September 23rd, 2009 • by William R. Dittman
i Dave :
I have enjoyed all the info & input you & your staff have put into the allpar net work, The articles are great , We can’ t forget where mopar- mouth’s -& – FCP’s
came from. I enjoy your new creativity , and thinking out-side the box. But I do like the old style better, I can dig deeper into articles that interest me. Your enthusiasm shows in the display of info. Keep up the great work.
Why won’t CHRYSLER do like GM & letting the public know that there up & running, and producing quality AMERICANS want to buy, for the long haul;
You have to get the public behind you like Iacocca did. People love a under-dog. ( like Iacocca said ; IF YOU CAN FIND A BETTER CAR BUY IT. ) Chrysler has to let the people know that they are building quality into their auto,s. Not just building vehicles. Any car company can do this. They have to start being a leader in innovation not like the followers that they have been. The American public see’s it and they won’t settle for krap that was peddled to them as in the earlier years. That’s why they buy forign brands. New styling, good to great mpg’s, comfort w/quality , at a reasonable price.
But to the manufactories defense, The GOV”TO need to impose EQUAL TRADE TARIFFS ON IMPORTS so the pricing game isn’t so far out of wack !!!
Chrysler needs to start producing their
concept cars, That’s what the public want’s Not these vehicles that you add boxes onto, or have an elephant sit on the hoods and makes them look round. Or the back side of wide bodied person. If they continue in this direction they are doomed to fail. ENGINEERING – MANPOWER – $$$$, are wasted if these concept models don’t go into production, They are afraid of make a wrong decision so instead they make NO – DECISION, which is even worse!!! Take the case of the Dodge RAMPAGE, its great innovation all the way thru. But it needs MPG’s , make it a hybrid , sm v-8 , & Hemi, or even electric, Now there’s a though for thing out side the box . you’ve covered all the bases.
The
Dakota is a waste from a – z !!!. No room , made f/a miget ( excuse me a small person ) w/ no better mpg’s than a full size RAM. Who in their right mind would want to buy one ?? Not Me!! Dodge was afraid to produce the Rampage it because the Honda ridgeline is not a fast volume mover. It’s a great vehicle. inside , creature comforts, innovations, mpg’s , Do you know what is missing ?? It’s NOT AMERICAN MADE !! The public would accept a mid-size trk , if it had amenities that didn’t look cheap, rattled and were put together w/out quality & comfort in-mind American car companies have rested to long on their lorals, now it time to get off the pot and beat the compition at their own game, What the BIG – 3 fail to realize is you don’t have to produce quantity to be # 1 , You have to build QUALITY !! , QUANTITY will come with QUALITY !!! Proven FACT !!
I’d LOVE be asked to come to their OR & DO meetings and give them my evaluations, They made a great move in purchasing the world engine plant in Dundee Mi. Also going to be using Fiat’s fuel efficient
engines. How about turbo charging, Ya it’s been out there f/decades, How about super-charging ?? Multi speed differentials like in yester years . Why let the competition steel your gusto ??
Quit trying to beat the compition , BE the COMPETITION for a change !! THE SCENERY NEVER CHANGES UNLESS YOUR THE LEAD DOG !! I’m Tired of the old scenery, How about YOU??
Chrysler has the newest, largest, most innovative, research & development center in the WORLD !!!! It’s a ghost town to all the reports I’ve read, ( ie: allpar. ) This is where they need to be brain-storming.
Chrysler needs to move up to the 21st century. I Love Mopars, always have always will, They NEED to get their heads out of their butts and back on their shoulders,
the new
challenger srt is great, Great looks, styling, a little bit heavy, but a great ride, quiet inside, & the HEMI sound. Needs to be be 5-k cheaper to compete w/the loaded camero ss/rs. They also need to spiffy-ize the plain drab dashboard. One black color runs into another., Why does it have the same dash as the
challenger ? If it’s all new , then let it all be new, The 09′s are better Spend a little more on insulation and dash – board BLING! , and lower the price, I do understand about cost of engineering , etc , etc. overhead, ya da ya da ya da. You can’t make all your profit off of only a few vehicles.
If you can forward this e-mail to Chrysler mgt. I would be very thankful. Thank you f/your time, ALLPAR all the hy won’t CHRYSLER do like GM & letting the public know that there up & running, and producing quality AMERICANS want to buy, for the long haul;
Why won’t Chrysler do like GM and let the public know that they’re up and running, and producing quality Americans want to buy, for the long haul?
