Automakers head to Washington – What should they drive?

Executives from Chrysler, Ford, and General Motors are traveling to Washington, D.C., this week to appeal to lawmakers for federal assistance. On their last visit, the Detroit  execs were chastised for indulging in corporate jets – each in their own—while appealing for billions in tax-payer-funded assistance. to avoid repeating that public relations gaffe, these power brokers are driving to the Capitol.

The auto industry is behind them, literally, with representatives from all 50 states heading to Washington to show their support  Friday. (Learn more about this effort and how you can show support at theengineofdemocracy.com.)

Bob Nardelli, Alan Mulally, and Rick Wagoner (of Chrysler, Ford and GM, respectively) will face a formidable challenge this week, and the fate of the domestic-bred automotive industry could depend on their performance. After the lackluster initial meeting with congress, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid provided a detailed outline for what they expect to see at the next meeting. Essentially, they are looking for a solid proposal that shows how with additional funding Detroit’s Big 3 can turnaround their struggling businesses and protect the tax-payer investment, rather than merely postpone a probable  failure.

For the record, Consumer Reports has said, "The loss of any major auto manufacturer would leave consumers with fewer choices and the industry with less competition and innovation, particularly at a transitional time when the industry is pursuing alternative energy technology." But, Consumer Reports feels that "If the government is going to come to the rescue of the automakers, it shouldn't be a bailout without any strings attached. There need to be strict conditions so taxpayers are protected and the automakers are held accountable to make the necessary changes to become more economically viable and energy efficient." (Read the full statement from Consumer Reports.)

Driving forces
The first act in the great drama to unfold this week is how the executives arrive. Safe to assume, it won’t be in a Dodge Viper, Ford Mustang, or Chevrolet Corvette—though that could be entertaining on Pennsylvania Avenue.

Mulally is driving a Ford Escape Hybrid, according to Automotive News. We’re currently in the process of testing a similar 2009 Mercury Mariner Hybrid. The 2005 Escape Hybrid we tested got 26 mpg overall in our testing—very good for an SUV. Other options for Mulally’s  interstate drive included the Focus sedan with a manual (29 mpg) or automatic transmission (26 mpg). Or the upcoming Fusion Hybrid.

Wagoner is taking a Chevrolet Malibu hybrid (27 mpg), a comfortable road-trip-ready car featured in the family sedan test group in our latest issue. We found the fuel economy gains to be mild for a hybrid. (In the same group, the higher-scoring Hyundai Sonata four-cylinder got 26 mpg overall, and it cost thousands less.)  Another option would have been the Chevrolet Aveo; we have tested three and the best overall mpg was 28 on a manual version, notably less than several competitors. As a long-distance cruiser, the Aveo leaves much to be desired, which arguably is a good reason for Wagoner to savor the experience. Shame he couldn’t pilot a Chevrolet Volt prototype to Capitol Hill.

Nardelli has the toughest choice to make. The company recently canceled its only hybrid products, Chrysler Aspen and Dodge Durango, just weeks after production began. Scanning the product line, there isn’t much there that promises good fuel economy or touts leading-edge "green" technologies. (Chrysler has showcased electrified versions of current models, though the range is limited.) He could choose a four-cylinder Chrysler Sebring (23 mpg in our tests) or Dodge Caliber (24 mpg). Or a Jeep Patriot. While that car-based SUV is a low-scoring model with just 20 mpg overall, its mere name waves the American flag proudly.

The vehicles selected by each exec will say a lot of about their companies, where they are and where they are going. Further, it will reflect on their own personal  priorities.

In this high-stakes, traveling reality show, I can’t image politicians and reporters being more stunned than if the executives all arrived in a Toyota Prius (44 mpg) and promised that their lineups would soon include a model with similar efficiency and pricing. Now that would make headlines.

Ultimately, the financial assistance the automakers seek is coming from you, the taxpayer. What do you think they should drive?

To look up fuel economy figures in making your choice, use our New Car Selector.

—Jeff Bartlett

Comments

[SunnyvaleCA]

Since they are supposed to be presenting a plan that makes them competitive with other automakers, perhaps they should be driving the vehicles of the competition. You know... get a feel for what they should be trying to build. Honda, Toyota, VW and others all sell vehicles in the USA that get better mileage and are more popular with consumers than the ones you mentioned in the article. Try arriving in a 4-cylinder Camry, Accord, or Passat TDI.

[david]

The Big 3 CEOs should car pool or take the bus. Just kidding.

