People mover is not a brand direction. All cars are people movers. So is a bus and a commuter train.
Chryslers last stand
The coming few years will tell us if Chrysler will still be around.
The replacment of the 300 has to be a winner.
Its time to make the decision. Chryler will be the People mover and have cars to compete with toyota.
They have to have more then 2 models, they need a small suv and a midsize suv.
The replacment of the 300 has to be a winner.
Its time to make the decision. Chryler will be the People mover and have cars to compete with toyota.
They have to have more then 2 models, they need a small suv and a midsize suv.
1 - 20 of 219 Posts
If the Chrysler version looks like a Wagoneer with a different grill, then one of them is unnecessary.
The trick is using what IS NOT seen for both vehicles, then changing what is seen.
Proper examples of differentiation:
2023 Charger vs. 2023 Challenger vs. 2023 300
2021 Durango vs. 2021 Jeep Grand Cherokee
2023 Wagoneer vs. 2023 Ram 1500
Poor examples of differentiation:
2015 Grand Caravan vs. 2015 Town & Country
The trick is using what IS NOT seen for both vehicles, then changing what is seen.
Proper examples of differentiation:
2023 Charger vs. 2023 Challenger vs. 2023 300
2021 Durango vs. 2021 Jeep Grand Cherokee
2023 Wagoneer vs. 2023 Ram 1500
Poor examples of differentiation:
2015 Grand Caravan vs. 2015 Town & Country
Nope, you need to change more than the face. look at Durango vs Grand Cherokee.Essentially keeping the frame the same, but changing the face, styling and power
pretty much every body panel is different. Wheel openings, window openings, etc.
This much is obvious, judging by timing throughout Chrysler’s history regardless of ownership.
The day they drop Chrysler and Dodge will mark the point where the auto market returns with a vengeance to passenger cars.
The day they drop Chrysler and Dodge will mark the point where the auto market returns with a vengeance to passenger cars.
But the Airflow has bronze accents! BRONZE!Chrysler is NOT a blank slate. For better or worse it has been around for 99 years.
The way to succeed forward is to take the path of least resistance on the market. The way to do that is to bring back those things that people remember Chrysler did well, but in a way that is relevant in the 21st century.
This is what 2005 Chrysler 300 did so well: the imposing styling, the HEMI power, the RWD setup, the roomy interiors, the overall size, reminded people of the best of Chrysler’s past but wrapped in a package that was impactful in its modern day.
But it took a man of incredible vision and drive like Tom Gale to bring all these elements together.
Is there someone at Chrysler with similar vision and energy to repeat a similar feat? I don’t know. I haven’t seen one so far.
That seem to be the major CF spent time on when I watched her presentation a few months back.
At least 10 years ago, someone was discussing the Chrysler PT Cruiser convertible they had just inherited. One person said they bet it was worth something because they hadn’t made Chryslers in a long time.But, as said, they have a clean slate. Most people I know think Chrysler hasn't existed for several years.
And when I was a kid, Chrysler WAS perceived as a luxury brand.
It reminded me in a sad way of “American Auto” and their clueless CEO.Again, not sure I should laugh or cry...
This just shows a lack of brand understanding and development. If Alfa and Maserati were strong, well defined brands Stellantis would not have to protect them from encroachment by Chrysler.These days Chrysler is not percieved as a luxury brand. Chrysler is barely percieved at all in fact, as you pointed out. But the other problem is that Ma Stella has plans for Alfa and Maserati, and they don't want Chrysler mucking things up by trying to compete with them. If Chrysler tries to be premium, they will get smacked down.
Sure it is different in other parts of the world. But holding Chrysler down isn’t going to strengthen Alfa or Maserati in North America. All this type of thinking does (not blaming the poster, but the planners within the corporation) is show they can’t manage brands.
The most common reply of that was wrong would probably be "I'm dead."I would ask Imperial owners or other 90s/2000s Chrysler owners what was wrong
No, because the average age of the people who bought new Chryslers in the late 1980s/early 1990s was pretty high. Take that old age and add 30-40 years, and many of those original K car New Yorker/Imperial purchasers are now dead. And I would not go back to those cars. They are irrelevant now....Because...X went wrong and Y failed, right? So you would address those components of the car.
Plus you don't ask people what they want changed. They will (intentionally or not) lie to you, trying to tell you what they think you want to hear
"Voice of the Customer" is basically worthless. "Observational Voice of the Customer" is where you learn.
