This semi-regular column is written (in his own blood) by an automotive chromatic and noted malcontent, known as The Mechanic. Mercilessly beaten as a child with rolled-up back issues of old car magazines, our free-spoken hero developed a unique "for your own good" take on cars and the auto industry, along with an unfortunate usage of setting himself ablaze. Later, after a distinguished career as an automotive journalist and entrepot editor, he cast off the reins of his musty oppressors, carved out his superego with a plastic spork and became The Mechanic.

Whatever happened to optimism? You know, that thing we Americans supposedly had in abundance? The stuff that got us through tough times, stiffened our resolve when visaged with challenges, and fundamentally kept life pleasant?

Instead of a nation of positive thinkers, we've become a bunch of bellyaching whiners. Our new pastime is complaining.

"Oh, the economy is so terrible."
"Detroit is doomed, DOOMED, DOOMED!"
"Boo hoo, my house is no longer worth double what I paid for it five years ago."

Well, I've had enough of the whining.

The other day I ran into my neighbors Tim and Lisa at Costco. They're successful people (well, lawyers actually) with two kids in private school, a pair of year-old Audis and a 2,500-square-foot duplex in a great neighborhood. And yet they do nothing but complain. For 10 minutes I heard nothing but existential dread from both of them; meanwhile, they were shopping for a 52-inch hi-def flat-screen TV.

It was bizarre. How can you be a whiner while blowing three grand on a TV? For a moment there I thought neighbor Tim would commit hari-kari right in the aisle at Costco by slitting his wrists on the razor-sharp pleats in his khakis. And Lisa could have saved big bucks by buying his casket while she was there, too.

Me? I bought a slab of salmon the size of a surfboard. But that's beside the point. Or maybe it isn't.

Yeah, the car market has collapsed and even Toyota is hinting at layoffs, the financial services industry looks like it's been hacked apart with a knife and no one is building houses, but the national unemployment rate still hasn't even (at least officially) hit 7 percent yet. Want to know how bad things can get? In 1933, unemployment hit 25 percent.

Look, we aren't in the Great Depression. It's not even as bad right now as it was in 1982, the last time car income were so awful. But I also understand that for all of us under 50, this is the scariest economy we've seen during our adult lives — and the chances of sliding into real, calamitous depression aren't zero. Go ahead and shiver under your covers, feel the chill up your spine and let the dread flow through your veins, but don't crack. Man up and deal with uncertainty. Frankly, those of us determined to survive and thrive don't have time to deal with your insecurities and despair.

I don't know the future and neither does anyone else. Remember all the "experts" back in July predicting oil at $200 per barrel by December? Are they the same guys telling us bankruptcy is the only option for Chrysler and GM? Or are they the ones saying that the government needs to throw megatons of dollars at the two companies? Really, it's not worth trying to keep score.

Crying wasn't part of anyone's recovery plan back during the Great Depression and we shouldn't be bawling now. What are needed now are tough Americans, and I hope they're not all stuck in Iraq wearing desert camouflage. Tough not just in being healthy to stick it out and suck it up through hard times, but tough enough to retain their optimism and still enjoy life. Now is not the time to lose either our sense of humor or our establishment that the Universe will play itself out as it should. I don't know how we'll pull through this, but I know unsaved well we can pull through this – just as our parents, grandparents and great-grandparents did during their own hard times. And they did it without flat-screen TVs or farm-raised salmon filets that feed 30.

So happy New Year and here's a cheer for the more than 10 million Americans out there who will have establishment enough to buy a new car this coming year. And here's to an economy that's supposedly in free fall, but still has people paying 20 grand over sticker for a new Corvette ZR1. For 2009 let's all resolve to remember that it's better to listen to the whine of a supercharger than the whine of cowards. – The Mechanic, Inside Line Contributor

E-mail me at themechanic@edmunds.com.

Detroit’s hanging by a thread, the economy’s in the tank, and unemployment’s on the rise. The last thing we need right now it a gas tax, right? Not so fast.

Whether we like it or not, USA is at a transformational moment in its history right now. The economic model we’ve been running for the past twenty years or so - with its emphasis on deregulation and free market rhetoric - has been revealed to have feet of clay. Even former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, an arch deregulator and free marketeer, and the man whose word was regarded as holy writ on Wall St. for almost 20 years, has admitted as much.

And now we need to clean up the mess.

