"AUTOMOTIVE ENNUI" AND THE 500 HORSEPOWER FORD

As most auto-wonks breathlessly contemplate the billions General Motors (GM) will lose if the strike lasts more than 72 hours, or the billions Ford Motor Company (F) could make with its new Chinese factory (all the while U.S. F-Series production being temporarily idled at another plant), the Wall Street Journal's Joseph B. White focuses our attention on a more fundamental and philosophical problem in the auto world. In an article entitled "Seeking a Cure for Automotive Ennui" (September 24, 2007; Page D2), White argues that "Boredom May Be a Factor" in the current "sales slump."

In support of his thesis, he lambasts the rehashed, Microsoft Sync-equipped, 2008 Ford Focus (tested in Ford-hating Seattle, no less) with an amorphous, diesel powered Honda Civic i-CTDi, eggmobile from Europe (imported -- and undoubtedly show-car prepared -- as a publicity stunt by the crafty Honda PR Department).

Predictably, White hates the Focus ("The Focus is competent, relatively inexpensive for an American-made car, and will be toast when Chinese auto makers figure out how to design a vehicle that will pass a U.S. crash test. . . .") and gushes over the Honda ("The Euro-diesel Civic is more fun to look at than most American small cars. . . . Slide into the first of the manual transmission's six forward gears, and the thing lunges like a shark that skipped lunch.")

Of course, White fails to point out the huge disparity in price between the "can't-buy-it-here" oil-burner Honda and the prosaic gasoline Focus.

Curiously, White picks on the Focus instead of wailing on more popular (and trend setting) made-for-America bordom-sleds, such as the chart-topping Toyota Camry (which, from the standpoint of flabby driving dynamics, flaccid performance, and nondescript appearance, may be the most "boring" car sold in America). Apparently it's more fun to kick a dog (like FoMoCo) when it's down . . . .

White's anecdotes are pressed into serve his larger point that the U.S. car market suffers from a sort of conservative malaise driven by our national and local (e.g. California) regulatory policy:

"It seems clear that the European approach to the issue of automobiles and energy efficiency -- which combines high fuel taxes with tax policies aimed at promoting innovation in small displacement powertrains -- is working better than the haphazard American Way."

White's general indictment is apparently predicated upon idea that only fuel efficient cars matter.

He wholly ignores the incredible array of high performance vehicles currently sold in America, such as the 500-horsepower Shelby GT500, and Chrysler L.L.C.'s street-ripping SRT lineup

Even though many are missing the "second supercar era" as a result of insane price escalation, dealer greed (especially Ford dealer gouging on the GT500) and limited supplies, arguably this is one of the most exciting and diverse periods in automotive history -- at least for high performance enthusiasts.

Speedzzter wonders how "bored" Mr. White would be whipping a 500-horse Shelby or 425-horse SRT-8 around on the twisting roads of the Puget Sound area. . . . However, given his suggestion that the current advanced, high-output engines are as interesting as "music from lacquer records that had been refined to hold 100 minutes of songs," perhaps his sensibilities are as "atrophied" as the neck muscles of Tom and Ray Magliozzi (a/k/a "Click and Clack," the Tappet Brothers).

White, however, does make (or perhaps unintentionally brush by) a few good points.

1. The American fixation on Corporate Average Fuel Economy without regard to functionality has grossly distorted the American vehicle market. Traveling further down that road (as the U.S. Senate and the greeniacs desire) will likely plunge us back into the far more "boring" days of the 1970s.

2. Torque is king in making a small car fun to drive. The Focus gave up over 100 lbs/ft of torque to the euro-diesel Honda, which played prominently in the gratis paean to the Nippon-Continental egg-wagon. Performance still sells--even to the appliance motorist-- when it's unobtrusively packaged.

3. Unlike the heady days when the brilliant (albeit underpowered), late SVT Focus scored on Car and Driver's snooty "10 Best" list, the current U.S. Focus has been neglected and de-contented into a tepid, uninspiring commodity car. The decade-long Jac Nasser-Bill Ford failure to invest in small car niches continues to rain down mediocrity on the American market.

4. Our growing patchwork of local environmental regulations (e.g. California and the like-minded Blue States) has deprived the U.S. of some of the best cars available over on the Continent and has unintentionally hurt overall fleet fuel economy. Undoubtedly the European Union's mania over "greenhouse gas" emissions may someday level this field. But thus far, many of the best cars balancing usable performance with fuel frugality are trapped on the other side of the Atlantic. Parochial environmental waivers and excessive regulations are expensive restraints on competition and innovation, yielding fewer choices.

5. The crushing burden of paying United Auto Workers "legacy" costs and unrealistic wage structures has depleted the Detroit 3's resources for making world class small cars. While Mr. White doesn't articulate this point, one look at the "boring" 2008 Focus and his dismissive road test review clearly suggest that Ford's resources are otherwise occupied. Meanwhile foreign manufacturers, whom the UAW have not saddled with punitive $25+ per worker-hour "tariffs," have folded more resources into improving their products and keeping them fresh.

A point Mr. White SHOULD have made-- and possibly would have if he hadn't been so star-struck with the hideous HondaEGG-- is that much of the current boredom and conservatism in design is driven by the presumed necessities of aerodynamic styling.

Yet even as he attacks the clichés of the near-luxury niche, he simply ignores unique and dynamic American contributions to current vehicular fashion, such as Cadillac's origami-in-steel "Art and Science" themes or Chrysler's chopped-top, neoclassic 300. Obviously, a Ford Mustang is apparently a Mustang, even without the badges. Nor is a Mustang hardly "essentially interchangeable" with other cars and trucks costing less than $40,000. Thus, he overstates his point on uniformity somewhat.

But his point is well taken that most of the mass-market "appliance cars" of the current design vernacular blend together in the popular consciousness as homogenized blobs.

Although he doesn't note it, Mustang, notwithstanding its iconic distinctiveness, has suffered from some recent sales downturns. But the "boredom" with Mustang is that Ford hasn't developed a better balance of high performance, fuel efficiency, and aftermarket "tuneability" at mass-market price point. Instead they foster the GT500 dealer gouge-fest, leavened with unsatisfactory substitutes and overpriced posers such as the Shelby GT. Nor has Ford sufficiently addressed important niches, such as the youth market or the "four-cylinder tuner scene."

But draconian fuel taxes and other Euro-style, "top down" edicts as Mr. White apparently longs for are not the answer.

Unfettered competition, better fuels (such as high octane E-85) and increased resources for development of competitive models will produce better choices and greater, market-sustained advances. After all, iPods didn't supplant compact discs (and compact discs unseat vinyl L.P.s) at the behest of some "top down" government edict.

Competition, Mr. White. It works when it's tried.