Selling Mopar Performance: be frightened

I am looking at Nardelli’s remarks about “monetizing some assets,” and the Wall Street Journal article on selling Mopar Performance and Chrysler Transport, as indicating that the cost-cutting plans will be expanded soon.

What really bugs me is that Chrysler needs investment and inspiration, not a trip to the chop shop.

With the exception of the ill-advised Aspen, their recent introductions are doing pretty well compared to their peers from GM and Ford. I think both the Caliber and Patriot would be delivering better numbers had Chrysler not launched the Compass, which was a totally unneeded vehicle. Had the launch of the Pacifica been handled differently, where the vehicle was positioned properly in the minds of consumers, I think it would have done better than it did.

And what’s being done to the PT Cruiser is nothing less than criminal. How can a company ditch a car the public loves even though it’s been largely unchanged for longer than just about any other light vehicle on the market? And, if they can’t come up with a legitimate restyle under Trevor Creed, why the heck aren’t they headhunting for a designer who can do the job?

However, Nardelli, and others like him, who are the flavor-du-jour in industrial CEOs, see that cost-cutting pleases Wall Street in the short term and know it’s easier than addressing the tough issues of fielding competitive products. I think Cerberus erred in tying Nardelli’s compensation to returning to profitability, which is comparatively easy to do. They should have tied it to growth, even if they promised him a billion dollars for every additional point of market share accompanied by increase in volume. In doing this, they would not only make money, they would increase the value of their new asset. But I am not sure the current pool of CEO “talent” includes anyone like that.

Oh, PT, what is to become of thee….

The above is one of the most pressing product questions facing many Mopar fans, especially us PT owners. The questions have only gotten louder with the to-be-built-in Toluca Dodge Journey being introduced. What will Chrysler do? Will they allow the current iteration to soldier on as a cheap-to-produce cash cow like the M and L bodies of old and then kill it off? Will they retire the name and bring out a Journey-based crossover with no retro cues? Or, worst of all, *not* retire the name, and bring out a Journey-based crossover with no retro cues?

What *should* they do? In my opinion, any “PT Cruiser” has to have a decidely retro feel to it. The Journey is very modern in the exterior especially, leaving room for Chrysler to continue the retromobile. The Journey also has a symmetrical instrument panel…so that theme can continue as well. While it is true that a PT based on the Journey would be significantly larger than one based on a Caliber, it would also follow Chrysler’s upmarket movement, without much of an MPG hit, if any, based on the estimates. This would,in my opinion, be the best option. A new PT Cruiser, complete with retro flair, and not competing with the entry level Compass/Caliber/Patriot. If you like this option, sign the Save the PT Petition at http://www.savethept.com/ !

Next, surprisingly, would be just building out the current vehicle until the line was needed elsewhere, or it was no longer profitable. They’d certainly get their moneys’ worth out of the current iteration, though we’d see little in innovaton and likely further decontenting. Thus would end the PT Cruiser, with the “replacement” being called something completely different and having no retro cues. It would, however, not sully what the PT Cruiser essentially is, and avoid the “then they stuffed it up” syndrome.

The worst option would be showing a complete disregard for what the name has built and ignorance of the brand by carrying over the name on a vehicle that shares nothing, in spirit, with the original. This would saddle the new vehicle with double baggage; PT Cruiser fans would say “That’s not a PT Cruiser!” and non fans would say “I hate PT Cruisers!” In the end you’d have a vehicle with an uncertain identity and, quite possibly, damaged chances for success.
We’ll find out how different the New Chrysler really is; as Option #3 is the type of boneheaded move the “Old Chrysler” was all too good at.

Please guys, get it right.

The PT was very good for Chrysler.

Do right by it.

More confidence in the Dodge Caravan

Today, I gained a lot more confidence in the Dodge Caravan.

