Allpar Forums banner

101 - 120 of 127 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,087 Posts
@oh2o

Just as I thought. WM is a cancelled Maserati Levante project. The one based on Grand Cherokee from JNAP.

AFAIK UT was not a Dodge project. It was a FWD Alfa Romeo. IMO it was a Giulia.
 

·
Administrator
1974 Plymouth Valiant - 2013 Dodge Dart - 2013 Chrysler 300C
Joined
·
36,163 Posts
Just noticed there's a JT and JP Wrangler Pickup...different codes for different regions or something else?
Two and four door? That's be interesting.

Jeep Truck and Jeep Pickup ;)
 

·
Administrator
1974 Plymouth Valiant - 2013 Dodge Dart - 2013 Chrysler 300C
Joined
·
36,163 Posts
The E Class was a FWD car, an extended K car. The AM (or just M) bodies were RWD cars, derived form the F body Aspen and Volare. The confusion probably comes because of the switch of the New Yorker from the M body in 1982 to both the E and M bodies in 1983 to just the E body in 1984. Caravelle is also another confusing one, a RWD M body in Canada but a FWD E body in the US (I don't know if the years overlapped).
Yup, at some point they went to two-letter names. I’ve never seen M referred to as AM though maybe it was in late corporate info. The New Yorker name did pass from the R body to the M body and then E body. They replaced New Yorker (the name) with Fifth Avenue on the M to clear up some of the confusion. Fifth Avenue had been an option package. The first M body Chrysler did not help - it was the LeBaron, a name taken from the grand Imperial. That name was moved onto a K-car in what may have been the biggest name-drop-in-status in history and was replaced by New Yorker on the same car.

A lot of this was done because the company kept ending their old rear drive platforms (lack of sales). New Yorker, Gran Fury, and some others had been on the C bodies, then were “downsized” (name moved to the R body), — note Monaco and Fury were “downsized” by moving them onto the smaller B body — and then the M body. That was the final curtain call for the Gran Fury but the New Yorker went front drive and even smaller. The Fifth Avenue,previously an option package and now a full model, simply died with the M body in 1989.

While we are there, yes, Caravelle was M body in Canada, E body in the US. I do not believe there was overlap. Canada may have retitled their Caravelle to Gran Fury when the name moved over. I could be wrong.

More confusing to some may be the two A bodies. There were the original A bodies, Valiant/late-Dart/Duster/etc, and then there were the AA bodies which were sometimes call the A bodies; AA were LeBaron (again), Spirit, and Acclaim. Saratoga in Europe. In South America or Mexico they may have used other names, I forget now.
 

·
Yes, This MK Goes Off-Road
Joined
·
1,318 Posts
Two and four door? That's be interesting.

Jeep Truck and Jeep Pickup ;)
The two and four door Wrangler are both called JL, so why do something different for a two and four door Jeep truck? Maybe there's a third surprise lurking somewhere?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
Perhaps something sharing the frame and wheelbase dimensions of the pickup, but all closed in. Maybe something along the lines of the Jeep Africa concept of a few years back.
 

·
Mopar Guru!
Joined
·
12,768 Posts
RA was the Chrysler fullsize crossover to be based on the Pacifica. However, internally that code is out and a new code of RD is in the system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,844 Posts
Yup, at some point they went to two-letter names. I’ve never seen M referred to as AM though maybe it was in late corporate info. The New Yorker name did pass from the R body to the M body and then E body. They replaced New Yorker (the name) with Fifth Avenue on the M to clear up some of the confusion. Fifth Avenue had been an option package. The first M body Chrysler did not help - it was the LeBaron, a name taken from the grand Imperial. That name was moved onto a K-car in what may have been the biggest name-drop-in-status in history and was replaced by New Yorker on the same car.

A lot of this was done because the company kept ending their old rear drive platforms (lack of sales). New Yorker, Gran Fury, and some others had been on the C bodies, then were “downsized” (name moved to the R body), — note Monaco and Fury were “downsized” by moving them onto the smaller B body — and then the M body. That was the final curtain call for the Gran Fury but the New Yorker went front drive and even smaller. The Fifth Avenue,previously an option package and now a full model, simply died with the M body in 1989.

