Say it ain't so, Akiyo.

I'm having a hard time truly reconciling myself with the Toyota recalls. Exactly why did Toyota recall the Prius due to "faulty braking" when the brakes were still functioning well within the legal constraints of safety? It made sense with the accelerators- people were killed and hurt. But in the case of Toyota recalling Japan's best selling car for a .4 second braking delay, I have to believe that Akiyo Toyoda's primary motivations behind making a public apology must have been cultural.

As this article states (much more eloquently than I can) the Japanese company had enjoyed a revered position in the automotive world. Toyota did things that American automakers could barely imagine, much less implement, for decades. An arrogance came with that excellence. An arrogance that bred a corporate culture in which questions and investigations were unwelcome critiques on a process the establishment had already deemed not just adequate, but near-perfect.

Adding to the mix is the Japanese government, which has even more influence over its large corporate entities than Washington has over the post-recession Big Three. A dangerous combination of a corporate God complex with government complicity in the mix leads to a damaging lack of internal communication, internal dissent, and perhaps most important to the current situation, internal testing and development.

So as someone who drives a Toyota (Sure, the Scion is sort of a My First Toyota, but it's still a Toyota) and whose family has driven Toyotas for nearly 20 years, I have to say that I'm not afraid of the recall. I have faith in what made Toyota great, what made them actually get to that level where they imagined themselves above reproach. But I would hope that in this case, Toyota will learn the important lessons from this fiasco that Detroit was never really given the opportunity to learn. Until it was too late.

Total Recall

Am I the only one who has had the passing thought that the Great Toyota Recall of 2010 and the media attention focused on might simply be a ploy to sway drivers toward purchasing vehicles from GM?

Apparently not.

But for some conservative bloggers and even some mainstream media outlets, this is much more than a passing thought. It's a frightening harbinger of the New World Order.

I don't really think that the government is sabotaging Toyota's image to garner buyers. But I will say this: GM has survived for so long by sole virtue of being an American institution, not a competitive company. I think it's going to be a while before they are able to work past using media and government funds as their business plan, and start actually acting like a car company.

Task number one: change the name.

I've owned two Indian motorscooters, and they both had their quirks. Pot metal drain plugs and brake levers, for example.

So you could understand my reservations in regards to India's Tata Group and their unveiling of the Nano, the world's cheapest car.

India still has a higher degree of QC, in my view, than China, insofar as vehicle production is concerned. Take, for example, the fact that this Chinese SUV rated a zero across the board in safety crash tests (and Geely wants to buy Volvo? Gaaaaah...). But I still can't help but wince at the notion of driving a $2500 Indian-built car. I mean, the MSRP on my Indian-made Bajaj Chetak was a hair more than that back in 2005.

But what is even more unsettling, for me, anyway, is the push to put more cars on the streets of what the PR folks at Tata are calling "emerging markets" (that is, developing countries). Developing countries are highly dependent on two wheel and public transport, and I have to say I don't think cars in large numbers are the answer for markets like India and Southeast Asia, that are already suffering from congestion and pollution with the cars they have.

As much as I love cars... I think that places like Delhi and Bangkok have enough issues without further traffic and emissions.

A saad state of affairs.

Once again, GM has called in like a Texan governor to pardon Saab for just a bit longer...

It seems odd to me that GM is calling the shots on the Saab deal. They probably know that the Saab name carries much more brand loyalty than the other names they put on the chopping block this past couple of years (seriously, who describes themselves as a Pontiac person?). But they nevertheless have a brand that has been losing credibility for some time now, and a brand that most of even the most die-hard of Saab fans have given up as a sad case of American capitalists making a giant, flabby, tasteless mess out of a venerable European tradition. You know, like what we did with the brewing of beer.

But I was intrigued enough by this potential deal that I decided to see just who these Spyker folks are, and what they are about. While Koenigsegg, the initial suprise bidder for Saab, is certainly a brand known for pushing every possibility to its limit, there was a certain amount of sense there. A Swedish company buying out their Swedish brethren, perhaps ushering in a new era of innovation and excitement for the "Born from Jets" brand. But who are these Dutch maniacs, and what kinds of cars do they make?

As a former Saab owner, I had only one reaction to the images of Spyker's flagship Aileron supercar.



AAAAAAAAAAAAUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!

Where to begin?

The bizarre and seemingly nonsensical placement of turbine-inspired intakes, including the one draped like a flaccid penis between the two panels of the 80's style T-top moonroof?

Gull-wing doors? On top of everything, gull-wing doors?

The interior- resembling the result of a P. Diddy/Vivienne Westwood design collaboration on Liberace's sex room?

It's just that every single element of this vehicle is too *done*. If *one* spoiler is good, let's try two, one on top, and one on the bottom of the rear. If *some* red in an interior (for reference, look at just about every other supercar) is good, LOTS and LOTS of red must be better. It's like a supercar designed by a 12-year-old boy. Too much, everywhere, in every way. It's lacking only a flux capacitor and standard-issue bikini-clad passengers.

All in all, I'm glad Spyker is still in play, just because I think they could learn a thing or two about moderation, broad appeal, and design from collaborating tightly with the folks in Trollhattan. There is nothing wrong with going crazy on a supercar, but to make a supercar that is beyond the exotic, something teenagers buy posters of, something whose name sends shivers down a trophy wife's spine... you need to know when to quit.