Allpar Forums banner

41 - 60 of 138 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,591 Posts
A car that got 40 mpg highway would have come due to the strings attached by the task force. It didn't have to come at the time it did, run on premium, or be on a widened C-Evo CUSW. It had to run on premium as long as the car was 3200 lb and they didn't give the engine direct injection. If they just tacked a trunk on Giulietta and made it in the US with a Dodge nose that would have saved 200 lbs. If they made it a sedan on SCCS SUSW they could have saved another 200 lb (2800 lb). An economy car running on premium was doomed to failure in the US. Unlike Europe the point is lower operating cost, not avoiding multiple CO2 taxes.
The requirement to run on premium has nothing to do with the type of injection used, it's down to the relatively high specific power of the 1.4 engine. Using DI to produce the same power from the same engine displacement would have made it more likely, not less, to require higher-octane fuel, because using DI increases combustion temperature (and that is why DI engines produce more NOx). One of the most common misconceptions about premium gasoline is that it gives better mpg: it doesn't. Higher octane rating means the fuel can be used in a hotter engine without pre-igniting: nothing less, nothing more (actually, in terms of calorific content, high-octane fuel normally has less energy in it that regular); it's more correct to say that hotter-running, higher-output engines require higher-octane fuel.

I agree with you about Dart being too big, although as someone who owns a Giulietta, I would add that it would have needed a wheelbase stretch of 2-3 inches in addition to the trunk in order to reach the size of a typical compact sedan (e.g. Corolla). The extra width was not required - Giulietta is actually slightly wider than a Corolla both inside and outside. (But when you see Dart as a rolling prototype for KL and 200, making it that big makes more sense).

It's also not true to say Europeans buy "economy" cars to avoid paying environmental taxes: low fuel consumption is still the overriding goal for buyers, all that the CO2-based taxation schemes do is make this clearer to buyers, because it is, in effect, a tax on vehicles with high fuel consumption. Burning a litre of petrol produces the same amount of CO2 regardless of what vehicle it's being burned in. The differences in emission are down to how much of that fuel gets burned. The banding in most systems does occasionally magnify some very marginal differences (e.g., a 1 gram difference that puts you into a harsher tax band), but overall, by buying a "low CO2" car you will save much more in fuel than in annual taxation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
506 Posts
The vehicles presently on sale in the US that meet the 35 mpg combined (adjusted) goal are the 2.0 Elantra/Forte, 2.0 Corolla Hatch, 1.5T Civic, 1.6 Accent/Rio and 1.6 Versa. Clearly there are different ways to hit the same fuel economy goal. The Elantra/Forte, Corolla and Civic sell well in the US (#1,2,3 and 5 small cars), the traditional 1.6 econobox does not (#10, 13 and 18 small cars). The NA 1.6 econobox still does great in Europe and Asia, it hasn't sold well in the US since the '80s.

Yes, the Forte/Elantra, Civic and Corolla sedan all have a 2,700 mm (106.3 in) to 2,720 mm (107.1 in) wheelbase, but the Corolla hatch that meets the goal has a 2,640 mm (103.9 in) wheelbase, quite close to the 2,634 mm (103.7 in) Giulietta wheelbase. The sales for Cherokee and 200 would have been higher if they were narrower and lighter as well, so the added width didn't make sense.

Look at the engines offered in the 500L and 500X in the US;
1.4T 160 HP 184 lb-ft @2500-4000 rpm premium required
1.3T 177 HP 210 lb-ft @1850 rpm regular gasoline.

That's pretty typical for direct injection on gasoline engines, higher specific output, more torque at lower RPM, better fuel economy, able to run on regular gas, able to meet US emissions including NOx and particulates without a particulate filter. That holds for NA 2.0 or 1.5T engines.

Given the punishing high taxes on gasoline throughout Europe it is more about avoiding taxes than saving gas.
CountryTax Per Gallon

Italy$3.11

France$2.78
Germany$2.79

United Kingdom$2.82
United States$0.56

About 1/4 of what we in the US pay at the pump is taxes. More of the cost of driving a gasoline car in Europe is taxes than gas. Europeans buy economy cars to avoid taxation. taxfoundation org/oecd-gas-tax/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,934 Posts
The NA 1.6 econobox still does great in Europe and Asia, it hasn't sold well in the US since the '80s.
Naturally aspirated 1.6 in Europe? I'm unaware of such new product from European car makers and if someone has it in its lineup it's not good seller.


