Joined
·
35,564 Posts
Seeking your opinions, comments, etc. http://www.allpar.com/corporate/creating-a-car-2014.html
This is a private forum, by invitation only.
This is a private forum, by invitation only.
Creating a car, 2014
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
I have given my comments to Dave on this article. This forum has been generated for recording the discussions regarding the topics and are hidden from public view for privacy. All of you invited are various Chrysler employees or ex employees and are needed to comment due to your experience with the corp in various functions and positions.
Please feel free to argue and fight to your hearts content (like I need to tell you that! ) without concern of it spilling over into the public forums. No one in here but us that made Chrysler great.
Please feel free to argue and fight to your hearts content (like I need to tell you that! ) without concern of it spilling over into the public forums. No one in here but us that made Chrysler great.
Joined
·
2,384 Posts
Hi: It's Works !
How a Pic of a Rack of Hurricane Engines ? I Found some In "Area 51" ( The North End of the Old North Plant) before I Left in Late August. They Were a Fenced in Area Covered with White Plastic.
Just Kidding, Not.
More Later.
DVB
How a Pic of a Rack of Hurricane Engines ? I Found some In "Area 51" ( The North End of the Old North Plant) before I Left in Late August. They Were a Fenced in Area Covered with White Plastic.
Just Kidding, Not.
More Later.
DVB
Joined
·
2,384 Posts
Is Our Esteemed Allpar Member Norm Invited?
1. Many Time He Knows Things & Info to 3 Decimal or 4 Decimal Places.
2. I Like Some One Who is Opinionated But ---------------.
3. I've Made Millions of Engines over 40 Years, So last Summer at Meetings with the Plant Manager and Staff When My Self and another Returning Retiree Spoke It Actually All got Quite and They Listened.
Well Enough Said.
DVB
1. Many Time He Knows Things & Info to 3 Decimal or 4 Decimal Places.
2. I Like Some One Who is Opinionated But ---------------.
3. I've Made Millions of Engines over 40 Years, So last Summer at Meetings with the Plant Manager and Staff When My Self and another Returning Retiree Spoke It Actually All got Quite and They Listened.
Well Enough Said.
DVB
I dont know....but this is strictly for current or past Chrysler people only, in my opinion. That way we can keep it all in the family, so to speak.
Joined
·
35,564 Posts
Makes sense to me. Well, other than my listening in...
I think there are four basic periods to consider.
1) Chrysler before AMC
2) Chrysler’s “second golden era” (third if you wish) between AMC purchase and Daimler takeover
3) Daimler / Quality Gates (Bob has written about the issues there, as has an anonymous contributor whose work you have not seen)
4) Fiat / current
My writeup is about the current setup based on a 2009 glimpse. However, you know that I have no limits on my ambitions of coverage!
I think there are four basic periods to consider.
1) Chrysler before AMC
2) Chrysler’s “second golden era” (third if you wish) between AMC purchase and Daimler takeover
3) Daimler / Quality Gates (Bob has written about the issues there, as has an anonymous contributor whose work you have not seen)
4) Fiat / current
My writeup is about the current setup based on a 2009 glimpse. However, you know that I have no limits on my ambitions of coverage!
I would have no objection to Jim being allowed access, but I draw the line at other mods....simply for the reason you two I trust, the others I dont, as I expect this to be a safe haven for chrysler people to talk openly. Your call though.
Joined
·
43,887 Posts
(Don't mind me - just here for the coffee.)
Joined
·
35,564 Posts
Update... this was written by someone anonymously. I will be integrating it soon.
Creating a new car at Chrysler (or any car company)
There are two major different “new vehicles” created by a car company.
1.) The Next Big Thing (NBT). These things come along rarely. Examples include the minivan, Pontiac GTO, Ford Mustang, Chevy VOLT, Saturn, Dodge Viper, Saturn Sky/Pontiac Solstice, Chrysler/Maserati TC, etc.. Typically, because these are “revolutionary” and not “evolutionary”, they need to be driven by a strong leader who is willing to take risks. Because these vehicles are “all new”, there is usually no infrastructure nor data inside the company to provide guidance to the product development. This requires the leader to provide his vision for the product. If the products are successful, the leader becomes legendary. If the products are unsuccessful, the leader is at the minimum tarnished, at the maximum fired. The stakes are high!
2.)Successors to current vehicles. By far, this is the most common case, and there are always several of these programs going on inside all auto companies all the time. Typically they are timed out so that the resources (people, faciliites, capital) can accommodate them which means that the intended launch for these new products is cadenced. No company can afford to renew everything at one time.
For the second case above, there is a lot of research done inside the company and outside the company to document the strengths and weaknesses of the current product being replaced. This data could include customer likes / dislikes, quality scores, warranty, manufacturing issues that make the current product difficult to build, pending regulatory issues (safety, fuel economy, etc.), and of course design (styling). All of these are controlled by cost!
1.)Marketing always wants to provide as many new unique features to the product they can, which makes the product easier to move off the showroom floor.
2.)Warranty can always be improved by increased testing and development time.
3.)Manufacturing always has issues regarding aspects of the current product that are difficult to build, and cost them time in the process to achieve good quality.
4.)Complexity. If a product is too complex with too many options and build combinations, manufacturing cannot be sure they will build it right and, although marketing wants to give the customer the features he wants on the car, if the product is too complex the dealer will not be able to stock all the combinations.
5.)Regulatory issues regarding safety, fuel economy, even recycle ability, etc., are always changing driving changes. Often, the current product can become unsaleable in future years due to regulatory changes making the development of a new product not an option but a necessity.
6.)The Design Office always wants to create rolling works of art.
All of these aspects, must be contained in a business case. In addition, the intended launch timing is established and must be held!
