Allpar Forums banner
161 - 180 of 254 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,053 Posts
Sebring doesn't have any more negative perception to the public than Chrysler. Can we stop repeating the Fiat talking points? 200 was intended to belittle Chrysler. Honda didn't drop Civic when they came out with a bad model, they moved up the refresh and replacement dates. I don't believe there are bad names for multi generation cars based upon one bad generation, that there was more than one generation proves it is a good name. Now names can become politically incorrect or divisive like Imperial or New Yorker, but a name with two good generations doesn't go bad simply because generation 3 was a clunker.
Sorry, but here I think you're merely projecting anti-FCA bias onto a name change without a shred of real or circumstantial evidence, as I don't see this as provable or even logical. Otherwise, I agree on your first point, and the Honda talking point is a good argument, as is the rest of the paragraph.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Donte Lindsey

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
The thing is all the Stellantis brands share that quality image. It's not like Stellantis owns Toyota and Honda. American, French and Italian car brands still have the perception to overcome, because it is based on the reality of the '70, and the spotty record since then hasn't erased it. Toyota and Honda were known as cheap junk that rusted out in a few years back in the '70, but they have 40 years of continuous improvement to point to. Hyundai/Kia was cheap junk in the '80s and '90s, but they now have 20 years of continuous improvement.

There was a Chrysler Imperial for 29 years before there was an Imperial Division, and a Chrysler Imperial for 4 years after there was an Imperial division. There was an Imperial that wasn't a Chrysler for 24 years, and I can verify that people were still calling them Chrysler Imperials in 1975, just as people call them Dodge Rams now. Stellantis doesn't need another division, but Chrysler needs a halo car that isn't a loaded version of a V6 300.

The Imperial design exercise was exactly what Chrysler doesn't need, a throwback RR clone. What Imperial signified at its best was a forward looking vehicle through 1973, the first car offered with anti-lock brakes in the US. An Imperial needs to be a modern Chrysler, not the '30s inspired Lincoln/Cadillac and Bentley/RR themes of later models and design exercises.
So you mean genesis? Lexus IS pretty much the Asians German brand, it competes a lot with them and you’re not gonna steal the devoted buyers of that brand. It’s gonna take decades for anything Chrysler does be it quality, luxury, or whatever. They’ve been out of the “luxury scene” for too long for them to just start pushing that imagine again. They’re gonna have to go the Mazda route and start moving up slowly.
The poor attitude is Exactly the problem with the current product. Lack of desire to change. Quality is fixing exhaust bolts breaking or poor ball joint durability. Window seals that don't keep the weather out and suspension bushings that don't shrink when the weather turns cold. Electronics that don't freeze or take hours to load. Oh a a dealer network that doesn't set out to rip people off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
Oh ya. $100k+ Chryslers would be flying off the lots 🤨
Well my wk2 replacement may just end up being a Yukon Denali diesel. $104 k was the sticker. It's just too big for the wife but she hasn't said no. I don't like the Wagoneer enough nor the power train choices. The one thing stellantis has over gm is the dealership network is quite as scuzzy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
536 Posts
Discussion Starter · #164 ·
Well my wk2 replacement may just end up being a Yukon Denali diesel. $104 k was the sticker. It's just too big for the wife but she hasn't said no. I don't like the Wagoneer enough nor the power train choices. The one thing stellantis has over gm is the dealership network is quite as scuzzy.
I actually like the look of the new Yukon! Get a unique color like Satin Steel, Redwood or Midnight blue! I want Dodge or Chrysler to come out with a variation of the GW.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
Any future Lancia car that size is going to be on STLA medium just like some future Chrysler, DS and Alfa models. So whatever the quality is it will be shared, it is a non issue.

As far as quality perception in the US, Lancia, Alfa, Fiat, Maserati, Peugeot and Citroen are mud, while Chrysler and Dodge are merely dirt. DS is either a complete unknown, or known as a Citroen and hence is also mud. Abarth of course is not seen as a brand, merely a trim on a Fiat. Opel is also seen as dirt, while Vauxhall is either a complete unknown, or an Opel with the wheel on the wrong size and a funny badge on the grill.
It's a good thing the general public has a short memory. It's too bad this is what management is counting on for sales. Fix the quality and durability issues.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Since I own a Imperial I will be biased and say Imperial lol. Also always need a waterfall grille.
Waterfall grill was very cool though short lived as Imperials go, besides the 30's was it 74 to 75 81-83 and 90-93? Personally I love the 69-73 Fuse style the best, but the front clip of the 74-75 is cool, but that 81 and 82 with the hidden headlights That should come back somehow! Cheers!
 

