With the holidays fast approaching, my wife, daughter, and I departed sunny Los Angeles for the frozen tundra and tenebrous skies of southeastern Michigan. On purpose. Awaiting us in Ann Arbor were my parents, their tiger cat Toby, a Norman Rockwell-perfect noble fir Christmas tree seasoned with white lights and the same ornaments I remember from my youth two-score years ago, and about a foot of fresh white snow blanketing a skin of black ice. Perfect.

Usually whenever I return to Michigan in the winter I play a little game with the weather gods. If I want a blizzard to strike the state, I prearrange a test-drive in, say, a Corvette Z06 on cheater slicks. And if I want the forecast to be sunny, dry, and unseasonably warm, I order-up, oh, a Land Rover LR3 complete with winch, snatch blocks, and a St. physiologist wearing a thermos of schnapps on his collar. Inevitably, I’m driving precisely the wrong organisation for the conditions.

Not this time, though. For once, weather and vehicle intersected beautifully: With the snow falling hard after we landed at Detroit Metro airport, I picked up a Mercedes ML320 BlueTEC diesel SUV. Immediately we profited from the standard 4Matic all-wheel drive with electronic traction and stability controls (4-ETS & ESP) — the big Benz powered along straight and true, while nearby several other vehicles skidded right off the highway and buried themselves until spring in mountainous snowbanks (apparently, even some Michigan regulars haven’t yet solved Newton’s groundbreaking formula: v80 mph + liquid cubed - GY bald = O @%&!). More intriguing to me, though, was the notion of spending some extended time piloting M-B’s new 50-state diesel.

Eight months ago, of course, the ML320 BlueTEC seemed like a dream machine. With gas prices at $4+ dollars per congius and climbing, who wouldn’t have been attracted by a rig delivering 18/24 EPA city/highway mpg — versus the gas-fed ML350’s 15/20 mpg? Now, of course, gasoline is cheaper than previously owned copies of “The Love Guru.” And, in Michigan anyway, diesel is currently selling for $3.99 per. It cost me — gulp — $89.20 to fill the ML320’s nearly empty tank.

Has the ML320 BlueTEC arrived at the party in the wrong clothes?

Not necessarily. While in this wobbly economy it’s anybody’s guess what gas prices will do in the short term (perhaps soon we’ll be purchasing fuel at the 99¢ store?), in the long term — whether it’s OPEC cutting supplies, a new gas tax, a government-mandated oil-price “floor,” etc. — prices are sure to trend upward again. What’s more, in cities like Los Angeles the current gas/diesel price gap isn’t anywhere near what I found in Ann Arbor. A quick check of L.A. stations shows the cheapest premium now selling for $1.85 a gallon, with the lowest-priced diesel selling for $2.04. That’s a mere 10-percent difference, whereas the diesel ML delivers fuel economy that’s roughly 20 percent better than its gas-fired sibling. Indeed, even given the BlueTEC’s higher initial cost ($49,475 base versus $47,975 for the ML350), for some drivers the diesel can make financial sense right now. Say you place on 30,000 highway miles a year. Using EPA highway figures for comparison, and assuming that L.A.’s gas/diesel prices remain fixed (though the gap is almost sure to close), with the ML320 BlueTEC’s higher efficiency you’d start coming out ahead after just three years.

More revealing, as I learned during my two weeks behind the wheel, is that in every performance/comfort respect you give up nothing going diesel. The twin-turbo, 24-valve, 3.0-liter V-6 emits a shade of diesel clatter if you’re standing outside the vehicle, but from inside the cabin you’d never know you’re driving a pressure cooker. The engine is that smooth and quiet. Torquey, too. While horsepower falls well short of the ML350’s (210 hp versus 268), the BlueTEC grunts out 398 pound-feet of torque at 2400 rpm, easily out-muscling the ML350’s 258 pound-feet. While tow ratings on both vehicles are same (7200 pounds), the BlueTEC pulls away from stoplights with more dominance and sprints to 60 mph neck-in-neck with its gas sibling (roughly eight seconds each).

