Bail-out

Robert Lutz is a respected man. My late father personally knew him when he was Managing Director of GM South Africa in the early Seventies. Mr Lutz has gone places and now is the vice-chairman of GM in the USA. Recently, GM deployed mr. Lutz in the wrestling over the Big Three Bail-out. Mr. Lutz gave the press his usual straight talk. But uncle Bob seems to miss the truth on the American automotive industry.

He claims that the big problem is the reduction in sales from 17million per year to 10.5 million per year. Right, that figure includes Honda and Toyota, two top sellers on the US car market. I do not recall any calls for bail-out from these foreign producers.

It has been said in a GM advertisement, that “We will continue to deliver personal mobility freedom to Americans using the most advanced transportation solutions,” according to the NY Times. Let us study the facts about the most advanced transportation solutions. To keep it simple for the likes of GM bosses, one may study key features of what may constitute advanced transport solutions. In fact, let us keep to the car and stay out of anything esoteric such as advanced public transportation.

Most petrol heads will agree, one may hope, that major advancements in automotive engineering include the following: Disk brakes, ABS brakes, crumple zones, air bags, independent suspension, electronic fuel injection, direct fuel injection for petrol engines and common-rail Diesel engines. Of these technological achievements, all of which enjoy broad commercial application, all of these features have been conceived, designed and developed outside the USA, and more specifically, beyond the realms of GM.

Disk Brakes: Jaguar (racing) and British Leyland (Austin Heally production car)
ABS: Mercedes Benz
Crumple Zones: Mercedes Benz
Air Bags: Mercedes Benz (1971 patent) and Porsche (first dual airbags appeared in 944)
Independent Suspension: Porsche (on VW Beetle with tortion bar springs)
Electronic Fuel Injection: Robert Bosch AG
Direct Petrol Injection: Robert Bosch (1955 Mercedes Benz), Mitsubishi (1996), VW/Audi (FSI system, 2000)
Common-rail Diesel Engine: VW/Audi

The above observations do not disprove the thesis by GM that they provide advanced automotive solutions. Such cars as GM manufacture in the USA do provide some of the above advanced features. However, GM does not lead the industry in any way whatsoever, since GM cannot claim credit for any these key developments.
Moving on from features, an important measure of advanced transportation is fuel efficiency. No GM car appears in the top ten. Figures in the table below are from Canadian sources and in litres per 100 km.

Car City Highway
TOYOTA PRIUS 4.0 4.2
HONDA CIVIC HYBRID 4.7 4.3
SMART FORTWO (CONVERTIBLE) 5.9 4.8
SMART FORTWO (COUPE) 5.9 4.8
TOYOTA CAMRY HYBRID 5.7 5.7
NISSAN ALTIMA HYBRID 5.6 5.9
FORD ESCAPE HYBRID 5.7 6.7
MINI COOPER 7.1 5.3
MINI COOPER CLUBMAN 7.1 5.3
TOYOTA COROLLA 7.1 5.3
TOYOTA YARIS 7.0 5.5
TOYOTA YARIS 7.0 5.6
HONDA CIVIC 7.4 5.4
HONDA FIT 7.1 5.7
HONDA FIT 7.8 5.6
MINI COOPER S 7.7 5.7

Quite frankly, for more than 30 years the US Big Three car makers have been dumping mostly rubbish on the American public, outpaced by all of the prominent overseas manufacturers. Reality has a manner of catching up with such mediocrity. Not even the might of Daimler Benz could rescue Chrysler, which unfortunate corporate marriage (1998-2007) only bled a few billion USD from Daimler Benz and ended in inevitable corporate divorce.

The recent fly-past of the three corporate princes in their corporate jets to Washington on a bail-out parade, did seem to push the American public to the point of epiphany. No, no, no: Adapt or die. So, what shall it be: A Darwin Award for GM, Ford and Chrysler, or a life-line?