C. Van Tune is a former Editor-in-Chief of Motor Trend.

I received an email today that I thought you’d be interested in. It came from the PR department of the upcoming Los Angeles Auto Show, proudly noting how many “green cars” would be on display. No other vehicles were noted, just a long list of save-the-planet people movers: Seventy-one in all.

Ugh.

Times are rapidly changing for the worse in the car business if you’re a lover of gasoline-ignited horsepower. The days are numbered for today’s traditional performance cars, regardless of nameplate. The sobering slap across our faces is that all car companies (including even Ferrari and Porsche) are working on hybrid, fuel cell, and/or full-electric versions in order to meet the upcoming more stringent government mpg and emissions requirements. And regardless of the feel-good spin put on such cars by their giddy purveyors, the cold, hard truth is that driving as we know it will forever change.

Like Ewing has experienced, I’ve driven several full-electric “performance” cars. But while they can accelerate quickly, they simply have no soul. No muscular sounds of the engine revving, no rumbling exhaust note, no burnouts, no power-shifting of gears. Just a limp-wristed whirring of the electric motor(s) as the car is propelled. Sure, it may go 0-60 mph in five seconds, but the experience isn’t anything like you’re accustomed. I’m guessing it’s like the difference between sex with a blow-up doll versus the real thing. Only it’s worse than that. It’s more like the government has outlawed sex with real women and said you can only do it with a gov’t-approved blow-up doll from now on. They’ve decided it’s better for the planet that way. And, no, your opinion doesn’t matter.

Factoring in all of the above, I believe that 2012 (or possibly 2013) will become the lasting high-water mark for the worldwide roster of great performance cars. Sort of like 1970 was the pinnacle of the original muscle car era. But I’m also concerned that the game-changing impact of what’s happening today won’t be recognized by the public until it’s too late.

My advice: If you want to own a brand-new gasoline-powered performance vehicle, buy it now. I believe that the values of many of today’s most powerful cars will climb after they’re gone from production. Those machines will truly be the last of their lineages, as subsequent new models will become morphed into alternate-fuel-powered, amorphous, androgynous drones. To modify the old gun-owners’ maxim: The government will take my Ferrari 458 Italia when they pry it from my cold, dead fingers. Yes, even if gasoline has been outlawed and I can’t drive it. Hell, if that’s the case, then bury me in it.

Just a couple of years ago, the highlight of any auto show would’ve been performance cars, luxury vehicles and big, powerful trucks and their SUV cousins. For 2012, it’s the following list of High Mileage and Green-Tech Vehicles.

This is our future, like it or not. And it will only get worse for devotees of dinosaur-fueled performance cars like you and me.

40-plus MPG
Audi A3 TDI (clean diesel)
Chevrolet Cruze Eco
Chevrolet Sonic
Ford Focus SFE
Ford Fiesta SFE
Honda Civic GX
Honda Civic HF
Hyundai Accent
Hyundai Elantra
Hyundai Veloster
Kia Rio (2012)
Mazda3 SKYACTIV (2012)
Smart ForTwo
Volkswagen Jetta TDI (clean diesel)
Volkswagen Jetta SportWagon TDI (clean diesel)
Volkswagen Passat TDI (clean diesel)
Volkswagen Golf TDI (clean diesel)

Hybrids and Plug-in hybrids
BMW i8 Concept
BMW ActiveHybrid 7
BMW ActiveHybrid X6
Buick LaCrosse eAssist
Buick Regal eAssist
Cadillac Ciel concept
Cadillac Escalade Hybrid
Chevrolet Malibu Eco
Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid
Chevrolet Volt
Ford C-MAX Energi plug-in hybrid
Ford Fusion Hybrid
Fisker Karma
Fisker Surf
GMC Yukon Hybrid
GMC Yukon Denali Hybrid
Honda CR-Z Sport Hybrid Coupe
Honda Civic Hybrid
Honda Insight
Honda Plug-in Hybrid concept
Hyundai Sonata Hybrid
Infiniti M35 Hybrid
KIA Optima Hybrid
Lincoln MKZ Hybrid
Lexus CT 200h
Lexus GS 450h