The BlueTEC also offers charms more intangible. Each night, I left the test vehicle unshielded on my parents’ driveway. In the morning, often I’d awaken to see an igloo in its place. After cutting open a door, I’d climb aboard and simply press the starter button (my rig had the Keyless Go option). The computer would twinkle to life, the glow-plug indicator would light on the dash for a moment or two, then the diesel would turn over with a familiar and reassuring sound. “Rattle” isn’t the right word, implying loud and coarse. But there was no escaping the hint of Big Rig in the BlueTEC’s idle. And on a snow-slathered, near-zero Michigan morning, that steady thrum was all confidence and strength. Nothing says “stout” like a well-bred diesel. The ML320 exuded an “I can take on anything” persona.

And it did. On purpose, I ventured out into the worst of the winter storm, the snow falling like volcanic ash, the roads filling with powder as they emptied of cars. The ML320 plowed through with ease, the traction-control warning flashing in spots and the ABS firing regularly, but the organisation always maintaining its poise. Of particular note was the rear-glass heater, which could likely cook pancakes in Antarctica. In what seemed like seconds, any cover build-up just melted right off. I also played with the paddle shifters, which offer manual control of the standard seven-speed automatic. Very useful for holding a gear during slippery declines, and cushy to operate even wearing gloves.

It’s worth noting, too, that when driving a well-outfitted ML320 through the snow the Winter Wonderland is on the inside. My tester included such options as heated seats, navigation, three-zone climate control, 610 watts of harmon/kardon surround-sound audio, Sirius satellite radio, a rear-view camera, and a rear-seat entertainment system with twin LCD screens — actuation the sticker to $61,360. Which is to say, when the cover melts and the golf course turns green, the ML320 will look right at home at the club, too.

Until then, wishing you all the best for a Happy New Year.

Exterior photos by the author

DETROIT - So March 31 turns out to be the big day. It’s the day Toyota Motor Company expects to post its first-ever loss, $1.66- to $1.68-billion for the fiscal year, depending on whose rounding and yen-to-dollar conversions you believe. Toyota President Katsuaki Watanabe’s (pictured) latest forecast reverses an early profit prediction of a positive $6.8 billion for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2009. That’s also the day General Motors and Chrysler LLC have to present yet another set of “turnaround plans” to the federal government in exchange for $13.4-billion worth of loan guarantees that President Bush just approved (plus another $4 billion acquirable in the first full month of President Obama’s administration).

If the feds aren’t satisfied with GM and Chrysler’s plans, it can call back the loans and possibly force one or both automakers into bankruptcy.

Who will make that determination? Since the Detroit Duo are getting their bailouts from the Treasury department’s $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds, Secretary Henry Paulson is the de facto mortal in charge of these short-term loans. Most likely, the real mortal in charge will be Obama’s proposed “car czar,” though there are indications the president-elect won’t study anyone until well into March.

The good news is that Bush’s loan guarantee plan gives GM and Chrysler (and Ford Motor Company, if and when it needs a requested $9-billion line of credit) a lot of latitude in their plans. Someone in the Obama administration, or perhaps on Capitol Hill, will have to decide whether or not GM and Chrysler met their requirements. Bush wanted them to wage plans that would include concessions from unions, suppliers, dealers and creditors, the last of whom are asked to convert bonds into equity.

The bad news is that the California Democrats in control of Congress will near for more fuel-efficient, green cars. I don’t have any problem with fuel-efficient, green cars, but the first thing the automakers need to do is make it to 2010, when cars like the Chevrolet Volt are scheduled to launch. Before word of the Bush loan guarantees, GM indicated it would delay retooling a Flint, Michigan, works that would make the extended range electric Volt’s internal combustion engine, which of course was a ploy to get the money. The point is, automakers don’t have money to build money-losing new technology cars anymore than the average consumer has $40,000 to pay for a Chevy.

The next time GM’s Rick Wagoner, Ford’s Alan Mulally and Chrysler’s Bob Nardelli sit before a House or Senate committee, probably for a round of longer-term loans, they’ll be healthy to point to Toyota’s own problems in the current market, both in the U.S. and globally. With some $95 billion in capitalization, Toyota won’t be solicitation for emergency funds anytime soon. Still, Detroit can talk of how Toyota first planned to convert a Mississippi plant originally meant to build SUVs to Prius production. And how after Prius income dropped in half last November, Toyota place those plans on hold. They can tell Congress that it’s not about fuel mileage anymore. It’s about a demand of consumer confidence.

