[Erik Latranyi]

Link please??!!

Since they are currently suggesting that this will be their only midsize sedan spread over two brands, then the cost can be justified--especially if the technically used is spread over multiple engines. What makes it cost so much more for the Pentastar engines??. The same was said about DI, turbo- and supercharging tech at one point but you can't find a car line these days without finding some form of these under the hood. They have been using the MultiAir technology since 2002 and if logic dictates I don't remember any technology getting more expensive the longer it's used. What makes it cost so much more for the Pentastar engines?? Currently the Pentastar engines aren't even using DI, which seems to be a the new standard in most cars, so is that too costly as well?? What kind of a powerhouse would the 3.6L be if it even had that small piece of tech?

http://www.allpar.com/forums/topic/148063-an-new-pentastar-engines-30-di-ma2/?hl=%2Bpentastar+%2Bmultiair#entry11319347

 

[Archknight]

http://www.allpar.com/forums/topic/148063-an-new-pentastar-engines-30-di-ma2/?hl=%2Bpentastar+%2Bmultiair#entry11319347

That really discussed a European option 3.0L engine, which is to avoid the heavy penalties placed on engines larger than that in the European market. Chrysler's positioning in the US is a premium segment brand, as Lancia is in the European market, so the cost of the 3.2L MA engine could be transmitted across those two. You have to keep in mind where they want to compete with the new products. The next 300 is suppose to go further upmarket, the 200 will have to be spread wide to cover multiple ends of the midsize market, if the Avenger isn't replaced.

 

[Mike V.]

the 200 will have to be spread wide to cover multiple ends of the midsize market, if the Avenger isn't replaced.

Which is why the costs out weigh the benefits...

Mike

 

[Archknight]

Which is why the costs out weigh the benefits...

Mike

Your statement makes no sense and it has no actual reasoning behind it. How in fact if one vehicle is spread to cover for two segments (mainstream and premium) in one market and a premium segment in another, not going to be cost effective for the development of one engine for a premium price? In the states there is no additional taxation for this kind of engine, which everyone seems to keep referring to the "3.0L MA2" article as their reasoning. The article clearly refers to engines in Europe, the Thema (300) already uses the 3.6L (286HP) Pentastar. A new 3.2L MA2 engine could replace it as the gas option if it developed similar power. Give me reserch and a valid reason not just what someone glanced over and percieved as a reason of it being to costly.

 

[Mike V.]

Your statement makes no sense and it has no actual reasoning behind it. How in fact if one vehicle is spread to cover for two segments (mainstream and premium) in one market and a premium segment in another, not going to be cost effective for the development of one engine for a premium price? In the states there is no additional taxation for this kind of engine, which everyone seems to keep referring to the "3.0L MA2" article as their reasoning. The article clearly refers to engines in Europe, the Thema (300) already uses the 3.6L (286HP) Pentastar. A new 3.2L MA2 engine could replace it as the gas option if it developed similar power. Give me reserch and a valid reason not just what someone glanced over and percieved as a reason of it being to costly.

Because you missed a previous post involving this discussion. You are welcome to search for it if you like.

You can amortize any way you wish, but if the efficiency increase can not justify the cost of implementation then why waste the time and the resources?

I'll bet on DI before I'll bet on MA. Adding MA to the Pentastar is not cheap nor simple... Nothing "perceived" about it. You got an extra billion or so dollars laying around to implement it for Chrysler so they don't have to justify the cost?

The 2009 five year plan was never set in stone. That nine speed looks GREAT.

Mike

 

[Archknight]

Because you missed a previous post involving this discussion. You are welcome to search for it if you like.

You can amortize any way you wish, but if the efficiency increase can not justify the cost of implementation then why waste the time and the resources?

I'll bet on DI before I'll bet on MA. Adding MA to the Pentastar is not cheap nor simple... Nothing "perceived" about it. You got an extra billion or so dollars laying around to implement it for Chrysler so they don't have to justify the cost?

The 2009 five year plan was never set in stone. That nine speed looks GREAT.

Mike

Sorry Mike V, but you assumed I was going on some old information when I'm actually talking about the revised plan of 2012.

http://wot.motortrend.com/chrysler-reveals-revised-5-year-product-plan-2012-full-year-profit-of-1-7-billion-322095.html

http://www.allpar.com/corporate/chrysler-group/five-year-plan.html

I ask about things I haven't researched first.