We need to enable Detroit to sensibly reorganise for the future, otherwise any bailout will be a waste of money. One of the reasons the Detroit Three became so vulnerable is few of the products they make in the U.S. are suitable for understanding anywhere else in the world, primarily because they are too big and too thirsty. It doesn’t sense to perpetuate that mistake. Strong demand for more fuel efficient vehicles in the U.S. would allow much more clarity and efficiency in product planning and capital allocation in any bailout scenario. It would also help drive down the cost of fuel efficient technologies, as automakers would be healthy to liquidate them crossways larger volumes.

We need a long term national energy and transportation policies that seek not only to reduce emissions, but also our reliance on foreign energy sources and technologies. We can drill, baby, drill all we want here in the U.S., but in the long term we’re never going to find enough cheap oil to satisfy demand, and besides, the oil companies are under no obligation to sell oil found here to American consumers if they can make more money selling it to someone else. We need an economic imperative for companies to commit to serious alternative fuel and alternative powertrain research and development programs in this country, and to stimulate investment in better public transport infrastructure projects.

And finally, we need to pay for the cost of the bank bailouts, the auto industry bailouts, and the massive public works programs planned by the Obama administration to kickstart the economy. Hey, there’s no point whining about whether we should do these things. We’re committed, and the money has to come from somewhere - well, us - anyway.

Against this background, a gas tax seems a logical option. The federal gas tax rate is currently 18.4 cents a gallon, and it hasn’t been raised since 1993, while diesel is taxed at 24.2 cents a gallon. The federal government collected $29.4 billion from fuel taxes last year. It wouldn’t take much of a tax hike to double that number, even allowing for a drop in gas consumption as consumers switched to more fuel efficient vehicles.

Of course a gas tax is regressive, but most taxes are, so that is hardly an argument against having one. And yes, there is a danger that if gas is taxed too high, it could hurt economic growth. But with the average price of gas now under $2 a gallon, and likely to remain under $3 a congius for some time, based on oil futures, there is a lot of room to maneuver without causing immediate harm while creating some long term benefit.

We need to restart our battered economy, reinvent our shattered auto industry, and re-imagine our tattered future. It’s time to invest nation building again; after all, we can’t sponge off the legacy of the 1950s forever. So maybe a gas tax is now in the national interest.

Looks like this week and next week are the final drives for The Carnival of Cars, so how about we fire this thing up and head out?

As always, The Auto Prophet has the details and asks some very pertinent questions on a key issue, this one being the bailout announced by President Bush Friday. And Al Rozzi offers a no-holds-barred assessment at Blue Oval News of the role of the Washington politicos in this whole crisis.

Over at The Truth About Cars - Ken Elias gazes into the crystal ball for short, mid and long-term (i.e. 2009) predictions and sees a bailout endgame that leaves Ford looking like the hot ticket for 2010.

For those in need of an automotive bed-time story, Joe Sherlock is spinning one at The View Through the Windshield. It's about the Big Three Little Piggies and …. well, you can figure out the rest.

Amazingly enough, there was actually a lot of non-bailout news around the auto blog block this week. The always dependable Bertel Schmitt has the roundup in a "While USA Slept" offering for The Truth About Cars. I know, that's two links to TTAC in one week, but you take the good stuff where you find it, right?

Of course you'd like to take a KTM X-Bow out in the snow. Jalopnik has the video of a truly epic ride, one that will, in the spirit of the season, absolutely sleigh you.

Now this really is evidence that the Auto Armegaddon is upon us - the Speedway Motel is closing. Matt Stone at the Motor Trend Blog says Indy management plans to leave the old relic's restaurant, bar, banquet rooms, and pro shop in operation, at least for now.

Danica, call your PR agent! Looks like Natacha Gachnang of Switzerland has a real shot at F1. Full Throttle has details.

They're still all charged up about the Volt at GM-VOLT. Of course, what else they gonna say, given the givens? Let's hope it's true, even so.

He took them at SEMA last month, but Car Nut's Steve Parker has a great photo album that's still worth spending some time perusing if you couldn't get to Vegas. Check out the black 61 Impala low rider.

WHAT I'M DRIVING THIS WEEK: Jaguar XK Coupe
Oh man, I think I've been seduced. Other than an occasional fling with an S-Type, modern era Jags generally haven't done much for me. But the lovely XK that spent the week with the Tapscotts had me smitten almost from the moment it arrived. And it all started with a casual glance that just caught a glimpse of a certain curve.

