AF: Future Product Plans (merged) | Page 12 | Allpar Forums
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Future Product Plans (merged)

Discussion in 'Mopar / FCA News' started by 24grant24, May 23, 2012.

  1. Jose Santos

    Jose Santos Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2011
    Messages:
    235
    Likes:
    1
    I was agreeing with everything on the list until I saw "Durango." Agree or disagree with me but there is a market (although not as large as GC's) for the Durango. And no offense to anyone, but if the Grand Wagoneer looks anything like the renderings I've been seeing, then I'm not sure it'll get far beyond the Jeep enthusiastic unless is as beautiful as the GC. I just don't see the Durango going away. It's way too soon to already canning it, let alone replacing it with a Jeep.

    Some just need to think a little more basic, some people just don't like Jeeps and the Durango already had a bit of time with Dodge as its 7-passenger SUV. I guess I'll wait until I see a concept or an official screenshot but Sergio needs to re-think the Durango plan.

    Just my two cents. If the Wagoneer turns out to be as awesome as most if not all of you claim it to be, then I welcome it.
     
  2. Erik Latranyi

    Erik Latranyi Allpar Legacy

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Messages:
    12,224
    Likes:
    13,234
    Yes, I think most people do not realize that development starts years in advance. The Grand Cherokee/Durango were started under Daimler and basically finished under Cerberus.

    The 300/Charger were also started under Daimler, continued under Cerberus and had some final tweaks by Fiat.

    Since Marchionne came on the scene, he has re-arranged the brands and mandated that showrooms will not have "twins" like the minivans any longer.

    That is a new direction, but product that was in the pipeline could not be stopped (Durango).

    Even the Dart was done quickly and before the final brand-arrangement was set in stone.

    Also, since more platform-sharing is the mandate, coordination with Fiat/Alfa/Lancia are now required. This means changes to product that is coming and changes to what products are here now must be made.

    That is why Durango is being dropped in favor of Grand Wagoneer.

    However, it will be interesting to see what they do with the Journey. Dodge should not have an SUV, but the Journey sells well as the Fiat Freemont.

    It is the last vehicle that does not fit the lineup.
     
  3. patfromigh

    patfromigh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2010
    Messages:
    3,563
    Likes:
    3,261
    What ever it is that Dodge should have, don't call it a station wagon. In the auto industry that is also known as the forbidden SW term.
     
  4. Erik Latranyi

    Erik Latranyi Allpar Legacy

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Messages:
    12,224
    Likes:
    13,234
    It looks like Chrysler is getting the forbidden SW term vehicles -- (200 replacement and T&C replacement)
     
  5. willy4110

    willy4110 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    646
    Likes:
    260
    Sir Moses et al; you have some good points and trunk shape is one of them. Unfortunately, for full size cars the Chargers etc do also have small trunks; for example, the Impala trunk is considerably bigger, but again, access to the trunk may be an issue, as it was in our Eagle Vision. As far as vehicle space, the Dart can't brag too much because the Cruze is a fair bit smaller on the outside but has just as much interior/trunk space. Sergio may very well be messing with people's minds, but ultimately that's also where the buck stops. It's not so much one major issue re Chrysler that concerns me, it's a whole truck load of smaller issues which quickly add up. Sort of like a court case where the prosecution doesn't have any significant forensic evidence but a truck load of circumstantial evidence which is overwhelming to the case.
     
  6. Stratuscaster

    Stratuscaster Vaguely badass...
    Staff Member Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2001
    Messages:
    43,889
    Likes:
    6,642
    Why not?

    What about crossovers? Are they OK? Because, really, that's what the Journey and Durango are. Crossovers. Or, if you'd rather, minivans without sliding doors. Or, glorified station wagons.

    Sorry. Shooting brakes. :lol:
     
  7.  
  8. Yes, that's probably true. I still believe it might have made more sense to add Fiat to all CDJR dealers from the start so that the C-sedan (Dart), a Camry-fighter D sedan and the D-CUV (Journey!) would have been badged as Fiats. Dodge, if kept, could then focus on muscle cars Charger, Challenger and Viper. Grand Caravan could be renamed Chrysler Grand Caravan (with a Town and Country option package).
     
  9. MoparNorm

    MoparNorm Active Jeeper
    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2008
    Messages:
    31,138
    Likes:
    7,674
    Don't worry about that, there aren't more than a handful of "Jeep enthusiast" who would confuse anything built upon the WK architecture as a Jeep.
    Every Grand Cherokee and Wagoneer is targeted at consumers, not Jeep customers.
    Chrysler is targeting the non-enthusiast with both of those vehicles. Don't be fooled by the brand name.
     
  10. Erik Latranyi

    Erik Latranyi Allpar Legacy

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Messages:
    12,224
    Likes:
    13,234
    Because Jeep will have SUVs and Chrysler will have glorified station wagons, we cannot have duplicates on the showroom floor.