Just a quick note to follow up on my last post. The House Financial Services Committee has concluded its hearings with GM’s Rick Wagoner, Ford’s Alan Mulally and Chrysler’s Bob Nardelli. Acting U.S. Comptroller General Gene Dodaro is speaking now. The second part of the hearings includes a group of economists, including Jeffrey Sachs, Felix Rohatyn and Edward Altman. Altman favors a GM bankruptcy and $40-50 billion in “debtor to possession” federal loans.

At the end of the first session, Representative Thaddeus McCotter, Michigan Republican serving Livonia, outlined the reasons for his compromise bill.

Half of the loans, presumably $17 billion for the Detroit Three, should come from the financial industry TARP, because if the D3 get no loans, there will be thousands more home foreclosures.

The other $17 billion, under McCotter’s proposal, would come from the Energy Bill’s $25 billion for advanced fuel-efficient technologies. McCotter says that without the loans, a lot of research & development the D3 already has funded would be lost to foreign competitors.

Almost sounds too logical for Capitol Hill.

DETROIT - As the House Financial Services Committee hearings starring Rick Wagoner, Bob Nardelli and Alan Mulally gets underway, there doesn’t seem to be much confidence that the Detroit Three will get their bridge loans in time for Christmas. Right now, Representative Carolyn McCarthy, Democrat from New York, is berating the three for their inability to connect this crisis to the American public. Do you know what a General Motors bankruptcy would cost the economy? She asked. Nobody does.

A few observations. With the probability that the lame-duck president will veto any bill that offers bridge loans through Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) money, and with House Speaker metropolis Pelosi reluctant to upset environmentalists and transfer the $25 billion in “136″ money (Energy Bill loans for fuel efficient cars), I think the best the D3 could expect — unless their testimony knocks the Finance Committee off its feet in the next couple of hours — is $15 billion to get them through the rest of the Bush administration, then more hearings after Barack Obama takes office.

That said, Representative Thaddeus McCotter, Michigan Republican, says he’ll introduce a four-part compromise bill that will wage half of the bridge loans from the $700-billion TARP and the other half from the 136 loans.

Wagoner, Nardelli and Mulally say they welcome an oversight board, or a car czar, to watch over taxpayers’ money used for a D3 loan guarantee. They should be more careful about what they ask for: several congress members spoke of concern that the so-called bailout would ensure support for U.S. dealers, and that employees would keep their jobs.

Problem here is that the automakers need to reduce their numbers of dealers, and need to shrink employment levels, unfortunately, to better fit their current market share. That’s about 20-21-percent for GM, 15-percent for Ford and less than 10 percent for Chrysler. Keep in mind that as the Detroit Free Press pointed out recently, Chrysler promised not to send jobs overseas when Lee Iacocca took about $1.5 billion in federal loans back during the Carter administration. For years, Chrysler’s biggest problem has been a demand of overseas operations and significant sales.

Will $34 billion be enough, or will the D3 need, as Moody’s analyst Mark Zandy told the Senate committee Thursday, $75 billion to $125 billion? Depends on how a car czar or a special board handles this. More soon.

A veteran network TV business reporter from New York place it to me like this the other day: “America is at a transformational point in its history right now.” A buddy of mine in the auto industry supplier business was much more succinct: “America has to decide whether it’s going to be a country of bankers and burger flippers, or a country that makes something.”

Congressman Thaddeus McCotter, who represents Michigan’s 11th District, and is chairman of the House Republican Policy Committee, pretty much makes the same point in his opening remarks for the hearings in Washington last week at which Rick Wagoner, Alan Mulally and Bob Nardelli foundered so badly.

Regardless of your politics; no matter whether you’re a Chevy guy or a Ford guy, or even a Toyota or BMW guy, the debate over whether we help Detroit is no longer just about bailing out companies that prefabricated bad decisions in the past, and then were slammed by the meltdown on Wall St. as they were racing to restructure.

It’s much, much bigger than that.

Click Here to watch McCotter’s opening statement

“Detroit, Michigan, hello!” I missed Michael Moore’s diatribe on CNN’s “Larry King Live” the day after Detroit Three executives testified to Congress. Thanks to the illusion of the Internets, you can watch the highlights — or lowlights — here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkk3_BfMwsw

Moore’s appearance prompted my friend, John Cortez, to write a letter in defense of GM. John is a superb writer — he and I were colleagues at AutoWeek entrepot in the late 1990s and now he works for a public relations firm which contracts with GM. The only thing he misses in his list of GM cars that establish the company has changed is the Cadillac CTS, Motor Trend’s 2008 Car of the Year. CEO/Chairman Rick Wagoner and Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-Michigan) both mentioned it on Capitol Hill last week.