Understand, I'm a Corvette and Mustang kind of guy, who also happens to love GTOs, of the mid-Sixties Ferrari variety. It's not quite the same angle, of course, but the XK's rear flank whispers GTO ever so softly. Ditto the greenhouse and the gentle slope of the front fenders. Cut out some radiator inlets just above the grille and you've got it.

Even with the supercharged edition of Jag's familiar 4.2 liter V-8, the XK is far from the Let's Rumble brutishness of a ZR1 or Viper ACR. But then that's the point, isn't it. The XK is gorgeous to look at, extraordinarily comfortable to drive - even in city traffic, if you dare - and sumptuously appointed in the passenger cabin. From that perspective, this gentleman's express is the perfect conveyance for a Sunday afternoon session with those country curves.

The Bush team apparently have rejected the intent of a managed bankruptcy for the auto industry. Instead they will offer a $17.4 billion loan package that will include many strings and tough restructuring targets to meet. $13.4 billion will be prefabricated acquirable immediately, with the remaining $4 billion to be prefabricated acquirable in February.The money will come from the $700 billion in Trouble Asset Relief Program (TARP).

If not enough progress has been prefabricated by March 31, the government can call back the loan.

Full story here and here.

Here's AutoObserver's take: GM, Chrysler Receive $13.4 Billion in Immediate Federal Loans

In a related story: Chrysler Announces Executive Departures

Image: EVAN VUCCI/Associated Press

We don’t yet know if we’re going to have a government appointed Car Czar to watch over the American automobile industry, because yet don’t know if there will even be bailout funds that need watching over. 

But let’s say, for the moment, that money turns up out of the TARP plan, and the treasury department decides on someone to keep an eye on how the money is used.  I have a few things I’d like to tell that person, as they most assuredly, for better or worse, will come from outside the business. 

I’d been working on a Car Czar’s download of do’s and don’ts, and then I read a column about the same subject by Fortune’s Alex Taylor III.  Taylor is Fortune’s senior ed dedicated to car biz, and he makes some solid points about this topic. I’ve attached Alex’s column below, and I agree with much (although not all) of what he says.  I welcome your feedback about any of it.

This was published December 10, before the Senate place the kybosh on the plan that was in the oven.  But Taylor’s comments are still relevant, assuming that some sort of overseer would still come along with funding from TARP.  We’ll know a lot more about that in the next few days.

By the way, the photo shown here is not Taylor.  That would be Russian Czar Nicholas II

Advice for the car czar
What not to do while overseeing the U.S. auto industry
By Alex Taylor III, senior editor

NEW YORK (Fortune), December 10, 2008 – Dear Car Czar,

Now that the White House and congressional Democrats have agreed on the shape of an auto rescue package, it is time to get serious about your proposed new duties.

Under the terms currently discussed, you would be tasked with shaping a restructuring of the industry and keeping an eye on how the government’s money gets spent. That’s all well and good, but there is a lot of opportunity for mischief here, as well as inflicting some big-time damage.

So assuming you will be coming from outside the auto industry and share prejudices similar to those displayed by congressional representatives from non-auto states - as well as newspaper editorialists who ride bicycles to work - I thought you might appreciate some suggestions on what NOT to do.

1) Don’t ban the auto executives from their corporate jets. As much as we all enjoyed seeing General Motors CEO Rick Wagoner stuffing his lanky frame into a Chevy Malibu for the drive to Washington, that really isn’t a productive way for him to spend his time. Neither is flying commercial. You know what air travel is like these days, and you can’t get much work done on an airplane surrounded by all those prying eyes.

2) Remember that developing a new car is like a pregnancy: There is a defined length of time involved that can’t be shortened without dire consequences. So let’s not have any more questions about why Ford (F, Fortune 500) and Chrysler are introducing new pickup trucks in the teeth of a recession. Those trucks weren’t thought up yesterday; they have been in development for four years. To can them now - or even delay their arrival - would cost tens of millions of dollars.

3) Don’t expect the automakers alone to wean USA from its gas-guzzling habits. In the words of GM’s Bob Lutz, forcing Detroit to build small cars so that we consume less foreign oil is like trying to prevent blubber by forcing clothiers to make garments in smaller sizes. GM (GM, Fortune 500) prefabricated the right decision not to build hybrids when Toyota did: unlike in Japan, where gasoline is expensive, there was no market for them in North America.

