Allpar Forums banner
81 - 100 of 113 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Charger sales have been relatively flat since its introduction. In the US, the Charger has been around 90K sales per year.....some higher and some years lower, but it has been steady. The introduction of Hellcats has not increased sales.

One might argue it prevented a decrease, but Hellcats and Demons only account for a handful of sales in comparison to Pentastar and Hemi Chargers.
I honestly think the Charger would have been gone by now if Dodge didn't add those trims in 2014-15. What's happening with the Chrysler 300 now is basically what would have had happen to the Charger if not worse.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,334 Posts
Charger sales have been relatively flat since its introduction. In the US, the Charger has been around 90K sales per year.....some higher and some years lower, but it has been steady. The introduction of Hellcats has not increased sales.

One might argue it prevented a decrease, but Hellcats and Demons only account for a handful of sales in comparison to Pentastar and Hemi Chargers.
Charger sales are down from pre recession levels, post recession peak was 2013.


2006114,201
2007119,289
200897,367
200960,651
201075,397
201170,089
201289,916
201398,336
201494,099
201594,725
201697,110
201788,351
201880,226
201996,936
202077,426
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,334 Posts
I honestly think the Charger would have been gone by now if Dodge didn't add those trims in 2014-15. What's happening with the Chrysler 300 now is basically what would have had happen to the Charger if not worse.
Charger would have been gone by now if not for the police package and fleet sales. Charger of course cannibalized 300 sales with the loss of the 6.4 to keep Charger alive, this was much more important than the supercharged engine. Post recession 300 peak was 2012

300 sales
2005144,048
2006143,647
2007120,636
200862,352
200938,606
201037,116
201136,285
201278,417
201357,724
201453,382
201553,109
201653,058
201751,237
201846,593
201929,214
202016,473
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,083 Posts
Charger is returning to its 90k level. How much more are they pumping into fleets is a good question since Manley abandoned the proper reduced reliance on fleet sales that Sergio enacted. The company is back to around 25% fleet sales, which is way too high for long term health.

Basically, they were propping up the unit figures until the merger could close.

With regard to the 300, first generation owners were excited about the new 2012 until they saw it. Then, they went elsewhere and sales continued to decline despite the 2015 refresh that was closer to what the 2012 was going to be until Sergio watered down the styling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Charger is returning to its 90k level. How much more are they pumping into fleets is a good question since Manley abandoned the proper reduced reliance on fleet sales that Sergio enacted. The company is back to around 25% fleet sales, which is way too high for long term health.

Basically, they were propping up the unit figures until the merger could close.

With regard to the 300, first generation owners were excited about the new 2012 until they saw it. Then, they went elsewhere and sales continued to decline despite the 2015 refresh that was closer to what the 2012 was going to be until Sergio watered down the styling.
Not sure why people were displeased with the 2011 gen 300. I think it has a slightly more "Lincoln Town Car" like feel to it, especially in the back. The 2015 facelift I really like though, but is it just me or the post 2015 models look slightly smaller/shorter than the 2014 and earlier models (gen 2 only)?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,083 Posts
Not sure why people were displeased with the 2011 gen 300. I think it has a slightly more "Lincoln Town Car" like feel to it, especially in the back. The 2015 facelift I really like though, but is it just me or the post 2015 models look slightly smaller/shorter than the 2014 and earlier models (gen 2 only)?
There was no size change from 2004 to present. All sheet metal hard points are shared. There are some illusions due to the way the sheet metal was stamped.

The 2011 was a dud. After the first generation 300 created such excitement and attention for being a "Baby Bentley", the 2011 was like a Lincolon Town Car....and old man's car that did not excite anyone. Styling was universally described as "bland". Most designs under FCA are bland instead of bold. Grand Cherokee and Wagoneer are both uninspiring from an exterior sheet metal view.
 