You have to get the public behind you like Iacocca did. People love an underdog. (Like Iacocca said: IF YOU CAN FIND A BETTER CAR, BUY IT. ) Chrysler has to let the people know that they are building quality into their autos. Not just building vehicles. Any car company can do this. They have to start being a leader in innovation not like the followers that they have been lately. The American public sees it and they won’t settle for what was peddled to them as in the earlier years. That’s why they buy foreign brands. New styling, good to great mpg’s, comfort with quality, at a reasonable price.
But to the manufacturers’ defense, the government needs to impose EQUAL TRADE TARIFFS ON IMPORTS so the pricing game isn’t so far out of whack!
Chrysler needs to start producing their concept cars, that’s what the public wants. Not these vehicles that you add boxes onto, or have an elephant sit on the hoods and makes them look round. If they continue in this direction they are doomed to fail. ENGINEERING, MANPOWER, and MONEY are wasted if these concept models don’t go into production. They are afraid of make a wrong decision so instead they make NO DECISION, which is even worse! Take the case of the Dodge Rampage, it’s great innovation all the way through. But it needs better mileage, make it a hybrid , small V-8, and Hemi, or even electric, Now, you’ve covered all the bases.
Dodge was afraid to produce the Rampage it because the Honda Ridgeline is not a fast volume mover. It’s a great vehicle, creature comforts, innovations, mileage, do you know what is missing ?? It’s NOT AMERICAN MADE !! The public would accept a mid-size truck, if it had amenities that didn’t look cheap and uncomfortable.
American car companies have rested to long on their laurels, now it time to get off the pot and beat the competition at their own game. What the BIG – 3 fail to realize is you don’t have to produce quantity to be # 1 , You have to build QUALITY!! QUANTITY will come with QUALITY!
I’d LOVE be asked to come to their OR & DO meetings and give them my evaluations, They made a great move in purchasing the World Engine plant in Dundee Mi. Also going to be using Fiat’s fuel efficient engines. How about turbocharging, it’s been out there for decades, how about super-charging? Multispeed differentials like in yesteryear. Why let the competition steal your gusto?
Quit trying to beat the competition , BE the COMPETITION for a change! THE SCENERY NEVER CHANGES UNLESS YOU’RE THE LEAD DOG! I’m tired of the old scenery, How about YOU??
Chrysler has the newest, largest [in size, not current head-count], most innovative, research and development center in the world! This is where they need to be brain-storming.
Chrysler needs to move up to the 21st century. I love Mopars, always have always will, they NEED to get their heads out back on their shoulders.
The new Challenger SRT is great, great looks, a little bit heavy, but a great ride, quiet inside, and the HEMI sound. Needs to be be $5K cheaper to compete with the loaded Camaro SS/RS. They also need to spiffy-ize the plain drab dashboard. One black color runs into another. Why does it have the same dash as the Charger ? If it’s all new , then let it all be new, the 09s are better Spend a little more on insulation and dashboard BLING! , and lower the price, I do understand about cost of engineering , etc , etc. overhead, ya da ya da ya da. You can’t make all your profit off of only a few vehicles.
»crosslinked«
Great points, mostly. One of the problems with American manufacturing is the “Walmart perception”, that is to say price builds quantity, quantity takes a back seat. I’m not saying that’s the way Chrysler needs to go, I would prefer they put quality first, like they have for the most part in the past. In spite of hearing about Ma Mopars quality issues all my life, I have to say that I know of 5 other A bodies besides my own still on the road in my county. I can’t say that I’ve seen a single Maverick on the road in years, and I know of only 2 Novas from the 70s and they have both been rebuilt. Same for K cars, theres 2 of them in my small home town, the only domestic competiters vehicle still around town these days is my wifes Skylark, and it’s been a pricey proposition to keep it on the road. The sad part about quality is that it is perceived in the short term, it takes the long term to show it.
I have to disagree on the $5k cheaper Challanger. From what I’ve heard they are competing with the Camaro just fine at the price they are, I keep hearing about people with orders for them that aren’t filled yet. A $5k cheaper price is going to require some cheapening of the car, and that’s the wrong way to go.
Richard H.
