Set Chrysler free!
Rumors are flying about DaimlerChrysler, AG finally letting Chrysler Group go. While some speculate that they’d keep Dodge trucks and Jeep, I don’t think that’s what will happen.
The best thing for DaimlerChrysler would be to take Chrysler Group public as Chrysler Corporation or a less confusing name, such as American Motors (AMC), which was swallowed by Chrysler some time ago. (The advantage of not using Chrysler Corporation is ending the confusion over Chrysler brand vs Chrysler the corporate entity). The new corporation would be incorporated in Auburn Hills, Michigan, and DaimlerChrysler, AG, would retain 49.9% of the stock.
Here are some of the advantages of this arrangement for DaimlerChrysler.
First, the size of the company and its location in the US would force most American indexed mutual funds to buy the stock, instantly giving a huge boost to the stock price and raising the overall capitalization of DaimlerChrysler.
Second, the German stock buyers who, for some reason, hate Chrysler Group would start valuing DCX more highly, ending Chrysler Group’s claimed negative equity of $10 billion.
Third, once the US company was indexed and its stock had gone up, DCX could sell off more Chrysler stock while still remaining majority shareholder and retaining effective control. This could be an excellent way to raise capital and pretend to be earning money.
Fourth, Mercedes would still be able to siphon off billions of dollars from Chrysler in the form of mandatory consulting fees and royalties, while benefitting from Chrysler’s low-cost (compared to Mercedes) engineering excellence, economies of scale, and expertise in flexible manufacturing and larger vehicles.
Fifth, Chrysler Corporation or AMC or whatever it was called could claim to be an American company, which I think would help them quite a bit in the heartland, the South, and in the police markets (the cost of doing this is more than the police Charger is worth, on its own). The German-engineering campaign has failed dismally, with sales dropping every time the ads run. (This wouldn’t work if they kept Daimler in the name.) Unfortunately, for this to work, the brown-nosers extraordinaire in the executive suites would have to get some pride in their own country (where this is the US or Canada) and not be such incredible suckups that they think calling the new corporation DaimlerChrysler, Inc. is a great idea.
Sixth, there would be a huge morale boost among most of the owners and employees - at least, I think there would be. I know there are some people on the forums who really believe Mercedes has been great for Chrysler, even among those who realize the Hemi came from Auburn Hills, not Stuttgart. But as far as I can tell, the vast majority of people DO want Chrysler to be independent; they just don’t want it to be tossed out on the street with no assets, and they would like to be able to tap into Mercedes’ parts bins when needed. This is definitely possible and likely with a spinoff that is still majority Mercedes owned.
This would not entail changing anything about how the vehicles are engineered or built. We would not lose ESP, the five-speed rear-drive car automatic, VVT, or any of the other post-acquisition technologies. However, we would, I think, gain quite a bit of credibility, visible pride, and money. The Daimler would be gone from outside the factories at long last; the Chrysler media web site would not require a trip to DaimlerChrysler’s Mercedes-obsessed mediasite; and journalists would no longer continually point out that Dodge is German. The stage would also be set for more independence as time went on, or at least a more equal relationship.
Let’s hope that’s what the Daimler people are considering now - and that they go whole hog and do it right, instead of setting up another German-owned LLC or separating Chrysler and Dodge’s cars from Jeep and Dodge trucks, or creating a new subsidiary corporation in Germany, or a new corporation in America named DaimlerChrysler, or, worst of all, selling Chrysler to a Chinese company.
I like this idea. Basically, it would mean Chrysler and Daimler-Benz would be equal partners, cooperating where mutually beneficial, but Daimler-Benz would not lord it over Chrysler. Wasn’t that how the 1998 deal was supposed to work anyway?
I have often thought that Chrysler Corporation should have joined forces with Volkswagen–they had cooperated before (e.g. engines for the Omni / Horizon) and their respective product offerings did not clash as much as Chrysler and Mercedes’ do. It would have made more sense, as they could have shared technology for the smaller cars, while leaving plenty of room for Chrysler to move upmarket.
Chrysler has to have more autonomy to survive. I don’t think Daimler-Benz really understands what it is doing to the Dodge, Jeep, or Chrysler brands. Though they had lapses in recent years, they do understand that the key to the Mercedes marque’s success is preserving heritage and image, and only selling cars worthy of the Mercedes name. They are fixing the quality issues, and sales are good. They understand making a quick sale (i.e., early M-class cheap materials and quality control) is not really worth sacrificing the long term health of the Mercedes brand. But they are not applying the same logic to the Chrysler Group: every base Town and Country and base Sebring they sell cheapens the Chrysler brand. Every Compass they sell, weakens the Jeep brand. Mercedes’ are sold because of their cachet and their reputation. Take that away and the sales falter. Chrysler Corporation was, over the years, successful because of one or more of the following: superior engineering (many examples), a broad range of products (Chrysler was once the #2 automaker in the world), styling (1957’s, LH, Ram, 300C), clever packaging (minivan, LH, Neon, etc), or because there is no real competition in a segment that Chrysler had developed or was able to dominate(in this category I’d put Jeeps, trucks and vans at one point, minivans in the 80’s and 90’s).
Daimler-Benz leaders have not stayed within those boundaries: the Chrysler dominance of the minivan market is eroding. Chrysler has no real player in the midsize car market. Jeep is in danger of being watered down. There is no player in the small car market like the Horizon or Neon was: thus, they are not going after the youth market that Toyota is exploiting with Scion. Chrysler has given up the CUV market so far. Will Dodge have an answer to the new GM pickups or the new Tundra? Will it have an answer for the 08 Accord? It is not enough to simply attempt to meet the competition, DCX must push past it, like Chrysler once did with the original Hemis, TorqueFlite, the 1960 Valiant, or the 1994 Ram. DCX has failed to do so because the Daimler-Benz leadership stifled the creativity and daring that Chrysler had prior to 1998 as an independent, American company; it won’t succeed until that returns.
I think then DailmerChrysler, AG might own around 51% of the stock unless otherwise
Let’s see who might be the other partner who can be interested to getting the other part of Chrysler
-Volkswagen?
-Fiat? Iacocca once dreamed of a merger with Fiat in the late 1980s will the lightning might strike again?
-Peugeot-Citroen (PSA)? In the case of PSA, it might be a golden opportunity for Peugeot to be back in North America.
-Honda?
-Mitsubishi?
-Renault-Nissan?
-Hyundai?
Not quite equal partners - DCX would own a controlling interest, still. But more equal than now. And I fully agree wit the rest of your comment, Jeremy.
Stéphane, I don’t know why you are acting the part of an investment banker. Chrylser is the world’s fourth largest automaekr on its own. Why should it be bigger? And why hook up with those people?
1) VW - expensive, badly run, and more German-is-better rubbish. Just what we need!
2) Fiat - well, of all the places for synergy and complementary operations, that’s it. Neither does what the other one does. But how would it work? How do the cultures fit? Somehow I don’t think it would work any better than DCX.
3) Honda - the only car the two companies don’t compete on is the Civic; otherwise the lines duplicate each other. Financially great but one would have to die.
4) Mitsu - well, they’ve done it before! but why a merger instead of just working together again?
5) Renault-Nissan - what is the advantage?
6) Hyundai - they’re on track to be a world-beater and don’t want to be tied down. I can see the Mopar engines really helping Hyundai, but other htan that…
Why merge? is the big question. 80% of mergers fail.
