Allpar Forums banner
1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
I wonder if the 2.4 will finally be replaced here in the states?
I am more concerned why they haven't offered the 1.3T in the Compass than whether they drop the base engine in the Renegade. They just need to make the 1.3T a standalone option for any trim. Where is this 1.5T we have heard about? Why do they keep spending on Brazil when the US is their profit center?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
It may have a little something to do with defending the company's market position in Brazil.
South America is a big profit center for FCA, along with the North American market. Europe is a drain on FCA, except for the one plant in Poland that makes everything not to be confused with the 6 plants in Italy that make 5 cars. Sorry don’t know enough about Peugeot and their factories and output
FCA doesn't exist. The US and Europe are huge profit centers for Stellantis, Brazil/LATAM is inconsequential in comparison. They need to pay more attention to the US and less attention to meaningless bragging rights that don't matter outside of LATAM.

 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
Yeah sure, when Carlos is able to close any of the under utilized factories in Italy I’ll believe FCA is gone.
Carlos promised to keep the Italian and French factories open to get his job. He didn't say anything about Brazil or the US. Brazil is only half as important as it was under Fiat, there is no need to keep letting the tail wag the dog. All American brand updates, Jeep included, should be launched in the US. Brazil has gotten way too much new product for its impact on the bottom line. They need to leave it alone for a while and focus on restoring Dodge and Chrysler. Drop the Brazil 0 star death trap cars, and if that means they lose market leadership, so what? The US is a far more important market for Stellantis, they can more than make up for it with new Dodge and Chrysler vehicles for the US.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
David are you sure South America is not profitable. Why retreat when they are doing quite well there.
I say retreat from Italy if anywhere.
I never said it was not profitable. It has had profitable and unprofitable years in the recent past. What LATAM has been at its best in the recent past is an order of magnitude less profitable than former Chrysler in the US and former Peugeot in Europe are now. It is taking the reasoning of killing the Dart and 200 and applying it in the location it actually makes sense. Stellantis doesn't need to be selling 0 star death trap cars in Brazil, they add relatively little to the corporate bottom line, while being a giant PR corporate responsibility black eye, easily offsetting globally any local goodwill derived from being the sales volume leader in the market by selling cheap junk. It is dumb to be spending a lot of money on unique platform vehicles for a single low margin market, that money would be much better spent on adapting small and medium platforms to actually become global by selling in the US and China in addition to Europe. LATAM doesn't have to be losing money to make investing there instead of in the US a dumb idea, it just has to be making a lot less money.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
Closing Belvedere would make sense if they never intended to have a car in the midsize SUV space... the space where Toyota sells 475,000 vehicles per year. Windsor's been closed for parts shortages but in the past has done 150,000-200,000 cars a year.
They don't need less volume, they need more product. They have to sell in the mainstream segments as well as the niches. Yes that includes FWD/AWD Higlander/RX competitors from Dodge and Chrysler.

4Runner and Venza are niche models in the same size segment. 4Runner is covered by Wrangler/Grand Cherokee and Durango, while Dodge gets nothing to go against HIghlander and Chrysler gets nothing to go against RX and Venza, and a BEV only Airflow does nothing to change that.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
The problem is there’s no desire to keep the current Windsor and Belvidere products flowing and resources are diverted elsewhere. That tells me they are low margin. Likely expensive to produce versus the price they can get. Much was made about moving the minivan upscale at Pacifica launch. That didn’t go as planned. Cherokee has almost always had high incentives since launch. The same reason FCA left the sedan market (low margins from less than competitive entries) is now being felt in the CUV space.
I absolutely agree with you, but if you were running the company, would you shut down the factory, or would you plan a better replacement for the Cherokee?
I’d hope for a better replacement for the Cherokee. And that they’d learned why they failed in the midsize sedan market so they would not keep repeating those mistakes in other segments.
I'd make the replacement for the Cherokee better by looking at it's shortcomings. Here's where I differ some from others. I'd go back to rear/4wd and base it on the Grand Cherokee architecture. Design it to look more like an update of the original Cherokee. Engine would be the 2.0T. Make one or two levels of price, but don't make it as well equipped as the Grand. Just my two cents.
Agree. Go back to the original Cherokee's roots. Maybe to even include a Wrangler drivetrain (like the original or previous generation had).
The problem with the low margin product is the management. They are perfectly happy to sell low margin Fiats, Peugeots and Citroens in Europe and LATAM. $10K Fiats are fine but heaven forbid we get a Chrysler or Dodge with an MSRP under $25K in the US.