The best example I am aware of in Chrysler's history was the 1994 Dodge Ram. They didn't ask people what they wanted in a new pickup. They watched people using their existing trucks and found the pain points - and addressed those.
That website is just noise.CarComplaints.com | Car Problems, Car Complaints, & Repair/Recall Information
Free help for car problems, repairs and recalls. What's wrong with YOUR car?www.carcomplaints.com
That's not how you study what is wrong with a car design.
You need scientific studies. People bash them, but JD Powers studies are much more scientific and controlled than random posts on websites.
Even internal data on warranty cost is more valuable than that website.
I recall them being so bold about Pacifica and its higher price (over the then out going minivan) that they told the price sensitive buyer to look elsewhere in the vehicle portfolio.
They’d had the same idea with the 200. The new vehicle would be more premium than the outgoing one.
The results? The 200 was cancelled in a hissy fit because the buyers didn’t believe it was more premium just because FCA said it was.
The same problem happened with Pacifica, people didn’t see the extra value FCA said was there. So the Grand Caravan hung around until they could make the Pacifica more price competitive. I imagine we weren’t far from a Pacifica hissy fit cancellation as well.
They’d had the same idea with the 200. The new vehicle would be more premium than the outgoing one.
The results? The 200 was cancelled in a hissy fit because the buyers didn’t believe it was more premium just because FCA said it was.
The same problem happened with Pacifica, people didn’t see the extra value FCA said was there. So the Grand Caravan hung around until they could make the Pacifica more price competitive. I imagine we weren’t far from a Pacifica hissy fit cancellation as well.
Here’s my thought on Hornet. It’s a decent vehicle.
As part of a complete lineup it would have been OK.
As the first new Dodge in a decade it can’t live up to the hype and expectations.
As part of a complete lineup it would have been OK.
As the first new Dodge in a decade it can’t live up to the hype and expectations.
The 200 and Dart were people movers and they are gone.The LH cars were cutting edge and "people movers"
And there is no wow factor to defining a brand as a people mover. A city bus or an airplane is a people mover. So is an escalator.There was no wow factor to either of them.
Although the PT Cruiser had issues, it was a very different but memorable car, kind of a 2000s icon.
No, Toyota’s wow factor is their quality. That is a factor that matters to a lot of people.Nobody considers Chevy or Toyota a "wow" brand either. But people keep buying them.
Chevrolet has a decent performance reputation and a getting better quality image.
The Chrysler as EV leader idea was debunked by all the 4xe Jeeps. Plus figure the largest (percentage of sales, anyway) EV market is going to be Europe for quite some time, a market where Chrysler is an almost non-entity, so this idea, like a lot of other FCA claims, makes no sense.Chrysler, they are claiming will be (a) pure bev (b) be first of all the other stellantis brands with the stla brain (tesla style centralized single computer) electronic architecture with (c) the new ai techy digitized interiors out of the new but fca era jv with foxconn. Chrysler has airflow concept on stla large 800v ev. Also remember: the Portal concept. So there u have it as brand positioning?....Chrysler as stellantis' set piece technology demonstrator (plus bev minivan.) They may not make money on it but it would be a sortof technolgy and quality futurist masthead for the corporation stellantis aka ex f C a in the usa? A Tesla Vibes by stellantis?
A simple change of wording could have made this misstep into something, for example “moving people in style and comfort” at least would elicit some positive connotation. It would distinguish Chrysler’s brand direction from the function of an escalator.
They came close on a couple occasions. There were even spy pictures.It's kind of sad that Chrysler has no models anymore outside of the Pacifica, which is a great vehicle still.
Never understood why they didn't make an attractive crossover off of the Pacifica platform. Honda has 2 such vehicles based sharing the Odyssey platform. Honda Passport and Honda Pilot.
One rumor had the minivan-based crossover going to Dodge and possibly replacing Durango ( thankfully that didn’t happen) and later the minivan-based crossover was a rumored addition to the Chrysler lineup along with a Chrysler version of the Grand Commander. That didn’t happen either.
So we are left with just memories of the original Pacifica which was a minivan-based crossover that was dropped because it was ahead of its time.
Quirky worked out so well for Subaru and Saab. Subaru became more conventional and survived. Saab didn’t and that was a bigger problem than GM’s meddling.
1 - 20 of 219 Posts
Allpar Forums
A forum community dedicated to Dodge, Jeep, Ram, Chrysler, AMC owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
