Allpar Forums banner

21 - 40 of 58 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,628 Posts
Didnt T_690 mention that platform isn't all that great?
Here is the thing.

FWD platforms with transverse engines are here because of 2 reasons in comparison to RWD.

One reason is build price. EMP2 may deliver on this front. Or upcoming eVMP previously known as EMP2 v4.

The other reason is space efficiency. A lot of interior space for car's length. And this is the major obstacle for EMP2 based cars. Compare Giulia which has 2.82 meters wheelbase with 4.64 meters of total length and European Pug 508 II which is EMP2 with rear multilink suspension and has 2.8 meter wheelbase and 4.75 meters in length. Giulia offers more interior space. Interior space like combined passenger leg room and rear passenger head room, even cargo room is similar by VDA standards. How is that possible?.IMO something is wrong with EMP2, something on enginnering level.
Things got even worse for EMP2 when someone compares it to Small Wide. Rear twisted beam vs rear twisted beam versions. Pug 308 II vs Fiat Tipo, both 5 door hatchback versions. Tipo has around 11 cm longer combined leg room although it has just 2 cm longer wheelbase.

I would like to hear @valiant67 thoughts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,628 Posts
This is an evolution of emp2 to more of a full electric. It has 400 miles of range WLTP and 325 hp. Not a hellcat, but decent. Upgrade the inverter and motors and it could go faster.
330 HP with BEV version which has 2 electric motors. One at the front and other at the rear. Lesser BEV versions will have one electric motor and of course less power.

For comparison. Giorgio BEV will have 3 electric motors, one at the front with others at the rear. Total power in excess of 600 HP.

This EMP2 version will actually have 2 floor subversions. One is PHEV/BEV and the other is MHEV/ICE. It's not different to what FCA is planning to do with some of their platforms. PSA is just more vocal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
Also, where is the edit function now?
Upper right hand corner of your post under the 3 dots, where the "report" function lies for other people's posts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
The problem is: 2 completely different markets. North Americans are completely uninterested in the European cars sold by PSA or FCA, therefore N/A is completely starved of new car product since the europeans refuse to acknowledge that the only cars making money are Charger, Challenger and the 300, if they'd let it. All the car development has gone to Fiat, Alfa, and Maserati, none of which has been shared with N/A cars, not even some second hand maserati bits for chrysler. Europeans have zero interest in N/A vehicles other than a few Jeeps. Stellantis is now a European based corporation in which Chrysler, and N/A in general, have little to no say in product development, even though it has been the profit generator for FCA since the takeover. So while the Ram guys, and the Jeep guys are all smiles, everyone else is starving due to lack of new product or development. I don't think anyone gives a hoot about whats it's based on, just give us something to buy that isn't 15 years old!
You don't really understand how FCA works. FCA US is in charge of its own brands, and thus products. It's been putting the money into Ram and Jeep, excepting for Pacifica. FCA IT does likewise with its brands. My take is this is mostly a result of FCA trying to position itself for the merger. Notice the general lack of FCA products in NA that aren't Jeep, Ram, expensive Italian sports sedans and CUVs, or tiny Italian city cars, besides the LX triplets and the Durango? x
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
246 Posts
Seems the only vehicles FCA has been interested in are the high profit high volume ones. They unlike Chrysler when it was America owned had a habit of looking for new niche vehicles. Anyone recall how the Sebring convert caught on like the PT Cruiser ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jimboy

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
36,920 Posts
You don't really understand how FCA works. FCA US is in charge of its own brands, and thus products. It's been putting the money into Ram and Jeep, excepting for Pacifica. FCA IT does likewise with its brands. My take is this is mostly a result of FCA trying to position itself for the merger. Notice the general lack of FCA products in NA that aren't Jeep, Ram, expensive Italian sports sedans and CUVs, or tiny Italian city cars, besides the LX triplets and the Durango?
There is absolutely no doubt that investment amounts and parameters were given the the US brand pool. They aren’t autonomous.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,894 Posts
Didnt T_690 mention that platform isn't all that great?
Yes, because that is his opinion of everything that doesn't come from the European side of FCA.
Here is the thing.

FWD platforms with transverse engines are here because of 2 reasons in comparison to RWD.

One reason is build price. EMP2 may deliver on this front. Or upcoming eVMP previously known as EMP2 v4.