I think people are trying to find much more problems than there really are. The problem Chrysler actually has is their vehicule line-up, however it’s not as bad as it was 2-3 years ago but there’s still much room or improvement.
First of all, the Smart. In Canada ,there are very few dealers that sell Smart, why? It’s not a prestigious product, why not selling it in a Chrysler dealer? Imagine the dealer having to sell one of his product to a custommer who WANTS a very high mileage… what can he sell him? ” 2 miles farther there’s the Toyota dealer who can sell you the Corolla or the Yaris” ????
The vehicule line-up is really incomplete. What’s the competition for a Rav-4 in the Chrysler group? The Nitro? no way, way too big.The Yaris? Perhaps the Smart…. but they are both very different. Corolla? None
That’s the real problem.
Are you basically saying Toyota has the perfect lineup?
I think there ARE problems with the lineup, but each individual product seems to be competitive…to a degree. I personally still prefer their minis to ALL comers. I love the Pacifica. The Charger and 300C are both great - esp. the Charger - in their class. The trucks are, well, trucks, easily competitive with the best of Ford and GM and in some cases with everyone (e.g. Ram). That said, they have continual problems with perceptions of quality - and sometimes with actual defects or problems - along with a dealer channel that can’t get it right (with notable exceptions) and a customer service group that alienates more than it helps. The marketing has… not been optimal.
I personally think every problem Chrysler has is solveable with hard work and confidence, BUT they need to jettison a few attitudes first:
1) The German way is the right way
2) People want German engineering / Mercedes’ good reputation can rub off on us
3) Brown-nosing is acceptable
4) You can’t step on Mercedes’ toes
5) We can’t compete directly with anyone
6) The customer won’t notice if we take this away
7) People know we make good vehicles
8) Our dealers treat customers well
9) Our customers are idiots
10) It’s more important to attract new customers than to please our existing ones
11) The fans are idiots (see #9)
12) McKinsey can help us
13) We can’t make a small car
14) We can’t engineer a small car
15) (It’s late.)
Toyota’s lineup is much more complete. If a customer goes to a Toyota dealer, he WILL find a car which satisfies his needs (except for sport cars). I don’t buy imported cars for political reason, even if for many years they’ve been in advance (now the difference is way smaller though).
When the caliber got out, some magazines did comparisons with the Mazda 3 wagon and the Matrix and guess what? Caliber got last place. That’s quite funny, because those are all-new engines with a new transmission, and it can’t even get on top of that road-test comparison against 2-3 years old models. I must admit however that lots of magazines are pro-japanese and tend to judge American cars a little too fast (great example is the Focus-Mazda3).
The real problems are within the Chrysler group. The merge is not perfect, but at least now Dodge has a real cargo van. But now the marketing choice is simple: tell the customers that Mercedes is the premium brand of Chrysler or put a wall between the 2 brands (they are choosing number2, but is this the right choice?)
i THINK THE BIGGEST CONCERN FACING DAIMLER - CHRYSLER GROUP TODAY IS NOT NECESSARILY THE MERGER WITH MERCEDES BUT WITH DE
DECADES OLD CONCERNS THAT CHRYSLER HAS NOT DEALT WITH OVER THE YEARS. FOR INSTANCE, SINCE THE 70′S, MANY CHRYSLER’S HAVE BEEN PLAGUED BY USING CHEAP INTERIOR PLASTIC COMPONENTS WHEN COMPARED TO THE EUROPEANS OR THE JAPANESE. WHATEVER THE PRICE RANGE, IT SEEMS TO BE ONE OF THE BIGGEST SIGNS OF COST CUTTING ON CHRSLER’S PART. MIND YOU IT HAS IMPROVED QUITE A BIT BUT NOWHERE NEAR JAPANESE OR EUROPEAN VEHICLE STANDARDS.
THE OTHER CONCERN SINCE THE LATE 80′S HAS BEEN THEIR TRANSMISSIONS-NAMELY THE ULTRA DRIVE AUTOMATIC. JUST BECAUSE, CHRYSLER WANTED TO RUSH THIS TRANSMISSION INTO PRODUCTION, SO THEY CAN CLAIM TO BE THE FIRST MANUFACTURER OF AN ADAPTABLE ELECTRONICALLY CONTROLLED TRANSMISSION, THEY SACRIFICED THE QUALITY. WHILE IT WAS A SOUND DESIGN, THEY PUT THE DEXRON 3
3 TRANSMISSION FLUID INSTEAD OF THE ATF + 3 OR 4 WHICH ARE NOW USED ON THE AUTOMATICS . SUCH KIND OF QUALITY LAPSES CAN COST A COMPANY MILLIONS IF NOT BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN SECURING A BAD REPUTATION WITH CUSTOMERS. RATHER THAN LOOK AT THE MERGER, CHRYSLER HAS TO DEAL WITH ISSUES FROM DEFECTIVE COMPONENTS OVER LAST SEVERAL YEARS. THIS WILL TAKE A HARD EARNED EFFORT, IN THAT COST CUTTING AND TAKING SHORT CUTS WILL MAKE MATTERS WORSE.
WHAT CHRYSLER MUST DO LIKE IT DID UP TO THE LATE 60′S, IS TO FOCUS VERY MUCH INTO THE QUALITY OF THE PRODUCT AND RISE ABOVE THE LEVELS OF THE IMPORTS IF THEY WANT TO CAPTURE THEIR MARKET SHARE BACK.
HOWEVER, IT MUST BE NOTED THAT IT SEEMS LIKE CHRYSLER’S QUALITY IS IMPROVING STEADILY BUT STILL NOWHERE NEAR THE LEVELS OF THE JAPANESE. IF CHRYSLER CAN ADDRESS THEIR LONG STANDING ISSUE OF CONSISTENTLY FAILURE PRONE COMPONENTS, THE IT WILL BE BACK TO THE GREATNESS IT ONCE HAD BACK IN THE 60′S AND BEFORE.
CHRYSLER’S BIGGEST ACHEIVEMENT IS ITS ABILITY TO MAKE AND PRODUCE BLOCKBUSTER VEHICLES AT A REASONABLE PRICE. WHILE THIS IS OK IN THE BEGINNING, IF THE QUALITY OF THE VEHICLE IS ABYSMAL, IT WILL REFLECT IN THE SHOWROOM. ONE ONLY HAS TO LOOK AT THE VEHICLES CHRYSLER HAS BROUGHT OVER THE PAST 3 DECADES. FOR EXAMPLE THE VOLARE AND ASPEN, TURNED CHRYSLER’S FORTUNE AROUND IN THE MID 70′S. BUT ONCE THE SHINE WORE OFF ON THESE VEHICLE BECAUSE OF POOR QUALITY CONTROL, IT ALMOST
BROUGHT THIS CORPORATION TO BANKRUPTCY.