The occasion was a press event, where Chrysler rented out part of Central Park to introduce local journalists to the new minivans, Dakota, and Liberty. The four shone in the hot sun, amidst the kiddy rides, all looking far better than I expected - particularly the Dakota, which has a new “face,” in this case (Laramie) all chrome. According to the trucks platform PR manager, they want to move the Dakota from the “baby Ram” concept to being a lifestyle vehicle, and have been discussing different features, size, and other aspects of the Dakota with customers. Expect lots of changes to the Dakota in the future - but for now, we have new styling that looks far more at home on the mid-to-large pickups.

The two minivans were there, side by side, and differences began to appear as I studied them. The Dodge instrument panel had three huge pods, with a ribbed plastic glove compartment; the Chrysler (a Limited version) had light wood trim, including large pieces on the dash and instrument panel, and dull silver accents, with a flatter set of four gauges surrounded by dull silver trim rings. The grade of leather looked better on the Chrysler, as did the fabric on the back of the middle seats. There were similar “small but important” differences on the outside, with the Chrysler having more chrome accents and chrome door handles, and the Dodge having subtly different sheet metal to make it look more sporty. (Yes, I said sporty.) The Chrysler hood was not ribbed; they were striving for a 300 look, and apparently the ribs didn’t work out.

What made me confident was the level of testing these vehicles went through. We were told that they had been through more wind-tunnel testing than any Chrysler-brand vehicle sold before, and I believe it. Dave Smith, who rose up from electrical engineering to platform management, discussed with authority the changes they made to the headlamps, A-pillars, mirrors, sills, and roof-rack; the metal crease in the rear is a “flick” for better wind flow. When questioned, Dave Smith was enthusiastic, almost eager to describe what they had done and discovered (and, yes, they do wind tunnel testing with both front and rear license plates). They also used 20% thicker glass on side windows to reduce noise. One result of this is that the gas mileage, using tougher 2008 standards, is 17 city, 24 highway on the 3.3 liter model (with a four speed automatic), and 16 city, 23 highway on the 3.8 and 4.0 liter models (with six speed automatics).

Dave told me that the chassis was completely new on this van, with a suspension they have not used before - MacPherson strut up front, with a twist-beam in the rear. He also told me that the Chrysler people were given autonomy over these decisions, and were not ordered to use any particular configuration by the Daimler or Mercedes people (which is probably why it doesn’t have a multilink rear suspension). He said that they spent a huge amount of time tuning the suspension, striving to reach a balance between Honda’s sport tuning and Toyota’s comfort tuning. The structure and use of stronger steel minimizes body roll, making it feel safer in aggressive twisting; and towing uses special shocks that pump up with a liquid so that the ride doesn’t degrade.

Also important was what Dave Smith said about the test drives. They took these vans through a variety of places, and discovered that strong sunlight could cause problems; owners of pretty much any cab-forward car can describe some of those. As a result, they worked hard on issues of reflectivity (seeing the dashboard in the windshield, etc), visibility (the LED bulbs could get washed out in sunlight), and other issues. They did clinics with customers and employees and suppliers and their families; and engineers watched through the one-way glass or actually had conversations with the people to get more in-depth knowledge. These may be the most well tested vehicles Chrysler has produced, and that is one reason I am optimistic. Another is that Dave Smith seems to be genuinely enthusiastic in a way I have not seen for a while, and I can see him arousing the enthusiasm of others along the way.

Oh, and that wonderful windshield-wiper defroster element put into place with the second generation minivans, and dropped with the last generation before the 2008s? Dave said that instead of having a heating element, they optimized the front defroster so that it would achieve the same goal, namely melting ice on the wiper blade. That was partly a side effect of the better airflow, but it was also intentional, a way to solve the problem of wiper-blade icing.

That’s not even to mention all the wonders of the new minivan feature lists - the switch-operated seats that fold into the floor quickly and easily, the swivel seats with tables, the video systems, the stability control and rollover protections, the in-floor storage, the mesh pockets and overhead storage rail system, the integrated child and/or booster seats, the heated front and rear seats, the sunshades, flashlight, removeable seat, umbrella holder, premium sliding center console, dishwasher safe removeable cupholders, LED lighting, and illuminated map pockets on the doors.