The other reason is space efficiency. A lot of interior space for car's length. And this is the major obstacle for EMP2 based cars. Compare Giulia which has 2.82 meters wheelbase with 4.64 meters of total length and European Pug 508 II which is EMP2 with rear multilink suspension and has 2.8 meter wheelbase and 4.75 meters in length. Giulia offers more interior space. Interior space like combined passenger leg room and rear passenger head room, even cargo room is similar by VDA standards. How is that possible?.IMO something is wrong with EMP2, something on enginnering level.
Things got even worse for EMP2 when someone compares it to Small Wide. Rear twisted beam vs rear twisted beam versions. Pug 308 II vs Fiat Tipo, both 5 door hatchback versions. Tipo has around 11 cm longer combined leg room although it has just 2 cm longer wheelbase.

I would like to hear @valiant67 thoughts.
It does appear to have some space efficiency issues based on the info provided here... cost could be the only benefit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T_690

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
There is absolutely no doubt that investment amounts and parameters were given the the US brand pool. They aren’t autonomous.
That's true, but that's not the point. The point is FCA US - and not FCA Corp - is responsible for Chrysler and Dodge's position, not Italian brands supposedly "stealing" Dodge and Chrysler's money. The money was spent on Jeep that could in some cases just as easily have been spent on a Dodge and/or Chrysler CUV/SUV. Ram is a truck brand, so the logic is pretty straightforward in that market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ScramFan and T_690

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
36,920 Posts
That's true, but that's not the point. The point is FCA US - and not FCA Corp - is responsible for Chrysler and Dodge's position, not Italian brands supposedly "stealing" Dodge and Chrysler's money. The money was spent on Jeep that could in some cases just as easily have been spent on a Dodge and/or Chrysler CUV/SUV. Ram is a truck brand, so the logic is pretty straightforward in that market.
It is the point. When you limit the market where the bulk of sales dollars and profit comes from to lesser amounts because your primary business function is pursuit of a merger vs. long term sustainability of the brands they were handed - you’ve destroyed goodwill, a non-tangible asset that’s hard to restore once gone.

When sedans can’t make profit, chop them without considering what it’s done to long term prospects. But you can’t apply the drop the low profit product to the markets that are underperforming. It’s a double standard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dave Z and David S

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,628 Posts
It does appear to have some space efficiency issues based on the info provided here... cost could be the only benefit.
Yes... And no option for mechanical AWD.

Still waiting for response from @cygnus and @valiant67. After they called me out they may respond to my post where I've explained why EMP2 is not a good choice.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
36,920 Posts
Yes... And no option for mechanical AWD.

Still waiting for response from @cygnus and @valiant67. After they called me out they may respond to my post where I've explained why EMP2 is not a good choice.
All one has to do is search your history and listen to you put down Toyota, FCA’s North American operations, PSA in general, etc. and then praising every decision made by FCA Europe. My point has nothing to do with EMP2. I’m just following a common pattern.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,372 Posts
Upper right hand corner of your post under the 3 dots, where the "report" function lies for other people's posts.
OOPS!

I guess I DO need to run to the Eye Doctor after all. :oops:

I really didn't notice the 3 dots at the upper right corner of the post until AFTER I put my glasses on!
Which only goes to show that the learning curve for this new site is going to be longer than I care for.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
35,238 Posts
When you get to a certain level, you just give an overall target and say 'make it so.' At his level, he is NOT working with CAD or getting into specifics of geometry, wheelbase, cabin room, etc.
At Chrysler that has varied dramatically by who the head designer is. Exner pretty much did all the large-scale designs. Engel did some but mainly delegated and got the groups to work well together. I don't know about R.G. but it's not like there is a constant flood of new cars coming through; he could still generate sketches and other designs. I suspect it's true re working with CAD but he could be doing some of the more "specific" work - if he wanted to do it, who would stop him?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,827 Posts
At Chrysler that has varied dramatically by who the head designer is. Exner pretty much did all the large-scale designs. Engel did some but mainly delegated and got the groups to work well together. I don't know about R.G. but it's not like there is a constant flood of new cars coming through; he could still generate sketches and other designs. I suspect it's true re working with CAD but he could be doing some of the more "specific" work - if he wanted to do it, who would stop him?
No matter how much or how little product is getting shown to the public Ralph is running around and doing anything but actual pen on paper/cintiq/cad work. If he is doing any sorta "design" sketches it would be for his own doing not for the company
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Here is the thing.

FWD platforms with transverse engines are here because of 2 reasons in comparison to RWD.

One reason is build price. EMP2 may deliver on this front. Or upcoming eVMP previously known as EMP2 v4.