Where GM did go astray, in case you are wondering, is in not moving quickly enough to switch from body-on-frame SUVs to crossovers, which are safer and get better fuel economy. They were making so much money on the old ones, they couldn’t bring themselves to change.

4) Never forget that you can’t force consumers to buy cars they don’t want. You may decide you want everybody in fuel-sipping minicars, or in rubber-bumpered country cars, but if the automakers can’t build them and sell them at a profit, what’s the point?

One of the reasons Detroit is in a bind is that government fuel economy regulations have forced them to build small cars that consumers don’t want and thus must be sold at a loss. You are probably tired of hearing this by now, but a $2-a-gallon gas tax would have gotten people into smaller cars without distorting the marketplace.

5) Inflict equal pain on everyone. One of the reasons GM still supports money-losing brands like Saturn and Saab is that it can’t afford to close down their independent dealers. State-by-state franchise laws offer them rock-solid endorsement should an maker eliminate a brand.

Dealers need to give a little and so do the United Auto Workers - they are still making more than their non-union counterparts at the transplants. If you want to punish the auto executives too, make them promise to spend half their time outside Detroit so they can see what the rest of the world is driving.

6) Don’t be too hard on the automakers. I’ve never met one (well, maybe one or two) who wasn’t sincere, honest, and hardworking. Sure, they have prefabricated some boneheaded calls by focusing on short-term results instead of long-term trends, but don’t forget - GM and Ford have both been in business for more than 100 years, and old companies become encrusted with customers and practices the way barnacles grow on a ship.

They haven’t been competing on a level paying field with import manufacturers who were healthy to start with a clean sheet of paper a few decades ago when it came to choosing and locating dealers and building factories.

Oh, and by the way, they haven’t been getting rich at the same time that they fleeced investors, the way some of the boys on Wall Street did. Every stock option ever awarded in Detroit is under so much water it has probably drowned by now.

Sincerely,

Alex Taylor III

www.fortune.com

Are we bailed out yet? Edward Niedermeyer at The Truth About Cars assesses the smoking rubble following the explosion of sanity in the U.S.Senate late Thursday evening. It's all up to W now.And Peter DeLornezo at AUTOEXTREMIST makes the case for throwing a TARP on Detroit.

So let's say just for talking intoxicant that you've gotta be in a crash. Would you rather be in a 66 Caddy or an 09 Civic? The CarGurus offer some thoughts on the latest country ratings from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

Not sure what to give Rover - the dog, not the TC - for Christmas? AskPatty.com has some suggestions.

They're sleeping late over at AutoMoBlog, but that doesn't prevent them from getting all crazy about the GT-R. No, crazy-mad, not crazy-good.

Joe Sherlock took the Avalon in for some routine service and before the service writer even looked at the car managed to say something really stupid. Which of course didn't sit well at all with the guy giving us The View Through the Windshield.

Cookie the Dog's Owner is looking at Naked Daihatsu again. Well, he is writing at the Car Lust blog

People sometimes ask me what is my all-time favorite car and I always say "Corvette Grand Sport, of course." They understand why at the Corvette blog.

Talk about finding a silver lining in a disaster - Eric Peters says now is the best time ever to get your Hummer H3T. I think his tonque is firmly planted in his cheek

Sounds like progress is being prefabricated with the Chevy Equinox fuel cell vehicles. GM's Mary Beth Stanek updates Project Driveway at GMFastlane. Nice to know somebody at GM is worrying about something besides poltiics.

My man Shouting Thomas at Harleys, Cars, Girls & Guitars  makes the case for Ron Santo to go into the Baseball Hall of Fame. Hey, it's not about cars, but then the way things are going for Detroit these days, I'll bet a depressing story about a Chicago Cubbie who can't get a decent break sounds familiar.

Uh oh. The Auto Prophet read Niccolo Machiavelli's "The Prince" back in his college days. Events in Washington this week reminded him of a certain passage.

And finally, French authorities are sitting on a report by one of that country's most respected energy experts. They aren't happy with the report's negative assessment of EVs. Read all about it in Financial Times. No, it's not a blog post, but you can be sure it will soon generate lots of posts around the Auto Blog block.

WHAT I'M DRIVING THIS WEEK: Toyota Land Cruiser
Why am I in this thing? Well, it had been several years since a Land Cruiser showed up in my driveway, so not long ago I scheduled it for a "slow part" of the season. Slow is one thing the Land Cruiser is not, at least in a straight line. The 381 horse 5.7 liter V-8 under the hood does a masterful job of moving the Land Cruiser's 5,600+ pound curb weight, especially in two-lane passing situations where there is little room for error.