As added bonuses, the new minivans are cheaper than the ones they replace - and have more features - and get slightly better gas mileage, or so we’re told. And according to Chrysler, the target markets for these vans - a certain type of family and empty-nesters - will be increasing quite a bit over the next five years, so perhaps, despite declining market shares (and I really don’t expect that to change now that Toyota and Honda both have minivans that, depending on your values, are in the same league), production may actually increase. That would be great news for all the workers in the two minivan plants, because under the new rulers, even a minor decline in sales could result in a decision to cut minivan production, raise prices, and close a plant. But I’m pretty confident that, unless the reviewers really are wearing the same blinders they wear with mid-sized cars, the new minivans will sell like hotcakes - and that the people who buy them will come back for more, just like in the good ol’ days.

Being Patriotic instead of high-Caliber

When the Dodge Caliber came out, it had its share of criticism, because it was largely framed as a replacement for the Neon. The original Neon - the one that came out in 1994 - was a hard act to follow, and it must be said that the second-generation Neon didn’t really live up to it, at least not relative to competitors. The original Neon had a standard 132 horsepower engine, while the next best in class had 125 hp as an option in the most expensive price class - and the Neon had 129 lb-ft of torque, while that 125 hp engine (in the Civic in case you were wondering) topped out at 100 lb-ft. The Neon was as big as anything in its class, cornered better than most or all contenders, got reasonably good gas mileage, and outraced most of its peers, if you got the stick-shift. That stick was nicely done, too - it wasn’t a bear. No surprise, then, that the Neon swept through its SCCA class. Sales were good the first year but some less than wise decisions led to a poor reputation for reliability, and it slowly sank. The second generation suffered from leaders who did not seem to understand the attraction; and the SRT-4 took far, far too long to come up.

Still, the second generation Neon was pretty good, with capable cornering, a large interior, pretty good mileage (from the stick), and good acceleration (from the stick). Then came the Caliber, and it felt far slower, posted much slower sprint times, didn’t corner with the same confidence, and didn’t seem to offer much more other than some gimmicks and a bigger look.

The main problem with the Caliber, above all else, is that inevitable comparison to the Neon. How could they have gotten it so wrong? asked a number of people.

Let’s think about this the other way. The Jeep Patriot is not a spinoff of the Caliber as much as the Caliber is a spinoff of the Patriot. The Caliber was designed with the idea of making a small-SUV variant from the start, as far as we can tell from public statements. If we assume that the Patriot is the real reason for the Caliber’s existence, then everything makes more sense. It’s like building a sedan from the PT Cruiser; it wouldn’t be as sporty or as lightweight as a sedan built to be a sedan, at least not if it was done in a rush and on a nasty budget with people from Stuttgart berating the engineers.

The Patriot is, by most measures, a success. It takes the Jeep look and miniaturizes it without seeming foolish; it can actually handle off-roading; and it gets surprisingly good mileage for a Jeep. The Patriot is the realization of an idea first started decades ago, a small, lightweight Jeep that feels perfectly fine as an on-road commuter or family car, and doesn’t cost as much as a Wrangler in terms of inconvenience, purchase price, fuel usage, or replacement tires.

Now, if the Patriot had come first, and the Caliber later, the Neon comparisons would never have come up, and the Caliber would probably have only been compared with various SUVs, where the competition for performance and economy isn’t quite as bad. It still would not be a standout, but it would be able to finish closer to the upper middle of the pack.

It’s worth a thought, or at least a bad pun.

Community in need

It’s that time of year again, when Broadway Community, which provides emergency food, shelter, and clothing to those in need while working on long-term healing of the body, mind, and soul, runs out of money. Summer is rough for some nonprofits, and for “BCI,” summer can be very rough as donors are often on vacation and it’s a dead time between grants.

