Allpar Forums banner
141 - 160 of 172 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,182 Posts
Best selling segments in the US and what Stellantis sells in them.

First half of 2021
Subcompact SUV 665.036 (#10 Renegade, a moderate performer, #29 500X an abysmal performer)
Compact cars 745.330 (Not present)
Midsize cars 765.825 (#25 Giulia an abysmal performer)
Large pickups 1.166.475 (#2 Ram a top performer)
Midsize SUV 1.614.971 (#2 Wrangler a top performer, #4 Grand Cherokee a top performer, #16 Durango a poor performer)
Compact SUV 1.966.581 (#11 Cherokee a moderate performer, #17 Compass a poor performer, #35 Stelvio an abysmal performer)

Jeep midsize SUVs and Ram full sized pickups are Stellantis' stars. If two divisions deserve to die in the US they are Fiat and Alfa. Their performance doesn't deserve another 10 years in the US.

You seem to want to pull another Fiat with Chrysler and Dodge. "Oh our half hearted efforts with Renegade/500X, Dart, 200, Cherokee and Compass didn't do well, let's abandon the segments to the Asians." Well we aren't dealing with FCA anymore, or Daimler- Chrysler so forget about the ME-412.

This is what Dodge and Chrysler need to do with the segments:



Midsize SUV FWD/AWD vehicles are half the segment. 2 row Aspen / Nitro 3 row Journey / Durango / T&C
I left off the compact SUV segment

Subcompact SUV = PT Cruiser / Raider People in this segment don't want real off road performance. HR-V is a wagon, Crosstrek is a jacked up Impreza. Renegade/500X were heavy for no reason.

Compact Cars = Daytona/Laser/Shadow/LeBaron GTC The people in this segment are here for 2 reasons. Low price and low center of gravity. Don't bother with high roofs here, send those people over to look at the PT Cruiser and Raider. 50"-53" is fine here.

Midsize Cars = LeBaron GTS / Stealth (Mitsubishi got the Lancer name) See compact car above.

Midsize SUV FWD/AWD vehicles are half the segment. 3 row Journey / Durango / T&C

Compact SUV FWD/AWD vehicles are over 90% of the segment. 2 row Aspen / Nitro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,836 Posts
Plenty of differing opinions here, nice to see! Everyone has their own idea about running the American arm of Stellantis, me included. I think we can all agree that the main idea is to bring Chrysler back from the brink and map out a future for both brands that allows them some individuality. I am prepared to give the company about one more chance to do something right with Chrysler, but time and my patience have nearly run out. So here's my advice to Stellantis about N/A brands....Get going or get lost, the world won't wait any longer for you to get your act together.
I think most of us agree that no matter what our personal desire, we just want Chrysler to come back as a viable brand again, like it was pre-Fiat merger.
 

·
Read Only
Joined
·
0 Posts
Best selling segments in the US and what Stellantis sells in them.

First half of 2021
Subcompact SUV 665.036 (#10 Renegade, a moderate performer, #29 500X an abysmal performer)
Compact cars 745.330 (Not present)
Midsize cars 765.825 (#25 Giulia an abysmal performer)
Large pickups 1.166.475 (#2 Ram a top performer)
Midsize SUV 1.614.971 (#2 Wrangler a top performer, #4 Grand Cherokee a top performer, #16 Durango a poor performer)
Compact SUV 1.966.581 (#11 Cherokee a moderate performer, #17 Compass a poor performer, #35 Stelvio an abysmal performer)

Jeep midsize SUVs and Ram full sized pickups are Stellantis' stars. If two divisions deserve to die in the US they are Fiat and Alfa. Their performance doesn't deserve another 10 years in the US.

You seem to want to pull another Fiat with Chrysler and Dodge. "Oh our half hearted efforts with Renegade/500X, Dart, 200, Cherokee and Compass didn't do well, let's abandon the segments to the Asians." Well we aren't dealing with FCA anymore, or Daimler- Chrysler so forget about the ME-412.

