Allpar Forums banner

1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,028 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
From the article:

Newly redesigned, the Nissan Rogue compact SUV addresses many of the faults of its predecessor (a cheap interior, uninteresting design, and dated technology) without abandoning its core traits of efficiency, value, and roominess. Though still offering a rather uninspiring driving experience, the 2021 Rogue parlays its family-friendliness with crisp, contemporary styling and comprehensive safety features – like vanilla, the Rogue might not be overly flavorful or bold, but most people will probably like it at least a little.

Full article here:

2021 Nissan Rogue SL Review: Top Of The Heap (motor1.com)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,028 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
I posted this for two reasons:

1) Nissan is refreshing its lineup with a focus on better materials and equipment. They know that they need to depart from chasing cheap volume.

2) The compact CUV market is becoming more and more competitive. Jeep needs to step up with Renegade, Compass and Cherokee....better materials, more standard safety technology and improved value.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
37,490 Posts
So more dragging of the company.
Nice.
Competition is good. It rewards those with the better product and hopefully encourages all players to make a better product.
For instance 2021 Jeep Cherokee added several safety features as standard, likely in response to the RAV4 doing so a few years ago.
 

·
Registered
2014 Jeep Compass
Joined
·
288 Posts
As a 23 (soon to be 24!) year old, I fail to find how interiors can be "nicer" when the plastic is still cheap. If I'm paying 30 grand for a new car, my last priority is how nice the interior looks. Or how many "safety features" a car has, because I won't use 80% of things like ACC, LDW, and the such.
Wish the auto market was more like me lmaoooo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,028 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
As a 23 (soon to be 24!) year old, I fail to find how interiors can be "nicer" when the plastic is still cheap. If I'm paying 30 grand for a new car, my last priority is how nice the interior looks. Or how many "safety features" a car has, because I won't use 80% of things like ACC, LDW, and the such.
Wish the auto market was more like me lmaoooo
You do not represent the widest part of the market.....just like those who want a "bare-bones" vehicles with minimal electronics and manual transmission.....they are not a large enough group to justify design, test, certify and market vehicles.

Marchionne was right that the cost to design, test, certify and market vehicles is higher than ever.....and that pushes out the niche markets.....which you represent.
 

·
Move along, nothing to see here
Joined
·
2,471 Posts
I posted this for two reasons:

1) Nissan is refreshing its lineup with a focus on better materials and equipment. They know that they need to depart from chasing cheap volume.

2) The compact CUV market is becoming more and more competitive. Jeep needs to step up with Renegade, Compass and Cherokee....better materials, more standard safety technology and improved value.
The question I have is how long Jeep can keep it's brand premium status and ability to command higher margins when they're playing in several very crowded segments. Let's face it, with the market push to CUV's having replaced cars, and Jeep being the only CUV lineup in the Mopar family, that means Jeep is the primary NA car brand for Stellantis. Jeep has this brand equity built up over the decades as being "tough" and "rugged" but I'm wondering how long until the long standing Chrysler/Dodge reputation for poor quality catches up. How long before Jeep just becomes the new Chrysler where they need deep rebates on the hoods to move them and they become the value leaders in their segments?

And when I say quality, I'm talking about long term quality. The materials all look very nice and the assembly quality from the plants is excellent. The problem for FCA has (going back to the DCX days) is they cheap out on their parts from suppliers. Nothing lasts and there's a high failure rate on a lot of components. The stuff is either under built or under engineered. Journeys and Caravans all blowing up their power steering lines in the winter regions from 2011-2013 is a good example of this. Since Jeeps are all being built from largely the same parts bins, it's no surprise that their quality ratings are poor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,028 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
The question I have is how long Jeep can keep it's brand premium status and ability to command higher margins when they're playing in several very crowded segments. Let's face it, with the market push to CUV's having replaced cars, and Jeep being the only CUV lineup in the Mopar family, that means Jeep is the primary NA car brand for Stellantis. Jeep has this brand equity built up over the decades as being "tough" and "rugged" but I'm wondering how long until the long standing Chrysler/Dodge reputation for poor quality catches up. How long before Jeep just becomes the new Chrysler where they need deep rebates on the hoods to move them and they become the value leaders in their segments?

And when I say quality, I'm talking about long term quality. The materials all look very nice and the assembly quality from the plants is excellent. The problem for FCA has (going back to the DCX days) is they cheap out on their parts from suppliers. Nothing lasts and there's a high failure rate on a lot of components. The stuff is either under built or under engineered. Journeys and Caravans all blowing up their power steering lines in the winter regions from 2011-2013 is a good example of this. Since Jeeps are all being built from largely the same parts bins, it's no surprise that their quality ratings are poor.
The smaller Jeeps (Renegade, Compass & Cherokee) already need heavy incentives to sell in North America. They are lagging the competition in many ways. The quality issue is always an albatross.

