Production of the Hornet
The new Dodge Hornet that was just shown the other day in Geneva needs to be produced. There is a whole slew of small vehicles that are coming to our shores and Dodge or DCX should get a piece of that pie.
To name a few of the sub-compacts:
| Chevy Aveo | $9,350 - $13,050 |
| Honda Fit | new this year |
| Hyundai Accent | $12,455 - $13,305 |
| Kia Rio | $10,570 - $12,445 |
| Nissan Versa | new this year |
| Scion xA | $12,780 |
| Scion xB | $14,030 |
| Toyota Yaris | new this year |
But if you look at any of the above sub-compacts, non of them have any character or attitude. This is what the Hornet will bring this this particular class of vehicles. The same goes for the Dodge Nitro in the compact SUV segment. It is exterior styling that is selling the 300 and the same will happen for the Nitro and for the Hornet if it is produced. Young males who want a starter car will come in droves for the Hornet.
The market for cheaper economical cars will continue to grow over the years and small will not equal cheap in the minds of North American consumers. The success of the Audi A3 will help BMW bring over their 1-series and maybe Benz will bring in their B-class to America (which is already being sold in Canada).
When gas prices shot up to 3 dollars a gallon in the summer, SUV sales sank (which they still haven’t fully recovered from), and cars sales relative to the SUV sales began to rise in North America for the first time in a decade. Gas prices have fallen since the summer, now they are roughly $2.50 a gallon, and that may seem cheap relative to the summer prices but they are still up roughly 30% over this time last year prices.
The global sales of sub-compacts in 2001 stood at 9.8 million units and it is projected to hit 14.1 million units in 2009 which is an increase of 44%. If Dodge wants a piece of that pie and to make headway into Europe…the Dodge Hornet is the vehicle that will accomplish these goals.
Only time for a quick note, but I like the Hornet, especially the interior. I hope it’s a sign of a new design direction…
Well, you are a bit more optimistic then I am. I don’t remember that last time that the interior of a concept has truly made it into a production vehicle. They always took so fantastic in concept for what are so watered down when production time has come.
The latest victim of this is the Nitro…the general feeling is there (from the concept) but it doesn’t touch the concepts feeling. Don’t get me wrong, the Nitro’s interior is one of the best out there but it could have been better.
Thanks for responding there Rich :)
Well, I don’t expect that exact interior (although that’d be really neat!) but rather there’s the hope that it might signal a change of design direction.
We can always hope…
Well, it is a hot little number, no doubt. But it would be a killer if it were a Plymouth.
I agree with you Curtis…I wrote this blog before the Plymouth blog but if you got back and read the Plymouth blog I state that Dodge should not produce sub-compact vehicles. When I was righting this one, I didn’t what the beat the Plymouth drum. I thought it would take away heat from the Hornet itself.
I do what to do some study for a future blog. Is it more profitable (in this new economic climate with higher gas prices) for a company to produce larger SUVs or a sub-compact car? They will sell more sub-compact cars then the larger SUV so it really comes down to the marginal cost of each of the vehicles.
Anyway, thats for replying.
I think it’s all in the markup. SUVs have a high markup and thus high profit margin. Small, entry level cars have, with few exceptions, been loss leaders. They’ve also been afterthoughts as far as the domestic side goes; if they put their mind to it I’m sure that they would see more attractive results. But, just off the top of my head, we’ve recently seen:
GM reskin it’s Cavalier more times than I can count
Ford let the Focus languish
Ditto Chrysler’s Neon
An assortment of Colts, Fiestas, Metros and LeMans that never impressed anyone
The second gen Neon was a better car than the original, but the styling wasn’t quite there and the mandatory rear window cranks had to make some wonder where else they cut corners. I knew someone with a 5 door Metro automatic, and it only loosely qualified as a ‘car’.
So it’s kinda a chicken/egg thing: do they not make the effort because they don’t make any money, or do they not make any money because the segment is an afterthought?
My humble Opinions.
1. Re: PT. I disagree. Before the 300, the PT was Chrysler’s biggest success in a long time. It brought a lot of people into the showroom that previously would never have thought of Chrysler. My parents, who have only owned imports since they sold their Gran Turino in the 70s, love their PT. Their only complaint is that it does not have all of the bells and whistles that my mothers TL has. Does the PT drag down the Chrysler image? Well, only if you are looking at the average selling price. The car is an icon. It could be America’s Beetle. Maybe Chrysler could spin off PT into their version of Toyota’s Scion? Sell them in the same dealerships, but without the Chrysler badge. It would provide a lot of opportunity for the PT brand to be on its own. Who needs Smart, if we have PT? You can’t send it over to Dodge- different culture all together. And I won’t even start with the talk of resurrecting that other brand.
2. Re: lower trim levels of the 300. I totally agree. One of the things that surprised me most about the new 300 was that they had those lower levels. One reason why people buy Acuras, Buicks, et al over Hondas, Chevy’s, etc. is that they have more status and they cost more. If the Charger did not absorb the buyers of the base 300s, maybe a magnum sedan would?
3. Re: Sebring Starting Price. Totally agree.
4. RE: Aspen. Aspen is not my thing, but it is necessary. I wish it were more aggressive looking, had more “bling.”
5. Re: Pacifica. Agree, but I do not think, the base model is as “base” as the entry 300s. What I really would love to see is a version aimed right at the FX. The FX is cool and I might drool over my neighbor’s black 45. I wish there were a Pacifica that was a little shorter, with a V8 and some fat tires. A Pacifica S, if you will.
6. Re: Crossfire. Well, I like the Crossfire. It is something different. It is good looking. My complaint with mine is that it is a little short. But is there a need for a 2-seat 35-45k Chrysler coupe/roadster? Definitely. BMW and Mercedes both have them. I’m not sure America was ready for a Chrysler like this. I think that if it had followed the 300, then it may have been more successful. The Firepower is a much bigger car; it is more like a vette or a viper. I would never drive one of those, not that others wouldn’t. I think the Firepower and Crossfire are totally different concepts.
7. Re: a Mark LT. Amen. The only thing stupider than the Blackwood is the Mark LT.
8. RE minivan. Totally agree.
9. Re: Interior, interiors, and interiors. Amen brother. Chrysler should have the best interiors of any American car company. Multi-driver & passenger memory settings, air-conditioned/ventilated, supportive front seats, power everything, ergonomic controls, multiple or duplicative controls (steering wheel mounted and dash mounted for some things), AC zones, and multiple power jacks. (Inhale) Sirius/XM option, lots of pockets and cubbies for cell phones, blackberries, change, sunglasses, building card keys, and Venti Lattes. A service similar to on-star, adjustable suspension, oh a cooler in the trunk option for the cold groceries- even if it were just cooled with the AC. With our brothers in Germany, I’m sure we could come up with the best interiors.
The thing that Chrysler needs most to move up market is patience. People do not change their thinking overnight. American car companies can be so fickle. Both the Pacifica and Crossfire were introduced with high prices; these were the first “premium” Chryslers. I do not think that it is too surprising that they were slow starts. There are a lot of people out there who hear Chrysler and they think K car. It is going to take more than a few years for America to get used to the idea of Chrysler as the Premium American car. We just need to keep the great styling and quality levels high until they are there.
I think people will only think of Chrysler as a luxury brand if it stops making entry-level vehciles.