Scottsdale Auctions - Detroit Once Had Mojo And Made Cars That Are Still DesirableCan Detroit Get Its Mojo Back

The last hammer has fallen at the mid-winter Scottsdale, Arizona collector car auctions. I'm no expert about the collector car market but it seems to me that while prices are down from their high marks during the cheap credit bubble, they aren't cratering. What I find fascinating is that while the domestic automakers struggle to stay alive today, their products from the 1950s, 1960s, and early 1970s continue to draw interest from collectors. Detroit had some serious mojo going on back then. It wasn't, as some Detroit bashers would have us believe, that Detroit was just feeding us crappy cars because we had no choice. There was a time when Detroit made products that were so desirable then that they continue to be desirable today.



When I was in high school in the early 1970s and got my driver's license, I drove a hand-me-down 1966 Impala SS. Like many cars Chevy has badged with the SS designation over the years, it had all the look fast parts, bucket seats, console shifter, SS badges etc. but had none of the go fast parts, just a two barrel 283 V8 and a two-speed Powerglide. It had a MSRP of $2,789 in 1965-66.

You're not likely to find many "2 barrel 2 speed" combinations at Barrett-Jackson or the other Scottsdale car auctions, but the mid 60s full size Chevys are still popular. Indeed this year's B-J auction saw six 1966 Impalas go on the block, with prices ranging from $14,300 for a non SS Impala with the small block 283/Powerglide setup to $39,600 for an Impala SS equipped with a 427cid/425hp big block V8 and a four speed Muncie transmission. Like I said above, their appeal endures.

In 1966, GM delivered about half the new cars sold in the US. Chevrolet was its best selling brand. The full size Chevy, the Impala, Caprice and the less costly Biscayne and Bel Air, was arguably the best selling car in America. It sold well because it satisfied customers' needs. Available with everything from an inline six to a big block V8, the Chevy was comfortable, fast (well, depending on what was under the hood), stylish and big. Maybe not as big as a Cadillac, but certainly big enough to pile in two adults, three or four kids, and a trunk full of luggage, and it was fast enough to cruise on the Interstate at 80mph all day long. They were competitively reliable and when they did need repairs, they were simple enough that just about any service station mechanic could get it back on the road. In a nutshell it was a good value, a family car with some power and style.

In 1966, Chevy used four different nameplates for its fullsize cars. The more expensive models gave customers the options and stylish trim they wanted without getting too far away from the value of the base Biscayne. They were, after all, buying a Chevy, not an Oldsmobile or Buick.

Today only the Impala name survives. An SS package is still available, giving customers the option of a 303 hp 5.3 liter V8, a better handling suspension package along with the de rigeur 18" chrome wheels and SS trim. With fuel injection and electronic ignition it starts more reliably than the 1960s car, gets comparatively outstanding gas mileage, and even with that V8 sitting over and powering the front wheels it is a much better handling car than the '66. The '66 barely had seatbelts. The '09 comes with a plethora of air bags, air curtains, collapsible steering columns and crush zones. Instead of an AM-FM 8-Track stereo, the '09 Impala has surround sound, satellite radio and On-Star. By any measurable standard except for 0-60 time, the 2009 Impala SS is a superior automobile to it's 1966 antecedent.

So why does a 1966 Impala SS fetch strong auction money while the 2009 Impala is relegated to rental fleet duty? Because the current Impala is a boring car. I often find myself defending the Impala or Chevy Cobalt since they are perfectly adequate cars, if not class leaders. Still, they are boring cars with little about them that evokes any passion. Adequacy rarely evokes passion.

While a car buff in 1966 could have distinguished an Impala from a Bel Air just by the trim, today's fullsize Chevy has such nondescript styling that even a car guy like me sometimes confuses the Impala with its midsize stablemate, the Malibu. All of the big Chevys were and are instantly identifiable as Chevys. Fords, Chevys and MOPAR products had styling that was hard linked to their brand. That link between brand and styling is no longer. If you took the badges off, could anyone not a car buff be able to tell an Impala from a Sonata?

Who's to blame? Toyota. Well, more accurately, Detroit trying to imitate Toyota. The Camry is a very competent transportation appliance but nothing about it is exciting. Even the tuner rice rocket boys turn their noses up at the maytagmobile. There are probably more than 20 tuned and winged Tercels for every Camry that's been hopped up. Detroit sees people buying Camrys and Accords by the half milion and rather than going with their strengths, the domestic automakers say, "yeah, I can hit that" and end up making another boring car. Under "what's new for 2009" for the Impala, bullet listed along with the 18" wheels and standard 4 wheel disc brakes with ABS, is "revised cup holder design". Call me crazy but I don't think anyone ever got excited about a cup holder.

Detroit forgot what its mojo was and then tried getting it back by imitating the competition. The question then is does Toyondissandai have mojo? Yes, but it's not the same. Detroit's mojo was once an amalgam of style, size, speed and value. Toyota's mojo is reliability, boring reliability. While the Asian manufacturers are capable of making a Civic Si or a Sentra SER, you'll never see a Camry get the Biscayne>Impala SS treatment. Toyota thinks the market wants a boring maytagmobile and everyone else, chasing the Camry, queues up in the same line. Cars that evoke passion are the opposite of appliances. To inspire passion, positive or negative, you have to take a stand, take a chance. Toyota doesn't take chances.

As long as the domestic automakers see the Camry and the Accord as their benchmark for what consumers want, Detroit will never get its mojo back. There are, however, hopeful signs. It's been slow in coming, but the domestic automakers, or at least GM and Ford, have recognized that a "me too" copy of the Camry or Accord isn't going to win back market share. They have to somehow leapfrog the competition. Since technology is pretty much the same from automaker to automaker, and since they all know how to implement statistical quality control, quality is less and less of a distinguishing characteristic, so it gets harder and harder to make your product different and better in the eyes of buyers.

So what's Detroit to do? Go back to its strengths. Euro design houses like Pininfarina and Italdesign notwithstanding, automotive styling was pretty much invented in Detroit by Harley Earl and Edsel Ford. There's nothing wrong with a maytagmobile, but giving an appliance some style is one way to make it stand out in a crowd of white enamel. As long as the substance is there, there's nothing wrong with a little style.

There's no question that there are talented designers in Detroit. GM particularly has raised the bar on exterior and interior design. Cadillac's "art & science" design language has been very successful and its no coincidence that the Cadillac CTS is regarded by Detroit boosters and critics alike as proof that Detroit is capable of building desirable cars. The CTS is instantly recognizable as a Cadillac, a very good looking Cadillac. If GM decides to make an upmarket version of the Chevy Volt, it could do much worse than the Cadillac Converj concept, a very pure distillation of Cadillac's styling cues.

Ford also seems to have some focus on style. While its critical to their survival to federalize some of their small Euro cars, the heart of the sedan market will remain midsize and fullsize cars. Even before hybrid sales collapsed with the financial crisis and cheaper oil, Toyota sold more than twice as many Camrys as Priuses. Ford's decision to restyle the 2010 Taurus, taking it from a boring albeit competent sedan, to a distinctive upmarket look, will set it apart from the bland competition that includes, yes, the Impala.