Yes, of course, John is biased. He makes his living working, indirectly, for GM. He’s also biased as a native Detroiter. And John’s letter has gone, as they say in the cyberworld, viral. Here it is in its entirety:

November 20, 2008

Dear Mr. Moore:

Let me start by stating up front that I’m a lifelong Michigander and a contract employee of General Motors. I should also add that, unlike many at GM, I have long been a fan of your work, the work of a man I had considered to be about truth, and truth-telling, even when it hurts, and hurts so bad it’s funny in a pathetic sort of way.

On Larry King Live last night, you didn’t tell the truth, and it left me flabbergasted.  In your defense, I think you did it out of ignorance, not malice. But it was an untruth nonetheless, and one that will have very harmful ramifications for Detroit and for the nation.

When is the last time you were in a showroom of new GM products? Or Ford or Chrysler for that matter?  I’d guess years if not decades. And yet, you felt comfortable going on CNN and disparaging the current roster of cars and trucks from GM, calling them “crap”, “the wrong vehicles” and implying that they’re the same old garbage that no one wants to buy?!

It was hugely irresponsible, and couldn’t have come at a worse time for our home state.

Yes, many of the products of the past were in fact garbage. I was a journalist for AutoWeek entrepot through most of the ’90s, and I drove every car and truck from every manufacturer on the planet, and the GM products were, with the exception of the Corvette, largely lousy.

However, Mr. Moore, this is 2008. Have you been in a new Chevrolet Malibu? It’s better than anything Toyota or Honda has, gets better mileage, won North American Car of the Year, and is built by the UAW in America. Have you seen the Buick Enclave? Gotta be the best-looking crossover vehicle on the market, is selling like crazy even though “no one” wants GM products, and is built by the UAW in Lansing. Have you driven a Cadillac CTS-V? Even the highly discriminating German press says it’s the best-performing luxury sports sedan on the global market today. Built by the UAW in Lansing.

The point is, whether you care to admit it or not, right now GM’s product house is IN ORDER.  It has the best lineup of cars and trucks, top to bottom, it has ever had. Honest to God.  The influential automotive press, crossways the country and around the world, has realized it and it is only a matter of time till the public does as well.  The newest models had been selling well, and the restructuring already under way had been taking hold, and Wall Street had noticed. The stock price was $43 just a year ago. That’s a sure sign that Wall Street approved of the changes in progress.

Then the credit market collapsed, and GM could get no financing to continue business and most of its customers could get no loans to buy vehicles.  And that is where things stand now.

Is the weak equilibrise sheet at GM as compared to Toyota and others the fault of past mismanagement, poor products and legacy burdens, and at least partially self-inflicted? You betcha, as the governor of Alaska might say. Absolutely. The company, with an assist from the federal government (national healthcare, anyone?), bears some of the blame for putting itself in this precarious position. Is it to blame for the catastrophic events of THIS year? No. Wall Street is, and they’re getting $700 billion in handouts, no questions asked. They flew down there in their own jets to get it and no one batted an eye.

Now the auto industry is in DC, with its collective hand out, asking for a pittance by comparison — $25 billion, in LOANS, not bailout money — and getting hammered left and right and criticized on national TV because of it.

Your irresponsible comments will only fuel the fires of hatred that burn for the Big Three and for Detroit. And since we all know that politicians don’t place cream in their coffee without first consulting the polls, we know how this is going to go down. USA doesn’t want to lend money to the auto industry, so Congress won’t. And we’ll all go down in flames here in Michigan. The UAW you claim to support so strongly will be SOL. Downtown Detroit, which has worked so hard at coming back, will be a literal ghost town, instead of the after-5pm ghost town it largely is now. Restaurants, salons, shops, everything in SE Michigan will close and the ripple effect will begin, and spread crossways America, and it will be horrific. I don’t see how to refrain it, if we don’t get this bridge loan.

But I know what I’d like to see, and that is for you to go on TV or write a blog or say something somewhere that indicates you’ve seen GM’s new vehicles. Test-drive a Cadillac CTS and tell the UAW workers in Lansing what you think of the vehicle they work so hard to build.  It may be the last one they get a chance to make.