THE SAME THING HAPPENED IN THE 80′S. CHRYSLER STARTED SELLING THE K-CARS. WHILE NOT THE MOST CONTEMPORARY OF VEHICLES, EVEN AT THAT TIME, IT SOLD THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS BECAUSE OF A VERY CHEAP PRICE AND ITS FUEL EFFICIENCY. UNFORTUNATEL, CHRYSLER TRIED TO SAVE A LOT OF MONEY BY USING CUT RATE MECHANICAL AND BODY PARTS. HENCE, THIS RESULTED IN VEHICLES THAT WOULD RUST PREMATURELY OR HAVE HEAD GASKET FAILURES. THE SAVING GRACE WAS CHRYSLER’S LONG POWERTRAIN WARRANTY, WHICH SAVED CUSTOMERS A LOT. HOWEVER THE COST OF THAT INCONVIENIENCE AGAIN GAVE CHRYSLER A BAD REPUTATION. THE SAME HEAD GASKET ISSUE WAS ALSO PLAGUING THE NEONS OF THE 90′S BECAUSE CHRYSLER AGAIN DECIDED TO GO CHEAP ON THE TYPE OF MATERIAL IT WOULD USE FOR THE HEAD GASKET.THESE KIND OF SHORT CUTS JUST TO SAVE A FEW DOLLARS, IS WHAT HAS PLAGUED NOT ONLY CHRYSLER BUT ALL THE DOMESTIC AUTOMAKERS-BUT BECAUSE WE ARE FOCUSSING ON CHRYSLER, LET US STICK WITH THAT. IF CHRYSLER CAN GO BACK TO THE WAY IT USED TO DO THINGS, THIS WILL TAKE CHRYSLER BACK TO THE FOREFRONT OF ENGINEERING SUPREMACY AND RELIABILITY AND PRODUCE A VEHICLE WHICH THE MASSES CAN AFFORD. CHRYSLER JUST HAS TO LOOK BACK AT ITS ROOTS AND REDISCOVER WHAT MADE THEM GREAT 4 DECADES AGO. AGAIN THE BOTTOM LINE IS: STOP COST CUTTING AND IT’LL PAY BIG DIVIDENDS 5,10 OR EVEN 20 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD!!!!!! I AM A BIG CHRYSLER FAN BECAUSE THEY HAVE PRODUCE VEHICLES THAT NO ONE ELSE DARES TO PRODUCE. NOW IF ONLY THEY CAN GET THE QUALITY ASPECT RIGHT, THEN I’LL BE BUYING CHRYSLER VEHICLES IN DROVES!!!
JOE M.
Well, one thing I forgot to mention is the importance of reputation in the automobile industry. If my Nike shoes are of poor quality, I wouldn’t really mind buying the same brand, but an automobile is so expensive, you DO want the highest quality possible and you rarely forgive a company. My parents’ ‘91 Voyager was a real lemon, however for some dark reasons they bought a ‘95 Grand Voyager. We got it up to 240 000 KM without much problems and we got 1000$ for it in a deal with GM when buying a Buick a few months ago. Where I’m going with that you might ask?
240 000 KM is a lot here in Quebec (because of the winter), so the second Voyager was in my opinion pretty reliable. Now I have a Cirrus 2000 with 160 000 KM and it runs very well, and the enginge (2.4L) has no problems whatsoever, the combustion is still great. However, when I talk about Chrysler, most people will say it’s not reliable at all (especially people in the 40s who bought the K-cars).
Now if I talk about Toyota, people will say the car is basically a tank, you simply CAN’T destroy it. Now I worked with people who had tercels and corollas BELOW 160 000KM, and if you followed the car, you could smell the badly-burned gas and the oil coming out of the exaust. Reliable engines? No way. Even a 4 cylinders engine isn’t supposed to have combustion problems at 160 000 km, at least that’s what I thought.
The difference? Reputaton. If you talk about Toyota, you have the idea of an ecological-friendly high mileage and reliable car, while a Dodge is a polluting thirsty SUV which is more likely in the garage than in your driveway.
Marketing departement of DCX MUST try to change the popular thoughts by saying the quality has greatly improved, they MUST admit the first generation Neon and Intrepid were of poor quality but they must be positive, instead of talking about environnement in a Jeep ad. GM has taken a huge step in the good direction in the marketing departement, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the next year would be a very good one for the no1 automaker. If GM KNOWS their new cars are of good quality and reliability, then why not put a very generous warranty instead of a Chill Zone? That feature is interesting, but as a student, I would prefer a better warranty. I don’t think anyone would buy a car because there’s a “freezer” in the car, but an extended warranty IS interesting.
Now, the interior. The Caliber’s interior (for example) is, in my opinion, of bad quality compared to the competition. Have you seen the 2008 Corolla’s interior? at first, I was sure that it was fake: the interior looks amazing for a car of that price. The interior is much more important than what people would think. The Sunfire, and most pontiac cars of the 90’s had the worst interior possible, now you knew the build quality was as poor as the interior.
However, I think the worst problem for the American automobile industry is Asia in general. http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061003/AUTO01/610030387/1148
It is said that Japanese automakers make 2400$ more profit for each cars they build. Even if I question their ways of counting, there IS a gap and it is huge. If Toyota makes (example) 3000$ profit for each Corollas, while GM makes 1500$ for each Cobalt , it means that Toyota has an extra 1500$ that they could spend on research and developpement, add standard equipement on the car or simply lower the price to attract even more customers. Un-fair competition? I’d say so. The gap is worst for Korean cars… guess why an Accent has heated seats? indecent wages in SKorea compared to North America. That’s why American automakers have always been more competitive in light trucks, and European in luxury cars. The profit margin is much higher so Asian carmakers can’t really compete.
Solutions? Free health care system in the US(extremist but it would work), taxes for imported products, and a little PRIDE for homemade products. “But, I don’t mind where it is made, I buy what’s less expensive for the best quality”… I’d like those people to lose their jobs because of cheap labor from Asia, only then they would learn.
So bottom line (after 100 lines of unstructured text), Chrysler isn’t all responsible for the problems they have.They probably have the lowest reputation out there, hence the “C-H-R-Y-S-L-E-R joke” ( Company Highly Recommends You to Start Learning Engine Repair). Daimler-Benz is even less responsible, they acquired a company that was already heading for HUGE problems, and I think they are doing fine in helping the Chrysler Group BUT they don’t want to risk losing the Mercedes reputation by helping Chrysler’s. That’s evident, and that’s kind of a problem: they’re not taking the risk, but who knows it COULD destroy Mercedes’s reputation if they mentionned Mercedes SUV’s use Jeep’s platform.
I hope they don’t seperate chrysler and sell it off,I don’t think it make’s any sense,doesn’t chrysler alone outsell mercedes ? I have been a mopar nut since I started driving in the early 1990’s and owned many mopar’s from 60’s to my new hemiram and I know I would never buy a new mopar again if they seperate chrysler from dodge,jeep.I just wouldnt look at them the same,when they merged I thought it was the end but I am surprised by some of the car’s they have now(they actually look,move good)My parent’s own a 05 hemi 300c,04 grand cherokee,even my pop’s said if they pick away at chrysler he would go back to ford&g.m,(he buys new cars every 3 years)I think alot of people would do so then after they sell chrysler and keep dodge/jeep they would lose a lot of sales and eventually die off.I know alot of mopar people and they would do the same also.If they sell off chrysler that would send a message that chrysler is crap therefore dodge and jeep must be on the chopping block because they are crap and there days are numbered at mercedes.Resulting in low to zero sales for dodge/jeep,I know 3 new cars now that would be traded for ford/gm.