Yes, the Forte/Elantra, Civic and Corolla sedan all have a 2,700 mm (106.3 in) to 2,720 mm (107.1 in) wheelbase, but the Corolla hatch that meets the goal has a 2,640 mm (103.9 in) wheelbase, quite close to the 2,634 mm (103.7 in) Giulietta wheelbase. The sales for Cherokee and 200 would have been higher if they were narrower and lighter as well, so the added width didn't make sense.
That's good question but it's something which should be addressed to Auburn Hills R&D center. Development of CUSW including engines used on North American products are their specialty. At least they were at the time when CUSW based care were developed.

In their defence. You like to point out to CAFE which is related to footprint. Footprint in US should be Track width x Wheelbase length. So wider car should help a bit.

Europeans buy economy cars to avoid taxation.
Partly true. But you've overlooked narrower roads, much denser cities and of course smaller parking spots. Latter is the reason why are we seeing more and SUVs on European roads. For example why would someone replace his/her VW Passat with new VW Tiguan. FYI, both are different than ones offered in US, US Tiguan is known as Tiguan Allspace in Europe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,453 Posts
A car that got 40 mpg highway would have come due to the strings attached by the task force. It didn't have to come at the time it did, run on premium, or be on a widened C-Evo CUSW. It had to run on premium as long as the car was 3200 lb and they didn't give the engine direct injection. If they just tacked a trunk on Giulietta and made it in the US with a Dodge nose that would have saved 200 lbs. If they made it a sedan on SCCS SUSW they could have saved another 200 lb (2800 lb). An economy car running on premium was doomed to failure in the US. Unlike Europe the point is lower operating cost, not avoiding multiple CO2 taxes.

Would I have preferred loaning the money and giving the company to Magna instead of Fiat? Of course. In that case the Dart would have wound up an aero body on the Caliber, the transmission and engine would have to change. Perhaps a low boost direct injected version of the 1.8 WGE running on regular, with an 8 or 9 speed transmission purchased from someone, or an improved CVT. So much for the alternative past we could have gotten, but didn't.

As it was the 2.4 Caliber and Dart Aero had the exact same operating cost, due to the premium fuel. Combine that with the DCT and you see why it didn't sell. People did want an economy car, but not something more expensive than the Caliber with equal operating expense.

People still want economy cars. Elantra, Civic, Corolla Hatch and Forte provide that now with 2.0 or 1.5T power running on regular. Dodge needs to be in that segment as well with a new car after the merger. EMP1/CMP or EMP2 could work.

C4 III on EMP1/CMP weighs 2762 lbs with a 128 HP 1.2T. To be competitive in the US that would have to be replaced with the 177 HP 1.3T. All new sheet metal would be needed as C4 III is a 60" tall 5 door hatchback. 105.1" wheelbase (Corolla Hatch 103.9")

308 II GT on EMP2 weighs 2599 lbs with a 222 HP 1.6T. This is already competitive in the US. All new sheet metal would be needed for the US. GTi is 2624 lbs 259 HP 1.6T. 103.1" wheelbase.

508 II on EMP2 weighs 3075 lb with a 178 HP or 222 HP 1.6T. Just a new nose and tail needed. 110.0" wheelbase
Bravo to everything you said about the Giuiletta. Creating the Dart was an exercise in wasted money, time, and effort as opposed to using the Giulietta as a starting point, and adding a trunk and a new front clip.

As for Magna...You would have thought that as a matter of national pride, the Canadian Federal Government, and Provincial Government of Ontario would have offered Loan Guarantees...if not outright Loans to allow Magna to acquire Chrysler LLC.
I share your feeling of missed opportunity that Magna never happened.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,934 Posts
C4 III on EMP1/CMP weighs 2762 lbs with a 128 HP 1.2T. To be competitive in the US that would have to be replaced with the 177 HP 1.3T. All new sheet metal would be needed as C4 III is a 60" tall 5 door hatchback. 105.1" wheelbase (Corolla Hatch 103.9")

308 II GT on EMP2 weighs 2599 lbs with a 222 HP 1.6T. This is already competitive in the US. All new sheet metal would be needed for the US. GTi is 2624 lbs 259 HP 1.6T. 103.1" wheelbase.

