Automotive Concept Cars Don't Work

Well taking a cue from Great Britain's TopGear television magazine, the reason why no one wants American cars is because they tend to have very poor fit and finish, have cheaply configured and produced sub-assemblies, and have woefully antiquated engines.

It really is that simple.

If you like cars, expect them to last at least a decade, want minimal upkeep costs, and expect that the fit and finish of your car to be at a minimum an A- execution, then most American cars will not fit those parameters. The concept car of the future offered ever single year at the Detroit Automobile Show was always that---a concept for the future. Things like engine control, multivarible port injection, advanced drivetrains, active suspensions, integrated advanced safety, advanced fuel types, and even green technology implementation of car life-cycles were all something the Big 4 offered.

Except year after year, the concept vehicles never seemed to come into an recognizable existence. When they did you got vehicles like the Aztec which was a nightmarish amalgamation of plastic body panels glued on to a truncated truck chassis or it was something like a Prowler which is a great car that sold well but would never be more than a niche car with a cult following. You cannot maintain a company as a broad market competitor if most of its cars are ill-conceived to the point that few buy it because it serves no obvious purpose.

Why buy an Aztec? It isn't a passenger coup. It isn't a truck. It isn't an SUV. It doesn't go very fast either on or off road. It was just a very ugly car that people talked about after seeing it in concept at the auto show circuit. GM mistakenly thought that the "buzz" and "gravitas" surrounding the Aztec concept meant people would buy it. Obviously they didn't.

But the irony is that while Detroit dwindled from the Big 4 to the Big 3, to the Big 1 with two destitutes, the rest of the world manufacturers were doing something other than just building concept cars that caught people's interest. Detroit collectively saw concept cars as they had since the 1950's. A concept car was intended to bring image branding to the market perception. When Detroit built a concept car, it wasn't intended as a proof of concept that would indicate the future engineering and styling cues to be expected on production cars. Also compounding this problem was the simple fact that the Detroit automakers did not engage in competitive racing on multiple levels. Meaning the rate of innovation in American production cars was almost exclusively the result of a handful of American designers and engineers who had somehow managed to eek out small micro niches of competitive motorsport in the Detroit factories.

Oldsmobile, Corvette, and Chrysler Vipers were the only remaining venues of direct competion left where the world leading manufactures were pitted in true competitive racing. And for all you NASCAR fans, realize something. NASCAR is now a very staid formula competition where the only difference between the cars comes down to the stickers on the fender wells and what decals get put on the front end to signify a "manufacturer. Aside from engine blocks, NASCAR has little to do with development or unlimited competitive adaptation during racing. Meaning it became Detroit's favored venue of "competition".

Unfortunately for Detroit, this form of competition yielded nothing in terms of technology or reliability that could be diverted back to the manufacturing of passenger cars. Like the concept cars made by Detroit, the choice to virtually exclude itself from competitive racing resulted in a situation where there was little benefit aside from marketing penetration.

In 1998 Toyota made a conscious decision to become the #1 automobile maker in the world in three respects. The first was in total numbers of vehicles sold. The second was in total net sales volume. And the third was to be the ultimate manufacturer in Formula One. By some estimates Toyota Formula One Team Motorsports has spent no less than $1.2 Billion in the last 11 years.

What did they get?

Well for starters they did get the world's most advanced car design center in Germany, with the wind tunnels and super computers to go with it. They also became very advanced in composite engineering and manufacturing. Having gone from 10 cylinder to 8 cylinder engines to the now required 16,000 RPM limited 8 Cylinder engines that must last 4 races in a row, Toyota directly imparted the design and reliability lessons learned from racing to their current passenger cars. Electronic engine management and multivarible transmission shifting technology went straight from their race cars to their passenger cars. They also got laughed at for generally finishing at the back of the pack for 10 straight years.

Until this year. Toyotas are now the terror of the Formula One campaign. BMW, McClaren Mercedes, FIAT Ferrari, and Renault are all now witnessing the results of driving competitively with a goal of excellence no matter the cost. And it is also translating into Toyota becoming the leader in numbers of cars sold and getting close to eclipsing Porsche as the world's most profitable car maker.

When consumers look at cars, almost all of them are simply looking for a reliable cost effective means of transport that meets their expectation of durability and usability. There are some who demand far more in terms of the vehicle being a pinnacle of some sort. Be it pure speed like a Buggati, style of a Citroen, ruggedness of a Pinzaguar, or durability & practicality of a SEAT. But almost without exception, the leading manufacturers are very similar to what Enzo Ferrari maintained as the reason for making passenger cars.