Thank you for your responce. What are your thoughts on the govt’s free trade rules? I always thought that free trade ment, was that If the foreign county only allows ( example )1000 U.S. cars into their country w/a $1000 per car tariff , that’s what The U. S. should allow into the U.S. But No the U.S. says: send what every you want to, the U.S public will buy it, with little or no tariffs added to each vehicle. Also The Govt should Impose to any and all car company’s manufacturing in the U.S. that with-in a 5-year period of operation that they should become a UNION SHOP. Another law to even the playing field is that any new car sold and NOT produced in the U.S. Should have a $5-k NON-MANUFACTURING TAX ON IT !! In the same respect, If a manufacture shuts down. a facility to move it abroad for either tax advantages or to save MILLIONS , then ship that same vehicle back to the U.S. F/ JOHN-Q-PUBLIC To BUY. Then a heavy Fine should be imposed on each vehicle sent here for sale . These are only a few things that are wrong w/the laws that should be changed. This is the 21ST century, were living and working by 19th century laws. The U.S. needs to build in the U.S.again, So our economy and welfare is not threatened as we are all experiencing now. These are only few of the ways that all the car company’s can survive. That way manufactures will have to build a quality product, Or get out of DODGE !! ( WHAT A PUN ) The start of this problem was NAFTA !! Time to RE-VAMP-CHANGE-ELIMINATE-UP/DATE.
What hurts Chrysler, and has hurt them for some time, is the perception of poor quality. I say perception because in my experience it’s not reality. I’ve owned A LOT of vehicles in my lifetime, 2/3 of them Chrysler products, and to me, they are as good or better than ANY of the foreign or domestic cars I’ve owned including Lexus and Volvo. They are also less expensive to maintain. My experience with Ford products has been just okay, and GM has been poor, but not as poor as my Lexus of all things. Go figure.
I don’t think Chrysler has to be like other car companies. In fact, being different may actually be a benefit. It’s worked for Subaru. Chrysler should focus on the things that have been successful in the past. Jeeps that are Jeeps. Dodge trucks bult like the Power Wagons of yore. Compact cars that remind us of the Dart and Valiant. I think the K-cars and their derivatives came close. I still see some K-cars, Dynatasties, New Yokers and Acclaims still running around. When was the last time you saw a Ford Fairmont or Chevy Citation?? Or even a Corolla or Camry from the same era??
When Dodge decided to compete with the Ford Ranger and Chevy S-10, they didn’t copy them, they exceeded them by producing something bigger and more capable. I’d hate to see the Dakota replaced with a Honda Ridgelame equivalent.
I say be bold, be different. It has worked in the past.
Scott B.
I agree with you in the fact that mopars are good to great cars that take a licking and still keep ticking.You can use them,abuse them,& put them away wet,and they don’t miss a beat ,& keep on trucking.I also have owned many a vehicles ( 125 ) to be exact. race-cars ,luxury, family, motor-homes , sport cars & trks ,sm.-med-lg trucks. Semi’s the list goes on. My last trk. w/a 2004 ram-1500 w/hemi. I re-programed the putor and was able to achieve 21 – 25 mpg at 57-58 mph.So I know that if I can get mpg’s – MOPAR CAN. I do have to disagree w/Richard H. on the price of the srt’s. I have two price quote’s. One is a 08-srt ( $42,245k ) & 09 – srt ( $ 43,625k ) Compared w/2010 ss/rs fully loaded w/all the bells & whistles. One dealer in town W- $39,750 , & another in a small town w- $ 37,600k. Both w/the 426 hp. That’s w/the price reduction is needed to be able to compete. Especially since it’s the slowest of the three pony cars. But it does rides the best, handling is very responsive, is the quietest interior, & get the most attention. Easier to enter & exit f/the car. Besides there is nothing like a HEMI !! FOREVER.
09challenger, I recently went back and read a review AutoWeek did on the 2009 300C SRT8. They compared to the BMW M5 at half the price. No apologies. They felt the SRT8 was very close to the BMW, even better in some aspects, and would have a hard time justifying the price difference. When was the last time you heard anyone saying that about an AMERICAN vehicle, especially a Chrysler?