On a more serious note, I think Chrysler and GM should enter chapter 11 to make it easier to re-organized themselves. I am not advocating a liquidation or shut down the two companies, but rather an orderly re-organization. The cost structures are just too high to be competitive. Shareholders, bondholders, union, dealers, management and other stakeholders should take some form of loss for GM and Chrysler to have a long term future. Only at such time should the government do a bailout. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

[Sandra]

Any make as long as it is a hybrid

[David Isenbergh]

To return the American car industry to competitiveness, both domestically and internationally, two enormous steps need to be taken:
1) Our three major companies must get thorough make-overs: removal of the bulk of failed senior executives and managers, and replacement by a new generation of technologically and managerially sophisticated car experts (not exclusively from the U.S.) The initial steps of this conversion will have to be made by the Federal Government, in close consultation with experts from our still-great centers of technological education and managerial expertise (MIT, Harvard Business School, etc.), as well as respected commentators and writers from the automotive press. There must be a commitment to make more fuel efficient (or alternative-fuel) cars and trucks. We must also catch up in the technologies of automotive safety and user-friendly electronics.
2) Even in the best of circumstances, it will take years for the U.S. companies to catch up with, let alone surpass, the currently superior refinement and value of our Japanese, Korean and European competitors. If these companies were allowed full competitive sway during this period of transition, the U.S. auto industry wouldn't stand a chance, and all this effort & expense would come to nought. So, if we want to maintain our American auto industry, we need to protect it from serious competition while it is being rehabilitated. That means tariffs, restrictions and subsidies for a number of years. Yes, competition is good, but successful industries have always been sheltered at some point in the course of their growth (usually in the nascent stages).

A similar approach to American manufacturing renaissance will have to be adopted in other vital areas of our economy: textiles, electronic & optical goods; ship-building; railroad & other public transportation industries. The loss of manufacturing competitiveness is the story of all declining economic powers. And, once on that slippery slope, climbing back is an enormous task.

[carol]

They shouldn't be driving Prius's. It sends the wrong message. I think that driving is ridulous. They can flyer commercial airlines in coach.

[Paul T]

I think all three CEOs (and the head of the UAW) should drive to Washington together in a 5+ year old U.S.- made minivan or SUV with > 150k miles on the odometer. It's probably been years since any of them have driven a car with more than 10k on the odometer for an extended period of time.

The togetherness they experience in this shared ride might be enlightening -- and I think their riding in the style that more like the majority of Americans might help them better understand why purchasers of their products now feel they way they do...

[Jill Goodwin]

Driving leaves a much smaller carbon footprint (even driving separately - carpooling would be even better) than flying. Air transportation is much less efficient in terms of CO2 emmissions.

[for#24]

to d. isenberg:
when daimler had chrysler, it plundered chrysler. compare the product line of 1997 to that of 2008. little to attract new buyers, reliability is down, jeep commander was voted least likely to be rebought by current owners. GREAT EUROPEAN BUSINESS PRACTICES! now chrysler is in huge trouble & its new owner is considering suing daimler for misrepresenting chrysler at time of 2007 sale.
bankruptcy as a means to break the uaw is a road to elimination of the middle class as known today. protections of workers is more than simply jobs: safety, fairness, healthy environment, etc. for every 1 job of a D3, 5 other jobs exist due to the D3 worker. uaw has given concessions last contract. look to manufacturing process & management deficiencies for high costs.
buyers still consider D3 vheicles; however, without ability to get a loan, virtually no one is buying. this is a financial market issue as much as anything.

[Paul]

This may sound ridiculous, but maybe it's time for the American auto industry to disappear. The fact of the matter is it costs too much to build cars in the U.S. On one side, you have a unionized work force which require steep pay rates and extraordinary benefits. On the other side, you have reckless pay rates and expenses incurred by "Big 3" executives. Meanwhile, cutbacks are made at the expense of R&D.

If you look at Honda and Toyota, their U.S. plants are non-union employees only. Their executives are not paid as much. And they don't have to offer multi-thousand dollar incentives to customers to "bribe" them into buying their cars because they make reliable cars that people actually like.

Any idiot can run a car company. It takes some real work effort, focus, and thought to run one profitably.