While we are there, yes, Caravelle was M body in Canada, E body in the US. I do not believe there was overlap. Canada may have retitled their Caravelle to Gran Fury when the name moved over. I could be wrong.

More confusing to some may be the two A bodies. There were the original A bodies, Valiant/late-Dart/Duster/etc, and then there were the AA bodies which were sometimes call the A bodies; AA were LeBaron (again), Spirit, and Acclaim. Saratoga in Europe. In South America or Mexico they may have used other names, I forget now.

Two-letter body codes:

This was done with the AMC purchase. AMC was using two letter codes for 'some' jeep models (XJ, YJ,). Others I believe were still one letter code at the time. Some Renault/AMC products used letter/number or single letter codes. Premier was B body. To prevent overlap, and confusion, all existing Chrysler models were made A#, Premier became BB, all Jeeps had #J as the 2nd letter. Same kind of thing was done for part # system in service and parts to prevent having the same part number showing up for two different parts in a merged database. All former Nash/Hudson/AMC/Jeep parts had a 'J' prefix attached to the existing AMC/Jeep partnumber, All Renault/AMC part numbers had a 'T' prefix to existing part numbers, while Chrysler maintained it's existing p/n's.

Caravelle:
M-Caravelle in Canada was never GranFury, but was "Caravelle Salon" , when the E-Caravelle was launched.
 

·
Mopar Guru!
Joined
·
12,768 Posts
2015 to Present:
LADM22 = Dodge Challenger SRT Demon
LADR22 = Dodge Challenger SRT HELLCAT / SRT HELLCAT widebody
LADS22 = Dodge Challenger SRT392
LADX22 = Dodge Challenger T/A 392 / R/T Scat Pack
LADP22 = Dodge Challenger R/T / T/A
LAEH22 = Dodge Challenger GT AWD
LADH22 = Dodge Challenger SXT

2008 to 2014:
LCDX22 = Dodge Challenger SRT8 / SRT392
LCDR22 = Dodge Challenger SRT8 Core
LCDP22 = Dodge Challenger R/T
LCDH22 = Dodge Challenger SE / SXT
 

·
Mopar Guru!
Joined
·
12,768 Posts
2011 to Present:
LDDT48 = Dodge Charger SRT HELLCAT
LDDX48 = Dodge Charger SRT392
LDDR48 = Dodge Charger R/T Scat Pack / Daytona 392
LDEP48 = Dodge Charger R/T AWD
LDDP48 = Dodge Charger R/T / Daytona
LDES48 = Dodge Charger SXT AWD / GT AWD
LDDS48 = Dodge Charger SXT Plus
LDDM48 = Dodge Charger SE / SXT

2006 to 2010:
LXDX48 = Dodge Charger SRT8
LXEP48 = Dodge Charger R/T AWD
LXDP48 = Dodge Charger R/T
LXET48 = Dodge Charger SXT AWD
LXDL48 = Dodge Charger SXT
LXDH48 = Dodge Charger SE
 

·
Administrator
1974 Plymouth Valiant - 2013 Dodge Dart - 2013 Chrysler 300C
Joined
·
36,163 Posts
“RA was the Chrysler fullsize crossover to be based on the Pacifica. However, internally that code is out and a new code of RD is in the system.”

Anyone know about RD?

Dodge full size crossover? (am I misreading the “D”?)
Or did they just revise the heck out of it?
Or rename it because of the leaks?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Guys a lot of this speculation from insiders is incomplete or straight up outdated. Yes almost everything listed has been studied but few are solidly in the plan. Fca are in debt payoff mode and also not approving programmes with minimal payback potential, they are being purely pragmatic right now. All these cars have gone back except for those in the compliance plans for Nafta, Emea and China. Don't expect many surprises before 20 or 21my. If they're unapproved now then add 24 to 30 months from approval to production (which in itself is damn fast....competitors where I've also worked for take 3 to 5 years). If you wanna guess what's gonna be made think about what would achieve volumes and margin with minimal discounting and then secondly what's aligned to the compliance requirements for cafe, eu commission and Chinese requirements and then thirdly what the current openly stated strategy to build up Jeep, ram, alfa and maser would deliver.
 

