Sounds a lot like Sergio, CUSW and Giulia. Except in that case it is all true, too soon to say for STLA Medium.

And once again the misleading complaints about the old 1.2 3 cylinder that has already been fixed and Diesel engines used to besmirch all PSA engines. The ones that aren't coming here

 

Ah, yes, CUSW, the “flexible” platform which was redone and exceptionalized for every single vehicle is appeared on, other than the first two (Dart/200).

 

The first two were '13 Dart and '14 Cherokee, Cherokee was 1 1/4" wider on the same wheelbase. '15 200 was Dart stretched 1 3/4 inches in wheelbase and width. They were all needlessly different.

 

Tavares was a disaster, as was SM before him. Maybe third time will the the charm? (Probably not with Elkann still around.)

 

Elkann should stay out of things. Let a car guy run it and Elkann can laugh all the way to the bank.

 

Changing wheelbase, length, and width are not reasons the vehicles could not be co-produced. That failure to co-produce was a big a shortcoming as the weaknesses of the platform.

 

To be clear, Chrysler's "if it fits in the container" manufacturing specs are such that they could almost certainly have made the SUSW Renegade on the same line as Cherokee. I think Sergio suffered from fits of pique at cars for not selling and/or didn't seem to think that a car that needed big rebates to support 100,000 sales a year would be able to get by far easier at 50,000 sales per year on the same line as another car needing 50,000 sales.

Cherokee, 200, and Dart sold well enough to support a single factory in comfort.

 

His commitment was to uaw employment levels (and keeping the under water uaw pension and healthcare funds topped up) NOT to selling this or that 'zombie' nameplate from financially 'zombie' car brands i.e., Dodge(exHellcat etc) and Chrysler(exMinivan.) THAT was the endInItself not sales volumes of commoditized negative margin high volume 'cars' few people bought, or asked for (anymore: sedans.) He did the same in Italy: kept employment levels up but refused to invest, until a Big Merger for scale economies, in high cost, low margin made in Italy nameplates or marques. Tavares WAS nothing like Marchionne: a bureaucratic 'Darwin' yes, and a good one too who i for one supported but, still: no public 'Confessor' of being a 'Capital Junkie' or auto industry 'poker' player. Note that GM and Ford too, post2016/17 ended up doing what Marchionne did with sedans etc, while also seeing profitability turn desultory, and taking on billions in losses in europe, india, latam, australia, japan, and now even china (gm: 5billion usd charge just now.) Marchionne, rightly, and accordingly avoided punting billions on 'loser' autonomous driving tech (went with waymo instead while gm and ford and vw....predictedByMarchionne lost billions, mary barra just also booked what? 2 billion of a charge on shutting down Cruze automation.) Or on full bev s....more billions lost by gm and ford et al. Meanwhile: uaw employment levels at gm and ford? Layoffs, ongoingly, of engineers and workers, too? Plant closures by gm in n america AND now even china, by Ford everywhere exUSA including currently in europe. Tavares had been too much like gm management, and ford, than enough like 'automotive poker player i.e., NOT Darwinist'Marchionne.

 

The ONLY reason any car brand is a zombie is because SERGIO MADE THEM THAT WAY.

 

If you were able to put Tavares and Sergio together as one, Lee had more talent in his pinky then these two combined.

 

But yet for all that talent, Lee put us on the path that led to DCX, FCA, and Stellantis...

 

This plan... I don't know if anyone read it carefully.

Basically. STLA Small for Pomigliano means C/compact segment hatchbacks on this platform and not on STLA Medium.

STLA Medium ended it... It's a very limited platform it seems. High costs, high weight, not much variations.