AN: 2015 Charger: the unexpected refresh
With E-Evo work pushed back (and maybe abandoned) and a complete rework of the large car line postponed until 2017 or later, Chrysler announced in late 2012 that it would have an unexpected L-car refresh, covering Charger and 300/300C. Thus, the 2015 Dodge Charger (to be unveiled in mid-2014) will not be the completely new car some expected, but is likely to be a polish-and-update of the current cars. Most observers expect the 2015 Charger and 300C to get eight-speed automatics as standard equipment across the line, which would help the V6 police car to compete more effectively against Chevy’s V8 Caprice, and could cut operating costs for police departments regardless of which engine they choose. By then, the eight-speed should have amassed a good reputation for reliability and durability, including the Chrysler-rejiggered version built in Indiana. UConnect 2, full parking assist, and other gizmos are also de rigeur for..
View the original, full post
1 - 20 of 124 Posts
Joined
·
149 Posts
This article was very helpful, thank you! There seemed to be some confusion regarding the 2014-2015 L* vehicles, in that we weren't really sure if they were "all new" or a refresh. The current versions of those vehicles were considered "refreshes" of the original 2005 platform. It seems that an "all new" platform is usually followed by a "refresh," and then the cycle repeats. A refresh following a refresh doesn't seem to be as common. A "refresh" would explain why the 300 wouldn't be getting the Chrysler design language.
One question: Why are we thinking that E-Evo work has been pushed back, or even abandoned? That's the first I've heard of it. Wouldn't E-Evo be a pretty important platform, since it would cover the current L* cars, a Maserati, and maybe even the future minivan or lifestyle pickup and has been mentioned here in the past? And if the platform would serve that many vehicles, why would they abandon work on it?
One question: Why are we thinking that E-Evo work has been pushed back, or even abandoned? That's the first I've heard of it. Wouldn't E-Evo be a pretty important platform, since it would cover the current L* cars, a Maserati, and maybe even the future minivan or lifestyle pickup and has been mentioned here in the past? And if the platform would serve that many vehicles, why would they abandon work on it?
Joined
·
889 Posts
There's still alot of life left in the L-car line if developed and executed correctly.
Though I like the rectangular grille opening best even the current fishmouth looks way better with the sleeker low-stacked wishbone profile.
Though I like the rectangular grille opening best even the current fishmouth looks way better with the sleeker low-stacked wishbone profile.
Joined
·
135 Posts
I don't think you fully understand the condition of Chrysler at the time of the Fiat deal. Chrysler has made tremendous strides since then. This can not happen overnight.willy said:
Come on Chrysler. Lets have a 2 dr. coupe and/or convertible in the 300 and Charger models. I'm a Chrysler retiree and the only car you have I would buy is the Challenger. I'm sure there are lots of others that are singles or couples that don't need or want a 4 dr. car.
How many times has the "Ram" undgergone a significant refresh? Then they could also afford to refresh the LX sooner as well. It may not be true, but if they can afford an SRT for the Durango...there are a lot of things more important than an SRT Durango, that's for sure. I just read GM is introducing 20 new vehicle models this year, and GM also was in bankruptcy, and maybe even worse financial condition at that time than Chrysler.
Joined
·
1,669 Posts
The Ram has had a major overhaul 4 times. The '94 BR Ram was a complete redesign. The '03 Ram was a complete departure from the previous model (exterior and interior update in the mid 2000s). The '09 Ram was a complete overhaul, and the '13 Ram is very different from the '09.willy said:
Joined
·
1,144 Posts
The first gen "Ram" was introduced in 1988, and was itself a refresh of the D/W Series Dodge trucks that had been mostly unchanged since the early 70's. The 1994 Ram was a total redesign. The 2002 Ram 1500 (and '03 HD) was also a total redesign. There was a mild refresh (mostly interior) in 2006, and then another complete redesign in 2009.....although the '09 redesign was perhaps not as extensive because under the skin, the trucks were still pretty similar. Another refresh just took place this year.AutoTechnician said:
LX was introduced in 2004 as a 2005 model. The 300 went mostly unchanged all the way to 2011. Magnum got a refresh in '08 and was then killed. Charger went on sale for '06 and was unchanged until '11. Challenger of course is still mostly unchanged from it's 2008 form - with the major exception of the 6.4-liter engine in the SRT model.