508 II on EMP2 weighs 3075 lb with a 178 HP or 222 HP 1.6T. Just a new nose and tail needed. 110.0" wheelbase
A lot of wrong info in your posts. Someone may say it's as usual.

You said that Small Wide is a heavy platform which just is not true.

For Small Wide vs EMP2 comparison I'll provide Fiat Tipo vs Pug 308 II review. Not some subjective data but something which was measured.

Interior dimensions, take a look at number 7:
72887



Cargo capacity:
72888



72889


As you can see Tipo offers much more combined leg room than 308 II. It weighs 20 kg more which can explained by using big and heavy 1.6 diesel engine which is based on 2.0 diesel and has cast iron engine block while Peugeot has smaller (dimensional) engine with aluminium engine block.

Tipo offers similar ride quality. Yes, it can be measured and it's nice so that someone can avoid subjective opinions.

I'm glad to be able to debunk some false claims.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
506 Posts
A lot of wrong info in your posts. Someone may say it's as usual.

You said that Small Wide is a heavy platform which just is not true.

For Small Wide vs EMP2 comparison I'll provide Fiat Tipo vs Pug 308 II review. Not some subjective data but something which was measured.

Interior dimensions, take a look at number 7:
View attachment 72887


Cargo capacity:
View attachment 72888


View attachment 72889

As you can see Tipo offers much more combined leg room than 308 II. It weighs 20 kg more which can explained by using big and heavy 1.6 diesel engine which is based on 2.0 diesel and has cast iron engine block while Peugeot has smaller (dimensional) engine with aluminium engine block.

Tipo offers similar ride quality. Yes, it can be measured and it's nice so that someone can avoid subjective opinions.

I'm glad to be able to debunk some false claims.
Once again you completely missed the point. Small Wide gains a lot of weight when federalized for the US market. Any federalized SCCS small wide platform is too heavy:

Promaster City 3509 lb, Nissan NV200 3280 lb
Fiat 500X (AWD) 3305 lb, Hyundai Kona AWD 3085 lb
Fiat 500L 3254 lb, Kia Soul 2844 lb
Compass FWD 3184 lb, Outlander Sport 3120 lb, Subaru Crosstrek (AWD) 3117 lb
Renegade FWD 3056 lb, Hyundai Kona FWD 2890 lb

1458 kg is 3214 lb, just as bad as the Dart.


Same old worthless set of measurements. Gas pedal to back seat. If EMP2 requires a longer wheelbase for the same interior room that is fine in the US, actually it is preferable since it makes the fuel economy target easier due to a larger footprint.

The 308 III is coming out in a few months.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
506 Posts
Naturally aspirated 1.6 in Europe? I'm unaware of such new product from European car makers and if someone has it in its lineup it's not good seller.




That's good question but it's something which should be addressed to Auburn Hills R&D center. Development of CUSW including engines used on North American products are their specialty. At least they were at the time when CUSW based care were developed.

In their defence. You like to point out to CAFE which is related to footprint. Footprint in US should be Track width x Wheelbase length. So wider car should help a bit.



Partly true. But you've overlooked narrower roads, much denser cities and of course smaller parking spots. Latter is the reason why are we seeing more and SUVs on European roads. For example why would someone replace his/her VW Passat with new VW Tiguan. FYI, both are different than ones offered in US, US Tiguan is known as Tiguan Allspace in Europe.
CAFE is only helped when vehicles sell. If a narrower vehicle increases sales significantly then CAFE is helped by a narrower vehicle.