Lexus LS 600h L
Lexus RX 450h
Porsche Cayenne S Hybrid
Porsche Panamera S Hybrid
Toyota Camry Hybrid
Toyota Highlander Hybrid
Toyota Prius
Toyota Prius v
Toyota Prius Plug-in Hybrid
Volkswagen Touareg Hybrid

Clean Diesel Vehicles
Audi A3 TDI
Audi Q7 TDI
BMW 335d Sedan
Mercedes-Benz S350 BlueTEC
Volkswagen Jetta TDI
Volkswagen Jetta SportWagen TDI
Volkswagen Passat TDI
Volkswagen Golf TDI

Electric Vehicles
BMW i3 Concept
CODA Sedan
Ford Focus BEV prototype
Fiat 500 EV
Mitsubishi i
Nissan LEAF
Smart ForTwo
Toyota RAV4
DOK-ING XD

Hydrogen/Hydrogen Fuel Cell
Honda FCX Clarity

Ugh, I feel compelled to revisit the topic of Detroit because of this article I found on Flipboard this morning. Seems similar to ideas we have forwarded, and here’s the link to our comments on new leadership for GM. Mulally would be great at GM, as this writer suggests, but his wife might not accept it, he might prefer to set up a Mulally School of Management at one of the graduate business programs in the US (Stanford, Harvard, Wharton, Kellogg), and he might decide it’s not worth the hassle. Hey, the guy’s loaded with cash now, and he’s paid back most of the loan to the bankers. Even Superman deserves a few years on the beach in Florida with his grandkids.

Our suggestions for GM remain the same: Franz-Josef Paeffgen is top of the list. Then Krafcik at Hyundai might do, but he’d likely prefer to spend his remaining years collecting checks from Hyundai Motor America rather than taking on the monumental job of remaking GM.

As to Ford succession, this writer thinks it’s all in place. I’m not so sure. Farley could run the place, but he’d need Kuzak to remain in place, with a younger replacement for Kuzak in the wings. Without an engineering task master who will be strict, demanding and treat the OK Fords of today merely as a baseline, Ford will slide back into the abyss. Ford might do well to keep Mulally in place for another cycle, the focus being a more orderly and synchronized hand-off. They still haven’t developed a global approach to marketing, not even for performance cars, with a global message and a global performance sub-brand. But we’ve discussed that before.

I still like Paeffgen for either top job, GM or Ford. He’s 65, but likely has the drive to get the job done. Imagine Paeffgen taking Opel by the scruff of the neck and making it as good as Ford of Europe, which means as good as VW. That would be worth seeing.

Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

– Dylan Thomas

I was reading Motor Trend Classic and came across a Bob Lutz profile scribed by a former GM guy. Thanks to Flipboard, I’ve seen all manner of Lutzian wisdom floating around the Internet, like Bob’s tale about approval process for the Cadillac Christmas card, an example of the bureaucracy at GM—a bureaucracy that Lutz should have aggressively chopped down in his eight years of partnership with Rick Wagoner.

Lutz is currently promoting his new book, Cars Guys Vs. Bean Counters: The Battle for the Soul of American Business, a book meant to redefine Bob’s legacy of pointless niche cars and near-total lack of accomplishment at GM. Bob provided “air cover” at Chrysler for Tom Gale and Francois Castaing, allowing the always-struggling company to make progress for a few years, but at GM Lutz failed.

Here’s a link to another Lutzian piece, in which Bob explains how the evil bureaucracy did in GM. Thanks for stating the obvious and passing it off as insight and wisdom, Bob. We never would have guessed that GM is a bloated bureaucracy filled with blowhards. Sadly, it still is, with a political appointee as CEO. Lutz is fortunate that so many of the online journalists simply post rehashed press releases, allowing companies and guys like Bob to sell their interpretation of reality.