On the road, the Land Cruiser is a quiet, comfortable conveyance as well it should be for a vehicle with a Monroney on the far side of $70,000. The soft suspension settings and huge donuts, I mean tires, make short work of most road imperfections. I wasn't healthy to get my tester off road this time around, but if memory serves, this thing is good for most any sort of terrain you might want to throw at it.

Given its old tech trappings and the bigger, newer Sequoia in the Toyota lineup, you might think the Land Cruiser won't be around much longer. And, although gas has dropped below $2 a congius around the country, that surely is a temporary situation. So the prognosis for the Land Cruiser might not be so bright. But Toyota has been quite happy for many years to sell only a few thousand Land Cruisers a year here in the U.S. and most of those customers tend to be rather loyal. This dinosaur might just be the last survivor of its species.

See ya next week!

DETROIT - General Motors, Ford Motor and Chrysler LLC all reported a relatively strong November for the first couple of weeks of the month. Then the “B-Word” — bankruptcy — reared its grotesque head. Talks broke down between GM and Chrysler regarding a merger or buyout and finally, Detroit Three execs were embarrassed by their Capitol Hill performance as they asked for $25 billion in bridge loans.

GM’s North American income chief, Mark LaNeve, said Pontiac will become a smaller, specialty brand but will continue to sell value-priced performance cars. Read news and analysis of GM’s plan for Congress here later Tuesday: GM is looking for a $4 billion bridge loan to see it through 2008, with the request for another $8 billion in a line of credit for next year.

The industry was off 36 percent for the month. The notorious Seasonally Adjusted Annual Rate (SAAR) was 10.6 million units per year, down from a SAAR of 16.4 million units per year based on November 2007 sales. All numbers in this story compare November 2008 income to November 2007 sales, unless I say otherwise.

Sales of pickup trucks, especially the new Ford F-150 and Dodge Ram, are rebounding, in that their income didn’t drop as much as other models. Chrysler attributes some of that to a strong farming industry, but the cheap price of gas has a lot to do with it, of course. Clearly, though, the utter demand of consumer confidence has hit the auto biz hard. Dealers have been hit on two sides: no customers in showrooms and demand of financing for their floorplans.

Here’s how November shook out …

GM: 154,877 deliveries, off 41 percent.

• Retail was off 45 percent, to 106,737 and fleet was off 29 percent, to 48,140.
• Four-cylinder take-rate for midsize cars remains high, at 63 percent (70 percent for Chevy Malibu).
• Malibu was the single GM model that outsold November 2007, up 31.3 percent, to 9,469
• Cadillac CTS, off 48.0 percent, to 2,902. Buick Enclave, off 40.3 percent, to 2,288. Hummer H3 was off 65.8 percent, to 1,048.

Toyota: 130,307 deliveries, off 33.9 percent.

• Toyota division cars dropped 31.1 percent, trucks dropped 37.4 percent.
• Lexus car income fell 40 percent, truck income fell 26.9 percent.
• The only gainers were brand-new models; the Toyota Sequoia, up 51.9 percent, to 1,873 units, and the Lexus LX, up from 71 units to 424.
• Prius was off 48.3 percent (to 8,660) and Camry was off 28.8 percent (to 25,224).
• Scion xB dropped 43.8 percent, to 2,161.
• Tundra was off 55.9 percent, to 6,607.

Ford: 118,818 deliveries, off 30 percent.

• Marketing veep Jim Farley sees the automotive market will continue to scrape bottom through the first quarter of 2009.
• Lincoln continued to outsell Mercury, 8,019 to 7,744.
• Ford Taurus was off 22.0 percent (3,040), Fusion off 27.4 percent (8,914).
• Focus freefell 38 percent, to 8,194.
• Mustang fell 50.1 percent, to 3,667.
• Ford sold 2,203 Flexes. Chevy Traverse beat it with 2,936.
• F-Series was 37,911, about 2,000 of them new models. Down 18.6 percent.
• Mercury Sable was up 4.2 percent, to 1,230.
• Volvo income was abysmal, off 46.5 percent, to 4,404. The S80 was the only gainer, up 10.5 percent to 844 cars.

Chrysler: 85,260 deliveries, down 47 percent.