I dont know why the asian car company’s have such a good reputation for quality,toyota 4 runners have head gasket problems,honda/toyota have bad tranny’s pilot,minivans,honda cant keep a timing belt,unless you change them every 20,000 km to be safe so you dont wreck your valves,nissan’s burn oil from the get go,pretty much all asian cars have head gasket problems my aunts 03 corrolla is cheaply made,doesnt even have power windows,cheap plastic materials, cant even follow behind it it stinks,had many irretating problems with only 40,000 k.Besides toyota has the highest number of recalls ,I put on 350,000 k on my 99 ram with zero major repairs,orig motor trans rearend front end, rad ,alternator ony let downs it even looked new when i sold it.toyota echos floorboards rusted out in the first 6 months also minivans rust out,camry’s tranny hesitate toyota/honda cars stall and cant be started yeah good cars,I drive 5,000 k a month and when I see a dead car on the side of the road if its an american car its usually from the 1980’s to early 1990’s,asian cars not to many 1980’s models left they are usually mid 1990’s to 2000’s so to me that tells me something asian cars superior if you want to spend all your money at the shop,sure keep fixing them.
I dont know why the asian car company’s have such a good reputation for quality,toyota 4 runners have head gasket problems,honda/toyota have bad tranny’s pilot,minivans,honda cant keep a timing belt,unless you change them every 20,000 km to be safe so you dont wreck your valves,nissan’s burn oil from the get go,pretty much all asian cars have head gasket problems my aunts 03 corrolla is cheaply made,doesnt even have power windows,cheap plastic materials, cant even follow behind it it stinks,had many irretating problems with only 40,000 k.Besides toyota has the highest number of recalls ,I put on 350,000 k on my 99 ram with zero major repairs,orig motor trans rearend front end.The only problems were the rad ,alternator ony let downs it even looked new when i sold it.toyota echos floorboards rusted out in the first 6 months also minivans rust out,camry’s tranny hesitate toyota/honda cars stall and cant be started yeah good cars,I drive 5,000 k a month and when I see a dead car on the side of the road if its an american car its usually from the 1980’s to early 1990’s,asian cars not to many 1980’s models left they are usually mid 1990’s to 2000’s so to me that tells me something asian cars superior if you want to spend all your money at the shop,sure keep fixing them.
The idea was to sell of Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep - Chrylser Group - as a unit.
TO ANSWER ALL YOUR CONCERNS ABOUT HOW COME ASIAN MANUFACTURERS HAVE A GOOD REPUTATION, IT IS BECAUSE THEY ARE MORE WILLING TO SERVICE IT AND TREAT THE CUSTOMER FAIRLY. AS A SERVICE ADVISOR WHO HAS WORKED FOR BOTH IMPORT AND DOMESTIC DEALERSHIPS, THE IMPORT DEALERSHIPS ACKNOWLEDGE THEY HAVE CERTAIN GENERIC DEFICIENCIES AND ARE MORE FORTHCOMING WITH IT.
THEY ARE WILLING TO SERVICE THE VEHICLE AND MAKE SURE PROBLEMS DON’T RESURFACE FOR MANY YEARS IN EVERY GENERATION MODEL.
TAKE FOR INSTANCE CHRYSLER’S TRANSMISSION-CHRYSLER HAS KNOWN IT HAS HAD PROBLEMS WITH MANY OF ITS ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSIONS YET IT TAKES MANY YEARS TO FIX SUCH AN ISSUE. YOU COMPARE THAT TO THE ASIAN AUTOMAKERS AND THEY RECTIFY THE PROBLEM ALMOST IMMEDIATELY AFTER IT BECOMES AN ISSUE. FOR INSTANCE, I WORKED AT MAZDA AND THEIR MPV’S ARE GENERALLY ONE OF THE WORST JAPANESE VEHICLES-EVEN THOUGH THE POWERTRAIN IS MADE BY FORD. THE MPV’S FROM 2000-2003 DISPLAYED A DEFECT WHEREBY THE REAR HEATER LINES THAT GO TO THE REAR HEATER WOULD CORRODE ONLY AFTER A FEW YEARS.3-4 YEARS AFTER THE CUSTOMER PURCHASED THE VEHICLE. THIS WOULD CAUSE COOLANT TO LEAK FROM THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE AND THUS IN MANY CASES CAUSE OVERHEATING. SEEING THAT THIS DEFECT WAS COMMON, MANY OWNERS WHO SPEND MONEY FIXING THESE HOSES WERE REFUNDED THEIR MONEY IN FULL AND NOT ONLY THAT MAZDA ALSO EXTENDED THE WARRANTY ON THIS PARTICULAR COMPONENT FOR UP 7 YEARS UNLIMITED MILEAGE.THIS IS WHY THE ASIAN AUTOMAKERS ARE WINNING BECAUSE THEY ARE MORE FORTHCOMING WITH THEIR DEFECTS AND ARE MORE WILLING TO RESOLVE THEM.
YOU COMPARE THAT WITH CHRYSLER AND THE OTHER DOMESTIC AUTOMAKERS, THEY’LL DENY THERE IS A PROBLEM IN THE FIRST PLACE AND THEN ONLY AFTER MANY YEARS OF COMPLAINTS THEY’LL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. TAKE FOR INSTANCE, THE NEON’S HEAD GASKET ISSUE.IT TOOK CHRYSLER ABOUT 6 YEARS TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE. THEY EXTENDED THE WARRANTY ON THE 1ST GENERATION NEONS FOR THIS COMMON DEFECT TO 7YRS/160000KMS. NOW THIS WOULD NOT BE VOLUNTARILY TOLD TO THE CUSTOMER UNLESS THEY COMPLAINED VERY HARD. MY POINT IS, IF THE DOMESTICS WANT TO RECLAIM THEIR MARKETSHARE, ADMIT AND BE HONEST TO CUSTOMERS WHEN THE CUSTOMERS COMPLAIN.WHEN CUSTOMERS ARE NOT GIVEN THE GO AROUND, AND THEIR COMPLAINTS ARE TAKEN SERIOUSLY, THEN YOU WILL REGAIN THAT REPUTATION. LIKE I SAID BEFORE, IF A COMPANY IS FORTHCOMING WITH THEIR DEFECTS AND ADDRESSES THEM QUICKLY, CUSTOMER SATISFACTION WILL GO UP. AS A RESULT, MORE CUSTOMERS WILL BUY THEIR PRODUCTS. IT IS JUST PLAIN OLD COMMON SENSE!!! IF THE DOMESTIC AUTOMAKERS GET THAT RIGHT, MORE PEOPLE WILL RETURN TO THE SHOWROOMS TO BUY THEIR VEHICLES.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS-HONESTY IS THE BEST POLICY!!!
NOW MANY OF YOU STATE THAT MANY JAPANESE VEHICLES THEIR ENGINES START CONSUMING OIL, LEAKY HEAD GASKETS-WHILE THIS IS TRUE, THE JAPANESE AUTOMAKERS DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. AS A RESULT YOU WILL NOT HAVE GENERIC DEFICIENCIES FROM GENERATION TO THE NEXT GENERATION OVER AND OVER AGAIN.-UNLIKE THE DOMESTICS.