I figure the Challenger is just as sweet. I just took a look at a bunch of Camaros at our state fair (Chevy is the big sponsor) and quite frankly no one in my family likes ‘em compared to the Challenger. The reason why is that the Camaro doesn’t look like my wife’s old ’69 Camaro the way the Challenger looks like a ’70-’74 Challenger. Chevy might have an slight edge on performance and price, but the Challenger looks the part and is a lot more practical with a larger interior. I can tell you the interior appearance of the Camaro isn’t as good as the Challenger, IMO.
If I could afford a Challenger right now, one would be in my garage. I’m going to have one sooner or later. I missed the original and if I’m going to have to pay $30-$45K for one, I’d rather have the new one. Mainly because my intuition tells me that the memory of the old ones is better than the reality. I know I’ll be happier with the ride, handling, and refinement of a modern Hemi and chassis. I think I’d feel a lot safer going 150 in a new one than 75 in an old one! I kinda hope they build a convertible again, but it won’t stop me from getting one if they don’t.
Now if Chrysler could just a hit a few more homeruns in their other product segments…….
I do have to compliment them on the new Ram. They resisted the urge to keep making them bigger, with higher payloads and towing that sacrifice ride, etc. That’s fine for the HD’s, but for the 1500 they made the right choices, IMO. More comfort, better handling, improved fuel economy, and conveniences like the Ram Box (I wish they’d drop the price on that option to $995 instead of $1,895). For what most people use the 1500 for, those kind of refinements make the most sense. Too bad the auto rags ding them for not chasing higher payloads and towing capacity like the rest are. If you need the extra capability, buy a 2500 or 3500. That’s why they make them.
I to have to agree with all the posters so far. Chrysler has so much innovation in store it’s a shame everybody thinks of Chrysler as worthless company. Take for example the dual-clutch , 7 speed transmission factory we have just sitting. How much better do you think that will make the Avenger/Patriot/Compass. Or let me rephrase, what other company has a dual-clutch tranny in their cars… No one. Maybe Nissan but the GT-R starts at around 70,00 so it doesn’t even matter. I think Fiat will be surely suprised what can come out of Auburn Hills with some investment and the right minds, which from what sources tell me we have.
Yes quality should be number one. That is what sells cars. Only problem is that went away when the German’s got their hands on us. Case in point, my buddy has a ’94 Sundance,127 K. Runs like a top and half of the car is gone or rusted(not joking). Thats quality.
As far as foreign competition goes. Unforunately, now we can do much to help it. And with the current administration running the country it’s seems to me that they wan’t to HELP them as much as possible. But for the sake of saying it, all the Japenese competition really started when Carter let them build factories here. The moment they tried he should have layed down the iron fist and tell them to get the hell out. Tax their imported cars like crazy and the BIG 3(in sales) would still be GM, Ford, Chrysler.
For what it’s worth, as I recall the first Japanese auto plant in the US was the NUMMI plant opening in 1984 – under Reagan’s watch. I could be wrong about NUMMI being first. However, in the past 25 years, both parties have equally demanded the hollowing out of America.
Scott B.: In regards to the comparisons to the BMW,your right on. When was the last time A U.S. auto was compared to a foreign auto and given an even break? Got Me wondering. Now that the whole industry is scrambling & paying attention to ALL AUTO manufactures ( SM – LG) They are keeping an eye on MOPAR. They know that they have the ability and resources (TECH-CENTER)to rebound again, for the um-tenth time. But they have to keep improving on being better than the standards that they have been producing. They have to be RE-INVENTED- (thinking out side of the box),just not in the next universe. ( Let’s use the idea’s from the CONCEPT CARS. DUH!! )
I had forgotten to mention that I priced a 2010 Challenger srt 8/09 ( 45,000 – 47,000 ) That’s why I suggested the price reduction. I agree w/you in that it is the best all around pony-car. when getting into the camaro my hair close to my scalp rubbed the door entrance roof line.(DISTURBING) Once in the seat,it felt comfortable but weird. The upper portion (passenger side )of the dash didn’t feel right. The gauge cluster on top of the tunnel was right on. The Magazines keep emphasizing the rear roof post ( blind spot )on the challenger, but barley mention it if they do on the Camaro or Stang-GT which they also have in the same location. It Goes with that type of car. My GOOD friends 08-GT is very nice inside & out, but was noisier( from the back seat area ) than my other buddy’s 08-Challenger. And also not quite ( throw you back in the seat performance as One would expected) I felt bad when I asked him if it was a V-6 ? No it was a V-8, Little disappointed, other wise it was a very nice car. What about the foreign Ferrari – style , They don’t seem to bash them for not being able to see out the back. They don’t have reverse? Or change lanes when driving ?
