Today, when all cars are of quite high quality, free of defects, and highly suitable for their intended use, design, more than ever, is a competitive weapon.

No motor manufacturer wields the design weapon more effectively than Audi. Look at any Audi from the last 20 years, and you’ll see a clean, original, beautifully thought-out car. The theme has not changed; it’s simply been refined and developed.

From 1984, when the first really aerodynamic Audi appeared, with the flush-mounted windows to eliminate wind noise, the company’s been consistent in their design theme, while pressuring their competitors to find themselves. Mercedes-Benz and BMW have tried, but really haven’t equaled Audi. Lexus and Infiniti are also striving. Cadillac, too, with results you may like better than I do.

Surviving or Winning?

What’s it take to be a top-ranked car? Cadillac used to be #1, from about 1940 until the ’70s. Now, they’re straining to make a comeback, after having been eclipsed by Mercedes-Benz 30 years ago.

Before Cadillac, Packard was the top make, from the ’20s through the ’40s. A changing world did them in, but not before their dealers had built some handsome sales buildings. The British Motors building on Van Ness, designed by Bernard Maybeck, was originally built for the Packard distributor.

The Packard story, repeated by Cadillac, was one of consistency. The quality and style of each brand was consistent and predictable during their success years. The producers knew their customers, and respected their needs. Cadillac upstaged Packard with style, giving their customers things they didn’t even know they needed, like tailfins.

Mercedes-Benz got the edge on Cadillac by redefining the luxury car, making a smaller sized, higher quality product desirable. Mercedes dominance lasted for 15 years or so, but then sportier BMWs drew at least even.

Then along came Lexus (built by Toyota). Although they didn’t offer much styling innovation, starting about 15 years ago, Lexus redefined the luxury car with a combination of value, defect-free cars, and superior customer relations.

Fast forward to 2005 and there are no clear trends. It’s more like a free-for-all. Lexus taught Mercedes-Benz a thing or two about quality. Between Lexus and BMW, they administered a series of lessons to Cadillac that were almost fatal. They have Ford’s Lincoln brand reeling. Nissan’s Infiniti is challenging Lexus by offering equal quality and customer satisfaction, presented in a more stylish, dynamic package.

The Sleeper of the Lot

There’s another player in this fray. Audi quite possibly offers the tastiest mix.  Start with the proposition that quality of product is essentially equal. While there are slight measurable differences among the various brands, in terms of customer convenience, the variations are virtually irrelevant.

If you accept that, then the “flavor” of the car — the way it looks and drives — is the differentiator.

An Audi A6 3.2 Quattro is a sub-$50,000 car that makes you wonder what else you could possibly want or need.

Style? Audi has been steadily refining their smooth, aerodynamic style for 20 years, with a steadiness and consistency exceeding any other producer. The result is a simple, tastefully detailed shape that makes the competition look lost.

Driving feel — silky smooth when you want it, strong but beautifully controlled when you call on its abilities.  Need a clumsy SUV for skiing? Why, when the Audi has all-wheel drive in a far more civilized package?

Another Value for Money Puzzle

You may have noticed there appears to be little correlation between price and value in automobiles.

Last year, according to Consumer Reports, Subaru was the most reliable car brand in America. The Hyundai Sonata was the top individual model. Makes you wonder what the pricier brands offer.

And so it is with the 2006 Mitsubishi V6 Eclipse sports coupe. At around $25,000, it’s an impressive high performance coupe. Nissan 350Z coupes are $5-10,000 more costly. A Porsche Boxster even more. But the Mitsubishi performs more or less equally, compares favorably on quality issues, so one has to wonder what the extra money buys.

The Mitsubishi is certainly a different flavor from the Audi designs — a bit too voluptuous, trying a little too hard to “look good”, but maybe their target loves the Mitsu.

Driving the Eclipse is a pleasure. The controls are clear and understandable — no orgy of electronic wizardry here. The structure is tight, suspension nicely tuned for quick road, not track, driving, and the seats and steering are set-up for serious driving. Unfortunately, the over-wrought body shape feels like you’re sitting in a hole, and visibility to the rear corners, helpful when you’re reversing, isn’t great.

Another interesting thing to consider is this: both Mitsubishi and General Motors are “on the ropes” financially. But here’s Mitsubishi with a very bold new car, betting that desirable cars will produce the sales necessary for recovery. Might be an idea for GM to consider.