Sounds good. I would love, for example, to see the Chrysler pentastar decal somewhere prominent on the vehicles lIke they were years ago. Like in the hub of the steering wheel, or as a hood ornament or fender decal, etc. Chrysler is an American institution, and should be treated as such.

 

Well before the merge of equals I do remember a small pentastar on all Chrysler, Dodge, Plymouth and Jeep products. It was usually on the lower fender just before the door. Probably cut by a bean counter.

 

It was a gold colored, small pentagon. I had it on all my Mopars '62 through '79. I can't recall if my '84 Laser still had it, or not.

 

The last time was the mid-90s, around the Neon/LH time. The Pentastar became the corp logo on the car with each brand getting a separate logo after years of putting the Pentastar logo all over every car.

But now the Pentastar is retired, so the only corporate logo is FCA script.

 

At one point GM put little GM logos on all their cars. Wonder if it would help Chrysler if all the Dodges, RAMs and Jeeps would easily be traced back to Chrysler.

I'm wondering if the current company upper-management even wants to have their products traced back to Chrysler.

 

I agree regarding the Chrysler flagship, but I agree that the path to that is blocked by Maserati. That said, most brands seem to have a flagship that is NOTHING like what they sell. Toyota did the MR2, Subaru the SVX (and now the STi, which at least shares a body with regular Subes), Chevy the Corvette, Ford the GT...



You mean, the Chrysler that’s associated in the public eye with repeated bankruptcy and failure? Sadly, all the accomplishments of the company have, I think, been wiped out from the repeated debacles of the last forty years or so. Nobody thinks, “Hey, yeah, Chrysler that built all those tanks when they said it couldn’t be done, for a third of the government’s estimated price,” or “Right, the Chrysler that saved hundreds of thousands of (Allied and civilian) lives in World War II by mass producing guns the inventor said could never be mass produced, and helped prevent Japanese biological warfare by making the atomic bomb possible.” A brief history of Chrysler military work (at http://www.allpar.com/history/military/ )

It’s more often, “Yeah, the Chrysler that was bailed out after the Volare, then was bailed out by Mercedes [I am not speaking truth here, but perception, remember], then went bankrupt and had to be bailed out yet again.”

Aldo does the market research, maybe he could tell me if my impressions are at least regionally correct?

Anyway, I understand why they don't associate with Chrysler... also of course because now it's FIAT Chrysler, or FCA, and they really have been trying to break down the old allegiances and make it One Big Happy Family. I do mean the last part literally, not sarcastically.

When people criticize Sergio, just remember it could have been much. much. worse. Sergio wanted to build a united company; I think we all remember the other approach.

 

Chrysler needs a flagship, even if it is only a new concept or an 'idea' car. We haven't had a notable one for awhile.
The recent 300 Executive Series was a nice trim level, but it hardly moved the meter. If they want to raise the bar for the Pacifica, that is a fine direction to go in also. I have read good things about the Hybrid package, but otherwise I'm not real excited.
The rat pack-ish, large, black Chrysler sedan with speed and style is still my idea of a flagship. Chrysler's future styling vision needs to be absolutely stunning, if not controversial. They've done it before, they can do it again.
The chrome grills and winged badges are OK. The Chronos and Phaeton show cars of the '90's were stirring. I like Imperials, but don't see them returning, unless they are positioned to do battle with the likes of BMW and Audi sedans. For now that is Maserati territory and we don't want to badge-engineer or to muddle brand-missions either.
Jeep is doing very well with future product in the pipeline. I'm seeing some Cherokees on the roads around here. Some parked in driveways next to Subarus and RAV4s.
Dodge has to be congratulated as having the Hellcat Demon as a flagship. Most can't afford it, but many aspire to it. It has desirable 'image' power.

 

As a side note on the pentastar logo, it's not completely absent from my 2014 Avenger but you have to really be looking for it. I found a tiny one in the fine print in the window glass.