The reason f/me in purchasing a new 2010 Challenger is exactly the same reasons you gave: safety-performance-styling-comfort-D-all the above.Mopar in the past has put some real krap out there ( past 10 years )for the public. The public is tired of it, that’s why Chrysler not only has to produce a good product, but the best in all classes, then and only then will the public start to believe in them again & take a chance.( like in the IACOCCA DAYS ) The problem is that It didn’t get this way over night and it won’t be fixed over night.
In regards to the RAM-1500, very true that some of the popular options are over way over priced, That’s the only way they can hide the profit. The Ram gets a hands down in the (win) department. From styling-performance-comfort ( about time )-quality-interior upgrades – quietness-inside storage compartment,- over-all, down right great truck. Needs to work on the MPG’S. Hopefully that’s on the way soon!! And also a cost REAVALUATION.
The Journey seems to be the right size and mostly on the right track for a cross-over. The interior two-tone color scheme SUCKS!!. What were they thinking? Let that be an option if that is what trips your trigger. The two tone interior’s should be in and on the dash boards ( bling ) not the seats, unless it’s the souped up race( RT – SRT ) version. The seats need to have more padding , we are all a couple of pounds heavier,( than 30t) years ago.so the extra cushion is very helpful on short and long rides. When the Journey came out Jim Press said on ( ALLPAR Video ) That just before it went into production they made 18 upgrade to the interior. Thank GOD !! f/that. It’s scary to think of what it started out as. I just wonder if any of the design eng’s are TALL? Most of the door entrances are made for people that are 5’8″ or shorter, Needs a little higher door opening. Sucks if your taller: wear a helmet I guess.
All the Mopars need to install as much quality sound-proofing,insulation,& 3-seal window weather stripping, I’ve noticed that they are upgrading the new 2010′s w/the above, so hopefully it will trickle down to all their products.
Again as I mentioned before Chrysler need’s to go for QUALITY not quanity , It does seem to be heading in that direction w/ Sergio M. He know’s that he has to get it right the first TIME!
Now Motor-Trend ,Consumers Report and the rest of the Magazines need to give the U.S. auto makers a NEW fresh start: Instead of having 1 – 2 mark’s against them from the start. If the magazines keep thinking in the old ways NO U.S. AUTO comp. has a chance.
Lets hope that they ALL read the PUBLIC’S thoughts and steer in a positive direction. Thanks ScottB.
ChuckG, as much as I hate the fact that the Japanese (and now Korean) vehicles have become so popular here, I really would hate to think what kind of junk the Big 3 would still be pawning off on us without the competition. If my ’77 Olds Starfire or ’85 Cutlass were any examples, then we should be happy the Japanese came to town. It’s the only motivation Detroit had to improve.
The part that bothers me is some of the “dumping” and currency manipulation that went on back in the day to give Japanese cars a price advantage that none of our politicians addressed adequately. That allowed them to gain a huge foothold in this market. You also have to hand it to the transplants that most of them have been able to keep the unions out of their shops. That helped them avoid excessive costs from pay rates, benefits, and ridiculous work rules that killed productivity at the Big 3 for years. I don’t like to see Americans losing their jobs, but some of it is self-inflicted by the UAW/CAW. They didn’t smarten up until it was too late.
Lastly, the Big 3 have had three decades to figure out how to produce small, quality, fuel efficient vehicles that people wanted to buy to compete against the Corolla et al. They didn’t do it. Sure, they made some tries. Most of them pathetic. Escorts, Cavalier, Neon, and on the Chrysler side, you can throw in the Sundance/Shadow twins. None of them were quite as refined as the Japanese cars and none of them built a gold-plated reputation like the Corolla did.
So, without excellent small cars, the Big 3 repeatedly got caught with their pants down every time gas went up in price. A cycle they should’ve learned from long ago. Cash for Clunkers brought this to light again recently. Who benefitted most from that program? The Asian car companies. Why? Because they had the best and the most fuel efficient cars to choose from.