The other reason is space efficiency. A lot of interior space for car's length. And this is the major obstacle for EMP2 based cars. Compare Giulia which has 2.82 meters wheelbase with 4.64 meters of total length and European Pug 508 II which is EMP2 with rear multilink suspension and has 2.8 meter wheelbase and 4.75 meters in length. Giulia offers more interior space. Interior space like combined passenger leg room and rear passenger head room, even cargo room is similar by VDA standards. How is that possible?.IMO something is wrong with EMP2, something on enginnering level.
Things got even worse for EMP2 when someone compares it to Small Wide. Rear twisted beam vs rear twisted beam versions. Pug 308 II vs Fiat Tipo, both 5 door hatchback versions. Tipo has around 11 cm longer combined leg room although it has just 2 cm longer wheelbase.

I would like to hear @valiant67 thoughts.
There are several reasons FWD/AWD compact and midsize platforms like EMP1/CMP and EMP2 make up 60% of the US market, and RWD is under 10%. It is a combination of inertia and several factors that led FWD platforms to be the most popular in the US.

1. Fuel economy/light weight. This is why the US switched en mass in the late '70s and early to mid '80s to FWD.
2. Better traction in snow. This is why many people stay with FWD.
3. More benign handling characteristics. FWD cars for the most part do not want to swap ends.
4. More recent technology like traction and stability control has made RWD and AWD SUVs more acceptable in the snow and in extreme handling characteristics. If you want RWD to accelerate well in the snow and you want AWD to stop well in the snow, you need to buy snow tires. Americans don't like the expense of snow tires, they don't like the hassle of putting snow tires on and off the car, and they don't like how snow tires drive when there isn't snow on the road, which is most of the time in the winter. Many would rather drive a FWD car with all season tires in the winter than deal with snow tires for just a few days of snow in the winter.
5. Cost.

The US market favors longer cars, and the fuel economy regulations have favored longer cars since the footprint regulations came out in 2011. The US market doesn't care about VDA standards.

You want to compare EMP2 to Giorgio, but the proper comparison is to CUSW (C-Evo Wide).

You want to compare EMP2 to Small US Wide (GM-Fiat SCCS Wide), but the proper comparison is to compare EMP1/CMP with Small Wide.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
35,238 Posts
There are several reasons FWD/AWD compact and midsize platforms like EMP1/CMP and EMP2 make up 60% of the US market, and RWD is under 10%. It is a combination of inertia and several factors that led FWD platforms to be the most popular in the US.
Agreed, not to mention the “hump.” In a FWD car that has no AWD option, in theory, you can have more interior space because there's no driveshaft. Improvements in tech since the 1980s have helped RWD cars' weight and interior space, admittedly.

I'd also say that RWD is really only a major benefit for high performance driving, which few people really do. For the average person just driving to work and back at reasonably limit+10 speeds, the driven wheels don't matter until you have an emergency, and then you have understeer rather than oversteer; both are less than they used to be. (It was a big shock to me to experience severe understeer in a FWD car after being used to having the rear end swing wildly around in RWD, even knowing up front that was the way it happened).

You want to compare EMP2 to Giorgio, but the proper comparison is to CUSW (C-Evo Wide).

You want to compare EMP2 to Small US Wide (GM-Fiat SCCS Wide), but the proper comparison is to compare EMP1/CMP with Small Wide.
I was thinking that re EMP2 and Giorgio. There's a hefty price difference between Giulia and the typical EMP2. Maybe if there was a cheaper Giorgio car, but there isn't.

I am pretty sure the brand investment decisions are handled at the board level.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,628 Posts
@Dave Z

As you've mentioned. There is no hump on FWD cars with no AWD as can be seen on this EMP2 car:
72857


Uhm, something must be wrong. It's not possible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
@Dave Z

As you've mentioned. There is no hump on FWD cars with no AWD as can be seen on this EMP2 car:
View attachment 72857

Uhm, something must be wrong. It's not possible.
You really aren't illustrating anything with that low resolution black carpet picture. We can't tell if it has a hump, a bump or is perfectly flat. Exhaust pipes, driveshafts and batteries have to go somewhere. The tunnel for a driveshaft to the rear can be a pretty big deal in a low RWD car. If you make a skateboard BEV the floor is perfectly flat, but too high. I would rather have a low foot well than a perfectly flat floor. The child in the rear middle seat is either so small it isn't a problem, or he can stick one foot in each well. A flat platform is better than a rounded hump.
 
21 - 40 of 58 Posts
Top