 

Call it dumb or just wishful, but I wish they had somehow kept the old Avenger/200 and just produced them in mass. Base engine for fleets (if need be for the cost) and pentastar standard on Se/limited and above.

I know the Dart was required for additional control of the company, but I have to imagine there couldn't have been a better way. The time crunch factor really did undue destruction to the success of the car. I remember every color of the rainbow (almost) lined up of the Darts; all were manual. Great deals if you can drive a stick, unless the Fiat utilized hydraulic components fail as easily as they can in the Freemont.... or early suspension issues from late made decisions... or whatever else there was.

 

The Chrysler brand will not go upscale because that is where the Italian brands are. Sergio doesn't realize that a lot of people don't care about them. Sure the Chrysler name has been beat up, but many Americans remember the name and I am not talking about the financial problems but the hemi, the letter series and even the new Yorker name. Its name is as recognized as Cadillac ( Which it use to compete with ). One of the real good salesman for Chrysler was Lee I

 

The Chrysler brand will not go upscale because that is where the Italian brands are. Sergio doesn't realize that a lot of people don't care about them.

But people can actually find a Chrysler dealer near them, not so with the Italian brands.
A slightly more upscale Chrysler model wouldn't impact Italian sales. Two different beasts, two different customers.

 

We have a choice, overlap or full-range brands. There's a little overlap now (Grand Cherokee Trackhawk is in Maserati's price and performance range, for example) but I don't think it would make sense to go back to the days when they had three brands which shared almost everything.

A flagship, in the Gale tradition, would define the brand. For Plymouth, it was the Prowler (remember, Cruiser was supposed to be a Plymouth). For Dodge, the Viper. For Chrysler they were looking at prewar-influenced luxury. Today the flagship Dodge is the Demon.

To know what a flagship Chrysler should look like, you really need to know what Chrysler should be, and I gather they are wrapping that up and it might be the Portal.

 

We have a choice, overlap or full-range brands. There's a little overlap now (Grand Cherokee Trackhawk is in Maserati's price and performance range, for example) but I don't think it would make sense to go back to the days when they had three brands which shared almost everything.

A flagship, in the Gale tradition, would define the brand. For Plymouth, it was the Prowler (remember, Cruiser was supposed to be a Plymouth). For Dodge, the Viper. For Chrysler they were looking at prewar-influenced luxury. Today the flagship Dodge is the Demon.

To know what a flagship Chrysler should look like, you really need to know what Chrysler should be, and I gather they are wrapping that up and it might be the Portal.

I think a new version of the Cordoba would work. There would be nothing like it in this 'jellybean' world.

 

I feel the way the company is today that any upgrade to Chrysler would be infringing on the Italian brands . Like it or not one of the main reasons that Fiat got Chrysler was to get the Italian brands back in the USA.

 

If they'd had the stick that the Fiat 124 has... and the 1.4 tuning it has... it would have sold!

 

It could, but I think FCA is being very cautious at the moment.... though they could do a “new Cordoba” by applying the Challenger body shell with 300C-like front and rear styling... not cheap and if it's a mistake, boom!

 

If Lee was still running Chrysler you might get something like that, he was a gambler ( Mustang/ Minivan , K car ) and I almost forgot the convertible.

 

Chrysler had the Imperial concept about a decade back. Chrysler needs that styling theme on the CUSW platform. I know the Imperial concept was rear drive, but there is a gap that the 200 left. There is no way that a fwd based car would bump against Maserati or AR. The Dart and 200 were sporty and low slung when the market wants more height. An Imperial need not be Jeep Cherokee tall, or even have that car on stilts stance, such as on the Fiat 500X with AWD. It would only need a taller stance like the last Dodge Avenger.

The CUSW 200 had some things going for it, such as the V6 option and the electronics options. Cadillac and Lincoln are failing miserably reaching down into Chryslers turf with their small sedans. Meanwhile, the blocky Chrysler 300 still sells. A CUSW sedan with some height and wheelbase could overcome that, "just another mid-size car in a sea of lookalikes" perception. It would be different enough from the 300 to not compete with it.

