• 
• 
• --Select Make-- AcuraAston MartinAudiBentleyBMWBuickCadillacChevroletChryslerDodgeFerrariFordGMCHondaHUMMERHyundaiInfinitiIsuzuJaguarJeepKiaLamborghiniLand RoverLexusLincolnLotusMaseratiMaybachMazdaMercedes-BenzMercuryMINIMitsubishiNissanPontiacPorscheRolls-RoyceSaabSaturnScionSmartSubaruSuzukiTeslaToyotaVolkswagenVolvo
• 
• Home
• 
• New Cars
• 
• Used Cars
• 
• Car Dealers
• 
• Buying Guides
• 
• Research
• 
• Community
• 
• 
• 

Autotropolis Columns

Or perhaps "joins the Fiesta" would be more appropriate, and I don't mean just because I'm feeling a bit bilingual today.

Here's the deal: As most people with even the slightest interest in the industry already know, the Blue Oval is launching its successful global subcompact, the Ford Fiesta, early next year in the U.S. The car has been on sale overseas for about a year now, moving more than 500,000 units since its debut and becoming the second-best seller in Europe for 2009.

Needless to say, Ford is expecting big things from the little car in America. It's supposed to give the company instant credibility in the subcompact segment, where Ford hopes it will pull customers from rivals like the Honda Fit, Toyota Yaris, Nissan Versa and Chevrolet Aveo. And it should, as it is expected to offer the same kind of fuel efficiency but in a more stylish package that also offers some impressive driving dynamics. Plus, as Ford's first mainstream global product launching in the U.S. — the Ford Transit Connect isn't exactly aimed at retail buyers — it will also be a serious test case for whether American customers are ready for a European driving experience.

And while European-spec models already have been prowling our roads for a few months courtesy of the Fiesta Movement, the excitement has been growing over the U.S. version's official debut at the Los Angeles auto show next month. You know, the same event at which the Mazda MAZDA2 (overseas model shown above) will be launched.

Now, the brief for the MAZDA2 probably sounds a bit familiar to Fiesta supporters: The Mazda is a well-established global subcompact that aims to bring style and "zoom-zoom" driving dynamics to the segment in this country, while still achieving serious mpg numbers.

The MAZDA2 also happens to be built on the same platform as the Ford Fiesta, which makes perfect sense once you remember that Ford had a controlling interest in Mazda right up to about this time last year.

This kind of cross-company platform sharing has worked out pretty well for the Ford Fusion and the Mazda MAZDA6, but those two mid-size sedans are really aimed at different parts of the market. Well, different enough, anyway.

The Ford, despite the presence of the Fusion S sport version, works the more family-oriented Toyota Camry/Honda Accord side of the street, while the Mazda6 relies on that aforementioned "zoom-zoom" stuff to set itself up as the choice for more enthusiastic, style-driven customers.

But the MAZDA2 and Ford Fiesta (UK model pictured near right) are going to be much more similar, and their battle for market share is likely to be much more contentious.

Kind of like the situation with another Ford model slated to debut in L.A., the 2011 Ford Mustang. The current-generation retro-look Mustang has already been the recipient of a subtle-but-extensive exterior redesign for the 2010 model year, and the focus in Los Angeles is likely to be on powertrain and handling improvements — and a rumored 600-hp EcoBoost engine for the next Mustang GT500.

But even that might not be enough to win today's muscle-car sales wars, as Ford has to battle against the surprisingly popular Chevrolet Camaro. The Chevy has outsold the Ford for five consecutive months, and some analysts (e.g., those who work at GM) are thinking the Camaro could end up ahead of the Mustang by the end of the year.

The Camaro, to my admitted surprise, has become a flat-out hit. Not only is it outselling its chief rival from Ford, but it was also the fourth best-selling car overall from the General in October, trailing only the Chevrolet Malibu, Chevrolet Impala and, uh, Pontiac G6, which was still good for 8,358 October sales.

Coincidentally, that's about the same number of vehicles that HUMMER has sold all year, which is about what you would expect from the dead brand. What you might not expect, on the other hand, is that HUMMER thinks it can triple that number in 2010.

This might be a bit optimistic, but if the the current crop of U.S. muscle cars can find more than 100,000 customers a year — a number already exceeded in 2009 by combined sales of the Mustang, Camaro and Dodge Challenger — there's no reason to think off-road enthusiasts can't support both Jeep and HUMMER.