This is what Dodge and Chrysler need to do with the segments:

Subcompact SUV = PT Cruiser / Raider People in this segment don't want real off road performance. HR-V is a wagon, Crosstrek is a jacked up Impreza. Renegade/500X were heavy for no reason.

Compact Cars = Daytona/Laser/Shadow/LeBaron GTC The people in this segment are here for 2 reasons. Low price and low center of gravity. Don't bother with high roofs here, send those people over to look at the PT Cruiser and Raider. 50"-53" is fine here.

Midsize Cars = LeBaron GTS / Stealth (Mitsubishi got the Lancer name) See compact car above.

Midsize SUV FWD/AWD vehicles are half the segment. 2 row Aspen / Nitro 3 row Journey / Durango / T&C
Wrong again on your numbers. Here are the actual numbers from the website:

1984 models
LeBaron 96 interior 15 trunk
E Class/New Yorker 97 interior 17 trunk
Newport/5th Avenue 99 interior 16 trunk
Executive 101 interior 14 trunk
Grand Marquis 111 interior 22 trunk

2004 models:
Concorde 107 interior 19 trunk
300 M 105 17
Grand Marquis 109 21

2021 model
300 106 16


The last Grand Marquis had 5 more cubic feet in the trunk than the 300. The Concorde had 3 more cubic feet in the trunk.

As I said the old style cars had width for a bench seat, that didn't give any extra usable space for 4 people, six fit much better.

I don't call a short tall vehicle a triumph in packaging. It is an old Eurasian concept to minimize vehicle shadow while maximizing interior space by going vertical. This is discouraged by the present EPA footprint regulations that actually give an advantage to the traditional lower longer wider US car style. The real triumph is making a 50-53" tall car with good headroom for a 6'2" driver.

PT Cruiser 98.9 cu ft interior 21.6 cu ft cargo (measured as a station wagon, so not directly comparable to a sedan like a hatchback would be).
LeBaron GTS 98 cu ft

The LeBaron GTS it the real triumph in packaging, right way to package that interior volume for most people in the US.
Wasn’t the GTS just a K-car with a high roof?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,182 Posts
Wasn’t the GTS just a K-car with a high roof?
No. It was a Daytona with a high roof and a big back seat, if you can actually say a car with a 53" tall roof had a high roof. It was the same height as the K car.

AllTheNarrow RegularProductionFront Wheel DriveChryslerCars
LeBaron GTS / Lancer (85)Daytona / Laser (84)LeBaron K / T&C (82)LeBaron GTC (87)LeBaron AA (90)E Class / New Yorker (83)New Yorker (88)Fifth Avenue (90)Imperial (90)Sebring Coupe (95)PT Cruiser (01)
Wheelbase103.1 in (2,619 mm)97.0 in (2,464 mm)100.3 in (2,548 mm)100.3 in (2,548 mm)103.5 in (2,629 mm)103.3 in (2,624 mm)104.3 in (2,649 mm)109.6 in (2,784 mm)109.6 in (2,784 mm)103.7 in (2,634 mm)103 in (2,616 mm)
Length180.4 in (4,582 mm)179.0 in (4,547 mm)179.2 in (4,552 mm)184.8 in (4,694 mm)182.7 in (4,641 mm)187.2 in (4,755 mm)193.6 in (4,917 mm)198.6 in (5,044 mm)203 in (5,156 mm)187.4 in (4,760 mm)168.8 in (4,290 mm)
Width68.3 in (1,735 mm)69.3 in (1,760 mm)68 in (1,727 mm)68.5 in (1,740 mm)68.1 in (1,730 mm)68.0 in (1,727 mm)68.5 in (1,740 mm)68.9 in (1,750 mm)68.9 in (1,750 mm)69.7 in (1,770 mm)67.1 in (1,704 mm)
Height53 in (1,346 mm)50.1 in (1,273 mm)52.9 in (1,344 mm)50.9 in (1,293 mm)53.7 in (1,364 mm)53.1 in (1,349 mm)53.5 in (1,359 mm)55.1 in (1,400 mm)55.3 in (1,405 mm) 51.0 in (1,295 mm)63 in (1,600 mm)
Passenger room98 cu ft83958997971001041049199
Cargo room18 cu ft17151414171617171222
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,182 Posts
Everything from the 80s was pretty much just a K Car.
If the Challenger, Quattroporte, Ghibli and Levante are pretty much LX cars then everything from the '80s is pretty much a K car.

