Check out the latest posts
Archive for October, 2008
|
| Original Ka was exactly that; new one will allow owners to retain anonymity |
|
Creating an automotive design icon is quite a challenge. If it were an easy thing to do, I’m sure every car maker would have one. But of course it isn’t and therefore they haven’t. All the more surprising then that a major manufacturer like Ford should stick a dagger through the heart of its little Ford Ka - which stood every chance of achieving (some would argue it already had) cult iconic status.
Let’s look at the evidence. What are the basic ingredients that make up an automotive icon? First and foremost: individual and distinctive design. The original Ka had this in spades. Its charming, cheeky-chappie styling was like nothing else around. Ford designers themselves must have been pretty chuffed with themselves as they even used the Ka’s shape to define the K-A logo.
Next add a generous helping of character. Aside from the Ka’s cute and stylish looks, it was a hoot to drive. It arrived at a time when Ford’s engineers had really hit a sweet spot in tuning their chassis. Witness the Fiesta, Puma and the 1st generation Focus which followed soon after.
The toughest part of the equation is longevity. A true icon has got to stand the test of time and outlast all of its rivals. The Ka lasted 12 years without a major facelift, and in recent times, this is exceptional. OK, I know there was the StreetKa version and then the SportKa but, to me, these merely served to prove the validity of the original concept.
Ford had two choices on how to proceed. Either acknowledge that the Ka was something special and apply subtle changes (Kinetic dialect?) to update the design while still retaining the essence of the original (see Audi TT) or deny the baby Ford’s status, stick rigidly to the Kinetic design language and end up with the bizarre compressed Fiesta cum Corsa that is the all-new Ka. I think the former option could have resulted in a car that could almost match the appeal of the Fiat 500 that shares its platform.
Still, Ford is not alone in treading this disappointing path. Any takers for a charmless Twingo?
|
This image is from a new SEAT cinema commercial. I won’t bore you with the puerile plot, but the punch line is a woman driving off into the distance having outwitted a number of male drivers – hence the finger.
Motor journalists are supposed to exercise a duty of care and not write or say anything that is likely to encourage reckless or belligerent driving. It seems that SEAT, at least, does not consider itself to be subject to the same common-sense restraint.
Moreover, the gesture exemplifies the attitude seemingly prevalent among certain classes of young, female drivers who seem to regard any male driver, and for that matter, each other, not as fellow road-users, but as targets, to be outwitted in a show of belligerent driving that reveals inexperience rather than skill.
|
If you run a new-car dealership this will make your eyes water. According to Automotive News, a GM dealership is Moscow is selling between 600 and 900 cars a MONTH. The UK average is 500 cars a year.
And apparently the profits are good, too. A UK dealer makes around 1 per cent on each new car, whereas their Russian counterparts regularly make between 3.5 and 4 per cent. It appears that Russian buyers are suckers for extras, which deliver a higher profit than the cars themselves. BMW has understood this principle from Day One.
The Russian dealers also make a decent margin on servicing, and many service departments stay open until 9 0’clock every evening, just to cope with the level of business. The Genser GM dealership – the 900 cars a month dealership – employs 200 people in its service department, which handles up to 180 cars a day.
When told by Automotive News of the average levels of sales in the UK, and the profit margins, Natalyia Ignatova, Sales Department Director of Genser, said: “You call that a business?”
|
A friend of mine tried to buy some brake spares for his middle-aged Citroen. The car’s about eight years’ old and so he went to his local ‘continental’ car spares outlet. They sold him the parts he needed and assured him they were correct for his particular make and model of car.
Except they weren’t - although he didn’t discover this until he’d stripped down the brakes on his car and rendered it un-driveable. So he walked back to the shop, where he was told the correct bits were on ‘back order’, and sorry about the mistake.
A week later, the shop rang him to say the parts were in. As they were, but not the correct bits. To cut an even longer story short, my friend eventually finished up at a breaker’s yard (or whatever they are nowadays called) and found precisely the bits he needed. Total time: 12 days.
His car obviously isn’t old enough. I also need a few small parts for my car, but mine is 61 years’ old: a 1947 MG. A quick flick through an online catalogue, a short ‘phone call, and next day the bits arrived. Total time: 18 hours.
I am not sure if that’s a triumph for the Internet, or for the classic-car business. Either way, it didn’t drive me spare.
|
I was surfing through some local government websites yesterday, looking for details of parking-fine revenues, when I came across this, and I quote:
‘From March 31st this year councils across England were empowered to use CCTV camera images to enforce parking fines. Prior to this ruling, parking tickets were only valid if placed on the vehicle or handed to the driver in person. The new regulations stipulate that CCTV cameras can be used only in areas where it is too “difficult or sensitive” for an attendant to operate, such as a fast-flowing road or a busy junction. Now, fines can be issued through the post up to 14 days after the alleged offence occurred.’
This is news to me, and I guess to most of you, too. So before you next dart into the newsagents or offy, don’t simply scan the vicinity for wardens – look up, and if you can see a camera, it can see you.
Check out the site in question for yourself: you will find it here. Has anyone been caught this way?
|
|
|