    Therefore, I believe Journey will have to either morph into a smaller minivan (return of the Caravan) or exit. But the problem exists that it is too popular for Fiat to exit.........so does it become a Fiat?

    PS: Yes, there are no real SUVs left in the lineup.
     
  11. MoparNorm

    MoparNorm Active Jeeper
    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2008
    Messages:
    31,138
    Likes:
    7,674
    While Dodge calls and markets the Durango as an "SUV", it's really just a car, closer to CUV, it exactly fits the CUV definition since it started as a BOF and is now unitbody with IS.
    The only true SUV's left are the Wrangler Unlimited and the Mega Cab.
     
  12. FThorn

    FThorn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2002
    Messages:
    3,279
    Likes:
    99
    Strip the dash/IP. Go VW (need I say Bulli) austere. Sprinkle iPad or iPad mounts where needed. Done.

    [​IMG]
     
  13. Stratuscaster

    Stratuscaster Vaguely badass...
    Staff Member Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2001
    Messages:
    43,889
    Likes:
    6,642
    So when does the 300 die?

    Again - some folks are taking this whole "no duplicate" thing out to the nth degree and reaching a bit.
     
  14. cGmC11

    cGmC11 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    34
    Likes:
    0
    Why not a Dart Coupe?
     
  15. freshforged

    freshforged Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,974
    Likes:
    2,542
    No offense meant, but I'm really glad Sergio didn't take your advice. Sure Dodge might have some baggage, but ti also has much higher (positive) brand recognition then Fiat. They'd basically have to start from scratch and in the process loose boatloads of repeat business (see Plymouth).

    AFA the Journey, why mess with a good thing? It fits in nicely as a tall wagon/crossover for dodge and fills (somewhat) the gapping void left by the much-lamented Magnum. Perhaps down the line, Chrysler will get a shooting brake with a rear sliding door using the Journey platform. Even without a Chrysler stable-mate, between dodge in north america and fiat abroad they should be able to sell enough to keep it viable.
     
  16. No offense taken. I do believe that Chrysler needs a brand (Fiat? Chrysler? Dodge? pick one) that can eventually capture 10% or more of the market by itself to get marketing economies of scale on par with Ford, Chevrolet, Toyota and Honda. My vote would be Chrysler since it's the name of the company. Fiat has apparently been ruled out for that duty -- Marchionne seemingly sees Fiat as a cute niche brand in North America -- so VW's strategy of making American-style Jettas and Passats won't be copied. I'd love to see Marchionne get bold and make everything a Chrysler, a Jeep or a Fiat (excluding Alfa Romeo, Ferrari and Maserati of course). Chrysler brand styling would be sophisticated a la Audi but for the masses (pricing from $15K to $50K), Rams would become Chrysler Rams (same styling and badging as now -- only the window sticker would have "Chrysler" on it until the market got used to the idea). Chrysler should also go to China in a big way. A brand rationalizing will eventually happen when it becomes apparent that 5-vehicle lineups aren't capturing mindshare.
     
  17. jsb399

    jsb399 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2008
    Messages:
    1,604
    Likes:
    9
    spot on big time.
    it's obvious they have one too many brands. chrysler or dodge brand has to go.
    everything else is just hand waving, like "five vehicles per brand".
    spreading 11% across 4 brands makes no economic sense, and really muddies the message to a consumer who already has way too many choices in his/her face.


    logically the pickup truck should probably be a jeep and not a chrysler or a dodge, but i don't think peoples' minds could accept that. but as jeep is making 4cyl fwd econoboxes now, the pickup truck is really more "jeep". let's face it - what was the name of the plymouth rd operations?
     
  18. james.mooney.

    james.mooney. The Poster Formerly Known As "Bethlumboy"

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,644
    Likes:
    1,470
    I actually really like the idea of several brands with smaller, more focused lineups:

    Fiat 500 line.
    Segments: A, B.
    Layout: FWD.
    Body styles: Hatch, convertible, MPV, CUV.
    Pricing: mid-range, premium.
    Styling: Italian sporty.
    Markets: worldwide.
    Shares vehicles with: N/A.

    Fiat cars.
    Segments: B, C, D, E.
    Layout: FWD.
    Body styles: Hatch, sedans, (wagon?), CUV, minivan.
    Pricing: affordable, mid-range.
    Styling: Italian.
    Markets: outside North America.
    Shares vehicles with: Dodge FWD (with unique fascias/sheetmetal).

    Dodge FWD.
    Segments: B, C, D, E.
    Layout: FWD.
    Body styles: (Hatch?), sedans, (wagon?), CUV, minivan.
    Pricing: affordable, mid-range.
    Styling: American.
    Markets: North America.
    Shares vehicles with: Fiat cars (with unique fascias/sheetmetal).

