obvious anti-Detroit bias) and the Asian auto makers.

A large chunk of blame rests in FoMoCo’s failure to update and diversify its automobile line-up.

Based on strong sales of the Civic and Fit (both of which are arguably fresher designs than Ford’s Focus), Honda actually increased sales in February by 4.9% and is up 1.5% for calendar 2008.

FoMoCo’s gross neglect is demonstrated in Four critical market segments:

1. The Youth Market: While the Mustang certainly is an iconic car that millions of young drivers lust after, the vast majority of youths will never be able to swing the huge insurance/fuel/monthly payment burden of purchasing a new one.

And even if they could, a whole generation of parents brought up on the “Consumer Reports” mythology (which constantly and consistently dogs rear-wheel-drive sports models) would never sign off on one.

Instead, car buying youth end up in Civics or a variety of more “sensible” Asian cars.

Ford’s problem is that it hasn’t developed a sporty, affordable Sub-Mustang model which mixes practicality with style and panache. Recent small Fords (excluding the underpowered SVT Focus) have had all the youth market appeal of a hair shirt.

Some would say this die was cast back in the 1970s when virtually all of the Detroit automakers conceded the majority of the entry-level car market to the more diversified imports.

But with 35 m.p.g. Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards looming (even if the NHTSA “attribute” regulations eventually soften the blow a bit for FoMoCo), and the graying of FoMoCo’s loyal customer base, Ford must figure out how to build a desirable and affordable youth market model so as to offset enough high-performance V8 Mustangs to satisfy the adult market.

Of course, the Mustang should not be compromised as it was during the infamous Mustang II era (1974-1978) or during the pre-Fox body Mustang GT “daze” (1979-1981) just to chase a few more youth market sales.

Instead, FoMoCo needs to develop a “Sub-Mustang” that is more affordable, practical, fuel efficient, sporting and grassroots “tunable” than the late Mercury Cougar or Ford Probe. Obviously, the halo version of such a youth model should master Mitsubishi’s EVO and Subaru’s WRX STI. But the grassroots “mainstream” model should offer a high level of insurable performance potential at a value price.

Ford also needs to be the first to bridge the import tuner and hybrid worlds with a VW-style twin-charged gas-electric hybrid version of the “Sub-Mustang.” Such an out-of-the-box model would surely generate a wave of youth market enthusiasm.

The “Sub-Mustang” is not a replacement for more “mainstream” models such as the Focus. But as Toyota demonstrated long ago (while Ford was wasting time and money on the Pinto), the small car market is highly segmented and diverse. As fuel prices and environmental pressures increase, more diversity in small cars and more sporting models are essential.

2. Large Sedans: It’s clear that renaming the prosaic Five Hundred as the Taurus didn’t fool anyone. GM’s Chevrolet Impala and Toyota’s Camry still handily outsell Ford’s oversized FWD lump. FoMoCo is reportedly cutting back to only one shift at the Chicago Assembly Plant to cut supplies of the slow selling Tauri/Sable models.

Ford must find a way to build a sedan that generates some sort of mass-market excitement. Impala has achieved a modicum of success in spite of its lackluster FWD specifications because it doesn’t appear be an automotive equivalent to a corrective shoe. Instead, Impala offers an “SS” model with a somewhat fuel-efficient V8, as well as a number of lesser models.

Curiously, Carl Edward’s second 2008 NASCAR Sprint Cup win (at Las Vegas on March 2, 2008) in his Roush-Fenway “common template” Ford Fusion funnycar was paced by a Dodge Charger in police livery. This reminded FoMoCo viewers that Dodge is making serious inroads into FoMoCo’s Police Interceptor market share and of FoMoCo’s general neglect of the Panther lines.

Of course, no Police Interceptor can run with a Hemi-Cop Dodge because FoMoCo has withheld Hemi-killing 4-Valve/DOHC Modular V8s from the Panther line (save the nearly forgotten and underdeveloped Mercury Marauder). And FoMoCo hasn’t significantly updated the specs of the Panthers for five years (and has held onto the styling for ten model years).

To be sure, FoMoCo needs two large sedans.

It needs both an anvil-tough body-on-frame Panther-based RWD model for fleet and traditional sedan buyers and a smaller Impala/Camry fighter. And it needs to leverage its V8 heritage with superior DOHC 4-valve direct injected eights as halo models in both lines. (The V8s don’t have to be huge, but optional eight cylinder power (combined with cylinder deactivation and other fuel saving technologies) offer an important psychological link with Ford’s glorious past.

Moreover, both large sedans need a lot more “American swagger” and sportiness than either the Crown Victoria/PI/Grand Marquis/Town Car or the lackluster Taurus/Sable. The old Ford Interceptor concept car showed that some at FoMoCo may have understood this. But typical FoMoCo inaction has caused Ford to continue to miss this market.

Additionally, FoMoCo must take a page from the Europeans and offer torquey turbo diesel options in both of its large sedans.

3. Sports Sedans: Pontiac’s exciting new G8 and Cadillac’s CTS (along with a whole host of RWD BMW, Audi, Mercedes and Lexus models) point to a serious deficiency in FoMoCo’s line: A lack of serious sports sedans. Sports sedans are not high volume models, but are high profit and high profile ones. Sports sedans make a serious statement about the engineering acumen of an automaker.

Ford, of course, has produced serious sports sedans in Australia based on its RWD Falcon. Ford Performance Vehicles (FPV) offers more than one exciting Falcon-based grand touring sedan in the Land Down Under. But Ford’s hapless North American operation has been content for decades to bleed sales to BMW, Audi, Lexus, Cadillac and now Pontiac.

Ford has also occasionally built a flabby, overpriced sport sedan at Jaguar. But Jaguar’s impending release from the FoMoCo fold (as well as its historically poor sales performance) suggests that Ford needs something a bit more disciplined and serious in this segment to be competitive.

A serious RWD sport sedan (with optional turbo diesel and “Eco Force” twin turbo V8 and six) is an essential statement that Ford must make to be taken seriously as international automaker. Without one, Ford will continue to lose owner loyalty to GM and the luxury imports.

4. Small trucks: How old is the Ranger? Who can even remember?

Yet with huge gas prices weighing down the entire American economy, FoMoCo is not very well positioned to sell smaller, more fuel efficient trucks. An updated Ranger with more powerplant and cab/bed options is critical to leading the shift to smaller, more fuel efficient trucks and vans.

A street-going, all-wheel-drive high-performance model inspired (loosely) by Baja 1000 trophy trucks would also be a segment breakthrough.

Ford will continue to suffer -- boycott or none and regardless of the state of the American economy -- as long as it fails to provide a diverse line-up of affordable, exciting and desirable vehicles.