Marketing states the price target they feel they can sell the proposed car for based on competitor’s similar offerings. The part costs for the current product are well known, so comparisons of new proposals and estimates of their associated costs are compared. Besides the cost of the part, the tooling to create the part must always be considered. These figures can run into many hundreds of millions of dollars.
A very simple equation can explain it all:
(Price) - (cost of the parts) – (cost to assemble the car) – (overhead i.e. engineers, testing, lights and heat in buildings) – (tooling required to make the parts/projected volume of cars to be sold) = a positive number as high as possible!!
A small cross-functional team of individuals is established usually 5 -6 years before the intended product launch. This small team gathers the information from the various parts of the company and pulls it all together. This information starts out at a high, very general level, and then is refined to more and more detail. This refinement is driven by a cadenced series of management reviews. At any of these reviews, the team can be given the order to proceed or at the extreme, sent back to start all over. As the product definition gets more detailed, more and more people are added to the team to support the workload.
This process then proceeds with improved product definition, then with part designs, then with prototype parts, then with prototype vehicles, then with testing results and any fixes required, then with pilot cars built on the intended production line until the day comes to begin production of saleable cars. Usually, this starts at a rate less than the intended final production rate, but escalates as rapidly as possible while still maintaining quality.
By the time these final steps happen, a new team has already been formed to start the process all over again.
Creating a new car at Chrysler (or any car company)
There are two major different “new vehicles” created by a car company.
1.) The Next Big Thing (NBT). These things come along rarely. Examples include the minivan, Pontiac GTO, Ford Mustang, Chevy VOLT, Saturn, Dodge Viper, Saturn Sky/Pontiac Solstice, Chrysler/Maserati TC, etc.. Typically, because these are “revolutionary” and not “evolutionary”, they need to be driven by a strong leader who is willing to take risks. Because these vehicles are “all new”, there is usually no infrastructure nor data inside the company to provide guidance to the product development. This requires the leader to provide his vision for the product. If the products are successful, the leader becomes legendary. If the products are unsuccessful, the leader is at the minimum tarnished, at the maximum fired. The stakes are high!
2.)Successors to current vehicles. By far, this is the most common case, and there are always several of these programs going on inside all auto companies all the time. Typically they are timed out so that the resources (people, faciliites, capital) can accommodate them which means that the intended launch for these new products is cadenced. No company can afford to renew everything at one time.
For the second case above, there is a lot of research done inside the company and outside the company to document the strengths and weaknesses of the current product being replaced. This data could include customer likes / dislikes, quality scores, warranty, manufacturing issues that make the current product difficult to build, pending regulatory issues (safety, fuel economy, etc.), and of course design (styling). All of these are controlled by cost!
1.)Marketing always wants to provide as many new unique features to the product they can, which makes the product easier to move off the showroom floor.
2.)Warranty can always be improved by increased testing and development time.
3.)Manufacturing always has issues regarding aspects of the current product that are difficult to build, and cost them time in the process to achieve good quality.
4.)Complexity. If a product is too complex with too many options and build combinations, manufacturing cannot be sure they will build it right and, although marketing wants to give the customer the features he wants on the car, if the product is too complex the dealer will not be able to stock all the combinations.
5.)Regulatory issues regarding safety, fuel economy, even recycle ability, etc., are always changing driving changes. Often, the current product can become unsaleable in future years due to regulatory changes making the development of a new product not an option but a necessity.
6.)The Design Office always wants to create rolling works of art.
All of these aspects, must be contained in a business case. In addition, the intended launch timing is established and must be held!
Marketing states the price target they feel they can sell the proposed car for based on competitor’s similar offerings. The part costs for the current product are well known, so comparisons of new proposals and estimates of their associated costs are compared. Besides the cost of the part, the tooling to create the part must always be considered. These figures can run into many hundreds of millions of dollars.
A very simple equation can explain it all:
(Price) - (cost of the parts) – (cost to assemble the car) – (overhead i.e. engineers, testing, lights and heat in buildings) – (tooling required to make the parts/projected volume of cars to be sold) = a positive number as high as possible!!
A small cross-functional team of individuals is established usually 5 -6 years before the intended product launch. This small team gathers the information from the various parts of the company and pulls it all together. This information starts out at a high, very general level, and then is refined to more and more detail. This refinement is driven by a cadenced series of management reviews. At any of these reviews, the team can be given the order to proceed or at the extreme, sent back to start all over. As the product definition gets more detailed, more and more people are added to the team to support the workload.
This process then proceeds with improved product definition, then with part designs, then with prototype parts, then with prototype vehicles, then with testing results and any fixes required, then with pilot cars built on the intended production line until the day comes to begin production of saleable cars. Usually, this starts at a rate less than the intended final production rate, but escalates as rapidly as possible while still maintaining quality.
By the time these final steps happen, a new team has already been formed to start the process all over again.
Joined
·
35,564 Posts
It is indeed generic, from Chrysler. It's in addition to, not in place of, the earlier one. I was thinking of doing "generic process" vs "current formal process." And then of course there's the quality gates to go over, I do have some info there but that'll take time to shape up, and nothing detailed about the AMC or 1970s Chrysler processes.
for convenience, I will split my comments up by paragraph.
All of these comments relate to the Bob Lutz style of product management and organization that was used on the BR/T300 after the purchase of AMC.
There was a lot of heartburn over the Phoenix. It was an evolutionary design of the AD/AW (2wd and 4wd respectively) and came close to approval prior to Lutz's hiring. At a design review, Lutz took one look and rejected it as "not enough" to win the marketplace and immediately ordered everyone to start over. The quote was "we need a polarizing design. People need to love the style or hate it. There will be "either or"-no middle ground." (Paraphrased here.)
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!