The Compact and Midsize CUV market that they play within are the same as the Compact and Midsize Sedan market....people want quality, safety and reliability with a helpful dealer network.

Hyundai/Kia have been able to change those things (still in process) but the results are showing.

If Chrysler can bring PSA platform CUVs to North America and offer them in the mainstream markets, Jeep can return to its roots of ruggedness and off-road capability....especially with Ford's Bronco Family and Toyota coming with all-new, very capable vehicles.
 

·
Registered
2014 Jeep Compass
Joined
·
288 Posts
You do not represent the widest part of the market.....just like those who want a "bare-bones" vehicles with minimal electronics and manual transmission.....they are not a large enough group to justify design, test, certify and market vehicles.

Marchionne was right that the cost to design, test, certify and market vehicles is higher than ever.....and that pushes out the niche markets.....which you represent.
Never said I wanted bare bones? Assumptions are prevalent here, I see.
My gripe is the "better interiors" line, with plastics lining all over the inside. That comes from the same people wanting a cheap $23,000 vehicle with a full leather interior, the biggest screens, the best features, etc.
THAT'S not possible to make money in, unless the corners cut are out of this world or you just plan to lose money on the whole ordeal.
I'm not a fan of these safety features when I want heated/ventilated seats and push-button 4WD, and I don't enjoy the fact that I need to blow $60,000 to get vented seats, but I can get all these others safety features on $20,000 cars lmao
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,028 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Never said I wanted bare bones? Assumptions are prevalent here, I see.
My gripe is the "better interiors" line, with plastics lining all over the inside. That comes from the same people wanting a cheap $23,000 vehicle with a full leather interior, the biggest screens, the best features, etc.
THAT'S not possible to make money in, unless the corners cut are out of this world or you just plan to lose money on the whole ordeal.
I'm not a fan of these safety features when I want heated/ventilated seats and push-button 4WD, and I don't enjoy the fact that I need to blow $60,000 to get vented seats, but I can get all these others safety features on $20,000 cars lmao
Please work on your reading comprehension. I said "just like" not that you wanted bare bones. There is a difference in meaning that you fail to grasp.

I can understand if English is not your native language.
 

·
Registered
2014 Jeep Compass
Joined
·
288 Posts
Please work on your reading comprehension. I said "just like" not that you wanted bare bones. There is a difference in meaning that you fail to grasp.

I can understand if English is not your native language.
As an adverb, just can literally mean;
1: EXACTLY, PRECISELY
(Source: Just | Definition of Just by Merriam-Webster (merriam-webster.com) )
As an adjective, like can also literally mean;
1: the same or nearly the same (as in appearance, character, or quantity)
(Source: Like | Definition of Like by Merriam-Webster (merriam-webster.com) )

In any way, shape, or forum, just like means that I am exactly the same, or nearly the same, as like those you stated. Taken quite (yes, it's pretty much my favorite word) literally, you said I'm exactly like those that want a vehicle that is bare bones.
Being the same means I am someone that wants bare bones.
I don't think my comprehension is that far off. What you seemingly meant is quite different to how I took it as.
That's using an online chat room for you.
All you needed to say is that "the market does not cater to someone with needs that don't 'justify designing, testing, certifying and marketing vehicles' that the majority are found to want, but the minority don't."
Which is a completely fair statement and avoids all this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
As an adverb, just can literally mean;
1: EXACTLY, PRECISELY
(Source: Just | Definition of Just by Merriam-Webster (merriam-webster.com) )
As an adjective, like can also literally mean;
1: the same or nearly the same (as in appearance, character, or quantity)
(Source: Like | Definition of Like by Merriam-Webster (merriam-webster.com) )

In any way, shape, or forum, just like means that I am exactly the same, or nearly the same, as like those you stated. Taken quite (yes, it's pretty much my favorite word) literally, you said I'm exactly like those that want a vehicle that is bare bones.
Being the same means I am someone that wants bare bones.
I don't think my comprehension is that far off. What you seemingly meant is quite different to how I took it as.
That's using an online chat room for you.
All you needed to say is that "the market does not cater to someone with needs that don't 'justify designing, testing, certifying and marketing vehicles' that the majority are found to want, but the minority don't."
Which is a completely fair statement and avoids all this.

You're not going to win this one here. Ive tried several times. The attitude is get in line with the tech obsessed drivers and soccer moms and buy what is sold or don't voice otherwise.

I'm of that minority you got grouped in, only I want performance features without having to buy extra safety or tech gimmicks. If you want one you have to buy it all.

Accept it and buy, or stfu and go is the general attitude here.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
37,490 Posts
You're not going to win this one here. Ive tried several times. The attitude is get in line with the tech obsessed drivers and soccer moms and buy what is sold or don't voice otherwise.

I'm of that minority you got grouped in, only I want performance features without having to buy extra safety or tech gimmicks. If you want one you have to buy it all.