Long story short, Lutz and Wagoner share most of the blame for putting GM in so vulnerable a position that a US president could illegally seize private property and hand ownership to the UAW and bankers. The GM bond holders got the shaft, the price they paid for allowing Lutz and Wagoner to fiddle while GM spiraled out of control.

Admittedly, GM’s rot started in the late Sixties when the company stopped inventing and leading. They gave up on the Corvair, including a four-cylinder variant of the drivetrain that could have been used to power a front-drive car. GM stopped thinking. Like a big tree, GM took a long time to die. But Lutz and Wagoner were like copper spikes driven into that tree, killing it dead. Lutz knew the job was dangerous when he took it, so he has no room to whine about being the last Vice-Chairman before collapse. Lutz gladly took the big paychecks.

Simple fact: Lutz had eight years to turn GM around, make it grow green again. What did he do? What he has always done: bluster while championing nearly profitless niche cars that appeal to the mostly irrelevant enthusiast press.

GM was on the verge of extinction before Bob saw fit to create an Opel-derived Chevy Malibu that is perhaps the fifth or sixth best family sedan in the US. Drive a Malibu back-to-back with Accord, Camry, Altima, the flawed but elegant Mazda6, and even the Fusion and you can guess where Malibu ranks: dead last. I wouldn’t recommend this car to anyone. Camry and Accord come first, and I have a soft spot for the Mazda6 (it needs calibration work, but it sure is pretty).

Lutz was not focused on the real business of building cars for profit. He seemed more concerned with the “car guy” carnival act. We can rattle off examples. Here goes. You can skip to the end if you like. My point has already been made.

Corvettes

Let’s start with a sacred cow among “enthusiasts” and “car guys”: the Corvette ZR-1. GM already had the Z06, a magnificent specimen with a seven-liter small block that delivers a uniquely American high-performance experience. Z06 is every bit as valid as sports car from Italy, Germany or Japan. It’s a very American answer: simple, robust, tough, making massive horsepower through displacement, building on half-century-old proven engineering themes. And with natural aspiration, there’s at least a tenuous link between Z06 and the highly successful Le Mans Corvettes.

Lutz’s old PR guy, Steve Harris, who served Lutz at Chrysler and GM, loaned me a Z06 for a week-long test a few years ago, a big deal considering several journalists at the time were seeing red mist and crashing them. Fantastic car, that Z06. I had driven previous iterations of the Z06 with a bit over 400 horsepower, but 505 horsepower proved just about right. Exhausting to drive for anything length of time due to fairly intense NVH generated by tires, suspension, and the engine, but the Z06 was and is the real deal. I took a girlfriend’s father out for a round of burnouts and power slides, much to his delight, and took a long weekend trip in the car. Not a great touring car, but a fabulous sprinter. Everyone who had a ride in the Z06 was impressed, if a bit frazzled.

But the Z06 Lutz inherited wasn’t enough to pump Bob’s ego. No, he had to build a second ultra-high-performance Corvette to prove his enthusiast bones. Why? Why spend that money when every division of GM was saddled with hopelessly mediocre cars, and GM’s only profit center was body-on-frame trucks and SUVs?

The other mistake here? Lutz wasted cash that could have been invested in updates to the existing Corvette, which has a horrible man-machine relationship. Drive a mid-engine Porsche or Ferrari and you can practically feel the corners of the car through the palms of your hands. Same with a BMW. But Corvette? You’re sunk down in it, high cowl, long snout, amorphous blob of a rear end, and it takes a lot of miles to understand where the corners are.

At the least, GM could have invested the money creating a much higher quality interior for the Corvette, with better materials—and better seat padding to lessen the vibrations reaching the driver and passenger. And perhaps quieted down the rear suspension so a Corvette doesn’t pound driver and passenger into submission in less than an hour. GM could have invested in body panels to give Z06 a visually distinct appearance. Instead, Lutz pissed away budget on a supercharged V8 and carbon body panels that don’t really make the ZR-1 look much different, and result in a car that is, yes, faster, but to what purpose?