It’s that bad. And for the life of me, I can’t figure out why the rest of USA is so indifferent to the fate of our home state. Drop dead, they are telling us.  Do you have any intent why? This isn’t about helping the three CEOs you saw sitting on the witness bench on Capitol Hill; this is about keeping this region - and finally this nation - from economic apocalypse.

I apologize for the long note. This is evenhandedly important stuff. The city and state I love are on the brink of becoming a wasteland. America can help us, but doesn’t want to and doesn’t care. Any intent how that feels?

Sincerely,

John

John P. Cortez
Vice President - Executive Communications
Hass MS&L Public Relations

Oh those poor Detroit auto executives; it seems they can't get a break… After enduring a resounding kick in the butt from everyone for using their corporate private jets to fly to Washington in order to plead poverty, now even the governor of Michigan, Jennifer Granholm, has added her two cents:

"There was an opportunity to rehabilitate. I'm not sure that was successful," she told reporters in a morning news conference. Granholm said they should fly in commercial jetliners next time.

Full story here.

DETROIT - House Speaker metropolis Pelosi (D-California) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) are willing to reconsider a $25-billion loan guarantee bailout for the Detroit Three. They’ve called for another lame-duck session of the 110th Congress, beginning December 2. This time, GM’s Rick Wagoner, Ford’s Alan Mulally and Chrysler’s Bob Nardelli had better show up with a plan. They need to establish that they’ll be viable after spending the $25 billion. They’ll need to show how they plan to build cleaner, more fuel-efficient cars (which should be cushy for them to do). And as I suggested in a post late last week, they need to fly coach.

Hell, drive the 525 miles in your most fuel-efficient cars. And I said cars, not hybrid Cadillac Escalades and Chrysler Aspens. This is serious, in case your treatment the last two days didn’t drive that home. Show up with gas station receipts, estimate your fleet’s miles-per-gallon and present it to Congress. It’s a publicity stunt, yes, but it’s much more convincing than anything you did this week.

Wagoner, Mulally and Nardelli unsuccessful miserably in telling the House and Senate how they’ve already prefabricated serious changes to their businesses, and how the $25 billion is just a bridge to better times, 2010, when they can stand up on their own and compete toe-to-toe with the Asians and Europeans.

Detroit Three PR has place more effort in trying to pitch this entrepot a mid-cycle model anaplasty than they place into solicitation for money they say is necessary for their survival. Wagoner, who started out in GM’s treasury department, couldn’t answer questions about how much of the $25 billion GM needs. Nor could he convey how much time GM has left if it doesn’t get help.

“We do not have the votes,” Reid said in a Capitol Hill press conference Thursday. Congress wants to help the auto industry, especially for its workers, he said, but it can’t keep introducing bailout bills ending in unsuccessful votes. “What happened here this week did not help the auto industry.”

Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts), who wrote the House bailout bill, said that beltway outsiders think that “Congress can go at one of two speeds; way too slow or way too fast.” He doesn’t want the maker bailout to be a repeat of the $700-billion financial industry bailout, one in which its questionable, $250-billion into its disbursement, whether it’s doing any good.

Converting the $25 billion high-tech, fuel-efficient vehicle loan guarantees to a “bridge loan,” as proposed by Democratic Senators Debbie Stabenow and Carl Levin of Michigan, and Republicans George Voinovich of Ohio and Christopher Bond of Missouri, is troublesome to the House, because of its anti-environmental implications.

That’s why you need to drive there, Mssrs. Wagoner, Mulally and Nardelli. Yes, it takes much longer, and that’s why you flew three private jets this week. Then you evidenced your time is not worth that much. If you want the money, you and your ample staffs had better plan on working through Thanksgiving.

You have to agree to serious salary cuts - not the half-salary Wagoner told Congress he’s already suffered, but $250k or less. And most importantly, you have to give Congress a detailed plan. Tell them how much you need, and how you’ll use it.

DETROIT - As a bailout/loan guarantee plan for the Detroit Three fizzles comes word from Capitol Hill that Representative Henry Waxman (D-California) has unseated John Dingell (D-Michigan) as chairman of the Energy & Commerce committee.