[paul pena]

Ha!!! Now that the 3 automakers are on the begging end, how sorrowful, humble and contrite they purport to be. They act like any common criminals who are finally caught; ...how sad,sorrowful and contrite they now behave. But for many years in the past, they "stuck it" to the consumers as if we were just a bunch of dumb driven cattle. Obviously, they did not learn their lessons well; beginning the early 1970's when we; -the consumers, stood in long lines, each one, taking turns with our odd and even lisence plate numbers to buy gasolin. Instead, they hired high price ad agencies who promoted the mantra of "Buy American", together with their well paid lobbiest to promote the sale of their gas guzzling SUV's inspite of the mandate for a more economical vehicle. Additionally, they exported their manufacturing plants outside of the country for cheaper labor and greater profit at the cost of American laborers. They criticized Asian automobiles as being made cheap and inferior. But intead, time has proven them wrong as the American cars were in fact, proven to be inferior quality. They tried to impose a higher tariff for the import of Japanese and Korean automobiles. But instead, they were outsmarted by the Japanese and Koreans because these foreign car compnaies moved their factories to the US, and became big employers of American workers. I was in Detroit 5 years ago. I wanted to see an American car assembly plant. I was told by the natives of Detroit "I don't know where to take you. They don't assemble cars here in Detroit anymore. Those tall buildings you see with the Ford, GM and Chrysler signs are just car company's corporate offices." Now in the big 3's desire to acquire a bail, they are selling fear mongering with the threat of the loss of jobs of American auto workers. What else is new when the true fact is, they moved their plants to foreign countries. Bail out??? ...hell no!!! Chapter 7 or chapter 11 ...heck yes!!! A well defined full enegies, thoughts and moneys should be spent on those poor Americans who lost or are losing their houses, retirement pensions, health insurance, foods and clothings for their daily maintenance. By the way, if these CEO's and company official lose their jobs, will their way of life be affected in the same equivalence as us; the common folks?

[Bob Henry]

Rick Wagoner of GM should drive my 2005 chevy
silverado Z-71 4x4. He will have to head for
Washington one month early in order to arrive by March 31st. For the restructuring progress meeting.
He will stop at a chevy dealer to have the rear end
replaced for $2400 he will need bailout money for this, as well as 3 weeks hotel room & meal money.
Then he will have to stop at another GM dealer
get the front whell bearings replaced (another 3
days). One more stop for the front differential seal. He should arrive in Washington in jig time
with 72,000 miles on the vehicle. By the time he
arrives he will have a clear understanding of what
his Corporation needs to do to get back in the game. After all when someone buys a vehicle and makes payments for five or six years. They shouldn't have to pay the vehicle cost to maintain it. Now if he drove my brother in laws Toyota Tundra he could leave the day before enjoy the drive and he wouldn't need a bailout to get there.
When American Auto makers are designing the new cars for our future...workmanship is not the issue,
design and product quality are. I have always bought American...but my last 2 trucks (chevys) fell apart. I can't do it anymore and their dealers
gouge the heck out of you in the process. Pretty
simple actually...ya think!

[chris]

I wouldnt get another GMC vehicle.I purchased GMC PEWTER 2002 flex fuel 3dr Sonoma on 12/29/2002 with extended warranty in Atlanta Ga. I dont trust them. I was treated so very very poorly from GMC regarding my brand new pick up with poor abs breaks. When malfunctioning, it pulled to the left at times pulling me into traffic at times. I returned the vehicle several times asking about this issue. I was always told there was no problem. I had many issues with this vehicle. I lost power while driving on the highway, and I was fortunate to be able to pull over. I was made to pay for my tow at that time and it took arms and legs to get reimbursed by the dealer. I had electrical issues in which I had to replace my radios 9 times, a battery replacement, daytime running lights replaced x2, headlights rear lights, electrical brake switch outage,solenoid replacement, and engine light that wouldnt turn off. The Chev dealership made me drive 500 miles to check if the light would go out. AS they kept on sending me out to drive the vehicle, I had to make them give me an invoice to show the mileage each time I brought the vehicle back. This was a nightmare for me because I had to take time off of work, I didnt trust the truck and had trouble with the dealership. My car was under warranty and they wouldnt acknowledge my brake problem although it was demonstrated at a different dealership(who then said both of my hands werent on the steering wheel). I sent numerous emails and phone calls to GMC, posted many complaints on the National Highway Safety Administration website, to other websites. Finally I made it to a district manager and after a long conversation who offered to repair my abs brakes problem.I was relieved. Here is the catch, I had moved to Texas and they wouldnt allow me to repair it there. I was recently in Atlanta and the district manager said I need have the work done in Atlanta. I suppose the Dm didnt think I was going to come from TExas, but I showed up for the appointment and he didnt. Well finally they fixed my abs brakes early 2006. Then tried to sell me another truck. I laughed and said no thanks! Why would I want to be loyal to a company who doesnt want to be loyal to their customers. I have a box full of documentation to show their type of loyalty and it aint with the customer!
MAKE BETTER CARS AND TREAT CUSTOMERS BETTER!