Manhattan has a higher population density than any city in Europe. Cities in New Jersey have similar population densities to the most densely populated cities in France, Belgium and Spain. NY and LA are larger than any city in Europe. There are many narrow roads on the East coast of the US in the densely populated Boston-Washington corridor. There are a few on the West Coast, but most of the growth there is post colonial with wider roads.

wikipedia org/wiki/List_of_cities_proper_by_population_density
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,934 Posts
Small Wide gains a lot of weight when federalized for the US market.
Who said that it will be different with EMP2?


Same old worthless set of measurements. Gas pedal to back seat. If EMP2 requires a longer wheelbase for the same interior room that is fine in the US, actually it is preferable since it makes the fuel economy target easier due to a larger footprint.
Pedal to rear seat rest measurement tells a lot. For example how efficient packaging is. Small Wide wins over EMP2.

Longer wheelbase? Offer it on Small Wide and it will still win.

For years I've hearing how modern and lightweight EMP2 is. Now comparison to Small Wide proves otherwise. And we are talking about late 2013 vs mid 2015 product. "All new" vs "old" platform.

Small Wide wins even for insulation. I forgot to post that part of the test.

1458 kg vs 1438 kg based on identical test procedure which includes full fuel tank and driver. I'm not sure if luggage is included. But it's identical to all tested cars.

For comparison Hyundai i30 Fastback 1.4 TGDI Style DCT was measured at 1522 kg.

Or if you want specs from US. 500X AWD was listed at 2967 lbs when Pop trim was available. I don't see it much different to for example Hyundai Kona.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
SUSW is much better than EMP2 or CMP, but, the fact is that PSA is making much money with this « poor » platforms...

However there are allready old platforms... Stellantis will have new platforms as eMini, eVMP and eGiorgio.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,934 Posts
However there are allready old platforms... Stellantis will have new platforms as eMini, eVMP and eGiorgio.
There could be a lot of internal fights for future platform and product development.

Rumor says there is an eSmallWide under development. How about that?

Add to that next generation CMP.

It will be fun in the coming years. At least it seems that PSA has stopped petrol engine development and they will switch to GSE and GME. Of course PSA engines will live for foreseeable future.
 

·
Resident Photoshop Nerd
Joined
·
8,016 Posts
Discussion Starter #51

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,591 Posts
Manhattan has a higher population density than any city in Europe.
Manhattan is an enormous, glaring outlier in the USA. It's also an invalid comparison, as you've cherrypicked the most densely populated borough of one city and compared it with complete cities elsewhere in the world. When you take New York City as a whole, you get a population density of 27,000 per square mile (about 10,000 per square km), which is nothing out of the ordinary in a European context (it's below Lyon on your list), but New York is still the most densely-populated American city by a long distance (San Francisco is next, at about 17,000).

There's also a big difference between the density distribution of a typical European city and a typical American one: American cities tend to have very small but high-rise, high-density cores ("downtowns"), surrounded by low-density inner city neighbourhoods and very low density suburbs. European cities haven't got the same density spike in the middle (for cities with historic "old towns", the centre can even be lower density than the immediate surrounds), but against that, the inner city and suburbs are built at a much, much higher density than in the USA.

The USA is a more urbanised country than Europe (82% of population living in large towns or cities versus 75%), but the average European lives in a settlement with higher population density than the average American does.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,667 Posts
I'm sure there will be some turf wars over which platform is better. They really need to study the platforms very carefully to see which one offers the most flexibility and cost to manufacturer vs where it comes from.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,332 Posts
CAFE is only helped when vehicles sell. If a narrower vehicle increases sales significantly then CAFE is helped by a narrower vehicle.

Manhattan has a higher population density than any city in Europe. Cities in New Jersey have similar population densities to the most densely populated cities in France, Belgium and Spain. NY and LA are larger than any city in Europe. There are many narrow roads on the East coast of the US in the densely populated Boston-Washington corridor. There are a few on the West Coast, but most of the growth there is post colonial with wider roads.

wikipedia org/wiki/List_of_cities_proper_by_population_density
Manhattan lives and dies by the subway. So much so, that I was totally surprised that I was able to easily drive into the City on a weekend, which was in 2013. Most subways in Germany are more refined, or at least smoother. NYC can barely do more than maintain it's system in normal times due to passenger volume. Does anyone in the Greater NYC area know if they've taken advantage of all the COVID shutdowns to do any work there like we've seen on roadways in the Midwest? I've taken the A Train from JFK into the City before. Been on subways in several European cities, including Rome, Frankfurt, Munich, Stuttgart, Berlin, Vienna. Munich has gone from possibly the oldest trainsets to newest in the last year or two.

