Media Images and Press Releases Show How Even Carmakers Gave Up on What Made Them Special

I am not talking just about internal combustion engines (ICEs), mind you. I know that oil is running out, that people don't want cars to burn petroleum products anymore (even if carbon emissions elsewhere are much higher), and that electric motors are here to stay. That's fine, but why doesn't anyone have pictures of the engines or whatever else powers these vehicles among their press images anymore? These pictures used to be mandatory. When the motors or hybrid system were hidden somewhere in the car, PR teams provided gorgeous cutaways showing them, as was the case with the BMW i3, for example. Now, we don't have anything, except for the occasional hypercar of the week. Even the press releases are rather poor, sticking with marketing statements instead of talking about the savory technical details that should truly set these vehicles apart.

Ford did not talk much about the fifth-generation Expedition's 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 engine. I honestly believe it only mentioned it because it was slightly more powerful than the one that equipped the fourth generation of the SUV. In the company's defense, at least it provided a reasonable technical specifications document where people like me could solve their doubts about what we praise the most in an automobile: understanding how everything works together. That's not something I can say about Dacia and the Bigster.

Apart from having no engine images among the 157 pictures it released, the Romanian brand only mentioned how big the Bigster was in a document called "All-new Bigster: Dacia elevated essentials." To be honest, it was essentially incomplete, failing to inform the vehicle's wheelbase. When it said the 4x4 version of the car comes "with real off-road capability," the least you could expect was a description of what makes it so. Dacia did not even present fundamental stuff related to off-road. Where is the departure angle of the car? What about the approach or breakover angles? Fording depth? Ground clearance? Slope angle? Side slope angle, anyone? How can you be taken seriously when claiming "real off-road capability" without disclosing the basics? Worse, do customers even know the basics, or do they just choose to believe automakers in whatever they decide to say about their products? If the company thinks buyers are concerned solely about the SUV's looks, why even mention its off-road prowess?

The lack of information peaked when Dacia said the HYBRID 155 powertrain used "a 107 bhp 4-cylinder petrol engine." At least it did not call it a "hybrid engine" or a "hybrid motor." That's a major red flag about how little the authors of any text containing these expressions know about the very meaning of the idea. A powertrain will only be hybrid if it puts an ICE and an electric motor to work together, preferably mechanically connected.

A little further, the text states that "the HYBRID 155 powertrain completes the HYBRID 140 range available on All-New Duster and Jogger. It delivers more power (up 15 bhp), more torque (up 20 Nm to 170 Nm for the combustion engine alone) and increased towing capacity (up 250 kg to around one tonne). Efficiency has also been improved, with a 6% reduction in fuel consumption and emissions, owing primarily to optimised engine speed management." That all suggests the HYBRID 155 ICE is the same one used by the HYBRID 140 powertrain since "the combustion engine alone" has 20 Nm more and optimized speed management. But it isn't. Only journalists invited by Dacia learned that these power and torque gains were due to a larger mill, with 1.8 liters of capacity instead of 1.6 liters. It does not have 20 Nm or 15 bhp more. Its rotation speed has not been optimized compared to its previous version. It is simply a new unit.

As far as I know, press releases are put together to solve all doubts a journalist may have about a subject. It saves the PR team time in answering basic questions. It seems Dacia does not think motoring writers and their readers want to know which engine powers their cars. In a way, it is right: several outlets, willing to publish their articles as soon as possible, just went with whatever the press release provided and talked about "an engine." Dacia didn't even show images of this mill. I am not sure how the readers reacted, but they probably didn't care, which is sad.

As Dacia's biggest and most powerful car to date, the Bigster deserved at least the same attention that the Jogger received. The only seven-seater from the Romanian company has cutaways of the HYBRID 140 powertrain, as well as other images that show how the system works. Even then, Dacia still failed to explain how its "automatic electric gearbox" works without a clutch.

Ford and Dacia are not the only ones to blame. They just happen to be the latest ones to present products I have covered, examples of how the lack of interest in cars led even its manufacturers to indifference. Sadly, I am sure I will see the same signs with several other automakers as soon as I am given the chance. Who's to blame? There are several possibilities.

Is it the internet, where everything has to be served and consumed as fast as possible? After all, it made videos popular because they turned information into entertainment, demanding a lot less time and attention from anyone to watch them than a text requires to read it. Would it be on the customers, who do not care about anything technical anymore, as long as the car drives? Automakers also have some credit for giving in to pressure and even supporting absurd things such as World Car Free Day. They seem ashamed to sell automobiles, hiding the engines or pretending they do not exist.

Even automotive journalists may have their share in this tragedy for doing lazy work and failing to tell people why they should care about the technical aspects of a vehicle. The guys who praised the Ford Focus for its independent rear suspension were either replaced by people who cannot tell a multilink from a torsion beam – like most car buyers – or just could not make a difference. They even had to hear Ford's CEO say the Focus was a boring car... I admit that writing in vain is the rule in my profession. When any article changes perceptions and raises discussions, that's what truly shocks us.

That said, why did I even bother to write this? Simple: I hope this text is an exception, something able to bring change or at least some awareness. If the auto industry keeps following this tedious path, it will not live for long. If it does, cars will become appliances, and some are already named after them. If even these tools have accurate technical descriptions, I see no reason for automobiles not to deserve the same respect.