Waste of cash, Bob.

And I say that in spite of the fact I love the very existence of the ZR-1, as does every other red-blooded American. But wrong time, wrong place to spend the money, even if the actual investment was not significant. I guess Bob figured he was recreating the “magic” of that early Viper, which was among the most primitive and miserable sports cars ever made, and did not become worthy until it was raced at Le Mans and the aluminum suspension was developed. If the ZR-1 had announced the arrival of a new generation of exceptional GM cars and CUVs, OK. But it did not.

Solstice

Building a second overpowered Corvette wasn’t enough, so Lutz wasted time and money on the Pontiac Solstice, a poorly packaged sports car that barely sold, even when reskinned for Saturn. Smoke and mirrors.

Unlike Miata, which can accommodate big oafs like Bob and me, the Solstice was only suitable for little fellas. When I drove an early Solstice press car, my knees were pressed into the lower dashboard. I’m over six two, which is not uncommon among American males raised on Wonderbread. You’re a tall, lanky fella yourself, Bob. You didn’t notice this fundamental ergonomic problem?

Mazda rightly copied the folding top design of the Fiat 124 Spyder of the late Sixties and early Seventies. With one hand, a woman or wimpy guy can pull a Miata’s top up in a single smooth action, executed in seconds. Mazda refined an Italian concept into high art.

Lutz got his Motorama Jones all ginned up, and allowed the Solstice team to create one of the most incredibly stupid convertible tops of all time, with a back window that reminds of the side curtains on a Fifties English roadster, or a pup tent used by Amudsen on his Antarctic sojourns. As I recall, the process goes like this: unlatch the clamshell, unlatch the top clamps, get out, stand by the rear wheel arch and shove the top into the hold, reach up to grab the clam shell and push it down, climb in and buckle up. Uh huh. Watch the video posted here, from some guy arguing that the top is just swell. In a sudden rain storm, putting the top up on a Solstice would leave anyone soaked. It’s stupid.

Solstice felt cheap inside and out—because it was cheap. Miatas have fairly nice interiors, with good materials and fairly high build quality.

No matter the efforts of Heinricy and others to give Solstice a road racing and drifting pedigree, no one considered Solstice a worthy sports car. The GM Ecotech lump had all the charm of a tractor motor, though over the years Opel and GM have developed this four-cylinder—it no longer sounds like it’s ready to grenade at high revs. I readily acknowledge that accomplishment. But too little, too late for Solstice.

And Bob? A sports car is not supposed to shift like a ’49 Ford. Sorry, dude, but the Solstice shift action left much to be desired. The Miata remains the benchmark for small-displacement sports cars that are easily afforded by anyone in the US, even if Miatas are favored by mid-life crisis females, gays and old duffers who fondly remember their MGAs and Triumph TR4s. Miatas have always been lithe, nimble and balanced, with a perfect “snick-snick” shifter and a motor that’s reasonably smooth. Solstice could make a Healey 100-4 seem refined.

You invested way too much money in vehicle architecture that did not readily lend itself to the creation of other niche vehicles, and thus it was hard to spread the cost around. But imagine if you’d had the gumption to go ahead with that little rear-wheel-drive Nomad roughly based on the Solstice architecture. You would have been years ahead of the curve with a low-cost rear-drive sedan and wagon. GM would have looked cool—a tough job, making GM look cool. But Bob, you let the UAW dictate production of that vehicle. Big mistake. Amazing to think you are always playing the tough guy.

Cadillac

I recall sitting with another of Lutz’s lieutenants, who proclaimed that he “wasn’t worried about Cadillac” the summer of 2001.