 

[Mike V.]

Sorry Mike V, but you assumed I was going on some old information when I'm actually talking about the revised plan of 2012.

http://wot.motortrend.com/chrysler-reveals-revised-5-year-product-plan-2012-full-year-profit-of-1-7-billion-322095.html

http://www.allpar.com/corporate/chrysler-group/five-year-plan.html

I ask about things I haven't researched first.

And?

Mike

 

[Erik Latranyi]

Sorry Mike V, but you assumed I was going on some old information when I'm actually talking about the revised plan of 2012.

The plan is more of a guide than a firm roadmap........as we have all found out in the past.

 

[Archknight]

The plan is more of a guide than a firm roadmap........as we have all found out in the past.

So far this new map seems a bit more feasible than the ambitious 2009 version. Even if it's not a MultiAir version a DI version or something that makes Chrysler's engines stand apart from the others is needed to make them more distinct than their lesser counterparts. The interior of the 200 needs a complete overhaul as to not be so inherently Dodge or Jeep.

 

[Erik Latranyi]

So far this new map seems a bit more feasible than the ambitious 2009 version. Even if it's not a MultiAir version a DI version or something that makes Chrysler's engines stand apart from the others is needed to make them more distinct than their lesser counterparts. The interior of the 200 needs a complete overhaul as to not be so inherently Dodge or Jeep.

With 14 posts, you need to stop making declarations.

Allpar is a site devoted to FACTS. It is not the typical internet forum where anyone can spew their nonsense (not saying you are talking nonsense).

The Pentastar does not benefit from Multiair like other engines as it is very optimized already. Any MultiAir of DI variant may show up in a 6-figure Maserati, but not a $20,000 Chrysler.

The 200 is selling very well due to the incentives and vastly improved interior/exterior. It proves the vehicle had potential, but is due for replacement.....which will happen next year.

To ask for an overhaul of a vehicle with less than one year left is stupid and ignorant of the auto industry.

 

[Stratuscaster]

If your engines are meeting the requirements set forth for them without the extra help, then why increase your costs by adding the extra help now? Makes more fiscal sense to add that when the engine NEEDS it to meet requirements.

To say "because other automakers have it" isn't good enough. People tried that same excuse when Chrysler was still using 4-speeds while others were using 5 and 6 - yet there wasn't very much benefit to do so - if there was any benefit at all.

It might offer a marketing benefit - but that's not reason enough to spend the money in my mind.

 

[MoparNorm]

The interior of the 200 needs a complete overhaul as to not be so inherently Dodge or Jeep.

??? The 200 is a Chrysler, it was completely overhauled less than two years ago. It shares very little with Dodge or Jeep as there is no Jeep platform mate and it's Dodge cousin is a completely different vehicle inside and out.
I'd be surprised if there are few, if any, common part numbers.

 

[Archknight]

With 14 posts, you need to stop making declarations.

Allpar is a site devoted to FACTS. It is not the typical internet forum where anyone can spew their nonsense (not saying you are talking nonsense).

The Pentastar does not benefit from Multiair like other engines as it is very optimized already. Any MultiAir of DI variant may show up in a 6-figure Maserati, but not a $20,000 Chrysler.

The 200 is selling very well due to the incentives and vastly improved interior/exterior. It proves the vehicle had potential, but is due for replacement.....which will happen next year.

To ask for an overhaul of a vehicle with less than one year left is stupid and ignorant of the auto industry.

It's nice to think allpar.com is the only auto site that has facts attached since I only have 14 posts on here but let's look over the major forums (Motortrend, AutoBlog, Insideline, Topspeed, MotorAuthority, Leftlanenews, etc), the name on each is the same. Speculation is sometimes needed to motivate automakers and the more people clamor towards certain information the more likely it is to present itself especially when it comes to tech of any kind. Your discussion about MultiAir engines was only held among posters here, no actual project managers-technicians-insiders, that could even back or deny what you were discussing. Since I discovered this site I've only used it to cross-reference information that has been obtained by several sites that had already posted the information on certain products. So you shouldn't think this is be all end all of websites for this kind of information.

Btw....LOL, the comment on the the overhaul of the interior was about the successor of the current 200 model. Clarify before attacking, your assumptions make it seem as if you read too much into what is said instead of taking it at face value, since I've only spoken about the upcoming model from the start.

 

[Mike V.]