  • Like
Reactions: David S

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
While I think DS's design language fits Chrysler well, I think they should embrace a formal design language similar to Rolls Royce. They can use the DS4, DS7 and DS9 as design references, and then mix in some of their 50's and 60's styling with it. They need a competitive small hatchback, large sedan and large SUV. They should either use real names they've had before (Concorde, Aspen, Airflow, etc.) or create new ones. Names, no numbers- like Lincoln is doing, (and I think Cadillac is following). Chrysler needs to be positioned against Cadillac and Lincoln. This means that unlike the Germans, the ride of a Chrysler should be soft and pillowy.

Lincolns are sometimes criticized for riding too soft, but some people like it.

Just my opinion, but I would make Chrysler the king of range. Similar to how Dodge is the king of horsepower. (600, 700, 800+ miles of range for Chrysler models).

On my Behance page, I made a full, but now that I think about it: kind of crowded new lineup for them.

[Sorted by smallest to largest:]

Feel free to let me know which of these you would cut out if you feel they aren't necessary (or add anything I didn't think of)

1. A PT Cruiser revival based on the 2014 DS Devine Concept. This time would ride slightly higher up. [STLA SMALL]

2. A Crossfire based on the DS4. [STLA MEDIUM]

3. A Pacifica based Crossover that covers two size categories known as the Sigma... [STLA MEDIUM]

4. A DS7 based Aspen [STLA MEDIUM]

5. My interpretation of the new Airflow hatchback. [STLA LARGE]

6. An all new Chrysler Concorde midsize liftback slightly bigger than the largest midsize sedan in the class (Subaru Legacy- I believe). [STLA LARGE]

7. and Sigma+. [STLA LARGE]

8. An all new Pacifica based off the Grand Cherokee L's styling. [STLA LARGE]

9. Large Imperial sedan. [STLA LARGE]

10. Midsize SUV based of the Grand Cherokee L called the Newport. [STLA FRAME]

11. Plush Large SUV called the Atlantic [STLA FRAME]

They don't need 11 vehicles (almost what Mercedes has, maybe more!) just considering all the segment sizes.

My thinking behind the Sigma/Sigma+ was taking the minivan, turning it into a traditional car that more people would be interested in, and making it as aerodynamic as possible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,334 Posts
While I think DS's design language fits Chrysler well, I think they should embrace a formal design language similar to Rolls Royce. They can use the DS4, DS7 and DS9 as design references, and then mix in some of their 50's and 60's styling with it. They need a competitive small hatchback, large sedan and large SUV. They should either use real names they've had before (Concorde, Aspen, Airflow, etc.) or create new ones. Names, no numbers- like Lincoln is doing, (and I think Cadillac is following). Chrysler needs to be positioned against Cadillac and Lincoln. This means that unlike the Germans, the ride of a Chrysler should be soft and pillowy.

Lincolns are sometimes criticized for riding too soft, but some people like it.

Just my opinion, but I would make Chrysler the king of range. Similar to how Dodge is the king of horsepower. (600, 700, 800+ miles of range for Chrysler models).

On my Behance page, I made a full, but now that I think about it: kind of crowded new lineup for them.

[Sorted by smallest to largest:]

Feel free to let me know which of these you would cut out if you feel they aren't necessary (or add anything I didn't think of)

1. A PT Cruiser revival based on the 2014 DS Devine Concept. This time would ride slightly higher up. [STLA SMALL]

2. A Crossfire based on the DS4. [STLA MEDIUM]

3. A Pacifica based Crossover that covers two size categories known as the Sigma... [STLA MEDIUM]

4. A DS7 based Aspen [STLA MEDIUM]

5. My interpretation of the new Airflow hatchback. [STLA LARGE]

6. An all new Chrysler Concorde midsize liftback slightly bigger than the largest midsize sedan in the class (Subaru Legacy- I believe). [STLA LARGE]

7. and Sigma+. [STLA LARGE]

8. An all new Pacifica based off the Grand Cherokee L's styling. [STLA LARGE]

9. Large Imperial sedan. [STLA LARGE]

10. Midsize SUV based of the Grand Cherokee L called the Newport. [STLA FRAME]

11. Plush Large SUV called the Atlantic [STLA FRAME]

They don't need 11 vehicles (almost what Mercedes has, maybe more!) just considering all the segment sizes.