I saw an analysis on the news this morning about the 700,000 cars that were sold and the 700,000 that went to the scrap heap during the program. Almost all of the Top 10 cars purchased were Asain. Only the Ford Focus and Escape made the Top 10. ALL of the Top 10 cars that were junked came from the Big 3. And a lot were Chrysler products like the Ram, minivans, and Jeeps. The net of that is the Big 3 just lost about 400,000 buyers to the Asians. Probably to never return. So, thanks Congress for an ill-conceived program than in the end HURT American car companies…..and jobs. But the blame isn’t all for the Congress. The Big 3 didn’t have the right mix of product for the times….AGAIN!
ScottB hit every nail on the head!! With respect to the lack of small cars from the American manufacturers, the Big Three suffered from loss of enthusiasm in the subcompact market because of margins. And the need for margin was fueled, in part, by the legacy costs of health care benefits. So they concentrated on high margin vehicles, such as the “evil” SUVs and trucks. While I agree that failure to keep good product in the subcompact and compact markets was a big mistake, especially in light of volatile fuel prices, I cannot blame them entirely. They needed the cash.
In Chrysler’s case there’s Daimler, who decided that everything ‘Chrysler’ was to be a niche vehicle or look like a niche vehicle, with the exception of trucks. They didn’t want Chrysler to produce anything better than Mercedes, nor did they want Chrysler to enjoy any mass appeal. They did want Chrysler to buy expense Mercedes-like componentry, but that’s another story, too. Like the blitzkrieg the Germans are famous for, they raped Chrysler like they raped Poland. So the small car replacement for the Neon was the Caliber? Meanwhile, GM builds a car that looks a lot like the Neon and calls it a Cobalt and enjoys some success.
Yeah, I’ve seen the numbers and the Camaro is now outselling the Challenger. Of course the introduction was just a little more than a month ago and the Camaro was long awaited by die-hard Chevrolet fans. A car does not have to be very good at all to sell if you put the Chevrolet name on it. There will be buyers because there are legions of die-hard Chevy lovers. This won’t work well for Ford and it most certainly won’t work at all for Chrysler.
In this case I think the Chrysler version of the iconic American muscle car is by far the best of the lot, regardless of price. It is almost universally recognized as the truest execution of retro appeal. Okay, the Camaro is faster and maybe handles a little better. But the people laying down real bread and trying to relive their youth are feeling much more comfortable in a Challenger than a Camaro. I’ve talked to a some Challenger owners who were not owners of the original versions (three previous Mustang owners and two Camaro owners) and they were unanimous in their praise of comfort, ride, smoothness, size and esthetic appeal. If you find the Challenger interior stark you most certainly aren’t going to improve your chances in a Camaro. Neither are the seats as comfortable nor is the interior as quiet. Like one Challenger owner who drove the new Camaro just told me the other day, the Challenger may be somewhat slower, but the overall feeling is much, much better. And at sixty years old he doesn’t feel the urge to have to prove anything to anybody by burning up pavement at stop lights. The Challenger is fast enough. The Camaro has an appetence for more juvenile appeal, the Challenger is proving to be the modern and confident ancestral representative.
Dave, joint ventures go back much further than NUMMI. My company had a joint venture with Fuji in 1962 (Kennedy), where they made copying equipment in Palo Alto, California. Seems to me that one British car company actually built or assembled cars here, too. (Can’t remember the company at the moment.)
Dusty, you are right. However, I was replying to a previous poster who blamed the building of Japanese cars in the U.S. on Jimmy Carter. Unless he was referring to Volkswagen building Rabbits in Pittsburgh which started, I think, with the 1979 model year.
Chevrolet, Ford, and Toyota seem to do a better job marketing their strengths and fostering the mythology of their brands. The ads with Chevy trucks that survive a fire and keep running, etc. There are ALOT of high-mileage Mopars out there that could really help tell the story of Chrysler products’ quality and durability. Might also help counter the apprehension some buyers have that Chrysler Group is going away.
Fuel economy is another area where we don’t seem to get the message out well enough: The Hemi-powered Ram’s EPA est. is 20, and that is with a truck with 70 more horsepower than Ford, and gearing that out-tows the F-150 that is advertised at 21 mpg. Same comparison is true vis a vis Chevrolet: their “22 mpg” model has much less power, taller gearing and less towing. But you wouldn’t know that from the marketing. Ram has better horsepower and mpg than the Tundra, yet Toyota is perceived as the “greener” brand. from past experience with these 5.7 engines, the new Hemi Rams ought to easily hit 22 hwy mpg in real world driving. HEMI is also an ULEV II engine.