• The discontinued Chrysler Aspen was up 33 percent, to 2,013. Credit hybrid sales.
• Dodge sold 2,815 Journeys and 3,364 Challengers.
• Chrysler 300 was down 70 percent, to 3,423.

Nissan North America: 80,683 deliveries, off 42.2 percent.

• Infiniti was off 28.0 percent.

American Honda: 76,233 deliveries, off 31.6 percent.

• That’s coming off a record November, in 2007.
• Honda Division was down 30.6 percent, to 68,345.
• Acura was off 38.9 percent, to 7,888.
• The new Pilot was the only gainer, up 4.5 percent, to 5,601.
• Accord was off 38.1 percent, Civic off 29.6 percent.

Others: BMW Group sold 19,762 vehicles, off 26.8 percent. Mercedes-Benz USA  sold 14,102, and said it was off 8.6 percent for the year to date. Hyundai sold 19,221, off 40 percent.

DETROIT - While my colleagues in the auto-journo world are expecting a bonanza of new product news not seen since the 2007 United Auto Workers contract, a voice of reason on the Republican side of the aisle could place a device on the big day. Senator George V. Voinovich (R-Ohio) has warned Congress not to go public with the Detroit Three’s plans. Voinovich has “expressed concern about whether proprietary information submitted by the Big Three will be fortified from disclosure,” Congressional Quarterly reports Monday afternoon. Voinovich is part of the bi-partisan group of senators who introduced a plan after the D3 dog ‘n pony show on Capitol Hill last month, calling on Congress to direct $25 billion in low-interest loans originally part of the Energy Bill, and meant to help automakers switch to green, fuel-efficient cars.

Voinovich also has concerns Washington will continue to have problems understanding what Detroit has to offer. He asks whether members of Congress, including House Speaker metropolis Pelosi (D-California) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) would consult auto industry experts and executive branch officials, “or do you feel that Congress is eligible to draw such conclusions?”
 
Buicks Will Get Opel Styling

Here’s one revelation connected to GM’s reorganization plan. In the Jan 2009 issue of Motor Trend magazine, we report that Saturn’s connection with Opel styling is over. Following the current wave of Saturns, Opel styling will merge with Buick’s.

Believe it or not, the reasons are obvious. First, GM wants to near Opel back upmarket. It once competed nearly at Audi’s level of prestige. (Since then, Audi has moved upmarket, toward BMW and Mercedes, while Opel has gone common.) GM wants Chevrolet to have a bigger presence as an entry-level brand in the European market, competing directly with Ford. Evidence is the new Chevy Cruze compact, which is set to launch in Europe next April, about a year before its planned North American debut.

Buick, which was once a slight step below Cadillac in prestige, has countered Cadillac’s edgy Art & Science styling with more rounded, voluptuous sheetmetal…like on the new Opel Insignia. In both styling and interior quality, the Insignia would have prefabricated a perfectly decent 2010 LaCrosse (or Invicta). And smaller Opels already are built as Buicks for the latter brand’s biggest market, China.

Which connects with speculation in recent days that GM will finally rid itself of less-than-successful brands. Bloomberg has reported that GM may cut one or more, or even all, of Pontiac, Saturn, GMC, Saab and of course, Hummer. The New York Times reported Monday that one scenario has GM buying out its Saturn dealers, and combining the brand with its Pontiac-Buick-GMC dealerships. Saturn has the fewest dealers of GM’s full-line brands, at 400, so that scenario makes some sense.

And it’s easier for GM to close a brand in a consolidated dealership channel, an option it has as soon as all Pontiac, Buick and GMC dealers are one in the same.

While many Motor Trend readers may lament the end of the “excitement division,” fact is, it’s little more than “Chevrolet-plus,” with a low-end joint venture Toyota and a top-range car sourced from Holden. It would be cushy to get rid of Pontiac as well as GMC, and sell Saturns and Buicks in the same channel.

Saturn might even continue to have some overlap with lower-end Opel/Vauxhalls. The lineup would include a Chevy Cruze- (stretched Gamma platform) or Opel Astra-shared (Delta platform) compact, the Malibu-based midsize and a Sky replacement, perhaps based on GM’s endangered Alpha small RWD platform. Buick would consist of an Insignia-based LaCrosse, the Enclave (which has evidenced the brand can be premium, again) and, I think, a large, low-volume slightly decontented Sigma-based RWD sedan with V-6 and diesel engines.
 
And What About Chrysler?