Archknight, you are verging on trolling behavior...

The blog sites you listed normally are well behind Allpar on real information or "scoops" when it comes to Chrysler products. As a matter of fact many of them pull their info directly from Allpar.

We have discussions with real insiders here consistently. We have members here that are engineers with backgrounds in everything from manufacturing to design. We have ad agency members. We also have members who work on the Chrysler assembly lines.

I suggest you step back and stop attacking members who are trying, very nicely, to point you thru the BS and toward reality.

Mike

 

[Roy Thigpen]

When it comes to Chrysler, Allpar is THE definitive authority. It's highly presumptuous of you to come onto this board and state that it's just one among many sites, when those sites are all regurgitating information they obtained from here.

I would suggest you apologize and take it down a notch. This is not a site that is filled with [this word has been banned due to its use as a pointless flame tool]ys, and willful ignorance and disrespect are not tolerated.

 

[Erik Latranyi]

It's nice to think allpar.com is the only auto site that has facts attached since I only have 14 posts on here but let's look over the major forums (Motortrend, AutoBlog, Insideline, Topspeed, MotorAuthority, Leftlanenews, etc), the name on each is the same. Speculation is sometimes needed to motivate automakers and the more people clamor towards certain information the more likely it is to present itself especially when it comes to tech of any kind. Your discussion about MultiAir engines was only held among posters here, no actual project managers-technicians-insiders, that could even back or deny what you were discussing. Since I discovered this site I've only used it to cross-reference information that has been obtained by several sites that had already posted the information on certain products. So you shouldn't think this is be all end all of websites for this kind of information.

Btw....LOL, the comment on the the overhaul of the interior was about the successor of the current 200 model. Clarify before attacking, your assumptions make it seem as if you read too much into what is said instead of taking it at face value, since I've only spoken about the upcoming model from the start.

Your post reeks of ignorance.

As has been pointed out, the discussions here involve many who work for Chrysler and Fiat. We have international members who have the inside line at Fiat. Their prognostications have been proven over and over again as factual.

Lastly, the successor of the current 200 will not be overhauled. It is an all-new vehicle. Again, your ignorance is showing.

You have a choice to make: Leave Allpar and continue reading the ignorant speculation of those who know zero about the auto industry and Chrysler ---or--- stay here, learn something and ask pointed questions.

 

[UN4GTBL]

??? The 200 is a Chrysler, it was completely overhauled less than two years ago. It shares very little with Dodge or Jeep as there is no Jeep platform mate and it's Dodge cousin is a completely different vehicle inside and out.
I'd be surprised if there are few, if any, common part numbers.

Pssst...

2012 Chrysler 200 Interior:

2012 Dodge Avenger Interior:

There are differences for sure. The 200 is a *bit* more upscale, but at a quick glance, except for the steering wheel and a couple other things they are very similar. Ironically, prior to the '11 refresh they were much more different.

I myself didn't notice many differences until I pulled these pictures from Google. (Steering wheel, gauge cluster, radio surround, window switch surrounds, etc)

 

[MoparNorm]

Pssst...

2012 Chrysler 200 Interior:

2012 Dodge Avenger Interior:

There are differences for sure. The 200 is a *bit* more upscale, but at a quick glance, except for the steering wheel and a couple other things they are very similar. Ironically, prior to the '11 refresh they were much more different.

I myself didn't notice many differences until I pulled these pictures from Google. (Steering wheel, gauge cluster, radio surround, window switch surrounds, etc)

I stand corrected. I was in the 2011 200 S at the LA Show, it was beautiful. At that time it shared little with the un refreshed Avenger.
To regress in 2012 is a little too Daimleresque to me...?

 

[Mike V.]

I stand corrected. I was in the 2011 200 S at the LA Show, it was beautiful. At that time it shared little with the un refreshed Avenger.
To regress in 2012 is a little too Daimleresque to me...?

The press shots shown above are decieving, as usual. While similar, the overal shape of the two dash boards is quite different and unique per vehicle. Only vent shape, switches, and radio are really the only things actually shared. Sitting in them side by side the difference is quite obvious.

The A/C vents are shaped like that in just about all of the new Mopars.

Mike

 

[JRS200x]

They have always been that similar Norm, ever since the refresh to both...


Oh come on Mike... I sit in both almost every day, and outside of some little detailing and or more chrome, they are VERY similar...sure there are different part numbers, but they are VERY similar.