My thinking behind the Sigma/Sigma+ was taking the minivan, turning it into a traditional car that more people would be interested in, and making it as aerodynamic as possible.
Base the design language on the 1998 Concorde.

DS looks like it has Japanese noses and the rear overhangs are too short.

Make the whole range FWD/AWD on STLA Medium and STLA Small

Not enough models in your list, you don't have a Laser and LeBaron Coupe. Way too many RWD based models, RWD is only 9% of sales in the US.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
Base the design language on the 1998 Concorde.

DS looks like it has Japanese noses and the rear overhangs are too short.

Make the whole range FWD/AWD on STLA Medium and STLA Small

Not enough models in your list, you don't have a Laser and LeBaron Coupe. Way too many RWD based models, RWD is only 9% of sales in the US.
Oops I didn't mention drivetrain. Maybe they could be re-engineered to accommodate a flat passenger and cargo floor? Because that's what I think the Chrysler models should focus on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
"Not enough models in your list, you don't have a Laser and LeBaron Coupe. Way too many RWD based models, RWD is only 9% of sales in the US."

I would bring back a modern version of the ME Four Twelve and revive either the Conquest or Drifter names for an EV supercar.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,334 Posts
Oops I didn't mention drivetrain. Maybe they could be re-engineered to accommodate a flat passenger and cargo floor? Because that's what I think the Chrysler models should focus on.
A flat passenger floor means wasted space. The lowest thing in the car should be the driver's feet and the seat rails, anything more results in excessive car height. Route everything around the driver and passenger. The flat cargo floor can be accomplished by having small storage spaces under the flat floor. Again not doing this wastes space.

12 cylinders aren't needed anymore with hybrids. If you can do a BEV supercar you can do a 4 cylinder hybrid supercar. The 12 cylinder is excessive weight for no purpose.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,334 Posts
"Not enough models in your list, you don't have a Laser and LeBaron Coupe. Way too many RWD based models, RWD is only 9% of sales in the US."

I would bring back a modern version of the ME Four Twelve and revive either the Conquest or Drifter names for an EV supercar.
Conquest was a Mitsubishi model name, and it has the conquistador baggage. Drifter was never a US Chrysler model, and it suggests a RWD 4 cylinder Japanese car in the US. So neither is a good choice.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
38,725 Posts
So the main idea for Chrysler's future is to look backwards? The brand is in trouble then as nostalgia won't carry you forward for long.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
Conquest was a Mitsubishi model name, and it has the conquistador baggage. Drifter was never a US Chrysler model, and it suggests a RWD 4 cylinder Japanese car in the US. So neither is a good choice.
Those were the only names from Chrysler I felt were "super" enough.

Well, they also had a Thunderbolt concept that would be cool in production.

As for the LeBaron, maybe I would do it in limited production per year to keep it niche and desirable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
So the main idea for Chrysler's future is to look backwards? The brand is in trouble then as nostalgia won't carry you forward for long.
Not exactly. In names, and a few design aspects only. Unless there could be a new language for Chrysler.

The future is in fresh product that draws influence from, I'd say, 1920s, or maybe 50/60s styles and themes adjusted for modern design, addressing build quality and reliability, as well as achieves outstanding electric range and has lots of room for people. Mostly upright designs, or those that prioritize interior space.

The key would be to heavily address build and long term quality, and to maximize EV range and passenger/cargo room.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
And if you think "well, reliability was never their thing anyway",

They can certainly learn if they have the drive to. Maybe study Toyota's hybrid/EV systems, combined with what's been making their older Dodge/RAM trucks so dependable?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,334 Posts
So the main idea for Chrysler's future is to look backwards? The brand is in trouble then as nostalgia won't carry you forward for long.
The cars can look back, the brands will succeed because there are forward looking SUVs that share platforms, components and factories with the cars, keeping factories near capacity. Chrysler and Dodge are dying because all the SUVs are at Jeep.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
The cars can look back, the brands will succeed because there are forward looking SUVs that share platforms, components and factories with the cars, keeping factories near capacity. Chrysler and Dodge are dying because all the SUVs are at Jeep.
The 2WD Jeeps should be given to Chrysler.
 
81 - 100 of 113 Posts
Top