That still doesn't make the LeBaron GTS a K car with a raised roof since it was the same height as the LeBaron/T&C/E Class/New Yorker/Executive/Limo that were the same exact car from B pillar forward.
 

·
Premium Member
2002 Ram 2500 Quad Cab 4x4 with Cummins.
Joined
·
4,283 Posts
The problem with any of those cars, of which I owned several were they differed very little in width. So as the longer they got, they started to look out of proportion. But they were no worse cars then anything else made in the 80s. It's basically the same thing PSA/Stellantis is doing, they have just taken it up a notch. And if all these brands are to survive, it's what has to be done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,182 Posts
The problem with any of those cars, of which I owned several were they differed very little in width. So as the longer they got, they started to look out of proportion. But they were no worse cars then anything else made in the 80s. It's basically the same thing PSA/Stellantis is doing, they have just taken it up a notch. And if all these brands are to survive, it's what has to be done.
Yes. The Accord became wider for '94, the Camry for '92, the Passat for '90, Maxima for '89, Sonata for '95. This was just how wide the imports were in the '80s. They only looked narrow in comparison with the big Ford and GM models. This was really only a problem for New Yorker, 5th Avenue and Imperial, one that was solved with LH.

PSA almost has as many models on PSA EMP1/CMP as Chrysler had on K derivatives, of course Dodge/Plymouth had a few more. This platform is the same exact width as the K one.

PSA has as many EMP2 derivatives as Chrysler had K derivatives. These models are significantly wider than the K derivatives, around the same width as LH.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,182 Posts
The problem with any of those cars, of which I owned several were they differed very little in width. So as the longer they got, they started to look out of proportion. But they were no worse cars then anything else made in the 80s. It's basically the same thing PSA/Stellantis is doing, they have just taken it up a notch. And if all these brands are to survive, it's what has to be done.
It was perfectly fine up to the Dodge 600 ES. It was a little silly looking when comparing the New Yorker, Fifth Avenue and Imperial with Cadillacs and Lincolns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
If Stellantis is smart they will invest in Chrysler and Dodge instead of pushing the Euro Bands here. They have NEVER sold well here for the years that Peugeot and Renault tried. That would be a colossal waste of money and resources. Proof: what happened to FIAT, a big zero and waste of money Alfa not much better. These brands have zero equity in NA.
One footnote for the better...The Renault Medillion-Premier was the prelude to the successful first (regenerated) 300 and Chargers. The Chrysler name has ten years to reinvent itself, they better hurry the clock is ticking!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,182 Posts
One footnote for the better...The Renault Medillion-Premier was the prelude to the successful first (regenerated) 300 and Chargers. The Chrysler name has ten years to reinvent itself, they better hurry the clock is ticking!
Hopefully EMP1/CMP (STLA Small) and EMP2 (STLA Medium) can be two more French platforms that provide the starting point for 30 more years of successful Chryslers.

LH/LX have been successful after a disastrous start with Premier/Monaco (Renault 25 with R 21 suspension bits) and the wrong for the cars AMC 2.5 and PRV 3.0 with Audi/ZF 4 speed automatics and French electronics.

Renault/Eagle Medallion (R21) was a failure here while a hit in Europe. It had the longitudinally mounted Renault 2.2.

Alliance/Encore (R9/R11) were also failures in the US, with European style engines and A/C systems overwhelmed by US emissions controls and driving conditions.

EMP1/CMP and EMP2 are more conventional transverse designs, as the Lancer, 600 and Dynasty were.

