Recently BBC America has been showing Top Gear on Monday evenings. (They’re showing episodes from Series 8, which was originally broadcast May-July 2006.) I love the show as it’s absolutely hilarious, especially the episode when they tried to go on a caravan trip and ended up burning down the caravan. I hope BBC America shows more series here, and barring that, perhaps some of the series will be available via DVD.
You know, I think you might be right about the American cars in Europe, but I’m not so sure you’d be right about European cars in America. I noticed a lot of cars that ought to be brought over. The Ford Mondeo, for example ( I think it’s finally coming as the taurus again?) was of much higher quality than any Ford in America since they redesigned it around 2002. It’s why I’m so frustrated with Detroit. Everyone says “Buy American!” but if they aren’t going to make something worth buying, eff that. I don’t want a car that rattles from the inside and feels like it’s made of cheap plastic. Hell, most interiors of Fords feel as substantial as a Solo cup. But this Mondeo was awesome. I really liked it. I generally feel the same about all American brands in Europe. They are generally put together in a much better way. I seriously think that if you brought over all of Ford’s and GM’s cars from Europe, you’d see a substantial market. Not for the “bling” crowd of course, but for the crowd who buys sensible toyota camrys etc.
I just get the feeling that US automakers only intend to give their customers “bigger” cars because “it’s what americans want.” They should take a page out of Apple’s playbook. Give them what they need and make them want it.
Now it’s my turn to be defensive. The Citroen 2CV was and is a very quirky and basic car and arguably survived long past its time, but to dismiss it as ‘a piece of crap’ is simply to fail to properly understand it.
It’s something that often comes up in various automotive forums (“Why don’t they bring this over here?”) and the general consensus is that the carmakers know what you want better than you do, and to attempt what you are describing has generally resulted in costly failures. Without going into details, suffice to say that if it were a good idea, Toyota and Honda would be doing it - they don’t. The Toyota Camry and Honda Accord sold in North American are built in the US and Canada specifically for the US/Canadian market, and are not sold in appreciable numbers anywhere else in the world except maybe Australia. The Honda Accord sold in Europe, for example, is sold in North America as the Acura TSX, but it would be foolish to bring it over as an Accord.
Rick and Balthisar are both insiders at Ford (or Volvo) and can probably give more details.
I do appreciate the argument on some level, but it still doesn’t clear detroit. Detroit has far too many problems to get off the hook free. Sure, maybe with the Pontiac Aztek, they thought they had a hit, but did you know anyone that thought it looked good?
All I’m saying is that the general consensus isn’t always right. Look at Apple, they took an old idea (with the iPod) and put their effing brains to it and got it right. It actually took a while too, but they eventually did. Apple is in the business of giving you what you need, and convincing you to buy it. The only difference here is that Apple is universally recognized as having great products. Sure people will hem and haw about the price, etc, but it is good at what it aims to do.
Detroit on the other hand, has tried on several occasions to change perceptions, but with inferior crap, instead of quality. Why, for example do Ford AND Mercury exist? Why do Chevy and GMC have essentially the same cars? You can say that, “it obviously must be the way it needs to be because that’s the way it is,” but that’s not really much of an argument. Look at it logically. Why do the both need to exist? I’ve never heard a good reason for it.
I realize that Detroit has a huge problem with unions, etc, but that’s not good enough. I hope they die off if they continue to make garbage cars. They don’t deserve my money if someone else makes better cars. Every time I rent a car I usually end up with a ford sedan or some crap, and it is always the same. Cheap interior, crap suspension, and LOOSE STEERING! It’s ridiculous how they still can’t make a car with proper steering.
Seriously, what attempts have been made at doing so? If VW can set up an assembly line to produce essentially identical copies of its cars in Latin America, why couldn’t Ford copy its European assembly lines in the US? What attempts have been made? Of the Ford and GM attempts I know, they’ve been successful. The ones I know are the Ford Focus and Fusion and some Opel.
