The most binnable news releases received by those of us who follow the motor industry are those announcing awards. I understand the need for awards. They’re useful for the people who give them and also for those who receive them. But they’re rarely of much interest outside the narrow circles for which they’re conceived, such as the company-car market or commercial vehicle circles. And why the PR departments of vehicle makers think that a magazine will publish the details of an award given by another magazine is beyond me.
Go deeper with GlobalData
These thoughts are prompted by an award program launched in 1999 that has witnessed its 2005 incarnation. I refer to the International Engine of the Year Awards. This has just resulted in a wodge of news releases from car makers giddy with excitement at the “prestigious” recognition given their power units. And there have been plenty of them, for this program awards gongs in eight displacement categories plus “Best Fuel Economy” and “Best Performance Engine”. There’s also the gong of gongs for “International Engine of the Year”.
It’s taken these seven years for this awards program to impinge on my consciousness. When the latest raft of releases crashed through my mailbox I decided to find out who was making these awards. Like you, I assumed that the judges were auto-industry engineers who were intimately familiar with the demands and problems of making good engines, or at least industry executives who have faced the challenge of managing a budget and setting targets for engine development. People, in other words, who really know what constitutes a good engine.
No such luck. The judges are — wait for it — journalists. And not particularly technical journalists at that. One, we’re told, is “America’s most-watched TV automotive pundit”. Though there are a few well-known names among them, such as Germany’s Georg Kacher, Japan’s Jack Yamaguchi and America’s Csaba Csere and Dennis Simanaitis, the cast reads like rejects from the European Car of the Year panel. We learn from the website (http://www.ukintpress.com/engineoftheyear) that they “judged each shortlisted engine using their subjective driving impressions and technical knowledge, and took into account characteristics such as fuel economy, noise, smoothness, performance and driveability.”
I’m unimpressed. There’s no clue as to how the short list was prepared. Nor is there any assurance that the judges have driven and inspected all the contenders, let alone some of them. The chaps in Egypt, India, Argentina, South Africa and Slovenia are likely to have been particularly disadvantaged in this respect. In spite of this, say the awards’ organisers, they’ve “become one of the most sought-after automotive accolades and an effective marketing tool for triumphant marques”. Well, they would say that, wouldn’t they?
How well do you really know your competitors?
Access the most comprehensive Company Profiles on the market, powered by GlobalData. Save hours of research. Gain competitive edge.
Thank you!
Your download email will arrive shortly
Not ready to buy yet? Download a free sample
We are confident about the unique quality of our Company Profiles. However, we want you to make the most beneficial decision for your business, so we offer a free sample that you can download by submitting the below form
By GlobalDataWho are the organisers, then? They’re an outfit called UKIP Media & Events — nothing to do with the UK Independence Party — that’s a subsidiary of Autointermediates Ltd. They organise events and publish various technical magazines, including some in the auto industry. Thus it’s a richly self-serving activity for them, creating a virtuous circle of back-slapping award-giving and advertising opportunities. There’s nothing wrong with that in our mendacious age, but it doesn’t mean we have to take these awards seriously.
Nor are the actual awards terribly insightful. For example the 2-litre category has been hammerlocked from 2000 to 2004 by the engine in Honda’s S2000 sports car. I grant that this engine has the highest specific power of any unblown unit in production, but its actual significance in the world of cars is negligible. In the class below 1 litre the judges have given the nod to Honda’s IMA engine in the Insight for six years running. Again, this overlooks many meritorious efforts in an important category. Needless to say, BMW has always dominated the category to 4 litres, to the exclusion of engines of far greater economic merit.
Another inherent problem is the granting of yearly awards in a discipline that makes major changes every decade or so. Engines aren’t renewed all that often, for obvious reasons. Handing out fresh engine awards every year makes no sense at all, at least not over ten categories. The yearly choice of a single engine would be a more-than-adequate task for a well-qualified judging panel.
This reminds me of the award by the Society of Automotive Engineers for which yours truly is responsible. It was my idea for the Millennium to have the SAE members vote on a “Best-Engineered Car” for the preceding century. In the end they voted on one for each decade in a program that honoured such disparate but significant autos as the Ford Model T, Chrysler Voyager and Porsche 911. Thereafter the SAE continued the program with the choosing of a Best-Engineered Car annually. One car honoured per year by the members of the world’s largest auto-engineering society — that makes sense. Ten engines honoured per year by a bunch of journalists? That doesn’t.
BMW wins International Engine of the Year 2005 (Press Release)
https://www.just-auto.com/press_releases_detail.asp?art=2001
– Karl Ludvigsen
Karl Ludvigsen is an award-winning author, historian and consultant who has worked in senior positions for GM, Fiat and Ford. In the 1980s and 1990s he ran the London-based motor-industry management consultancy, Ludvigsen Associates. He is currently an independent consultant and the author of more than three dozen books about cars and the motor industry, including Creating the Customer-Driven Car Company.
