Allpar Forums banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!
Joined
·
8,808 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Simple question, what do you think that Chrysler Corporation or its successor companies, or even to a lesser extent those that it absorbed, missed out on? Could be anything from a class of vehicle to a late introduction or early discontinuation, or important options that weren't explored, or even marketing opportunities, or if you can think of something else, would be interesting to hear.

This isn't restricted to 'vintage', but I'd like to bar from this discussion slated production vehicles that are not yet on the market.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
699 Posts
I would have like to have seen a Jeep pickup truck along the lines of the Dodge Power Wagon.
I would have like to have seen the PT Cruiser looking like a baby Chrysler Airflow.
I would have like to have seen the Charger looking more like the 1969 Charger.
I would have liked to see today's Challenger made 500 lbs. lighter.
I wish I had the Mirada I let slip through my fingers, so I could have ripped out the slant 6 and put a big and bad crate hemi into it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,973 Posts
A perfect topic for us Jeep fans! But I will concentrate on the Dodge pickups/SUVs. If they had been able to spend the money and find whatever magical combination of styling, features, durability, bang for the buck and marketing to increase sales and really compete with Ford and GM from say the mid 70s on instead of having to wait until 94 I thin k it would have been great.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
Diesel powered PT cargo van.
A Jeep station wagon to compete with the Subaru Outback/Forester.
A cheap Dodge economy microcar for about $10,000. I guess the Fiat 500 is it, but it's too pricey,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,445 Posts
dak4x4 said:
The turbine cars engine developed through the years to being a practical alternative to recip engines.
Piston engines are more efficient than gas turbine engines, and are much cheaper to manufacture. Turbine engines have a much higher reliability than piston engines (i.e. mean time to failure is much longer), and a much higher power to weight ratio. Turbines don't perform as well as piston engines when the output power is varied with time.

This means gas turbines are best for higher end aircraft applications, but piston engines still dominate the lower end of aircraft applications. Earthbound vehicles will forever be powered by piston engines. Exceptions are some high speed hydrofoil ferry boats, and some special military watercraft which use both--piston (diesel) engines for extended cruising, and gas turbine engines (which burn the same fuel) for relatively short periods of high power for high speeds. The Abrams US tank is also an exception--it is powered by a gas turbine engine, but the designers valued power to weight ratio over fuel efficiency.
 

·
DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!
Joined
·
8,808 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
jstew314 said:
Exceptions are some high speed hydrofoil ferry boats, and some special military watercraft which use both--piston (diesel) engines for extended cruising, and gas turbine engines (which burn the same fuel) for relatively short periods of high power for high speeds. The Abrams US tank is also an exception--it is powered by a gas turbine engine, but the designers valued power to weight ratio over fuel efficiency.
Funny that you mention that... My wife worked at Allied Signal and subsequently Honeywell on a redesign team for a newer powerplant for the Abrams and she said that there had been a tractor-trailer that also had one of these engines in it, running a regular route around the Southwestern US between the various facilities. I guess it was something of a testbed for the reliability of the engine and something of a proof-of-concept for using turbines in other applications. She left the company before finding out how it did really-long-term, but seemed impressed by it regardless.

I personally lament the loss of coupes and wagons on the same chassis as sedans. I see the sixties and seventies cars that appear at shows and they're almost all coupes, then wagons, and then only a few sedans, and the guys gushing over them had coupes or wanted coupes when they were in their teens and twenties. I also see today's youth drivers running around in import coupes. My first car was a non-Mopar coupe, a '93 Thunderbird. I don't see auto nostalgia for four-door sedans from the last 20 years being terribly strong.

I expect the '95-'00 Avenger coupe, the '01-'05 Stratus coupe, and to a lesser extent the Sebring coupes of the same era to be as popular as the sedans are, and those were made in much fewer numbers. I think that the Neon should have kept a coupe in the second generation and gotten the SRT treatment. I also think that the PT should have had at least a Direct Connection hardtop for the convertible, to make a coupe-like vehicle possible. And of course, the LX cars...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
My dad was in Vietnam 2 years during the war. He said the helicopters were turbine powered. He was a mechanic in the motor pool. My step dad was a gunner on a Huey during the war. The horrors he must've seen. :-(
 

·
Active Jeeper
Joined
·
31,129 Posts
jd_1138 said:
My dad was in Vietnam 2 years during the war. He said the helicopters were turbine powered. He was a mechanic in the motor pool. My step dad was a gunner on a Huey during the war. The horrors he must've seen. :-(
The Duece and a half could run on the same "Multi-Fuel as the Turbines in a pinch" it's one reason the Humvee replaced the M37 and M151, getting gasoline out of the field made fueling logistics much simpler and less dangerous.
The most memorable sound from my tours was the "pop-pop-pop" of the Huey's rotors. We didn't sneak up on very many folks with those. ;)
 

·
Virginia Gentleman
Joined
·
14,675 Posts
jd_1138 said:
My dad was in Vietnam 2 years during the war. He said the helicopters were turbine powered. He was a mechanic in the motor pool. My step dad was a gunner on a Huey during the war. The horrors he must've seen. :-(
Had an uncle that was a crew chief of a Huey in 'Nam as well - 9th Air Cav. Unfortunately, we lost him in '69.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
MoparNorm said:
The Duece and a half could run on the same "Multi-Fuel as the Turbines in a pinch" it's one reason the Humvee replaced the M37 and M151, getting gasoline out of the field made fueling logistics much simpler and less dangerous.
The most memorable sound from my tours was the "pop-pop-pop" of the Huey's rotors. We didn't sneak up on very many folks with those. ;)
Thanks for your service. Those deuce and a half's are pretty cool rigs.

Doug D said:
Had an uncle that was a crew chief of a Huey in 'Nam as well - 9th Air Cav. Unfortunately, we lost him in '69.
Wow, sorry for your loss. How sad.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top