Stellantis needs to look at the example of the Medallion and not repeat the mistakes of Renault of the '80s. Lancer, 600 and Dynasty all had better mileage with the 2.5 than the Medallion with the 2.2 and they had larger trunks. The 600 and Lancer had even more efficient 2.2 engines, plus more powerful 2.5 turbo engines, while the Dynasty got a 3.0 V6. Premier was saddled with the contractually obligated PRV V6 instead of getting the Chrysler 2.5 (3 speed mileage matched AMC 2.5 and 4 speed) and 2.5 turbo (same power but more torque than PRV V6).

Stellantis needs to select the right engines and transmission for EMP1/CMP (STLA Small) and EMP2 (STLA Medium), and make sure the platforms are suitably tested and modified for US conditions from day one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,244 Posts
Hopefully EMP1/CMP (STLA Small) and EMP2 (STLA Medium) can be two more French platforms that provide the starting point for 30 more years of successful Chryslers.

LH/LX have been successful after a disastrous start with Premier/Monaco (Renault 25 with R 21 suspension bits) and the wrong for the cars AMC 2.5 and PRV 3.0 with Audi/ZF 4 speed automatics and French electronics.

Renault/Eagle Medallion (R21) was a failure here while a hit in Europe. It had the longitudinally mounted Renault 2.2.

Alliance/Encore (R9/R11) were also failures in the US, with European style engines and A/C systems overwhelmed by US emissions controls and driving conditions.

EMP1/CMP and EMP2 are more conventional transverse designs, as the Lancer, 600 and Dynasty were.

Stellantis needs to look at the example of the Medallion and not repeat the mistakes of Renault of the '80s. Lancer, 600 and Dynasty all had better mileage with the 2.5 than the Medallion with the 2.2 and they had larger trunks. The 600 and Lancer had even more efficient 2.2 engines, plus more powerful 2.5 turbo engines, while the Dynasty got a 3.0 V6. Premier was saddled with the contractually obligated PRV V6 instead of getting the Chrysler 2.5 (3 speed mileage matched AMC 2.5 and 4 speed) and 2.5 turbo (same power but more torque than PRV V6).

Stellantis needs to select the right engines and transmission for EMP1/CMP (STLA Small) and EMP2 (STLA Medium), and make sure the platforms are suitably tested and modified for US conditions from day one.
What can EMP2 offer over let's say Giorgio except for maybe lower costs?

CMP is not STLA Small.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,836 Posts
What can EMP2 offer over let's say Giorgio except for maybe lower costs?

CMP is not STLA Small.
All FCA and PSA platforms are dead and will be replaced by Stellantis platforms.

But it is funny to watch you and @Prabhjot contradict each other as you claim Giorgio is not low cost while @Prabhjot brags about conserving capital.

You two need to get together and try to get on the same page.

Until then, both your posts reek of a desperate attempt to salvage some dignity for the last undignified decade.

Chrysler has a new CEO and a possible future that it did not have under previous management. We are celebrating this and remain hopeful for its success.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
742 Posts
All the moaning of the Pacifica being inferior is at best a stretch.
I live in a neighborhood of recent ,highly educated It people.
I can see many (given the size of the neighborhood) Pacificas parked alongside their Hondas and Toyotas.
So, they can't all be wrong.
I've have 2 in my family and if the chip shortage gets resolved it, I'll be looking to buy a Pacifica hybrid to park alongside my old folk 300S Hemi!!
Just sayin.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
114 Posts
I keep trying to pin down what makes Chrysler a Chrysler, looking at how the lineup from even 20 years back compares to now. The brand was fashion forward, innovative, well designed, and attainable luxury. I dont know if I would say the same for what is on offer today.

I miss those days where the brand was full of new product. Makes you wonder what type of a halo vehicle could help jumpstart a resurgence in todays SUV-filled arena.. and what would make it stand apart from all of the rest..

Automotive parking light Car Vehicle Motor vehicle Tire
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
38,573 Posts
Here's what Stellantis thinks of the Pacifica:
The Pacifica plant was among the first and seems to have had the longest shutdown for the chip shortage.
 
141 - 160 of 172 Posts
Top