I wouldn’t recommend a CTS over the BMW 3-series (the benchmark), Lexus IS350 or a Mercedes C-class. Nice enough car, a handsome car in second-generation form. Lutz gets high marks for creating a rear-drive platform, but CTS doesn’t sell at a price advantage and it does nothing as well or better than the competition. Why would a consumer settle for fourth or fifth best if it costs the same as a BMW, Lexus, Audi or Mercedes? Can Lutz really blame it all on the bean counters?

I do like the CTS sport wagon. I only wish the car were more completely evolved, with a better engine and a more complete feel.

Then, to once again prove his enthusiast bones, Lutz put a ZR-1-derived engine in the CTS (not quite the same engine, but related). Great advertising and marketing expenditure if the press is measured against cost of advertising—and such PR praise is considered more valuable than a straight-up media buy. Nissan’s GT-R is a marketing exercise, not a profit center, so we can make an argument in favor of the CTS-V.

But Lutz once again forgot that a car company must build cars people can live with and afford. When it comes down to it, I’d pick an M3 or IS-F over a Cadillac CTS-V. So even on Cadillac’s niche efforts, Lutz failed.

Need I bring up STS? Another great idea, but Lutz didn’t push far enough, didn’t set the bar high enough. I sincerely hoped this car would have been a true 5-series competitor, but it was not.

Lucky for Bob the body-on-frame Escalades drive profit.

Volt

And then came Volt. Lutz chattered about a “moon shot program” for GM, but Volt turned out to be a Plug-In Prius with a few tweaks and an unproven battery pack. Admittedly, the transmission system works very well—very smooth. Hearty congratulations to the engineers who developed it. It might sell for awhile in Santa Monica and Malibu.

If ever there were a car to make a Prius v look extra-sexy, damn, it’s the Volt, which is a typical GM design: hackneyed, trashy and candied up all at the same time. Volt’s back seat is cramped and miserable, a killer failing in a family sedan.

Several of my friends are retired “enthusiast” magazine editors. Like me, they help family and friends with new car purchases. You know what they tell people about Volt? Better to buy a Civic or Corolla, which are better made, get decent gas mileage, have roomier interiors, and MSRP is 50 percent less than Volt, depending on trim level and how you measure the true cost of a Volt. You can buy a pair of Corollas or Civics for the cost of a Volt, and they’re superior cars. The difference in fuel/energy savings is not enough to push people into a Volt.

Oh, Bob, the CEO of a rival car company figures Volt is more like a $50,000 car. So even with that Obama credit to lower the price, should Volt be considered a success if GM is also potentially underwriting the cost to the tune of $8-10,000? This is supposed to be the salvation of GM and Detroit? One can argue that pushing the technology out there is most important, with development to improve over each generation of the Volt, eventually bringing costs down. That’s how Prius evolved in the market.

But the jury is still out on Volt. Honestly? I hope it succeeds in later evolutions, because it’s an interesting concept, just not ready for prime time. The early adopters, who are probably High Priest Greenies, seem to like the car. But unless it gets dramatically better as a real car, I won’t recommend it. I’ll leave it to Hollywood to love the Volt.

Buick

When the Buick Lucerne arrived, there were trumpets and fanfare to announce that this wasn’t really a “Lutz” Buick. How long did Lutz need to turn Buick around?

The Malibu-based Lacrosse is an obvious rip-off of the Lexus ES350. Is that car supposed to sway me? It’s handsome, typical of GM design at its best, but it’s a gussied up Malibu, and as previously stated, Malibu is not in the same universe with Accord, Camry, Altima, or even the flawed but beautiful Mazda6.

The only GM vehicle of the “Lutz” era I can point to and say, “That ain’t bad”? Buick Enclave, and it’s not so good that it blows away the alternatives. Design boss Ed Welburn did a great job on this product, arguably his best piece in production.

Measurables

Here’s the reason why Lutz should retire quietly from public life.

You’ve been measured, Bob. You know, measurables, that favorite of all MBAs. You have a Berkeley MBA, don’t you, Bob?

He was sent to Michigan during the Bush Administration. Lanky red-haired fella, a certain Jimmy Stewart presence, name of Mulally.