·
Registered
1979 Lincoln Town Car, 1987 Chevrolet Silverado, 1990 Chrysler Imperial
Joined
·
1,962 Posts
Waterfall grill was very cool though short lived as Imperials go, besides the 30's was it 74 to 75 81-83 and 90-93? Personally I love the 69-73 Fuse style the best, but the front clip of the 74-75 is cool, but that 81 and 82 with the hidden headlights That should come back somehow! Cheers!
I would agree. I like hidden headlights as well but I like when they work more! haha.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,138 Posts
Sorry, but here I think you're merely projecting anti-FCA bias onto a name change without a shred of real or circumstantial evidence, as I don't see this as provable or even logical. Otherwise, I agree on your first point, and the Honda talking point is a good argument, as is the rest of the paragraph.
You ignored my circumstantial evidence in the first paragraph: "the only Chrysler with a number should be 300. 300 is like Chrysler's Abarth, it is supposed to be a sport version of another Chrysler. Putting 300 on the 190 HP 2.7 was an intentional insult by Daimler. Putting 200 on the Sebring was an intentional insult to Chrysler customers by Fiat. 200 means average horsepower and less than a 300. They followed that up with the insult of not putting direct injection on the 2.4 so it didn't even have 200 HP like the competition."

I'm not an insider, not that it matters in this case since they are likely to have not shared such bias against Chrysler in written communications that would serve as tangible evidence. Even if the intent is not provable the result is the same, the name 200 was an insult to traditional Chrysler customers ans shouldn't be reused.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,138 Posts
Waterfall grill was very cool though short lived as Imperials go, besides the 30's was it 74 to 75 81-83 and 90-93? Personally I love the 69-73 Fuse style the best, but the front clip of the 74-75 is cool, but that 81 and 82 with the hidden headlights That should come back somehow! Cheers!
I also loved the fuselage cars '69-'73

I don't like the '30s revival narrow grill. I loved the hidden headlights, but they are obsolete now with aero headlights, and with the new adaptive headlights coming some part will probably be on all the time the car is running.

The waterfall grill texture is fine when it isn't on something upright and narrow that looks like it came off a '33. Laid back and filling in all the space between the headlights like '82-'95 LeBaron. Cirrus was also similar to that. It was even tastefully done on the '88 New Yorker and T&C minivan. A tip of the hat to the '30s, fine. Grafting the top of a mostly upright '30s grill onto the front of a modern car, no thanks.

I can also do without the waterfall spilling onto the bumper, that looks like a Buick or Oldsmobile
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,053 Posts
Even if the intent is not provable the result is the same, the name 200 was an insult to traditional Chrysler customers ans shouldn't be reused.
That's still a weak argument that it was intentional.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
View attachment 84959
View attachment 84960
View attachment 84961

  • Large liftback shaped like a traditional sedan.
  • Bench seat available
  • column shifter
  • air suspension that can be adjusted to sedan or SUV height: 5.5-9 inches ground clearance.
Give any more feedback about this proposition, or anything else or different ideas of a modern classic.

Should the iconic nameplate be revived under the new ownership, how could it work, and be kept relevant in this day, and keep it in demand?

(You can also talk about other classic Chrysler cars making a comeback in this thread. LeBaron, New Yorker, etc.)
I appreciate your effort on the rendering. I've submitted a few, but have gotten savaged in the past by those who just didn't like my submission. So, I applaud you for submitting. That said, when/if the Imperial ever comes back, I hope they have the courage to make it a proper sedan, instead of another me-too, '4-door coupe' look-alike. In '05, they bucked the fwd, cab-forward, jellybean trend with the 300, and it was a huge success. A new Imperial, if it ever happens (or any new Chrysler standard-bearer, for that matter), needs to stand out, not blend in. Just my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
466 Posts
I appreciate your effort on the rendering. I've submitted a few, but have gotten savaged in the past by those who just didn't like my submission. So, I applaud you for submitting. That said, when/if the Imperial ever comes back, I hope they have the courage to make it a proper sedan, instead of another me-too, '4-door coupe' look-alike. In '05, they bucked the fwd, cab-forward, jellybean trend with the 300, and it was a huge success. A new Imperial, if it ever happens (or any new Chrysler standard-bearer, for that matter), needs to stand out, not blend in. Just my opinion.
Don't let them stop you from posting. I enjoy seeing people's ideas. Maybe you can come up with something that competes against the Aviator. I would love to see that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
536 Posts
Discussion Starter · #179 ·
Don't let them stop you from posting. I enjoy seeing people's ideas. Maybe you can come up with something that competes against the Aviator. I would love to see that.
I did the Newport on Behance. An inch longer wheelbase at 120 in.

I noticed this about Hyundai, but I don't think they intended this, but they tend to be both the lightest and largest vehicles in their segments. I think Chrysler should one up the largest luxury vehicles in their respective segments. At least in weight or space if not both.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
466 Posts
I did the Newport on Behance. An inch longer wheelbase at 120 in.

I noticed this about Hyundai, but I don't think they intended this, but they tend to be both the lightest and largest vehicles in their segments. I think Chrysler should one up the largest luxury vehicles in their respective segments. At least in weight or space if not both.
Hmm I don't think I saw it. Chrysler needs to one up every vehicle they make to seem better than the competition.
 
161 - 180 of 254 Posts
Top