·
Administrator
1974 Plymouth Valiant - 2013 Dodge Dart - 2013 Chrysler 300C
Joined
·
36,163 Posts
The DT-SUV would probably be 2020/2021, but it's all Wagoneer based, so...

I agree, I don't expect anything really new till 2021 except what we already know —
* Wrangler
* 2.0 GEMA-T4
* Pickups
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Bingo, also some food for thought on production capacity:

Windsor: full until grand caravan dies in a year or two
Brampton: can do 4 cars on longitudinal platforms, currently doing 3 that all are quite old...but the plant won't go as there's been a lot of expensive investment and challenger/charger at least will obviously live on.
Shap: will keep churning out DS rams and then wagoneer etc
Warren: will be full of new rams
Toledo: will be full of new wrangler and Jeep pickup
Jefferson: currently grand cherokee and durango but remember grand cherokee has unmet demand and Jeep are conspicuously lacking a 3 row e-suv
Belvidere: cherokee but still some spare capacity maybe...tbc
Toluca: New compass, and old journey for a couple more years (and 500 in small numbers)
Saltillo: will keep churning out trucks as it does now.

For the purposes of this let's ignore Latin America and Asia Pacific as they're local production sites for local consumption.

So we jump to Europe.

Tychy is bursting at the seams building 500 and ypsilon and will need to make room for panda to go back as per Sergios statement but lancia may not survive long as it's italy only.

Pompigliano will be free once the panda moves and builds on the supermini platform but can maybe also do compact wide platform.

Cassino isn't full with giulia stelvio and the old giulietta

Melfi is capacity constrained on renegade and 500x (and some old pantos but not for long Id guess)

Mirafiori is empty...8 lines of varying capacity building mitos at a snails pace and the maserati Levante...room for lots of products of varying volume and pressure from the city to commit to product could push fca that way. The plant is quite up to date but dormant

Grugliasco is full with the maserati sedans but it's tiny anyway

Sevel and Tofas are churning out lcvs and tipos at a high rate, good luck shoehorning more in there

Kragujevic is 500L only which isn't the greatest success story so could handle more compact wide cars maybe.

In interested what people might guess when you consider which plants are full or not and what platforms they build. Remember changing platform is not easy as we saw by the massively costly refits Shap and Toledo underwent recently to switch from compact wide to body on frame jeeps and trucks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
395 Posts
Grugliasco and Mirafiori are managed as one twin factory to build premium cars. And the only empty space ready for E-segment cars. The E-Alfas should go there, maybe also the D-SUV for Maserati plus Alfieri and GranSport/GranCabrio successors.

I've been in Mirafiori in 2008 for the Alfa Mito launch when at least four different models were rolling of the lines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Grugliasco and Mirafiori are managed as one twin factory to build premium cars. And the only empty space ready for E-segment cars. The E-Alfas should go there, maybe also the D-SUV for Maserati plus Alfieri and GranSport/GranCabrio successors.

I've been in Mirafiori in 2008 for the Alfa Mito launch when at least four different models were rolling of the lines.
Well...kinda managed together, i.e. yes Levante production is aligned and uses the same processes as grugliasco...but we have to remember the Levante line is a very small section of the whole mirafiori site. Yes you could build more E-segment cars there but its also capable of building the various versions of the Small and Compact platforms. The unclear part is what would be needed to build Giorgio platform. However as Cassino is a plant which build the Compact Platform and now uses a flex line to build Compact and Giorgio, it should work in Mirafiori too. Mirafioris issue is high fixed cost.

The D-SUV could work there but might make more sense to share Cassino with Stelvio. Alfieri and/or Gransport/Cabrio Im not so sure...the plant in Modena wouldnt be abandoned I dont think, the Italian unions would make life VERY challenging if they did...also not a great brand message.

Yeah i think fiat are very very cautious about how and if they will use Mirafiori, e.g. its too costly for mass market cars as per Sergios comments about italian production and last time they gambled on near-premium Lancias being built there the local laws meant they had to pay YEARS of wages to laid off staff after the cars went out of production and werent replaced...
 
101 - 120 of 127 Posts
Top