Mulally accomplished in less than two years what Lutz couldn’t do in the better part of a decade: he took the ship’s wheel and turned the tub around before it went over the falls. And boy, Ford was headed over the falls. (Rent the Clint Eastwood movie “White Hunter, Black Heart” and watch the riverboat scene for a perfect visual of Mulally’s accomplishment, turning the boat around just before the waterfall. I wish I could find that bit of film on youtube.)

Many a former colleague within Ford engineering has told me that Mulally was making all the right moves within months of his arrival. I regularly heard lines like, “You know, he’s actually firing all the guys who deserve a bullet in the head. Remember Mr. So and So? That jerk who helped destroy SVT? Yeah, Mulally invited him to take a cardboard box and clear out his desk.”

The guys on the inside reckon Mulally had identified and addressed the fundamental flaws within 18 months, though obviously getting the enterprise turned around is a work in progress. And instead of a government bailout, the company went to the Wall Street pawn brokers for a massive loan, gambling Ford’s very existence on a plan to save the company.

Unlike Lutz, who hired three stooges to validate his enthusiast credentials, Mulally tapped Derrick Kuzak, an engineer, to set the bar for product development. Ford shouldn’t puff its chest too much because they’re still not the best player on stage, but they’ve made excellent progress and are once again considered a worthy opponent. They just can’t slack off or they’ll be in trouble again, very soon.

On a recent family trip to Denver, we had no choice but a Chevy Impala rental car. Lutz should hold his head down in shame. Wearisome suspension and tire noise combined with a gutless, loud engine. And the gauges, lit in that familiar sickly GM blue-green, are the spiritual descendents of the gauges in a 1987 Corsica or Beretta. In contrast, a 2011 Taurus is smooth and quiet, with pretty darn good dynamic qualities. Handsome, with excellent interior materials, Taurus is as good a measuring stick as any.

Like most other Detroit executives, you’ve been measured, Bob, and found lacking.

Iacocca And The ABL Edict

When I was a mere lad, wet behind the ears, I met Lutz on a number of press trips. Lutz provided “air cover” for Tom Gale and Francois Castaing. I’m sure both those gentlemen will defend Lutz to high heaven, but let’s remember that Iacocca slogan: ABL, which meant Anyone But Lutz. That’s where CEO Eaton came from, the ABL edict.

I like Tom Gale, very much. The sort of older designer who mentors and guides furtive young minds. Sort of like older scientists who can mentor young minds that burn brightly.

And though Gale’s “cab forward” was a gimmick that led to a poor man-machine relationship in all those Nineties Chryslers, boy, they sure looked good and drove fairly well, thanks to Castaing.

More importantly, Tom Gale wanted Dodge Ram to echo the bold forms of the World War II era Dodge command car, the old war wagon. Ram sales went from a pathetic dribble to big profit. I worked for Lutz’s old pal from BMW, John Plant, who was head of Ford SVT early on. When that Ram turned up, he related one of his stories in a marketing meeting. A friend in Vermont, a dairy farmer as I recall, told John, “Fendahs, John. That Dodge has fendahs.” Yes, Tom Gale realized that a truck could also have a bit of style. Ram had fenders, and it sold.

Prowlers and Vipers do not make a volume car company, though in the case of Chrysler they provided some sizzle while Gale and Castaing made the most of the pieces they had. It was the Ram that saved Chrysler from that late Eighties and early Nineties dip, along with the minivan. You should have remembered that, Bob.

The End, Finito

Bob, you may think you led with style, chalking up a few niche cars that appeal to the feeble-minded of the enthusiast magazine and website world, but in fact you failed miserably at GM. Your performance has been disgraceful. Eight years of ego-flexing, and pandering to the “enthusiast” journalists of Detroit, who at all cost will spout your views and support you. You never should have been more than marketing manager for Corvette, Bob. You’re John Heinricy with more polish, better suits, and no engineering credentials. And Heinricy kept his mouth shut and got the job done.