    Dodge RWD.
    Segments: D, E.
    Layout: RWD.
    Body styles: Sedans, coupes, (convertible?).
    Pricing: affordable, mid-range.
    Styling: American muscle/sports.
    Markets: worldwide.
    Shares vehicles with: N/A.

    Alfa Romeo.
    Segments: B, C, D, E.
    Layout: FWD, RWD.
    Body styles: Hatch, sedans, coupes, convertibles, wagon, CUV.
    Pricing: mid-range, premium.
    Styling: Italian sporty.
    Markets: worldwide.
    Shares vehicles with: N/A.

    Lancia.
    Segments: B, C, D, E.
    Layout: FWD, RWD.
    Body styles: Hatches, sedans, (coupe?), convertible, (wagon?), CUV.
    Pricing: premium, high-end.
    Styling: Italian luxury.
    Markets: outside North America, UK.
    Shares vehicles with: Chrysler (with unique fascias/sheetmetal).

    Chrysler.
    Segments: B, C, D, E.
    Layout: FWD, RWD.
    Body styles: Hatches, sedans, (coupe?), convertible, (wagon?), CUV.
    Pricing: premium, high-end.
    Styling: American luxury.
    Markets: North America, UK.
    Shares vehicles with: Lancia (with unique fascias/sheetmetal).

    Abarth.
    Segments: B, C, D, E.
    Layout: FWD, RWD.
    Body styles: Hatches, sedans, (coupe?), convertibles, (wagon?), MPVs, CUVs.
    Pricing: premium, high-end.
    Styling: Italian sporty.
    Markets: worldwide.
    Shares vehicles with: "donor" cars from Fiat, (Alfa Romeo?).

    SRT.
    Segments: C, D, E.
    Layout: FWD, RWD.
    Body styles: (Hatch?), sedans, coupes, (convertible?), (wagon?), CUV, (pickup?).
    Pricing: premium, high-end.
    Styling: American muscle/sports.
    Markets: worldwide.
    Shares vehicles with: "donor" cars from Dodge, Chrysler, Jeep, (Ram?).

    Fiat Professional.
    Segments: B, C, D, E.
    Layout: FWD, RWD.
    Body styles: Vans, pickups.
    Pricing: affordable, mid-range.
    Styling: Italian.
    Markets: outside North America.
    Shares vehicles with: Ram (with unique fascias/sheetmetal).

    Ram.
    Segments: B, C, D, E.
    Layout: FWD, RWD.
    Body styles: Vans, pickups, (SUV?).
    Pricing: affordable, mid-range, premium.
    Styling: American.
    Markets: North America.
    Shares vehicles with: Fiat Professional (with unique fascias/sheetmetal).
    Note: Ram 1500, HDs, and any derivatives sold worldwide as Rams, not shared with Fiat Professional.

    Jeep.
    Segments: B, C, D, E.
    Layout: AWD, 4WD.
    Body styles: CUVs, SUVs, (pickup?).
    Pricing: affordable, mid-range, premium.
    Styling: American.
    Markets: worldwide.
    Shares vehicles with: N/A.
     
  19. Yeah, I've often thought that the Ram could fit in well as a Jeep. However, I think the marketing would be easier as a Chrysler because as a Jeep they'd have to change the grill to a seven slotter since Jeep's brand identity is so strong. As a Chrysler, they wouldn't have to make any styling changes at all (Chrysler's design language hasn't been consistent or memorable) or even have to put the name "Chrysler" on the Ram. It could easily be advertised as it is now with a quick voiceover at the end that says "see it at your Chrysler dealer." Ram as its own brand is not going to make a lot of sense as it will be lopsided with high-upper double digits Ram 1500/2500/etc sales. The Chrysler name (especially since the products are so good now) could really stand a shot in the arm by going mainstream and ditching the irrelevant "middle brand" styling vestiges and artificially-limited product range.
     
  20. Powdered Toast Man

    Powdered Toast Man Move along, nothing to see here

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,348
    Likes:
    2,009
    Journey needs to stick around. Dodge simply must have an entry into the mid-size CUV/SUV segment. Look at the competition: Edge, Escape, Santa Fe, Rav4, Equinox, Terrain, etc, etc... They can't just dump the whole "SUV thing" over onto Jeep. The problem for Dodge is that they were late to the CUV party and have been playing catch up for market share ever since. Also, it's the #1 crossover in Canada and the rebadged Freemont is doing very well. So, there is definitely more right with Journey than wrong. IMHO, poor marketing has been it's handicap in the USA.

    Caravan needs to remain a minivan because, even though they're not chic, they're functional, affordable, and they sell well. There simply is no more logical vehicle for a large family.
     

Share This Page

Loading...
 We are not affiliated with FCA. We make no claims regarding validity or accuracy of information or advice. Copyright © VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.