I simply refuse to believe that the folks in Detroit are forward thinking enough to actually know what I want better than I do. They were pushing SUVs until gas went up too high, didn’t they know that was gonna happen? I sure as hell knew. Why didn’t they stick with an electric car or any type of hybrid before now? This shows me that they have lack of vision, and if they lack vision, they surely can’t make any assumption on what the market could be rather than what the market is now.
Where he toured the world looking at their cars? Motorworld perhaps? I have the book, entertaining.
He also did a short series (can’t remember which one) looking at different aspects of the motoring world and gave the bastion of British car making, the British Leyland company, a proper roasting from head to toe. I don’t think he can be accused of being jingoistic when it comes to cars.
I think GM knows it has too many brands and would like to get rid of Buick if possible. They did get rid of Oldsmobile a few years ago, but it was expensive. I think it cost them almost a billion dollars with about half of that being payments to buy out the dealers.
20 years ago, brands like BMW, Audi, Acura, and Lexus either didn’t exist or were quirky furrin’ cars that only wealthy eccentrics bought in very small numbers, almost completely outside the mainstream American consciousness. The socially acceptable yuppie-mobile brands that doctors and lawyers bought were Buick, Mercury, Oldsmobile and Chrysler. It wasn’t too long ago that GM was hosting head-to-head Buick/BMW test drives to nip that little problem at the bud and dispell any notions that they were losing the lead.
So that’s why they exist. Whether there is still any reason to keep them around is another question.
It’s probably pretty well known, but it bears repeating. Jeremy Clarkson is a real-life troll. a significant portion of everything he says is carefully crafted to provoke/offend/exasperate. He’s not slagging American cars primarily because he thinks they’re crap (although this might coincidentally be the case), he’s doing it because that’s what he does.
I love Top Gear because they slam American Cars. My favorite example is the C6 Corvette. They had a REALLY hard time saying anything bad about it. They harped on leaf springs and a soft bumper panel. That’s it. It was a great car with great performance and they had to fill the time with [Jeremy Clarkson]leaf springs…like you’d have on a pram[/Jeremy Clarkson]
Everyone has an automotive bias…rarely does it have anything to do with anything provable. A manufacturer couldn’t stay in business if they were all as bad as someone says they are. I like Top Gear because they show LOTS of cars I wouldn’t otherwise see…
…and Big Stig from the Southern America special.
I love it, my kid loves it. We’d love it if they were taking about bricks.
The Hamster testing if he (and the car he was in) could survive being hit by lightning! Priceless.
Star in a reasonably priced car gave me a whole new appreciation of Joanna Lumley - again!
Brilliant, mad, wonderful show.
Yeah, that’s why I like the show, notice that it isn’t just Clarkson alone. Clarkson IS a troll!
But you also have May and Hammond there to ridicule him during his trollish moments. But he isn’t only just a troll. He’s immature, but he does seem to not have many prejudices about cars. If a car is garbage, then you’ll see the national stereotypes thrown in, but if it’s good he will ultimately love it. Notice how much he loved the Ford that he bought.
But I’ve seen a travel program in which he drives all around Europe by himself, and he is essentially trollish at times. In Spain in particular. It didn’t come off as funny, rather just immature and childish. He was basing his whole time there upon the fact that Spain had gotten a lot of money from the EU, therefore he as an Englishman shouldn’t be forced to pay for the roads again. “I’ve already paid” he’d say at the tolls.
But it works well in Top Gear because you have May and Hammond to tell him he’s full of shit when it is important.
It is slightly annoying that he always seems to win the big challenges they put on - I can’t help finding his success rate a bit contrived.
I’ve seen only the one episode and I thought it was boring as hell. The presenters raced each other from London to some Scandinavian city (Oslo I think). One drove and the other went by ferry. All we saw were scenes of one of them driving along freeways and the other sitting in the ferry’s bar. Talk about dull! I wouldn’t watch it again.