YOU MAY THINK THAT I AM PRO JAPANESE AND ANTI AMERICAN. NOT REALLY. I CALL IT LIKE IT IS. FROM MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE MANY OWNERS WHO HAVE OWNED JAPANESE VEHICLES, INCLUDING MYSELF, NOTICED THE SHEAR QUALITY THAT GOES INTO THESE VEHICLES.IN THE FIRST SEVERAL YEARS OF OWNERSHIP YOU DON’T HAVE MANY THINGS GO WRONG AND IF THEY ARE, IT IS VERY MINOR.
THE FIT AND FINISH AND THE WAY THE BODY FEELS AND SOUNDS FOR INSTANCE, LIKE WHEN YOU SHUT THE DOOR OR TRUNK, SCREAMS EXPENSIVE.
HOWEVER I AM NOT GOING TO DENY MY LOVE OF MOPAR. MOST OF CHRYSLER’S REAR DRIVES SCREAM DURABILITY AND RELIABLITY THAT IS UNPARALLED IN THE AUTO INDUSTRY. FOR INSTANCE, I HAVE OWNED MANY REAR DRIVE MOPARS AND THEY ARE ALMOST BULLET PROOF. YOU CAN BEAT THE CRAP OUT OF THEM AND THEY STILL KEEP ON PURRING. EVEN WHEN THEY NEED TO GET REPAIRED, THEY ARE SO SIMPLE TO DIAGNOSE AND FIX, THAT YOU DON’T FORK OUT MUCH MONEY AND MOST OF IT YOU CAN DO YOURSELF. I CAN ATTEST TO THAT BECAUSE I HAVE HAD SEVERAL M BODIES (THE GRAN FURIES AND DIPLOMATS) AND NO MATTER WHAT THE MILEAGES ARE ON THESE VEHICLES, THEY JUST START UP AND GO WITHOUT NARY A COMPLAINT. I DROVE MANY OF THESE VEHICLES FOR MANY LONG DISTANCE TRIPS INSPITE OF THEIR AGE AND MILEAGE AND THEY STILL KEPT ON RUNNING!!!! MANY OF THESE M-BODIES HAD WELL OVER 300 000 KMS ON THEM WITH THE ORIGINAL ENGINES AND TRANSMISSIONS. AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE LAST M BODY I DROVE WAS A PLYMOUTH GRAN FURY AND IT DROVE UNTIL 380 000 MILES. IT WAS STILL IN RUNNING ORDER WHEN I GOT RID OF IT LAST YEAR BUT THERE WAS QUITE A BIT OF REPAIRS TO DO TO GET THE VEHICLE TO PASS SAFETY AND EMISSINS.-THE OUTER BODY HAD MANY PERFORATIONS AND THE ENGINE BURNED OIL QUITE A BIT.
HAVING STATED ALL OF THAT, I KNOW CHRYSLER CAN DO IT. IF THEY STOP TAKING SHORT CUTS AND FOREGO COST CUTTING, THEY HAVE THE ENGINEERING EXPERTISE TO BUILD VEHICLES FAR SUPERIOR TO FORD,GM, OR ANY OF THE EUROPEAN OR JAPANESE AUTO MAKERS.IF THE HEAD HONCHO AT CHRYSLER GROUP REALIZES THAT, CHRYSLER WILL DEFINITELY BECOME THE BEST AUTOMAKER TO BUY CARS FROM LIKE IT DID BACK IN THE 60′S AND BEFORE. NOT ONLY THAT, IF CHRYSLER KNOWS TO WHERE TO CUT COSTS, RATHER THAN CHEAPENING THE PRODUCT AND KEEP PRICES COMPETITIVE, IT WILL BRING CHRYSLER BACK TO ITS GLORY DAYS!!!!
Wow, all caps. Ack.
Yes, being willing to admit mistakes AND using empowered work teams that are trained and motivated to fix problems helps quite a bit. Chrysler is now doing the second.
Going to weigh in with Dave on this one. Like his 15 reasons best of all. JOE M. PLEASE turn OFF the caps lock. No need to hollar at us. We are with you here. At first when Dave suggested that the corporation be named like AMC, American Motors Corporation, I was sorta not going to agree. However, after re-reading the material, it makes perfect sense. That would let Chrysler stand alone as a vehicle on it’s own, rather than trying to be the corporate car for the corporate image. It would also let the company explore bringing in the entry level car that it so desparately needs. OK no Plymouth, then how about Rambler? Great car, and it carried well. Would fit right where it needed to be. Well anyway, it is time to admit the merger wasn’t all that it could have been, and face it, Daimler has about taken all that it can from Chrysler without quite running it into the ground. Although lately, it appears that the people in Highland Park are marching to an odd drummer, as well as being out of tune, and out of step.
I think the reason Chrysler, and the American auto makers in general, continue to experience quality problems is that they keep using cheap parts. The Asians are the opposite. If they have a problem with a certain part, they will spare no expense to find a better one and fix the problem. Chrysler asked for 25% price cuts from it’s suppliers and that’s what they got, poor quality cheap parts. I don’t think Chrysler could ever come out with a 5 or 7 year basic warranty because it would kill them. They have bad enough troubles under 3yr/36,000. Heck nowadays they had tremendous problems under 1000 miles. We just had to replace a valve body on a 2007 Pacifica with the new 6 speed transmission because it was pouring transmission fluid out of it.
Great title!
DCX proceeds very cautiously to protect the Mercedes luxury image, yet is insensitive regarding the patriotic element inherent to the Chrysler brand. I can see that point.
Can the image of foreign ownership be eroded while remaining factually accurate?
I think it’s possible. The reality of the auto world today is a spider web of interconnecting financial interests and shared car parts. But even rebadgings can avoid brand damage if executed with a sensitive and discrete touch. DCX is careful to take its shoes off at the threshold of the Mercedes brand, but seems to think nothing of stomping all over Chrysler with its muddied public expressions.
Regarding brand integrity, I am more disturbed with the Chery rumors. China has awakened, that is reality. But is it a good idea to give Dodge the infamy of being the first to import a Chinese car to our shores?
I dont agree, the Germans had put a lot of work and time. Let´s give an opportunity to Mr LaSorda to bring back the
the Chrysler Group Back !!!!!!!!!!.
Bring the Chrysler group back? Pray tell, back to what? It is the same group of folks that is stifling the Chrysler group that you are advocating. Even with inventory stored all over the Detroit area, and dealers in an uproar, unabated overtime production continues making vehicles that are not selling. Two new models out on the market and less than a couple weeks and they have incentives on them already. Bring it back? It comes back all on it’s own….. to the same.
All of your comments are welcoming. It is nice to know that there are people who can see the big problem that is affecting the American auto industry these days.
By the way, all the CAPS lock I used was not to holler or stress a point, it is just I didn’t take it off. Thanks for the input.
Well, let us get down to it. From the emails I have received, it all agrees with my point, that if Chrysler and the domestic auto industry in general, stop cheapening the product, then there will be more people coming to the showrooms to buy American vehicles. We’d all love to do that because we want our economy to prosper and when we buy our home products we are investing in our future, here in North America. Unfortunately, as long as the American auto industry produces junk,
then it’ll just get junk results. Again, plain old common sense prevails here.
