1940 Ford Rat Rod Pickup on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Detroit and Silicon Valley: When cultures collide

Culture is a subject that rarely, if never, gets discussed when traditional auto companies buy — or hugely invest — in Silicon Valley-based companies. The conversation surrounding the investments is usually about how the tech looks appealing and how it's an appropriate step to move the automakers toward autonomy. Culture — the way things are done, the expectations, and the approaches — is something that is overlooked only at one's peril. The potential cultural gap is almost always evident in the obligatory photos of the participants in these deals, with is essentially a photo op of auto execs with their Silicon Valley counterparts. The former — rocking jeans and no ties — look like parochial school kids playing hooky. Don't worry: The regimental outfits will be back in place once they get back in the Eastern time zone. Consider what happened back in 1998 when Daimler bought Chrysler. First of all, there was a denial in Detroit that it happened. It was positioned as a "merger of equals." Which it wasn't. In any corporate situation, when one has more than 50 percent of the business, it owns the whole thing. And the German company was in the proverbial driver's seat. People who were around Auburn Hills back then kept their heads down and their German Made Simple books at hand. Things did not go well. Daimler had had enough by 2007, when it offloaded Chrysler to Cerberus Capital Management — which brought ex-Home Depot CEO Bob Nardelli into the picture, which is a story onto itself. But when you think about the Daimler-Chrysler situation, realize that these were two car companies (at least the Mercedes part of the Daimler organization), so they had that in common, and the language of engineers is something of an Esperanto based on math, so there was that, too. Yet it simply didn't work. It doesn't take too many viewings of HBO's Silicon Valley to know that the business people in that part of the world are far more aggressive than people who ordinarily head and control car companies in Detroit. About 20 years ago, a book came out about the founder of Oracle titled The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison* - and the asterisk on the book jacket leads to: God Doesn't Think He's Larry Ellison. It would be hard to imagine a book about a Detroit executive, even a book that had the decided bias that the tome about Ellison evinces, that would be quite so searing. Sure, there are egos. But they are still perceived to be, overall, "nice" people.

Mulally wanted to kill Lincoln as late as last year, Fields vows to turn it around

Lincoln fans might want to give incoming Ford CEO Mark Fields a pat on the back for having a hand in saving the brand from the chopping block last year. He's among the people spearheading the rejuvenation of the division away from its stodgy image to appeal to younger customers.
According to two unnamed sources speaking to Bloomberg, CEO Alan Mulally was ready to kill Lincoln last year. Following the slow production ramp-up of the MKZ combined a with a costly ad campaign, Mulally was frustrated and openly suggested dropping the brand. However, Fields and Jim Farley, Ford's marketing boss, convinced the CEO that the brand was worth saving. They also created a plan to prevent similar problems for new models in the future.
It seems that one part of the strategy may involve waiting until new models are at dealers before starting a big ad campaign for them. Lincoln global director, Matt VanDyke, recently told Autoblog that the division is holding off on a full marketing push behind the new MKC crossover to prevent the supply problems that plagued the MKZ last year. Its big offensive begins in the fall when the CUVs are at all of the dealers and consumers are at home watching more TV. VanDyke also told Bloomberg that Fields, Farley and Joe Hinrichs, Ford president of the Americas, have more direct oversight over new product launches now.

Least reliable cars and trucks of 2022

Related: Most reliable cars and trucks of 2022   Every year, Consumer Reports ranks new cars based on their predicted reliability. We often see Toyota, Lexus, and a few other automakers near the top. But on the other side of the coin, the list of least reliable vehicles sometimes contains surprises.   The organization surveys its members to determine the vehicles that exhibited the most problems over the prior year. Owners are asked about creaks and rattles, the durability of parts and trim, and mechanical issues. Consumer Reports assigns a weight to each problem and then uses them to create a score, with 100 being the best. Some familiar names appear on the list of least reliable vehicles (in order with the lowest predicted reliability score at the top), but there are a few eyebrow-raising models, followed by CR's score: Ford F-150 Hybrid: 4 Hyundai Kona Electric: 5 Lincoln Aviator: 8 Nissan Sentra: 9 Ford Explorer: 16 Chevrolet Bolt: 17 Chevrolet Silverado 1500/GMC Sierra 1500: 19 Jeep Gladiator: 21 Mercedes-Benz GLE: 23 Jeep Wrangler: 24 Consumer Reports noted that sedans are the most reliable vehicle category and found that trucks are far lower on the list. That said, the survey showed that trucks from American brands tended to have better reliability scores, so it’s surprising to see GMÂ’s big two and the Ford F-150 on the list. Part of their problematic ownership experience could be due to the fact that all three trucks have received recent updates, and the Ford was completely redesigned for 2022. New tech, fresh drivetrain components, and other improvements can upset the balance of reliability and make newer models look less dependable than their older counterparts. Related video: Green Chevrolet Ford GMC Hyundai Jeep Lincoln Mercedes-Benz Nissan Car Buying Truck Crossover Hatchback SUV Electric Hybrid Sedan Consumer Reports reliability