But is that known? Recent ads have have touted the minivans’s fuel economy, the Charger’s and Challenger’s fuel economy–that’s a good start. And wouldn’t a diesel Patriot with 50 mpg (like they sell in Europe) be a good selling point (before we have electrics available)? It would be possible with modifications to the VW diesel they offer in Europe. Even if it added $4000 or $5000 to the price there would probably be people lining up to get one. Imagine a 50 mpg SUV.
Safety is a Chrysler selling point. Sebring beat Camry in IIHS safety ratings for 2010. But would the average buyer know that? As long as Sebring is in production, why not run some print ads touting safety? We also have the 6 spd automatic that would get the Sebring up to 32 or 33 mpg, which would be in line with the competition, but so far we’re not pairing that with the 4 cyl. I’m not talking about dual-clutch, but an existing 62TE transmission.
I don’t know if Rampage would sell, but I do know that the big problem with Ridgeline is that it is expensive, and the fuel economy is not that high. Why pay $35,000 for one, and get 19 mpg, and only tow 4000 pounds, when you can get a Silverado for $25,000 with more power, towing and similar mpg? It also has styling that is not all that appealing. If Rampage could sell for $19,000-29,000, and offer decent looks, and offer economical 4 cyl and V-6 engines, it might be a success. I think Ford will be succesful if they offer the global Ranger in the US (likely for 2011), but so far Chrysler has not showed plans to counter it. Somethin like Rampage might work. Dakota is really too thirsty, and getting long in the tooth.
I’m glad to see some ads for the 300 out on TV that tout the car as being cool and elegant. That is spot-on marketing. It IS a cool, upscale car and that is the image that needs to be fostered. Chrysler has badly trailed Cadillac in marketing up until this ad.
Also, Ram is rated at over 10,000 pounds towing for the 2010 model 1500. No one else offers the combination of towing capacity, ride, power and fuel economy that Dodge Ram does.
Chryco fan, I agree that Chrysler doesn’t have to take a backseat to anyone when it comes to fuel mileage. When I look at the EPA ratings of Toyota’s pickups and SUVs they ofter have a lower combined average than Dodges (or Ford, or GM). Same applies to the Honda Pilot and Ridgeline. I’d take a V6 or V8 Dakota over any of them even if they only get 1 MPG better tham a similar Ram.
I’m not sure what kind of fuel mileage owners were getting out of 4-cylinder Dakotas when they were in production, but I don’t recall it being anything to write home about. A guy I kow with a fairly new Ford Ranger 4×2 with the 4-cyl has hit 30 MPG. Not bad. A Ridgeline couldn’t do it. Perhaps it’s time to bring back a regular cab, short-bed 4×2 Dakota with a 6-speed and the 3.7L V6 or even offer the diesel here as it is in other countries.
I also think Chrysler ought to do what GM did with the Silverado and pair the right engine, transmission and final drive ratio to optimize fuel mileage. Chrysler has offered fuel mizer versions of vehicles before like Ram’s with the slant-6 and 4-speed OD in a light package. Kinda like the Feather Duster back in the mid-’70s. Then advertise it like crazy just to get people into the showrooms even if they end up buying something else. Also, what’s the difference between a $4,000 premium for a diesel versus a hybrid? I’d opt for the new clean diesels any day over the added complexity of hybrid technology. Dakotas that hit 35 MPG or Patriots that hit 50 MPG. Something nobody else is offering right now.
I’m hoping that all the advertising that VW/Audi and BMW are doing around clean diesels will actually entice more manufacturers to offer diesels in North America. And, if you’re going to do a hybrid, why not take it a step further by using a diesel instead of a gas engine to boost mileage even further.
Yes, a V-6 Ram “Miser” might be an advantage, something not offered elsewhere, since Ford doesn’t offer a V-6 in the F-150, GM’s Silverado gets only 19 mpg with the V-6.
Currently the V-6 Ram is rated 14 /20 mpg, and tows up to 3800 pounds. But that is with a four speed automatic. A 6 speed manual ought to provide much better efficiency. Depending on engine tuning, 23 mpg ought to be possible–that would be best-in-class full-size-truck gas mileage, definitely a selling point. It would still be a useful truck, with full size cargo room, 4000 pound towing. The Pentastar is coming to the Ram, which would boost economy; pairing it with dual-clutch automatic would be another way to get to the top of the class in efficiency–22 or 23 mpg.