Rumors are percolating through the blogosphere about upcoming HUMMER products, too, with a new H4 and possible H5 getting most of the play. These would be smaller — and more fuel-efficient — than the current H2 and H3, with the H4 aimed at the Jeep Wrangler and the H5 slotting under that. These vehicles are still years away, at best, but it's worth noting that GM had already begun work on the former before killing off the brand, and that Sichuan Tengzhong Heavy Industrial Machinery will get the associated engineering plans as part of its deal to purchase HUMMER.

Assuming, of course, the deal actually goes through.

Select photos via Mazda and Ford

In a perfect world, my daily driver would be a Porsche 911 that goes from 0-60 in 3.5 seconds, stickers for under $20,000, seats five in comfort, is made entirely from recycled water bottles and runs solely on universe juice. And earns an Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's Top Safety Pick award, of course.

Needless to say, I'm not going to be holding my breath as I wait for Porsche to get something like this into production, and not the least of the reasons for this is because, at this stage in the game, some of my requirements are mutually exclusive. For example, to get Porsche-like performance in a vehicle that runs on electricity (about as close as we can currently get to universe juice) happens to require six figures' worth of technology — along with proximity to a Tesla dealer.

On the other hand, if you're looking for a vehicle that outperforms the industry in just one of those measures, that's a lot easier to find. And this is really the lens through which one should view the IIHS results.

Making the IIHS Top Safety Pick list is akin to winning the Green Car of the Year Award or setting a new lap record on the Nürburgring. It puts one measure of vehicle performance ahead of the others, and honors the cars and trucks that excel in that specific area, without regard to performance in other, equally important measures.

I mean, if you want a safe midsize SUV, you probably won't go wrong with an IIHS Top Safety Pick such as the Subaru Tribeca — as long as you don't mind driving a vehicle that achieves a combined EPA mileage rating of just 18 mpg. But you also probably won't go wrong with something like a GMC Terrain, which gets a combined 26 mpg and, like every other vehicle currently on sale in the U.S., meets or surpasses all federally mandated safety requirements.

To kind of level the playing field here, think of the situation like this: If the Tribeca gets points for going "far beyond minimum federal safety standards," as IIHS president Adrian Lund indicates, the Terrain has to receive some love for going far beyond minimum mpg standards.

And this year, quantifying how far a vehicle has to go beyond those federal safety standards to qualify as a Top Safety Pick has become a brewing controversy. More than 90 vehicles made the IIHS list last year, while only 27 did for the 2010 model year. The difference is that the IIHS has added a new roof-strength test to the mix. Top Safety Picks had to receive a "good" rating in this test, and, per the IIHS, "Vehicles rated good have roofs more than twice as strong as the current federal standard requires."

That's a significant addition to the testing regimen, and I don't think anyone can argue that the resulting Top Safety Picks are those that take safety performance to significantly extreme lengths. But just to be clear, they do so in the same way Bugatti takes performance to extreme lengths when it packs 1,000 hp into the Veyron.

That's the reason that Toyota, which had 11 Top Safety Picks last year, has a grand total of zero this year, a number matched by BMW.

With all this in mind, here's how I break down the winners: Ford and its Volvo division had six Top Safety Picks. Four were Volvos, and these, frankly, don't get any extra attention for making the list; Volvo "owns" safety, and every one of their vehicles should be a Top Safety Pick. Getting the Ford Taurus and Lincoln MKS on this list, however, is further evidence of the Blue Oval's momentum.

Subaru put every one of its models except the high-performance Subaru Impreza WRX on the list, which is an impressive feat; but as I hinted at above, one of the company's key safety advantages — its all-wheel-drive technology — continues to hamper its ability to make fuel-efficiency gains.

Volkswagen scored with the Audi A3, Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Jetta, Volkswagen Passat and Volkswagen Tiguan. The notable thing here is that this includes two vehicles offered with diesel power — the Golf and Jetta — giving VW a sort of two-for-one bonus. But I also have to point out that the Tiguan appears to be another vehicle sacrificing fuel efficiency for safety; the EPA rates it at 19/26/21 in terms of city/highway/combined mpg, which is well off the Terrain's numbers. Plus, the Tiguan calls for premium gasoline.

Honda put both the Honda Civic Sedan and Element on the list, the latter of which joined the equally geometrically challenged Kia Soul and Nissan Cube among the safest boxes on the road. Along with the Buick LaCrosse, Mercedes-Benz C-Class and Chevrolet Malibu, these vehicles all stand out as winners that can bring the safety without sacrificing in other areas.

Of course, the oddest thing about this year's IIHS list was that Chrysler saw four vehicles earn Top Safety Pick honors: the Chrysler Sebring, Dodge Avenger, Dodge Journey and Jeep Patriot. I mean, I didn't know the awards were given out posthumously.