1949 Ford F-1 Custom Pickup on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Tier 1 suppliers call GM the worst OEM to work with

Among automakers with a big US presence, General Motors is the worst to work for, according to a new survey from Tier 1 automotive suppliers, conducted by Planning Perspectives, Inc.
The Detroit-based manufacturer, which has been under fire following the ignition switch recall and its accompanying scandal, finished behind six other automakers with big US manufacturing operations. Suppliers had issues with trust and communications, as well as intellectual property protection. GM was also the least likely to allow suppliers to raise their prices in the face of unexpected increases in material cost, all of which contributed to 55 percent of suppliers saying their relationship with GM was "poor to very poor."
GM's cross-town competitors didn't fare much better. Chrysler finished in fifth place, ahead of GM and behind Dearborn-based Ford, which was passed for third place this year by Nissan. Toyota took the top marks, while Honda captured second place.

Detroit automakers gain market share simultaneously for first time in 20 years

While monthly sales figures might be an easy way of tracking the progression of the auto industry and individual automakers, looking at market share might be more indicative of how each company is actually standing up against its competitors. For the Detroit Three automakers, they have collectively lost almost 30 percent of the market over the last 20 years, but now, for the first time since 1993, Ford, General Motors and Chrysler have each posted market share gains at the same time.
According to Automotive News, Ford's share increased the most by 0.7 percent, GM was up 0.5 percent and Chrysler rose marginally by 0.2 percent, giving the Detroit automakers a total market share of 45.6 percent. As for the Japan's Big Three, the article reports that Toyota is up by 0.7 percent, Nissan is down the same amount and Honda has seen "little change."

Lincoln 'not true luxury' yet, says Ford design chief

Lincoln is "not true luxury," according to Ford's design boss, J Mays. His statements come from a story in The Detroit News that saw candid language on the issues facing Ford's troubled premium brand. Notably, there's a need for a strong character, with Mays saying, "Every brand needs to have a DNA and a unique selling point and things in the vehicle that make you think, 'That's that particular brand.'"
With a range of rebadged Fords, it's not hard to see why that DNA is missing. Mays hinted that a full recovery for Lincoln will be a ten-year process, that's been kicked off with the MKZ sedan. While that car is still largely a Ford Fusion under its extremely pretty wrapper, it's the first Lincoln in some time to inject its own unique take both through the exterior styling and through interior features, such as the vertical, pushbutton gear selection.
Some analysts weren't so certain about Mays' 10-year estimate. Jim Hall of 2953 Analytics thinks it'll be more like 30 years before Lincoln can show a true return to form. The issue, as Hall explains it, is that, "luxury has a degree of exclusivity," that Lincoln just doesn't have. Michelle Krebs from Edmunds adds, "it's definitely a wanna-be luxury brand," comparing the troubled American brand with Infiniti and Acura, two other brands that have struggled to find their place in the luxury market.