 

I priced out the ATS. It's still got a price premium over even the 300. The main problem with Caddy is figuring what the heck each car is. You really have to go by price on their models page. (In case you're wondering, yes, I would like a compact sedan with a stick, but not at Cadillac or BMW prices...)

 

I can't tell any of the 'cars' apart. There is such a thing as having too similar a family resemblance.

 

If he had stayed fully in charge and had his way, there would have been no Viper or LH.

 

That is what hardly anyone realizes about Iacocca.

 

My Dakota has one of these plates on the door sill:

 

Just started watching "The Cars That Made America". First episode featured Ford, the Dodge Brothers, Durant, Louis Chevrolet and Walter Chrysler. These stories formed my fascination with the domestic industry. Vision and goals. To this day, the brands have meaning, beyond Iacocca and Henry Ford II. At least for me, these men were legends and buying a car from a domestic brand still resonates, like buying a piece of that history.

With Chrysler that history includes so many of the brands: Willys, Nash, Maxwell, movers and shakers of the automobile industry.

I don't think, beyond fans, people remember what they actually meant. The romance for them just isn't there. Chrysler has such a rich heritage to draw from. The goals are really eternal: build the best vehicle for the market. Now it's spread sheets, stock price and short term goals for market share.

Chrysler, for me, still means something a cut above. I know that connection is long gone, but I can't make the leap that it's "mass market" and Ford, Chevrolet and Toyota fodder. That Chrysler history still carries weight with me, no matter the owners, past and present. The same with Dodge. Their place in my heads is firmly fixed.

 

Just started watching "The Cars That Made America". First episode featured Ford, the Dodge Brothers, Durant, Louis Chevrolet and Walter Chrysler. These stories formed my fascination with the domestic industry. Vision and goals. To this day, the brands have meaning, beyond Iacocca and Henry Ford II. At least for me, these men were legends and buying a car from a domestic brand still resonates, like buying a piece of that history.

With Chrysler that history includes so many of the brands: Willys, Nash, Maxwell, movers and shakers of the automobile industry.

I don't think, beyond fans, people remember what they actually meant. The romance for them just isn't there. Chrysler has such a rich heritage to draw from. The goals are really eternal: build the best vehicle for the market. Now it's spread sheets, stock price and short term goals for market share.

Chrysler, for me, still means something a cut above. I know that connection is long gone, but I can't make the leap that it's "mass market" and Ford, Chevrolet and Toyota fodder. That Chrysler history still carries weight with me, no matter the owners, past and present. The same with Dodge. Their place in my heads is firmly fixed.

You forgot about Plymouth, Walter Chrysler baby. I remember when you bought a Plymouth you upgraded to a Dodge or Chrysler now that line is blurred.

 

When was Chrysler really created? (at https://www.allpar.com/ed/chrysler-founding-date.html )

This image was @$*&!^! tough to get together.

 

When was Chrysler really created? (at https://www.allpar.com/ed/chrysler-founding-date.html )

This image was @$*&!^! tough to get together.

OMG. Quite the family tree. The roots are deep

 

Where did Eagle fit into the hierarchy?

 

Basically Eagle was replacing Plymouth, that is why Chrysler, Dodge and eagle got the big cars , big mistake.

 

Eagle came along with AMC/Jeep. The Renault Alliance, Encore and Premier contract was part of the deal.
Eagle carried over with the (Mitsubishi) Eagle Summit and Vistas. The Vision was a more 'Euro' LH with the ESi and TSi trim levels.
Sales didn't catch on and the Eagle division was discontinued.
I felt that if the Ambassador was ever going to be rekindled, it would have been an Eagle.

 

That is why it should have been a Plymouth instead of eagle. if you look at the original eagle it was a 4 wheel drive Concord.

 

Eagle was killed by its own lack of image... but you are definitely right about the intent.

A brief history of Eagle cars (a Chrysler division, formerly AMC) (at http://www.allpar.com/history/eagle.html )