If ratings are to go up to 35 mpg, then something like this would be a necessary first step. Eventually trucks are going to get alot smaller–whether they use diesels or hybrid power. The trucks of the future may well be things like Ford’s Transit Connect or Fiat Strada. If Chrysler “guesses” correctly, there are opportunties here to create new segments. I don’t know for sure, but I have to think that small vans will become more and more popular. Although Expo, Colt Vista and Axxess never caught on, short-wheelbase Dodge and Plymouths once sold well. Ford’s Grand C-Max (possibly coming to the US in 2011) is really filling the void of the earlier, SWB four-cylinder Voyagers, although in a more stylish form, perhaps. Could Chrysler enter that segment? Now is the time to capture younger buyers, those that can’t justify the size of standard minivans, and reject the thristier SUV’s their parents had. Also, for similar reasons, I have to think a FWD-based pickup of some sort will find success. I hope we don’t leave it to Honda to get their version right before us.
And I hope Chrysler will maintain the market it already has found, even if accidentally. For example, Dodge Sprinter has become the chassis of choice for RV’s. But Daimler is taking that model back. Will Chrysler have a Fiat-based model in production in time? I would not cede that market to Mercedes/ Freightliner.
Chrysler’s final short-wheelbase minivans were longer than their original long-wheelbase minis, weren’t they? ;)
I don’t disagree with you in general but Fiat already makes the Eurovans as you pointed out. I do think the minivan void should be filled by (shocker) short wheelbase minivans. The Journey was, I think, meant to fill in, but I don’t think it really does. Perhaps if they put sliding doors on and sold it as the Plymouth Voyager, too?
The last SWB minis were about 14 inches longer than the 1984 models. Yes Fiat does have some small vans / MPV’s like the Fiorino, so such a platform would probably be ok for something here.
The problem is trying to cater to what young families want today. It’s finding the spiritual successor to the first Voyager and Caravan–they were succesful because they weren’t the station wagons the previous generation drove. A modern-day SWB Voyager would have the right price, maybe the right fuel economy, but most of the buyers dislike minivans–what THEIR parents drove. So Journey probably does work for some of those buyers. Equinox and Highlander are what alot of those buyers are in now. But there’s a younger set of buyers coming up. The Grand C-Max would probably work better than a true, short-minvan as it looks better than past minivans or MPV’s. It’s sportier and should be more fuel efficient. I think Ford is onto something with this car:
http://jalopnik.com/5359230/ford-grand-c+max-headed-for-us
Come up with something clever before Toyota comes up with it first (do you think a little seven passenger Prius van would sell?).
The Ford Grand C-Max is what the Caliber should’ve been. IMO, anyway. I just don’t see that many Journeys on the road. Maybe they just don’t stand out in a crowd….which I think is the primary problem.
As for pickups, Chrysler has to come up with something smaller than the Dakota….like the M80. I used to have an ’80 D50 with the 2.6L 4-cylinder and that was a lot of fun to drive…..although the 1.6L version was a lot more fuel efficient than the 2.6L. Something that size with the new 173 HP world engine would be an interesting package. If Dodge does in this segment what they did with the Ram, that is not succumb to the urge of going bigger instead of better, then they could beat competitors to the punch. With the new CAFE standards, now is the time.
With respect to decent advertising, has anyone seen the Ram ad on the Dodge site that compares 0-60, passing, and towing performance compared to F150 and Silverado? I think this is a good ad, but I’ve never seen it on television. I can’t find anyone else that’s seen this ad, either. Of course, I think it is too long for spots, but it could be chunked up and done in several ads (continuous story).
By the way, my 2003 Dakota Sport Club Cab 2WD, 4.7 with 545RFE and a 3.55 LSD has a life time average of 17.41 MPG over 129,203 miles. If a load my 650 lb. ATV in the back I always break 20 MPG on a distance drive. My last trip from Rochester to Gettysburg, PA yielded 23.51 MPG.
I read on MSN.com on Friday that “reliable” sources say Chyrsler will be out of business with-in one year. Can anyone out there give a definite rebuttle to this story that spread accross the web? I have owned as primary drivers 9 Mopars, from a ’57 Plymouth Belvidere to a 2006 PT Cruiser. I love Mopars.