Having said all of that, amongst the big three auto makers, I find Chrysler making the biggest step to improving product quality by using teams, thereby cutting unnecessary waste and inefficiencies. If you look at many independent consumer groups, it seems Chrysler has made the biggest strides when it comes to manufacturing better products over the past few years. Many of the vehicles that used the platform team concept, have seen respectable reliability records. For instance, the PT Cruiser has had a consistently above average reliability record with Consumer Reports and JD Power, since its inception-the only exception is the turbo version of the PT Cruiser that has a below average record. Other vehicles that have improved in reliability or has a generally good reliability records are:The LX vehicles-the exception is the Hemi
The Dakota,Sebring and the Liberty. Vehicles in the Chrysler line up that have deteriorated are the Pacifica, the minivans,Durango and the LX hemi. All of these reliability ratings are taken from Consumer Reports Magazine and Lemon Aid Car Guide-an automotive consumer publication here that is in Canada. So there is progress in the Chrysler line up and hopefully this trend continues.
Better than all of what I have written above, is for Chrysler to return to its roots! Chrysler back in the 60’s and before, as I mentioned in my earlier emails, stood for outstanding engineering prowess and reliability, for a reasonable price. One only has to look at the vehicles it used to produce. Instances include:Valiant/Dart;Fury/Monaco;Charger/Daytona; Challenger/ Barracuda; and the list goes on. All of these vehicles were well built and meant to withstand the test of time. You were guaranteed at least 10 years out of these vehicles, if not more. The only vehicle in the last 20-30 years that Chrysler has produced, that comes close to matching the reliability of these former vehicles, are the M-bodies-which are the: Chrysler LeBaron (77-81); Chrysler New Yorker (1982); New Yorker 5th Avenue (1983), 5th Avenue (84-89), Dodge Diplomat (77 - 89), Plymouth Caravelle (77 - 81), Plymouth Gran Fury
(82-89)-which is also the Caravelle Salon in Canada from 82-89. Of course, these M-bodies were based of those vehicles and hence their durability is unparalleled.
In the 1970’s, Chrysler’s reliability fell off sharply, as did most American automakers. Obviously, with the fuel shortages, it caught the entire domestic auto industry flat footed. With no small vehicles to compete against the imports, the domestics rushed their subcompacts into production before they were tested sufficiently enough. This began the downfall of the American auto industry, which they haven’t recovered fully. Chrysler, especially suffered during this time, because they did not have a subcompact to call their own. It wasn’t until the late 70’s that Chrysler had their first truly small car-the Plymouth Horizon and Dodge Omni. It was an instant hit but because it was rushed into production and using dirt cheap mechanical and body components, the shine wore off very quickly, as a myriad of complaints came in. With many Chryslers suffering quality control lapses in the 70’s-not because of design issues but because of lapses at the factory, it really caused Chrysler financially to almost become insolvent. With such abysmal quality record that Chrysler suffered during the 70’s, it is taking a long time to recover from that. Although, Chrysler does not have the same quality control issues as they did back in the 70’s, it still exists to certain degree, even to this day. The irony is, that many of Chrysler’s rear wheel drive vehicles, back in the 70’s, were in some shape, way or form related to the Valiant, a vehicle which had an outstanding reliability and durability record. There are still many Chrysler rear wheel drive vehicles still running on the road today, even from the 70’s-that is if you got a vehicle without quality control issues, because of what platform they were based on.
Again, like I said before, if Chrysler can produce vehicles like it did back in the 60’s and before, I see no reason why it can become competitive in the marketplace for years to come. It just needs to look back and see at what level they excelled at. Maybe that is why they are bringing back old names to newly designed vehicles such as the 300c and the Challenger. But this is not good enough. What Chrysler needs, is to focus on QUALITY, QUALITY AND MORE QUALITY!!! There is no point of introducing these vehicle only for a lot customers to only find out that their vehicle has serious quality issues. This will be absolutely unacceptable and will cost the company a fortune if they are not smart enough to address issues quickly and promptly.
Hopefully, their new rear drives will be very good and recapture much needed market share. If Chrysler can address these quality issues with swiftness, then they’ll be back to their once lofty perch, like it was 4 decades ago. If not, Chrysler may not exist in the next few years!!! Believe me, Chrysler, it is that serious. Do not underestimate foreign competition from the far east because if you do, you might as well all kiss an American Instituition GOODBYE!!! and we definitely do not want that to happen! Think about it seriously Chrysler, because I would love for you to stay prosperous and many of us do. REMEMBER MOPAR RULES!!!!
First steps. The way I figure it, they’ll not be able to resist the opportunity to make more cash by selling more stock ;)
I can’t help but appreciate JOE M for his enthusiasm. I don’t quite remember the same quality issues on the same time line that he does. However, not to pick at nits about some of the things he does bring up. The main issue with Chrysler before the take over was a comprehensive overall management plan with a cohesive, inter divisional cooperative spirit. Most vice presidents weren’t even talking to one another, and that was because that was the “way it was done!” But, first things first. Get that stock out there, and it will sell as Dave says. After that a comprehensive plan needs to be implemented that will stay the course. Much like the Japanese set up for 50 years of projections. No major changes, and get off the high priced management kick. You want to compete on the level while maintaining medical costs, then pay the CEO a REASONSBLE salary…… not MILLIONS with MILLIONS more in stock options. Somehow, American industry seems to believe that it is the CEO that makes companies happen. WRONG. It is the people that make up the company. Management gives the direction/sets the parameters/tolerances, and the engineers, designers, production leaders, line workers are the ones that MAKE it happen.
The reason chrysler got a bad name was the mitshubishi garbage engines they used in the 80’s and 90’s .In 1990 my dad asked the head chrysler mechanic at our shop and he said stay away from the 3.0 v-6 unless you want to rebuild it at 120,000km.So they bought a dynasty with a 3.3 Our neighbor had an aries with a 2.6 mitsu and needed a rebuild within 2 years!!We had an 84 aries 2.2 never any problems,86 lebaron gts turbo until 1999,250,000 km,head gasket at 270,000,c.v joints,struts @200,000then at 4something paint,body was like new the car was totalled and they thought it was only 70,000,had digital dash after 200,000 went to zero but had an *in front of the #’s,so they had no idea.We had many chrysler’s and never any paint/interior problem’s,countless daytona’s/shadow/horizon/cirrus/ram fullsize vans/ram trucks/grand cherokee’s/town&country minivan never any qulity control problem’s,never got stranded,to me thats quality!!! dad has a 78 magnum since new besides the lean burn conversion&carb 3.91 axle for more power no problems,but tranny but then he used to burn the tires daily and do donuts that wasnt til the car was 10 years old mi unknown.Look on the roads and you still see lots of k cars roaming the streets those car’s are bullet proof with the 2.2 and 2.5 engines.I just don’t get it toyota/honda’s interiors dont look to good to me cheap plastic all over,lame styling!!Consumer reports,lemon aid books are all complete garbage,back in the 70’s my dad phoned them to ask about the cordoba they said it was basically garbage,a coworker of my dad bought one and my dad kept asking him if he had any problems and never did so in 78 he bought a magnum g.t (very very rare)and that was the best car ever,new never any problems,only problem the console cover had a rip within 5 year’s!!Dam lemon!!
Mercedes should dump them and then buy Volkwagen
That’s a good idea. Then they can keep making high-priced rubbish without any constraint or efficiency at all, protected until Lexus and BMW put ‘em out of business. Meanwhile Chrysler will, having been dumped, be free of the “promotion-by-shade-of-brown-on-the-nose” system, Joe Eberhardt will have been lynched, and Chrysler will be back to trying to regain #3 instead of threatening to fall to #5.
