|
About Me
My work has appeared in a number of major publications either as writer, photographer, or source. I enjoy talking about all things automotive. Recent Posts
Categories
Links
CarSpace Hudson's BlogAll around the car world there are stories and these are just a few of them. A new blog is posted every Monday. Sometimes more often. Feb 25, 2008 - The Shaky World of Automotive InvestingUntil around 1950, there was a Wild West-like attitude in the American automotive industry. It was a frontier to be conquered. Throughout automotive history, there have been something like 5,000 individual makers of cars and trucks in the world with about 3,500 of them being situated in the United States. Companies like General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler have survived, in one form or another, for over a century. General Motors turns 100 this year but its oldest parts (Cadillac, Buick, and the late Oldsmobile) are well over the century mark. Ford was founded in 1903. And while Chrysler was created in 1924 from the remains of Maxwell, parts of the company can be traced back to Rambler which dates back to 1903 as an automobile manufacturer. There are a few minor vehicle manufacturers in the US. The most prominent of them is Panoz which is slowly approaching its 20th anniversary. Outside of these tiny footnotes, there hasn't been a major successful American manufacturer founded since World War II. And even new import brands on US soil have been a rare find in the past 30 years. Rare successes like Hyundai and Kia are at odds with struggling Mitsubishi and soon-to-be-gone Isuzu. So you might have to forgive my apprehension everytime someone announces a new venture. When Bob Lutz announced the revival of Cunningham about eight years ago, I was excited. This was the first time in half a century that a new manufacturer would be coming to the US where I trusted the founder. Bob Lutz is the consumate car guy with REAL automotive experience working with the likes of BMW, General Motors, and Chrysler. Lutz even had novel, and as I saw it workable, approaches to manufacturing (which he laid out in two issues of Automotive Industries). But when Lutz was hired by General Motors, it was obvious that all bets on the Cunningham were off. So if Lutz prefered to take the corporate route instead of laying the foundation for real history, I knew new car production was truly a tough nut to crack. When people with questionable backgrounds talk about their automotive ventures, I automatically write them off in my head. People like Malcolm Bricklin, Gerald Weigert, and many others show great enthusiasm, some even know aspects of the automotive business, but most of them are just in business to make a quick buck. So ventures trying to tap the Chinese automakers for the next big thing find their way to my "skeptical" list. I understand that these people are trying to do what the Germans did in the late 1940s, the Japanese did in the 1960s, and the Koreans in the 1980s...catch the next big wave at its beginning. People like Max Hoffman and Kjell Qvale did just that, but the market was vastly different than it is today. The members of my list have included many different types of ventures. Importers of the ARO from Romania, the Proton from Malaysia, the TVR from the UK, the Citroen from France, the Alfa Romeo from Italy, and the Chery from China, among many others, have all announced their intentions in the past 20 years. Many times, these announcements have been followed by many different setbacks, some even could be just called frauds or scams. So it was of no surprise that Automotive News revealed that the head of one of these latest ventures was hiding a shady past. CHAMCO is a New Jersey-based importer who has announced that they plan on selling Chinese trucks in the next few years. The head spokesperson for CHAMCO has stated that he's simply a consultant for the company, but it seems that his wife is actually the chief stockholder of the company. And his past, according to the newspaper, shows that "he did time for fraud" in an earlier trucking venture that he controlled. I'm a huge car fan. I would love to see new and exciting choices in cars and trucks in the US. But each time a Build-To-Order or CHAMCO or ARO America is announced, I need to take a step back and see what's actually going on. The odds of any of these ventures getting off the ground, let alone becoming successful, are becoming smaller an
Feb 1, 2008 - Me and My MGsOne of my first Matchbox models was an MG 1100. There was something about that little green four-door MG model that made a connection between me and MG. I bought my first MG over twenty years ago, and I still own it. MGs were never known for their reliability or value. But they have always supplied the image of driving fun. It's that image that keeps me going with my car since it has not been licensed in the past 17 years. But I keep the plan alive to get it back on the road "by next summer." When Rover revived the MG brand in the early 1990s, I was so excited. "Perhaps MG could return to the US," I thought. Maybe I could work for MG USA when the factory initiated an import office! My brand had returned from the grave! The MG RV8 was a (nicely) warmed-over MGB, which itself had been out of production for 12 years. The body panels for the MGB had returned to production for use in restoration projects so it was relatively easy for Rover to build a "new" MGB. Power came from the fuel-injected aluminum-block V8 engine borrowed from the Land Rover brand; the V8 had seen use in the MGB but only in the GT coupes and only in limited production in the early 1970s. And the interior was brought into the 20th century as well. The RV8 was a nice transition from the old MG to a new, reborn MG brand. Rover's new mechanicals provided the basis for the new roadster. Since all production Rover cars were front-wheel drive and traditional sports cars were rear-wheel drive, Rover placed the drivetrain from its little cars in the rear of the new MG's platform. A Honda transmission put the power of Rover's updated (with variable camshaft timing) K-Series four-cylinder engine to the road. And the styling remained tracable to the MGB/C and Midget...the last of the "true" MG models. BMW took over Rover in the early 1990s and gave the company the money to continue living. With an Anglophile (Bernd Pischetsrieder) at the head of BMW, British car brands seemed to be due for a resurrection. As the century drew to a close, BMW was growing weary of the boat anchor that was Rover, so it was sold. A group of Brits took over the company for $14 (10 pounds), which included a $1 billion interest-free loan from BMW. What didn't come with the company was ownership of the name Rover, mainly because Land Rover was sold off separately. The new company prepared for a time when the Rover name would be unusable (the new owners had free use as long as they didn't produce an SUV under that brand) and named the new company MG Rover. MG versions of the Rover products were introduced, nearly doubling the lineup. Once again, my heart soared! MG's coming back! Perhaps they need help marketing the MG TF (an updated version of the MGF introduced almost a decade earlier) in the US! But my enthusiasm was, again, short-lived. MG Rover closed up shop in 2005. Assets of the company were transferred to Shanghai Automotive (SAIC) and Nanjing in China. The two companies argued over which one owned which parts while they both prepared to launch versions of the Rover 75 sedan. BMW sold the Rover name to Ford, owner of Land Rover, and since BMW already owned most of the traditional Rover brand names (including Mini, Austin, Triumph, and others), MG Rover only had the MG name within its rights. Nanjing claimed ownership of "MG" and badged its sedan as the MG7. SAIC needed to launch its own brand for its 750e sedan and christened it "Roewe" (sounding quite a bit like "wrong way"). Nanjing announced to the world that they would bring the MG brand back to the automotive market. Grand plans were shown including reopening the Longbridge plant in England and opening a new plant in Ardmore, Oklahoma. Nobody outside of Nanjing believed these plans and, late last year, Nanjing was absorbed by the much larger SAIC. While the Longbridge plant is still part of the deal, the "to-be-established" US plant was off the table. Now with all of the legal scuffling cleaned up, SAIC can relaunch the MG brand. Am I waiting to work for MG now? No. Am I waiting to put my name on the list to get a new MG? Not yet. Do I hope MG is successful? Yes, I do. I would like to see a return of a British-built MG...and especially one that can be purchased in the US. But I'm not placing bets as to when (or if) this will occur. Unlike my nature, I'm ever optimistic that it will happen...sometime.
|