BCI does an amazing job with their money; they get masses of food donations and training services from the community, and work on entrepreneurship and job training with a small number of clients who (in some cases) give up drugs or alcohol to turn their lives around. For these people, who faced a life of living on the street, BCI is Heaven-sent; a simple job in the service industry paying enough for a tiny apartment and regular meals may not seem like much to many of us, but to some BCI clients, it’s a whole new way of life.

Many other clients are not quite so badly off, and don’t need the training and support; they just need a temporarily food (and sometimes shelter) supply while they get their lives on track. To quote the Executive Director, Eleanor Donaldson, “Would you believe that in the past year, two accountants, two nurses, three musicians, an architect, a model, a computer technician, a grant-writer, a psychologist, an administrator, and two teachers have come to Broadway Community because they were homeless or in great distress? It has shocked me to see the number of professional people who have had things in their lives that have started a domino effect that leaves them with no resources for basic needs. For all of these people except one, drugs were not involved. An unexpected life-threatening medical condition, an accident, fraud, divorce, abuse, a spouse’s death, caring for elderly parents, another rent raise, a job layoff, … they found themselves in a desparate situation where they never thought they would be.”

BCI works to increase their clients’ sense of personal responsibility, not to diminish it, as some welfare programs can. BCI also works to educate their clients on proper nutrition, the energy they need for a healthy life - in spirit and in body - because what you eat influences how you feel and think. The chef, who voluntarily left a life as a well paid professional to work long hours for meager pay at BCI, makes sure of that, and this is one of the rare places where the homeless aren’t given corned beef hash and macaroni and cheese as staples; instead, they frequently get vegeterian meals, interspersed with chicken, beef, and even bison, depending on what local restaurants donate. But it’s always cooked with an eye towards helping people get onto their feet, long term.

This is my appeal to you - to visit the donation page at BCI and open your wallet, at least a little. I’ll match the first $500 in donations from Allpar through September 1, 2007.

Thank you.

HHR and PT: the real deal

Jason Vines’ latest tirade has been directed not at the journalists who can so easily take (much more public) revenge, but at Chrysler’s old hero, Bob Lutz, now over at GM. Lutz, whose remarks have recently taken a turn for the less than purely rational, recently called the new HHR SS “the real deal” compared with the new PT Sunset Boulevard. Lutz has a point in a way - the SS is much more significant a vehicle than the Sunset Boulevard, which is a mere color and trim package. However, until this year, Chrysler has also made a little thing called the PT Cruiser GT each year, which was more than a match for the SS.

As Bill Cawthon pointed out, the PT Cruiser “is seven model years old but is still in the top 15% of American light vehicles by current year-to-date (YTD) sales. It was in the top 11% in 2006.”

Though both vehicles were styled by the personable Bryan Nesbitt, the HHR hasn’t ever been as popular as the PT, nor has it really made much of a splash. Sales are not bad, but the PT still beats out the HHR, even after being severely decontented in 2003 and then again in 2006, with a clearly cheapened interior (albeit accompanied by better soundproofing). Chrysler officials’ frequent downplaying of the PT as a one-trick pony with no future has probably hurt sales as well, especially given GM’s support of the HHR in advertising.

The PT Cruiser was the original and, at least in the first generation, had an interior that matched the exterior; GM had a full opportunity to beat it, and somehow failed. The Chevy HHR could have been bigger and included a V6, occupying a different market niche and addressing critics’ main two PT concerns; instead they copied the PT almost inch for inch. The HHR could have been lighter and nimbler, but it wasn’t, at least not by much. In short, the PT was and remains, for now, the real deal.

That will almost certainly change when Chrysler gets around to dropping the PT, after cheapening and milking it for years, and bad-mouthing it consistently since just after its introduction. (After all, it isn’t a product of Superior German Engineering.) But until then, it’s the Real Deal.