As KrisW stated, NYC is basically an outlier. The Northeast, Old SF, and older Coastal Southern cities are exceptional in the US. Old Cities in Europe are the rule, and again, as KrisW stated, Europeans live more densely, much because they mostly all live in the confines of a village or larger settlement. Even the farmers in Germany mostly live in villages, or at least a small settlement that's an outlying portion of an incorporated "allgemeinde" village, in much of Germany. I've seen some disconnected farms like in the Midwest in the north, such as Westphalia, and a few farmhouses up in the Black Forest hills, walking distance from the village proper, but mostly, the farmers live in or on the outskirts of the village.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T_690

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,934 Posts


Yeeup.. oof.
SEC -TERMS OF THE CROSS-BORDER MERGER BETWEEN FCA N.V. AND PSA


At the Effective Time, all assets and liabilities that are held by PSA (including, without limitation, all shareholdings held by PSA in its Subsidiaries), will be allocated to the French permanent establishment of FCA registered in France on December 11, 2019 (the "FCA French PE") with effect as of the Retroactive Effective Date. The FCA French PE will continue to carry out, without interruption, the activities that were carried out by PSA prior to the Effective Time, without prejudice to the attributions and decision-making power vested in the head office of FCA. The Merger will not result in any asset or liability being transferred out of the existing Italian permanent establishment of FCA in Turin, Italy (the “FCA Italian PE”), which will continue to carry out, without interruption, the activities that were carried out by the FCA Italian PE prior to the Effective Time.


At the Effective Time:
(a)all assets and liabilities of PSA (without limitation) will be transferred to FCA by universal succession of title and FCA will be automatically subrogated in all of the rights and obligations of PSA resulting from any contract or commitment, of whatever nature;
(b)each holder of PSA Ordinary Shares (excluding Excluded PSA Shares) will receive 1.742 New FCA Common Shares for each PSA Ordinary Share, subject to the terms and conditions set out in this Merger Proposal;
(c)PSA will be dissolved without going into liquidation;
 

·
Registered
2014 Jeep Compass
Joined
·
186 Posts
Would I have preferred loaning the money and giving the company to Magna instead of Fiat? Of course. In that case the Dart would have wound up an aero body on the Caliber, the transmission and engine would have to change. Perhaps a low boost direct injected version of the 1.8 WGE running on regular, with an 8 or 9 speed transmission purchased from someone, or an improved CVT. So much for the alternative past we could have gotten, but didn't.
1.8 WGE. "Low boost direct injected"
Something doesn't add up here. Unless I'm out of the loop that Alfa's 1.75T is actually a re-designed 1.8 WGE mill with a turbo (and DI), or "low boost" now meaning lower CR, that all really sounds like an unnecessary investment into the 1.8 to add boost and DI.
That, and a "purchased 8 or 9 speed" sounds just a little like what already happened with ZF. We can also toss the CVT. The only reason they're still on the road is because the people who have them can't get into cars with actual gears.... I outta know. My friend had a Sentra. He came into some money, and now he drives a Compass. He actually really likes it too lol
Also: the least we talk about anything on the Caliber chassis, the better. That thing is wrong. And the subframes. The, rust-only-in-two-years subframes. lmao
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,453 Posts
SEC -TERMS OF THE CROSS-BORDER MERGER BETWEEN FCA N.V. AND PSA


At the Effective Time, all assets and liabilities that are held by PSA (including, without limitation, all shareholdings held by PSA in its Subsidiaries), will be allocated to the French permanent establishment of FCA registered in France on December 11, 2019 (the "FCA French PE") with effect as of the Retroactive Effective Date. The FCA French PE will continue to carry out, without interruption, the activities that were carried out by PSA prior to the Effective Time, without prejudice to the attributions and decision-making power vested in the head office of FCA. The Merger will not result in any asset or liability being transferred out of the existing Italian permanent establishment of FCA in Turin, Italy (the “FCA Italian PE”), which will continue to carry out, without interruption, the activities that were carried out by the FCA Italian PE prior to the Effective Time.