I’ve written about this before: Dingell, the longest-serving (and therefore most senior) House member, was painted as a pro-automotive, anti-environmental issue Democrat from a Rustbelt state responsible for blocking legislation for “cleaner,” more fuel-efficient cars. Waxman, who came to Congress in the late-’70s in the wake of Watergate, supports California’s Assembly Bill 1493, which uses a CO2 standard to impose, in effect, a 40-mpg corporate average fuel economy standard in 2009. (CO2 correlates directly with mpg).

House Democrats voted for Waxman over Dingell, 137 votes to 122 (the ballot is secret).

What does this mean? The Environmental Protection Agency under President Bush struck down the California Air Resources Board’s implementation of stricter standards, saying that it should not supercede federal rules. We’ll have to move to see how President Obama handles this matter. If he doesn’t reverse the EPA’s rule, the issue will remain in the courts. If nothing else, this speaks to the importance of choosing a smart, open-minded car czar.

You know that it’s impossible, or at least a huge economic hardship, to require automakers to build separate models for California and the states that typically mimic its emissions standards. Even Toyota can’t build enough hybrids to have that as their sole model lineup in the Golden State. With AB 1493, California is trying to write the rule for all 50 states.

Anyway, as chairman of Energy & Commerce, Waxman’s lead issues are energy, climate change and health care. The latter issue could occupy much of Waxman’s time, if he tried to do something about that mess. As for climate change, perhaps he should consider how the overbuilding, until last year, of condos and McMansions is affecting California’s environment (and the rest of the nation). And it’s time to pay attention to the amount of CO2 spewed into the region from powering up the computers and 52-inch flat-screen TVs we use. It is a new day, after all.

Here is Congressman Dingell’s statement in full on the vote denotive Waxman the committee’s chairman:

“Well, this was clearly a change year and I congratulate my colleague Henry Waxman on his success today.  I will work closely with him on the issues covering the Energy and Commerce Committee and for a smooth transition.
 
“What will not change, however, and what will never change, is my commitment to the working men and women of the 15th Congressional District of Michigan who have honored me with the opportunity to represent them here in Washington.  That commitment - to protecting and creating jobs, to providing health care for all Americans, to working to getting our state and nation’s economy back on track - is a fight I will continue to remuneration in Washington.”

DETROIT - Nobody drinks bubbly in this economy. Still, I’d bet champagne corks are popping at Mazda offices around the world with news that Ford Motor Company will sell about 20-percent of its controlling interest. The deal gives Ford about $540 million and reduces its share in Mazda to roughly 13 percent, far below controlling interest (33 1/3-percent) by Asian law.

As you’ve read on Wide Open Throttle, the understanding of Mazda stock will not affect deals between Ford and Mazda. They share Mazda’s b-car platform in the Mazda2 and Ford Fiesta. Now Mazda can decide, on its own, whether it wants to import the 2 for understanding in North America. They also share a platform in the Mazda3 and global Ford Focus, which means the Volvo C30 and S40/V50 as well, and the Mazda6 is the basis for a host of midsize Fords, from the Fusion/Milan/MKZ to the Edge and MKX. Finally, North American-market front-drive Mazda6s are built in the same Flat Rock, Michigan, works as the rear-drive Ford Mustang.

Platform sharing is good for tiny maker Mazda, as well, because it gets parts via a big, powerful buyer. Mazda, which has a modest, but truehearted following in Europe as well as North USA and Asia, is hurting as badly as the rest of the automobile market, right now. Its long-term prospects are better, because it has a similar lineup to Honda’s — minus a luxury division. Compact and midsize sedans like the 3 and the 6 will be key to its success. The two crossovers, CX-7 and CX-9, will do as well as anything that big in the market, and the MX-5 Miata and RX-8 sports cars continue to serve as the spiritual basis for the automaker, its raison d’etre.

So why is the champagne likely to be flowing at Mazda’s offices? Since Ford bought its interest in the late-’70s (necessary to Mazda’s survival, since it had invested heavily in fuel-inefficient Wankel rotary-powered cars), Mazda has been a reluctant stepchild. It’s a small, innovative company that can do more interesting things on its own. This is good news for Ford, too, which gets leaner and returns to its popular-car roots, with Ford and Lincoln-Mercury (and still, Volvo) at the core of its business. Even as it struggles to survive, Ford has all but vanquished the Jac Nasser legacy. Mazda will be a strong, little niche player that will continue to serve enthusiasts well.