Accept it and buy, or stfu and go is the general attitude here.
The problem is you are railing against car companies for offering features that are often required by law. No amount of posts on this forum is going to change the automobile regulatory climate.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
35,774 Posts
You're not going to win this one here. Ive tried several times. The attitude is get in line with the tech obsessed drivers and soccer moms and buy what is sold or don't voice otherwise.

I'm of that minority you got grouped in, only I want performance features without having to buy extra safety or tech gimmicks. If you want one you have to buy it all.
People here are generally not proponents of that line of thought, they are trying to tell you that is the way the automakers have it, and for good reason: when they do offer the kind of car you want, not enough people buy it.

You can talk about how great sedans or coupes or barebones performance cars are until you're blue in the face, but look at what's selling, and you can see why there are so few. Bare-bones performance? They tried the Scat Pack cars, cut out a bunch of features from the SRT but kept all the performance in, and they barely sold. Asian automakers have had similar experiences with hot hatches and such. Coupes? Sales figures have been dismal since the 1980s. Sedans? The current Corolla, Civic, Accord, and Camry are all great cars, near the best they've been (I think the 1980s Camry and 1990s Corolla were better, for the times), and sales are barely being kept alive by tossing features at people without lowering prices.

The sales numbers are the sales numbers. Heck, I love the Duster and Road Runner ideas, but given where things are today, they've hit the end of the line — except perhaps for the $35,000 Tesla, which is indeed stripped-down, bare-bones performance, with quality that makes the worst Mopar since 1976 look pretty good.
 

·
Move along, nothing to see here
Joined
·
2,471 Posts
The smaller Jeeps (Renegade, Compass & Cherokee) already need heavy incentives to sell in North America. They are lagging the competition in many ways. The quality issue is always an albatross.

The Compact and Midsize CUV market that they play within are the same as the Compact and Midsize Sedan market....people want quality, safety and reliability with a helpful dealer network.

Hyundai/Kia have been able to change those things (still in process) but the results are showing.

If Chrysler can bring PSA platform CUVs to North America and offer them in the mainstream markets, Jeep can return to its roots of ruggedness and off-road capability....especially with Ford's Bronco Family and Toyota coming with all-new, very capable vehicles.
Honestly, this is why Stellantis needs the Chrysler brand. Cut these smaller budget models off of the Jeep lineup entirely (No A, B, or even C segment Jeeps). Restyle those models and move them over to Chrysler (or Dodge) and let them duke it out in the mainstream affordable market with their rivals. This would free up Jeep to focus on being an "aspirational" brand. Wrangler will always be Wrangler, but then they'd have Grand Cherokee and Wagoneer (and variants) as higher priced, higher margin models.

It's funny how quickly people here argue about Dodge's brand mission being "performance" to justify their niche and lack of product, but they're completely ok with Jeep being watered down into a mainstream brand that's trying to be everything to everyone. On a budget? We've got a base model Renegade or Compass for you. Need a people mover? Here's a 3-row Grand Cherokee. Want to go off roading? Here's a Wrangler. Need a truck? How about a Rubicon. Rich person in need of a rolling house? Wagoneer got you covered. Heading to the race track? Hellcat Grand Cherokee. Honest to God if Stellantis could figure out a way to market a minivan as a Jeep they would.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
264 Posts
I've driven traded-in rogues with only a few years of driving on them and they were all squeaky, loose, rattling junk. A RAV4 with 250,000 on it is more solid. The new one might have a bigger screen and a few nicer materials but I doubt its any better quality wise.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
35,774 Posts
Honestly, this is why Stellantis needs the Chrysler brand. Cut these smaller budget models off of the Jeep lineup entirely (No A, B, or even C segment Jeeps). Restyle those models and move them over to Chrysler (or Dodge) and let them duke it out in the mainstream affordable market with their rivals. This would free up Jeep to focus on being an "aspirational" brand. Wrangler will always be Wrangler, but then they'd have Grand Cherokee and Wagoneer (and variants) as higher priced, higher margin models.

It's funny how quickly people here argue about Dodge's brand mission being "performance" to justify their niche and lack of product, but they're completely ok with Jeep being watered down into a mainstream brand that's trying to be everything to everyone. On a budget? We've got a base model Renegade or Compass for you. Need a people mover? Here's a 3-row Grand Cherokee. Want to go off roading? Here's a Wrangler. Need a truck? How about a Rubicon. Rich person in need of a rolling house? Wagoneer got you covered. Heading to the race track? Hellcat Grand Cherokee. Honest to God if Stellantis could figure out a way to market a minivan as a Jeep they would.
Hard to argue that, except that the reason it's so loaded up is that if they sold the Renegade or Compass as a Chrysler or Dodge, sales would presumably be much lower.

Branding is a poison to supply-and-demand curves and assumptions of buyer rationality.
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Top