But I’m just dreaming. GM doesn’t see much future in RWD cars, even if Chrysler does. Chrysler has announced that it can meet upcoming Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards with its 2011 Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger.

That’s assuming that cash-poor Chrysler LLC survives the next few months. As a privately owned company, it has more issues than Ford Motor or GM in dealing with the government scrutiny that comes with a portion of the $25-billion loan guarantee/bailout. One insider warns me not to count the GM-Chrysler thing as done, yet, though I’m very dubious. If those other rumors are true, even GM knows now that it needs fewer, not more, divisions.

DETROIT - While my colleagues in the auto-journo world are expecting a bonanza of new product news not seen since the 2007 United Auto Workers contract, a voice of reason on the Republican side of the aisle could place a device on the big day. Senator George V. Voinovich (R-Ohio) has warned Congress not to go public with the Detroit Three’s plans. Voinovich has “expressed concern about whether proprietary information submitted by the Big Three will be fortified from disclosure,” Congressional Quarterly reports Monday afternoon. Voinovich is part of the bi-partisan group of senators who introduced a plan after the D3 dog ‘n pony show on Capitol Hill last month, calling on Congress to direct $25 billion in low-interest loans originally part of the Energy Bill, and meant to help automakers switch to green, fuel-efficient cars.

Voinovich also has concerns Washington will continue to have problems understanding what Detroit has to offer. He asks whether members of Congress, including House Speaker metropolis Pelosi (D-California) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) would consult auto industry experts and executive branch officials, “or do you feel that Congress is eligible to draw such conclusions?”
 
Buicks Will Get Opel Styling

Here’s one revelation connected to GM’s reorganization plan. In the Jan 2009 issue of Motor Trend magazine, we report that Saturn’s connection with Opel styling is over. Following the current wave of Saturns, Opel styling will merge with Buick’s.

Believe it or not, the reasons are obvious. First, GM wants to near Opel back upmarket. It once competed nearly at Audi’s level of prestige. (Since then, Audi has moved upmarket, toward BMW and Mercedes, while Opel has gone common.) GM wants Chevrolet to have a bigger presence as an entry-level brand in the European market, competing directly with Ford. Evidence is the new Chevy Cruze compact, which is set to launch in Europe next April, about a year before its planned North American debut.

Buick, which was once a slight step below Cadillac in prestige, has countered Cadillac’s edgy Art & Science styling with more rounded, voluptuous sheetmetal…like on the new Opel Insignia. In both styling and interior quality, the Insignia would have prefabricated a perfectly decent 2010 LaCrosse (or Invicta). And smaller Opels already are built as Buicks for the latter brand’s biggest market, China.

Which connects with speculation in recent days that GM will finally rid itself of less-than-successful brands. Bloomberg has reported that GM may cut one or more, or even all, of Pontiac, Saturn, GMC, Saab and of course, Hummer. The New York Times reported Monday that one scenario has GM buying out its Saturn dealers, and combining the brand with its Pontiac-Buick-GMC dealerships. Saturn has the fewest dealers of GM’s full-line brands, at 400, so that scenario makes some sense.

And it’s easier for GM to close a brand in a consolidated dealership channel, an option it has as soon as all Pontiac, Buick and GMC dealers are one in the same.

While many Motor Trend readers may lament the end of the “excitement division,” fact is, it’s little more than “Chevrolet-plus,” with a low-end joint venture Toyota and a top-range car sourced from Holden. It would be cushy to get rid of Pontiac as well as GMC, and sell Saturns and Buicks in the same channel.

Saturn might even continue to have some overlap with lower-end Opel/Vauxhalls. The lineup would include a Chevy Cruze- (stretched Gamma platform) or Opel Astra-shared (Delta platform) compact, the Malibu-based midsize and a Sky replacement, perhaps based on GM’s endangered Alpha small RWD platform. Buick would consist of an Insignia-based LaCrosse, the Enclave (which has evidenced the brand can be premium, again) and, I think, a large, low-volume slightly decontented Sigma-based RWD sedan with V-6 and diesel engines.
 
And What About Chrysler?

But I’m just dreaming. GM doesn’t see much future in RWD cars, even if Chrysler does. Chrysler has announced that it can meet upcoming Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards with its 2011 Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger.