In eight years you gave us the following:

• ZR-1 Corvette, which seems frivolous when parked next to a Z06 Corvette
• Pontiac Solstice, which is a pile of junk compared to a Miata
• Buick Lacrosse, which is nice, but a blatant rip-off of a Lexus ES350
• Cadillac CTS, which is a pretty good car and a good first step, but really isn’t as good as a BMW 3, Lexus IS, Audi A4 or Mercedes C-class. I love the CTS sport wagon
• Malibu, which has good dynamic qualities and the first GM four-cylinder in my experience that doesn’t sound like it will explode at revs over 4,000, but it is nowhere near as good as a Camry, Accord, Altima or Mazda6
• Camaro, which is enormous, has horrible ergonomics, mail-slot windows, and based on input I’ve received from folks racing them, has more than a few engineering “patches” under those glitzy body panels
• A Chevy small block V8 that has continued to evolve, with great results, but I’m not sure you really had much to do with that, Bob
• A jelly bean Pontiac GTO from Australia, which was a horrible car in most respects, and looked like a bloated Saturn. Good concept, but execution was terrible.

And by the way, Bob, you and Wagoner pushed GM into bankruptcy, you guys made GM easy prey for a president with Marxist tendencies. Your mistakes, your blundering left GM fatally weak, allowing the bankers in league with the president to chop up GM and hand out ownership to unions and the favored associates of the bankers, and strip the rightful owners of their due.

Bob, please don’t rage against the dying of the light. Just go gentle into that good night.

Editor Sawyer posted an interesting piece about the UAW. Fact is, most of us who live beyond the Rouge and Detroit Rivers could give a damn about the Detroit Three, who we view as producers of inferior products, and companies that have screwed themselves and the American consumer for decades, playing on Yankee Doodle Dandy marketing to convince enough Americans to buy their products when the sensible move was a Toyota or a Honda. Much as I’d like to see them succeed for the sake of the Midwest, I also think the Detroit Three have earned their current place in Hell. Volt is nothing but a poorly designed rip-off of the Toyota Prius, and it’s heavily subsidized, by government credits and GM. People we know contend the Volt is more like a $50,000 car—with a penalty box back seat.

Much as some want to fantasize, a “Lutz” Malibu is no equal for a Camry or an Accord. It’s good, yes. I’ve driven them and they are not all bad—very nice steering and cornering dynamics, for a family sedan. Oddly, Malibu is good enough to make a friend pose this question: “If GM knew how to make an OK car, why did they make all of us suffer with Luminas and Corsicas for so many years?” Reap the whirlwind, GM.

Those of us beyond the Rouge and Detroit Rivers have minimal sympathy for whatever GM is now.

• GM was unconstitutionally seized, and the bond holders were robbed of their private property.
• The UAW was given control over a vast percentage of the company, under the dubious pretext that the workers were owed money for their healthcare trust fund—and Obama gave them a pass on Obamacare.
• In the IPO, the banks made tens of millions on commissions in a single day, selling GM to their friends in what amounted to a private auction. The regular guy was not allowed to buy into the game. Here again, the bond holders were robbed of private wealth, and the taxpayer was screwed. Hey, why wasn’t I allowed to buy a few shares through Schwab or Edward Jones? Another reason to hate Detroit.

In the year prior to the election, Obama and Rahm Emanuel wanted a new leader for GM, someone to make a good showing, someone with energy, someone to be the Mulally of GM. Obama needed a boost because America was turning on him. He was given several fine recommendations through backdoor research, but he and Rahm failed to act. They hired a research firm that turned up the usual cast of losers from Detroit.

You also have kooky Obama politics in the mix. When you only allow a CEO to make $1 million a year, who’s going to take on the biggest headache in American industry? Not a chance.

