If you compare last month to May 2008, then Ford Motor Company (NYSE: F) looks pretty shaky: the American auto maker posted a 24% dip in sales year over year. However, the picture starts to look a lot better once you compare April and May of this year.

All in all, Ford sold 161,197 vehicles last month in the U.S.. Yes, this was 24% off the pace it set last year at this time, but it does mark a pretty impressive 20% jump over its numbers during the previous month, as the company was able to take slight advantage of its competitors' financial woes.

Toyota (NYSE: TM) has arguably been more successful in the US car market over the last 10 years than any of its rivals. Its high-quality, modestly priced cars have helped it consistently raise market share while GM (NYSE: GM) and Ford (NYSE: F) have lost ground.

Now, the Japanese company is beginning to realize that the US auto picture is so bad that even its quality and fuel-efficiency may have limits when the world's largest market falls into a recession. According to the FT, "Toyota, the world's top-selling carmaker, is considering downgrading its US sales forecast to account for a worsening outlook for pick-up trucks and other big vehicles in its largest market."

Toyota had hoped to sell 2.64 million vehicles in America this year.

Toyota's main problem is that it did not stick to its knitting. The success of pick-ups and SUVs was so significant that it began to invest in and manufacture its own gas guzzlers. The net result was that, as gas prices rose, it was trapped in the same box as the US car companies. Consumers will not buy trucks from any car company, no matter how good the product is.

Toyota will survive the downturn in the US. It has a tremendous balance sheet and does well in a number of markets, especially Japan. But, if car sales drop from 16.1 million units in 2007 to well under 15 million this year, Toyota's US rivals may not be so lucky.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com and the author of the Ten Stocks Under $10 letter.

With recession fears, housing market worries and high gasoline prices, retailers have been facing tough times and so have luxury car dealers. March proved another tough month for carmakers, with overall U.S. sales declining after the weakening economy put a curb on consumer spending.

Amid the challenging market conditions, even the rich are joining the general anxiety. With the dollar losing ground each day it is difficult to know how much your savings are valued at any more. Then, a simple question appears "Can I afford to buy a luxury car?" It seems like not too many gave a positive answer as most luxury car brands faced sales declines last month.

Sales for BMW fell 8.7%, while Lexus saw a plunge in sales of 13.6%. And even Mercedes-Benz was down nearly 4 percent. Overall luxury vehicle sales fell almost 13% compared with the same month last year, according to Autodata.

In 1908, a Ford Model-T traveled 25 miles on a gallon of gasoline. In an attempt to return to those halcyon days, the U.S. voted late Thursday night to pass a new energy bill that sets lofty CAFE goals for the American car fleet.

Along with mandating a fleet average of 35 mpg by 2020 and energy-efficient appliances and lights, the measure will require the fuel industry to raise ethanol production to 36 billion gallons by 2022. Slightly less than 5 billion gallons were produced in 2006.

The first engine to use ethanol as a fuel was built in 1826.

In recognition of the damage to the nation's grain crop prices that increased ethanol production would wreak if it were based on corn, the measure mandates that most of that increase come from cellulose (think wood pulp).

The auto industry, in an embarrassing admission of its continuing inability to forecast consumer demand (if you remember its attitude about the Volkswagen Beetle in the 1960's, you know what I mean), was prepared to filibuster the bill, but the Senate was able to garner enough votes to override. However, the Republicans were able to use this lever to pry out of the bill language that would have taxed the petroleum industry to create a fund a program promoting fuel efficiency. They also were successful in removing a requirement that 15% of the nation's electricity be generated via windmills, solar power and the like.

President Bush's approval on the bill is still in question, though, as he opposes many of the measures including one allowing the government to punish companies found guilty of price-gouging.

In many arenas, the Republican and Democratic parties have little to distinguish between them, but this bill sharply differentiates their approach to the energy problem. This compromise seems to me seems, a strong vote for more of the same policies that have maintained the status quo for generations.