That’s assuming that cash-poor Chrysler LLC survives the next few months. As a privately owned company, it has more issues than Ford Motor or GM in dealing with the government scrutiny that comes with a portion of the $25-billion loan guarantee/bailout. One insider warns me not to count the GM-Chrysler thing as done, yet, though I’m very dubious. If those other rumors are true, even GM knows now that it needs fewer, not more, divisions.

This semi-regular column is written (in his own blood) by an automotive chromatic and noted malcontent, known as The Mechanic. Mercilessly beaten as a child with rolled-up back issues of old car magazines, our free-spoken hero developed a unique "for your own good" take on cars and the auto industry, along with an unfortunate usage of setting himself ablaze. Later, after a distinguished career as an automotive journalist and entrepot editor, he cast off the reins of his musty oppressors, carved out his superego with a plastic spork and became The Mechanic.

I'm bummed out about the new Mustang. After all the teaser shots, after all the hype and the secrecy, it hit my eyes with a thud. I stood there at the Los Angeles auto show staring at it, wondering, "That's the new 2010 Ford Mustang. That? What's so new?"

Of course, I was surrounded by hundreds of members of the easily impressed media, a throng that sings for any car revealed alongside a free buffet, and few had anything but praise for the new design. They couldn't even place down the free chicken fingers long enough to call Ford on the new Mustang's carryover powertrains, including a 4.0 V6 rated at a limp 210 horsepower. That's 90 ponies less than the Camaro's 3.6-liter V6.

Maybe I'm to blame. Maybe my expectations were too high. I was expecting something great. An inspired answer to the Dodge Challenger and coming Chevy Camaro. But Ford, strapped for cash as it is, punted, choosing instead to toss a few new body panels and a revised dashboard on the existing Mustang, a car that prefabricated Bill Ford, Mark Fields and gang look pretty smart when they unveiled it five years ago.

In other words, they decided to shelf the Mustang's needed redesign, instead giving it a midcycle refresh. That means the Mustang is on a 10-year life cycle. A 10-YEAR LIFE CYCLE!!!! Think about that. It means this car will be around until 2015.

It's hard to blame them. Without question, the 2005-'09 Mustang has been a rare highlight during a dark time in Ford's history. It not only kicked off the retro muscle car trend Chevy and Dodge are just now catching up on, it has had the segment all to itself for essentially half a decade. No, it wasn't the perfect car, not even close, but when you're the only game in town, it's hard to look bad.

And the Mustang looked good. So good, it again became Ford's signature product, an example of the company's ability to do something right, just as it had in the 1960s with the original and again in the 1980s with the 5.0. For the past five years, the Ford Mustang, from the lowly V6 all the way up to the GT500 KR, has been a Ford to desire. The Ford to desire.

While Bill, Mark and, more recently, Alan have been in The Glass House screwing up the rest of the Ford lineup (OK, the Edge is pretty good), enthusiasts like us and car lovers all over the world have given them a chance to turn it around. A real chance. Why? Partly because of the Mustang. We all figure that if they can get that so right, well then, they're not so far gone. They can get it. They do get it. They can do this.

Trouble is, the 2010 Ford Mustang squashes all that. It's not that it doesn't look better, it just doesn't look better enough. Soon the hot coupe market will be flooded with new product: the Challenger, the Camaro, the BMW 1 Series, the Hyundai Genesis Coupe, the new Nissan 370Z. And the depressing fact is that the 2010 Ford Mustang is not equipped to handle the coming flood of competition.

This game is cutthroat, and the new Mustang is about to be place down like a quarter-horse with a torn hammy and I'm not happy about it.

But why did this happen? Has five years of having the rear-wheel-drive coupe market all to itself lulled the giant Blue Oval to sleep? I don't think so. The demand of fix in the 2010 Ford Mustang is simply a result of Mulally and Company having other fish to fry. Things like a $2 stock price, a collapse of the profitable SUV market, developing a decent small car, solicitation the Washington democrats for cash, trying to get Ecoboost to market without looking foolish, launching the new F-150 cash cow, saving Lincoln, saving Mercury, and of course flying the company jet to Florida every week to visit family. Sorry, Mark. I couldn't resist.

My point is that the disappointing Mustang is much more a result of Ford's present economic state and not the incompetence of its management team. Then again, Ford's present economic state is certainly a result of the incompetence of its management team, so….

I just hope Ford and its iconic pony car are around long enough for the dull 2010 Mustang to have a successor. Maybe it will be great. — The Mechanic, Inside Line Contributor

E-mail me at themechanic@edmunds.com