I suppose I can see Willy's argument that the L-cars could be updated more often, but the ones that have been allowed to go unchanged the longest - 300 and Challenger - have also been the most consistent in sales. Magnum only got a refresh because it was floundering. The truck segment is also a heck of a lot more competitive than the large RWD sedan segment. I still think the current 300 and Charger look fresh, inside and out. The Challenger's interior has not aged well but the exterior is timeless. Since the Challenger is setting sales records month after month, I can see why Chrysler isn't in too big of a hurry to mess with it. As for the 300 and Charger, right now a few package realignments, special editions, new colors, and other relatively cheap things to develop would boost sales IMHO. That would hold them over for another calendar year when the 2015 models are ready.
Technically, there was a minor refresh for '08 MY (Much needed, they put some soft touch materials over some of the nasty hard plastic in high contact areas). And the tail lamp assembly of the 300 was also revised. In 2009 they revised the taillamp assembly of the Charger. Also, in 2009, the LX cars got a rather quiet bump in fuel economy on the hemi, going from 23 MPG highway to 25 MPG under the new EPA numbers - which amusingly enough are the same numbers the car was released to under the old EPA regs. But an improvement in reality. But uh, ultimately, nothing most people ever noticed. Couple materials and a tail lamp assembly here and there.FreeLantz said:
Chrysler's bigger concern may be simply that GM, Ford, and Toyota have all released updated versions of their large cars since Chrysler brought out the 2011s. It'd be good to keep Chrysler in the spotlight. Even if the large car market isn't all that big of a deal - it's a market Chrysler has excelled in for quite some time. And the LX cars are fantastic vehicles. The 2011s were such fantastic overhauls. They got to keep that momentum though.
1974 Plymouth Valiant - 2013 Dodge Dart - 2013 Chrysler 300C
Joined
·
25,582 Posts
E-Evo would be very important but it hasn't been mentioned lately and I think it's just not practical as it was originally pitched, that is, to encompass FWD cars, RWD cars, minivans, trucks, SUVs, etc.
I think the L-cars will be redone but not completely re-engineered; I think the Ghibli is the shape of things to come but I also think it is not going to be as simple as "let's take Ghibli and make it cheaper." No, I think the 2017-2019 L-cars will adopt some of Ghibli's changed, e.g. the front suspension changes and mounting point movement, and go from there.
I'd also like to see, at the risk of starting a flamewar, a FWD car that uses the Ls as a base. It would not be the same platform if they did it right: no V8 (shorter hood), axles pushed out further to the edges, and more interior space. In short, a replacement for Intrepid that was set up for those who want a big big car inside and would rather have higher gas mileage than crazy acceleration. One can see this fitting into the 300C length footprint. It would cost quite a bit to develop but would be very competitive and might really be a winner if gas prices go up and full-size buyers want something economical but good. (Figuring it would use the 3.2 at first and maybe the 3.0 DI and/or VM diesel.) Also a good choice for the snow belt. Some people are likely to start screaming and crying about how it's the end of RWD, but again, I'm just suggesting adding a front driver.
There are times I also think it would be interesting to set up Dodge as the RWD brand (the BMW, so to speak) while Chrysler goes all FWD (the Audi, so to speak). Both would have AWD options (the Audi and BMW and Subaru, so to speak). It would be a differentiator and would expand upon the upcoming midsize segmentation (Dodge/Alfa = RWD, Chrysler/Lancia = FWD) and would transfer to Europe (again Alfa vs Lancia).
1 - 20 of 124 Posts