At the Effective Time:
(a)all assets and liabilities of PSA (without limitation) will be transferred to FCA by universal succession of title and FCA will be automatically subrogated in all of the rights and obligations of PSA resulting from any contract or commitment, of whatever nature;
(b)each holder of PSA Ordinary Shares (excluding Excluded PSA Shares) will receive 1.742 New FCA Common Shares for each PSA Ordinary Share, subject to the terms and conditions set out in this Merger Proposal;
(c)PSA will be dissolved without going into liquidation;
Oh!, Dear God!
There's nothing like a big dose of 'legal-eze' to give you a screaming Ice Cream headache!...And I don't even have any Ice Cream in the house either!:p:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,332 Posts
SEC -TERMS OF THE CROSS-BORDER MERGER BETWEEN FCA N.V. AND PSA


At the Effective Time, all assets and liabilities that are held by PSA (including, without limitation, all shareholdings held by PSA in its Subsidiaries), will be allocated to the French permanent establishment of FCA registered in France on December 11, 2019 (the "FCA French PE") with effect as of the Retroactive Effective Date. The FCA French PE will continue to carry out, without interruption, the activities that were carried out by PSA prior to the Effective Time, without prejudice to the attributions and decision-making power vested in the head office of FCA. The Merger will not result in any asset or liability being transferred out of the existing Italian permanent establishment of FCA in Turin, Italy (the “FCA Italian PE”), which will continue to carry out, without interruption, the activities that were carried out by the FCA Italian PE prior to the Effective Time.


At the Effective Time:
(a)all assets and liabilities of PSA (without limitation) will be transferred to FCA by universal succession of title and FCA will be automatically subrogated in all of the rights and obligations of PSA resulting from any contract or commitment, of whatever nature;
(b)each holder of PSA Ordinary Shares (excluding Excluded PSA Shares) will receive 1.742 New FCA Common Shares for each PSA Ordinary Share, subject to the terms and conditions set out in this Merger Proposal;
(c)PSA will be dissolved without going into liquidation;
Yet:
FCA and its reference shareholder Exor have nominated 5 members (including John Elkann as Chairman) and Groupe PSA and two of its reference shareholders (EPF/FFP and BPIfrance) have nominated 5 members (including the Senior Independent Director and the Vice Chairman). Carlos Tavares, Stellantis’ Chief Executive Officer, will also be a member of the Board of Directors. Groupe PSA and FCA announce Stellantis Board membership
Mr. Tavares is CEO and one of TWO Executive officers of Stellantis, the other being the Chairman. I presume, given the board being split evenly, Mr. Tavares would be a deciding vote in the event the two sides of the company are at odds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: David S

·
Administrator
Joined
·
35,572 Posts
Sergio was like anybody else. He had his strengths and his weaknesses, and depending on your point of view you either thought he did a good job or not. One thing is for sure, he has passed on. The next gen of leadership is going to have to put the merger into action and go on from there. We won't know for a few years yet just what that is going to look like, or if it is successful or not. It's all speculation at this point. Hurry up and wait.
Lutz also had his strengths and weaknesses! If he'd humored Lido a little, we'd have had him running Chrysler and no Daimler.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
35,572 Posts
Sorry, that was from page 2.

Dimensions aren't heavy. Not all of the changes for the USA are dimensions. Again, particular types of safety testing and suspension durability play a role... as does cost reduction.

It's a good point that Dart was a pilot for Cherokee and Pacifica and 200. Otherwise, it could indeed have stayed on the Alfa platform. The suspension would still have needed some work to meet USA durability needs - our roads are rubbish compared to pretty much anywhere in Europe. Work on powertrain and cost reduction would be needed as well. But it would have ended up a better, lighter car. I like my Dart but the trunk seems to be the same size as my wife's 300, and the rear seat space is almost the same. I would have actually preferred a narrower car by around six inches and maybe a less-long car.
 
41 - 60 of 138 Posts
Top