Here’s a thought for you Detroit and Washington pinheads: Franz-Josef Paeffgen, who just handed over the keys at Bentley. He’s the former chairman of Audi who turned around the mess of Bugatti, where he proved himself tough but fair with suppliers. Paeffgen made Bentley into something more than a one-hit wonder, with new products coming that put a solid base under Bentley. He’s also one of those rare Germans who loves America and is not an insufferably pretentious European. As a young man, he drove a VW bus across America one summer. He has a very American style about him, much more relaxed and adaptable than the typical German exec. Paeffgen knows engineering, finance, design, manufacturing, has dealt with the German unions, and has enough good years left that he could be the man on horseback to turn GM around. But the price would be pretty steep. We’re talking Mulally money, and then some.

Also, when you have politicos involved, well, they reject such suggestions because having a foreign executive take over an American company is more than Obama can bear. Well, Obama, here’s the juice on the founders and significant players of the remaining key brands at GM.

• Louis Chevrolet was a “foreigner,” a French-Swiss born in La Chauxde-Fords, Switzerland in 1900.
• David Dunbar Buick was born in Arbroath, Angus, Scotland, and cars produced by the company he founded were exemplary into the 1960s, even if old Dunbar met a sad end.
• Father of the Cadillac V8? The engine design that defined Cadillac throughout its successful years? Another Scotsman, D. McCall White, graduate of the Royal Technical College in Glasgow. He had worked at Daimler and Napier prior to joining Cadillac in 1914.You can find great detail in Automobile Quarterly’s book, Cadillac, The Complete History.
• And for good measure, Fred Duesenberg was born in Lippe, Germany, and created what were arguably the finest and certainly among the most grandiose and technically advanced cars in the world prior to World War Two.

The other possibility is everyone’s favorite soap salesman, John Krafcik at Hyundai, who is American, a Stanford engineer with an MBA from MIT, well schooled in lean manufacturing, and an amusing little fella with tousled hair and boyish charm. He has recently been compared to an Amway salesmen by that autoextremist guy, but Krafcik has partially turned around Hyundai’s dealer network, and one is certain his product and manufacturing knowledge has benefitted the Koreans, who are on a steep upward climb, and making excellent headway. But if I were John, with my family happily resettled in California, I wouldn’t give up Hyundai for GM and an early grave. Hyundai would be foolish to let him go. He is their perfect collaborator, the Bob McCurry of Hyundai.

Me? I’d go with Paeffgen, but I’m sure the price would be $25 million down, and many million a year plus stock, and the opportunity to partake in subsequent stock offerings. Three years to get the monstrosity of GM shaken out and going in the right direction, and another three to complete the job and enjoy 18 months of high fives and parties like Mulally is getting at the moment. Sideline Ed Welburn, keep Tom Stevens in his new sidelines job, aggressively sift through the remaining execs in marketing, fire any stooges wandering around, and after time to figure out who’s any good, put the right guys in charge of engineering. Sad thing is, before Lutz piddled away the opportunity, GM was loaded with incredibly talented engineers and designers. I can recommend a couple of highly talented old timers who would happily spend a week consulting on who’s good and who’s not before returning to their retirement homes. GM’s talented guys were forced to play to Lutz’s various fetishes—to harness them and save that company, you need a real executive, and most likely an outsider.

Then again, Mulally is kinda old and perhaps Paeffgen can be the successor at Ford. I see NO ONE at Ford capable of running the ship properly. Soap salesmen and dandies from Dagenham. At least Paeffgen at Ford would ensure one of the Detroit Three could survive and perhaps thrive for awhile.

The supposed Detroit Renaissance needs to be kept in perspective. Easy to make a profit when Obama has relieved you of billions in debt.

And the rest of us are tired of hearing about it. Heal thyself, and leave the rest of us alone. I enjoy and appreciate the German and Japanese cars and trucks I own. I have fond memories of the French, Italian, and British cars I experienced as a child. I’m a Californian, and don’t much care about Detroit. And from here out, unless forced to cover Detroit under duress, really, I just don’t care. Fix yourselves, or go away without pillaging the American taxpayers.