…and I should add one more big thing - customer service. For some reason, Chrysler seems ot have decided it’s cheaper to spend $5,000 in rebates plus $3,000 in TV ads to gain new customers instead of authorizing repairs for $400 to keep old ones.
Doesn’t matter who the majority owner of Chrysler stock is…
what matters is the desirability and quality of the cars….
..not being American hasn’t hurt Toyota at all
No, but it HAS hurt Chrysler. As for the desirabilitiy and quality, if you think the owner is not relevant to that…
Dave,
I applaud you on both comments.
Thank you.
Like a take off on a well versed public service advertisement: “friends don’t let friends drive junk.” It sure didn’t take long for the stigma of poor quality to stick to Chrysler very soon after the 1957 models hit the market. OK, I know it was a long time ago. Yet, in a lot of minds, the quality issue is still the reason they won’t buy a Chrysler or CG produced vehicle yet today. “If you build it, they will come”. We all know that line from the popular movie. BUT…. when it comes to certain things, it ain’t necessarily so. IF DCX started letting CG do it’s own thing, and the focus was on top notch quality, where it should be BTW, people will come. Management makes the determination on the level of what it is going to accept in it’s production. Can you imagine the food industry operating on the level of the acceptable quality of today’s automotive products? Partly, it is also the consumer’s fault, into believing that this is the best that they can get. That isn’t necessarily so either. Harken back to stead fast refusal to allow stuff to “slip” on by where parts that didn’t meet exacting anvil like standards were just automatically rejected, and maybe then, when the “QUALITY” issue becomes the standard we would see a regular run to the show rooms for CG products. With the provision that the products are relevent. I think that over use of established name plates hurts the situation too. The Compass stands out in that respect. What does it mean to Jeep? Not good probably. Jeep fanciers from all over, and this web site as well tried to tell the powers that be about cheapening the brand. Seems like it is too late.
I must agree with Dave - it is time to set Chrysler free. And probably with a new name - AMC, Maxwell or something altogether new. While the Mercedes name over here has usually meant quality, reliability and marketabliity - their reputation in Germany is not as good (or hasn’t been). These 2 great car companies could share technology and expertise without loosing so much of their independence. Why are Jaguar, Aston Martin, SAAB, Volvo not branded with their parent companies “brand” (or are they)?
Chrysler and the other N.A. car companies have this problem about producing vehicles even if they’re not selling - probably due to Union demands. But since Chrysler and their competition can rebate vehicles to such a degree, does that not tell us there is a lot of profit margin in these vehicles (not that profit is necessarily a bad thing) but couldn’t the quality of materials increase without raising the price of the given vehicle? Couldn’t our (N.A.) car companies look at what is increasing the value of Honda, Toyota, Hyundai, etc. in consumer eyes and strive to incorporate some of those changes in the domestic product?
Can we as Chrysler owners/loyalists (for 37 years) get in on the “Set Chrysler Free” purchase?
As for making cars they’re not selling, before you blame the unions, think about whether bonsues are based on ratings of plant productivity. Keeping a plant running increases the productivity figure. Even if bonuses aren’t based on it, youknow they want to be thought of as productive…
Unfortunately, there seems to be a new round of cost cutting coming… just in time to botch the launch of the new minis.
I was about to say that you really shouldn’t blame Unions. In particular the United Auto Workers has probably played the best in the sand box of any. They too have their problems, and sometimes, create issues that lack understanding. That being said, the UAW is as capable, in fact, I would venture to say, they are the BEST auto assembly and production line people in the world. They are beholding, and will follow orders from management. If management accepts 90% quality, then the UAW is obligated to build it. And the union folks point issues out to engineers and production line staff constantly. If it doesn’t get fixed, it isn’t the union. Sensibility says that Union folks would probably rather slow down to a 32 hour week if they have to, rather than get a lay off, which is risky as to when they might return, or IF they are called back at all. Running a plant at full capacity, pushing in the overtime is all right for a time, but sooner or later, the tune maker has to be paid. Sometimes the price of collection hurts everyone, and it comes right back to management. As does the quality issue as well.
The new minivan launch has already been botched. The current RS vans took care of that. The steering noise issue was enough to run most of them off. 3 recalls and numerous TSB’s latter and we still can’t fix most of them. If that didn’t do it bad window regulators and problems with the power liftgate and sliding doors did. I’ve heard dozens of people say they would never buy another Chrysler minivan again. It’s no wonder that Honda can get list price for their minivans and sometimes have a waiting list to get them.
I agree with Compass not needed in Jeep’s lineup. I didn’t understand building it AND Patriot. I could see Patriot fitting in especially with Liberty getting a little bigger in 2008.
I would love to see 90% quality right now but it’s nowhere near that at this time. It does no good if someone loves the way a 300C looks and decides to buy one but then it spends a lot of time in the shop. That new Chrysler owner is definitely not going to return again the next time they are ready to buy a vehicle.
I too have the “I will never buy a Chrysler again” attitude. My 2005 Town and Country has forced me to become so close to the service manager at my local dealership that I almost feel obligated to invite him over for Thanksgiving dinner. Where should I begin? First, let’s start at the power tailgate lift arm which broke within the first month. Second issue was the rear window wiper fastner coming loose(I fixed this one myself). Third it was the brakes and rotors which completely wore out at 13,000 miles. Fourth it was the electronic air control that failed causing the vehicle to become inoperable (this one took the dealer 5 days to fix). Fifth it was the drivers side window regulator and or motor that failed (dealer replaced both). Sixth it was the drivers side door handle that would not return on it’s own which causes the door to not lock when pushed from the outside of the vehicle. This issue was fixed when we returned the vehicle to the dealer for loud noises coming from the front end while riding down the road. The loud noises were the result or premature failure of the upright links and front end suppension bushings. And just to think, the vehicle just hit 44,000 miles, needless to say it’s my first and last Chrysler.
Town & Country is currently the highest quality minivan; the Plymouth Breeze had very high quality rankings before it was killed. Chrysler definitely knows how to put together good cars. I would suggest that Chrysler workers are among the best in the business. But after Daimler-Benz drove off many of the engineers, it does not surprise me that the Chrysler group does not have the ability to overcome the quality problems Allpar readers have noted on this page.
But getting back to the main topic, several years ago, an interesting article was written “by an anonymous employee,” “romuluss99″ entitled “An independent Chrysler: Why and how it can be done”
Amazingly, the author’s words still offer the obvious solution: “Ditch this ugly styling and concentrate on improved materials that the customer interacts with, and you will change the sales numbers on most of the current Chrysler line-up. Better marketing would help too.”
He argued that Chrysler should appeal to two ends of the car market: the Value minded end(typical Plymouth), and the Driving Enthusiast end(”potential ‘old BMW’ style image for Chrysler”).
There is alot of truth in what this Chrysler employee wrote. Chrysler has abandoned the Value minded buyer (Plymouth); I believe they can get it back, just not with the Chrysler brand. If Chrysler had the autonomy to bring to market some new small cars, based on the Neon platform, they could re-establish a value brand (Plymouth). If the cars look good and have good interiors, and people see they don’t break, they will sell. It won’t take that much effort to make a car that looks better than a Scion (they are so ugly!). If history is is any guide, using an older platform will not hurt sales (look at the success of the Falcon / Mustang, K-car / minivan). All the bugs are out of it. If only someone at DCX would let the designers do it!