Put simply, Enzo Ferrari built cars for sale to consumers so that he could afford to build and race cars competitively in the leading motorsports competitions around the world. If you doubt it consider the examples. Porsche-Volkswagen-Audi own Lemans, Gruppe B & GT racing. Fiat Ferrari owns formula One. BMW owns track racing. Citroen owns WRC racing. Mercedes owns DTM, Formula One, and Truck racing. Renault is a bit down on its luck in Formula One, but it still competes and wins in rally racing as well. Nissan competes in Asia in endurance, road course, and Lemans racing. Honda supplies engines for open wheel racing, rally competition in WRC, and dominates motorcycle racing. In short the World's leading automobile manufacturers all compete heavily- Toyota even going so far as to compete in NASCAR.

And Where are the American manufacturers?

Oldsmobile of course died several years ago. The Viper was bought out by its designers and is now sold for short endurnce track racing to privateers. And GM's Corvette will see the end of its racing in American Lemans this season as well as make its last stop in the 24 Hours of Lemans as well. Meaning that in 2010 there will be ZERO factory backed efforts in any F.I.A. sanctioned competitions anywhere in the world.

If you intend to be world class, should you not compete against world class rivals? Do you expect to innovate your cars for sale to the public simply by picking motes from the ether? If you want things like active suspension, ABS, engine management, KERS, carbon fiber brakes, ultra efficient exhaust systems, and reliability engine mapping- which all resulted from Formula One- to appear on your production cars, do you not need to have a competition platform?

The whole point is that the American consumer began realizing that American automakers weren't making even a fraction of what they presented to be plausible in the concept cars. When European cars all began coming standard with ABS systems that they had developed in Formula One, American automobile makers were offering hastily cobbled together 3rd part ABS systems and then only offering them as expensive options on their highest profile car models. It doesn't take a genius to realize ABS is a pretty good idea. And it wasn't as if Detroit hadn't offered concept cars with ABS on them since the early 1970's. But in a void of competition development, Detroit never actually had to make a working ABS for mass implementation in all product tiers. By 1993 even lowly Volkswagen was slapping ABS on all its models. Detroit was still offering it as an expensive upgrade to its mid-level offerings, made it standard on the flagship premium brands, and still didn't have it for its entry models.

In 1995 I bought a Volkswagen Jetta GL for $15,000 brand new off the showroom floor. It had a 6 cylinder engine. AC/PW/PD/sun roof/Premium CD system/ leather interior/ ABS/Airbags/Active Suspension/Hella light package/ Sport rims/ and half a dozen other features I cannot remember. The Pontiac Sunfire I looked at had a 4 cylinder engine and AC. Sunroof, PW/PD/ABS/and airbags were available options. Active suspension and lighting improvement package was not an available option. The Sunfire also cost $17,000.

It isn't the case that Detroit screwed up because they didn't offer hybid or electric cars that turned off consumer demand. What turned off consumer demand for passenger cars made in America was the reality that in order to get a comparable car to the mid level import, you had to pay a super premium price purchasing the additional equipment needed to make an American passenger car comparable. The only thing holding up Detroit was the truck and SUV. The rest of the world simply doesn't have the market for either vehicle.

Consider that the Ford F-150 is the world's number one selling car by volume. More of these are sold every year than any other car in the world. But there is an exceptional caveat to that figure. The Ford F-150 is sold only in the United States and Canada. It isn't directly exported anywhere else in the world. The American market is very absorbent in terms of trucks and SUV's. Toyota and Honda both brought out full size trucks over the last few years to compete for market share. But when fuel prices skyrocketed Honda nixed the Ridgeline and Toyota scaled back its fullsize truck- but they could afford to because their passenger cars sell very well.

Detroit has been living on trucks for 20 years. And with the combination of high fuel costs and the emergine concept that not everyone needs a truck to commute to work in, the sales of Detroit's mainstay has collapsed. Add to this the reality that their passenger cars are essentially junk compared with the competition on the market and you get 50% declines in American manufacturer sales year on year.

It really is time for Detroit to take its medicine. Offering concept cars of a future that never comes, will not solve their problems. Chopping off brands and car models simply to stave off red ink won't work either. The only thing that will work is if Detroit eschews marketing promotions and style trending and instead realizes what every other manufacturer of automobiles in the world already knows.

Compete in automobile racing, take the technologies you develop and put them into the passenger cars you build for sale to the public.

It really is that simple.