As for Chyrsler itself, the base models have to go. The base Sebring’s interior makes a Kia Rio seem luxurious! The Aspen needs to go. It shares far too much with the Durango.
Whether it stays with DCX or not, Chrysler has to break from the pack in engineering and styling: it used to be a leader in turbocharging, why isn’t it using that technology now, to make a family size car with great gas mileage? It was an American supplier that invented the Twincharger concept (which combines a turbocharger and supercharger), but so far only VW is using it. Why can’t Chrysler? A 1.8 liter four with that technology would provide as much power as the 2.7 V-6 in the Sebring, with gas mileage better than the World Engine gets now. A sporty, turbo Sebring would give Chrysler that “old-BMW style” image in the mid-size car field. Couple that with the 300C and a new Chronos-inspired Imperial and Chrysler would indeed stand for something.
I don’t see any way possible that Town & Country is the highest quality minivan. Mike, you’re not the only one who feels that way. I see these vans roll in the shop everyday with the same problems that you described and more. One customer had BOTH driver’s and passenger side windows fail before the van had 5,000 miles on it. Where do you think he’s going to look for his next vehicle at? Certainly not another Chrysler.
Jeremy, thank you for that bit. I enjoy reading things like your blog post because it is like close to where I live. The writer you draw from certainly hit the nail on the head. It is too bad that we have to deal with the concept that Daimler is better, smarter, faster, etc: group. Perhaps if Stuttgart really knew the scoop, they would listen to individuals such as yourself bringing forth the concepts of what Chrysler Corporation really did stand for.
Mercedes should get rid of chrysler and start afresh. All chrysler has done done is hold it back with its debts.
Now that the past has caught up with them and the other domestics it only right they suffer. Mercedes doesn’t have to keep chrysler in the black because its not their fault Chrysler is in this situation.
Darn straight! Let ‘em cast Chrysler out! Be nice if they gave back that $8 billion from Chrysler’s cash hoard, and maybe Chrysler Financial, whose profits have been keeping Mercedes afloat, but you know. I think I’d be pretty happy to just get Chrysler itself… without ANY Mercedes geniuses to run the show.
They were SO good at management…took the most profitable auto company and turned it into a consistent loser. You just have to admire that kind of expertise.
Chrysler is holding Mercedes back? With the rape and pillage concept, perhaps not in the same connotation of the history of the old world, but certainly with that sort of mind set, Daimler rode in and stripped Chrysler of everything it had, including that nice big fat bank account that managed to float (and may still be - who knows what DuetscheBank has) Daimler along on some pretty expensive forays in a quest to be the world’s auto mart. We are subjected to the humiliation of listening to how great the German American engineering is, but nothing is said about how much Chrysler bits are in the Mercedes cars, so how about American German engineering? As well, how much Chrysler production expertise and line improvements helped Mercedes factories become more profitable? You won’t hear that one. It constantly amazes me that the truth of many matters just seems to elude some people, all the time. Or how much Daimler charges back Chrysler for use of license agreements, manufacturing tools, and other associated items in doing business. Putting Chrysler back together is a possibility, but, it would take a long look at it’s own history to correct the indiosynchronistic past, incorporate that which made it successful, and implement a long range plan to improve on improvements while building quality vehicles of the sort and type that people want. Introduction of dozens of new vehicles doesn’t smack of success. A lot of what DCX is tossing out begs to question, who asked for this, and what is it? Running full bore in the factories while the cars are NOT selling also smacks of lack of expertise or some sort of underhanded plan.
Curtis and Dave,
I fully agree with both of your assessments of the Daimler saga. It is about time these words were said.
Funny our family has owned 2 town & country minivans,1 a 2002 with 140,000,only problem was a warped brake rotor which dealer replaced free under warranty@23,000k,they said they dont replace them over 20,000 but did for free anyway.My sister liked it so much she bought a 2006 in the summer 5,000k no problems.By the way she drives like a crazy person 60km over speed bumps the hardly ever changes the oil ,Yes toyota has bad brake caliper’s as well,have 3 family members with toyota’s,the 2003 sienna is a rolling disaster,trans went out at 15,000 km,bad brake rotors,died twice and could not be started,some sensor(have to ask my brother his van)he tows a little travel trailer about 500 km a year,his crappy 94 caravan did so for 5 years with no problems(his wife works for toyota hence the sienna)
There is no reason for Mercedes to get rid of Chrysler, more than 50% of Mercedes profits come directly from the Chrysler group. The quality of European vehicles have been abysmal over the last 5-8yrs. I do agree that Chrysler has had its issues, the head gasket failures in the Neons were the result of not checking suppliers. Chrysler left it to the supplier to supply the parts; the supplier gave Chrysler junk. We fail to understand that alot of companies buy from the same suppliers. Consequently you get what you pay for or what that supplier can get away with. Chrysler however needs to be more honest with it customer base, and meet people half way on warranty concerns. Mercedes for example extends the warranty for sludge build up in their engines, but have refused to do so for the Chrysler 2.7L motors. The dealerships are also to be blamed, service advisors who get paid on commission will always try to milk an unsuspecting customer. I had one guy tried to sell my sister a complete brake job on a SX 2.0(Neon) with less than 30000 K’S. This guy, as well could not solve a check engine light after 8 tries on her 2004 caravan, which was still under warranty. These guys bill Chrysler for their service so the more they can keep you coming in the better it is for them. They don’t realize that the customer isn’t blaming them, the customer goes away saying that Chrysler makes a piece of junk; whereas this guy was trying to milk them and the corporation. Chrysler i must agree unfortunately needs to drastically improve the interior materials in all their vehicles. They need to give the customer what they need, how long was it before they put rear sensors on their vehicles and even then it was an option. People were complaining since the introduction of the 98 intrepid,and even today it’s an option even on the top of the line Hemis. Look at lumbar supports, GM on a base Impala gives you a pump lumbar support, on a Hemi C you get a cheap crank attached to the back of your seat, that you have to be ambidextrous to use while you are driving or parked. Cheap and Tacky. To gain customers they need to give people more than they expected. Thats how the Japanese took over. The difference in the yen or the juan or whatever the currency wouldn’t matter if people beleived in your product and you stood behind your product, they would buy it. Toyotas and Hondas are not cheap as i recall. Chrysler also needs to develop small cars, they have too many stupid SUVS,CUVS,APVS, what ever the moniker. They should have kept the neon added to the cruiser instead of saying they are going to kill it, in the future. Put diesels in them here like they do in Europe. Give the people what they want. They need to take their heads out of the sand, look forward and don’t just benchmark, surpass the competition and the future will be so bright they’ll have to wear shades. in the end Mercedes would not be willing to give up a cash cow.
Well, cash is gone, or so we ar lead to believe, and the cow has no more milk. Feeding the same is costing Daimler money. Yes, time to turn Chrysler loose. Hopefully to finally fulfill what it meant to be when Walter Chrysler started it. For many years, Chrysler DID give folks the cars they wanted. Along the way, quality became a secondary issue. It was never meant to be that way. Which would mean bringing Plymouth back to produce those entry level, economical, inexpensive (NOTE: NOT CHEAP like Compass) vehicles that a cusotmer could option out for the car he truly wanted.
You