The problem with the Cherokee is it isn't Jeep enough for the diehards and it is too Jeep for the general public. They need a Dodge SUV to go after RAV4, CR-V, Rogue, Equinox and CX-5. Lightweight and FWD. Then there needs to be a Jeep version that goes after Forester and Outback, AWD only with different degrees of off road ready. Throw out the Fiat CUSW platform and put it on the Peugeot EMP2 platform. All AWD models are hybrids with electric AWD. The Jeep can sell at low volumes because it runs down the same line as the high volume Dodge.

They don't need more brand specific platforms. They don't need a BOF Wrangler and a Unibody Wrangler named Cherokee. That will have even less appeal outside the Jeep core buyers.

They failed with the midsize sedan because it was overweight and under wheelbase for the segment, and they refused to sufficiently update the engines with direct injection and offer a turbo 4. Messing up the transmission tuning the first year didn't help.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
And that's why they should base the next Cherokee on a Jeep platform. That way the FWD/AWD platforms can be Dodge or Chrysler. They honestly could've fixed it already. The two row could've been the Cherokee and the three row Grand Cherokee. But no, they are all about max margins even if the public in this class of vehicle is all about 7 passenger capabilities.
There are multiple classes here. The present Cherokee is in the compact class.

All the Jeep SUVs and the competition that sells better than Grand Cherokee
2 door Wrangler 96.8" WB
Renegade 101.2" WB
Compass 103.8" WB
CR-V 104.7" WB
RAV4 105.9" WB
Rogue 106.5" WB
Cherokee 106.5" WB

Jeep Brazil/China Commander/ Grand Commander 110.0/110.2"
Highlander 112.2" This is the size missing at Jeep in the US.

WK Grand Cherokee 114.8" WB
Grand Cherokee 116.7" WB
4 door Wrangler 118.4" WB
Grand Cherokee L 121.7" WB

Dodge needs to be the division competing with CR-V, RAV4, Rogue and Highlander at 102.4", 106.3", 110.2" and 114.2". The AWD hybrids can be the "international" Jeeps. These go on Peugeot EMP2 replacing Renegade, Compass, Cherokee and Commander/Grand Commander.

The old WK is still offered for 2022. Maybe just make that the Cherokee for the traditional Jeep crowd. Or did you want a "Grand Cherokee S" to be the Cherokee, shortening the Grand Cherokee to a 112" wheelbase, same as the Highlander? That doesn't introduce a new platform which they can't afford to do.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
There are multiple classes here. The present Cherokee is in the compact class.

All the Jeep SUVs and the competition that sells better than Grand Cherokee
2 door Wrangler 96.8" WB
Renegade 101.2" WB
Compass 103.8" WB
CR-V 104.7" WB
RAV4 105.9" WB
Rogue 106.5" WB
Cherokee 106.5" WB

Jeep Brazil/China Commander/ Grand Commander 110.0/110.2"
Highlander 112.2" This is the size missing at Jeep in the US.

WK Grand Cherokee 114.8" WB
Grand Cherokee 116.7" WB
4 door Wrangler 118.4" WB
Grand Cherokee L 121.7" WB

Dodge needs to be the division competing with CR-V, RAV4, Rogue and Highlander at 102.4", 106.3", 110.2" and 114.2". The AWD hybrids can be the "international" Jeeps. These go on Peugeot EMP2 replacing Renegade, Compass, Cherokee and Commander/Grand Commander.

The old WK is still offered for 2022. Maybe just make that the Cherokee for the traditional Jeep crowd. Or did you want a "Grand Cherokee S" to be the Cherokee, shortening the Grand Cherokee to a 112" wheelbase, same as the Highlander? That doesn't introduce a new platform which they can't afford to do.
They could use the old WK, but I fear that the new two row will take a 3rd row seat compared to the L. They could've decontented the new two row some and lower the price, call it the new Cherokee. I just saw a new WL two row that is 71k. That's insane. The highest L that the dealer currently has is 62k. Who in their right mind would give up that kinda volume for 9k.
Rear legroom on the new Grand Cherokee 38.2", WK 38.6", cutting the new Grand Cherokee shorter might not give enough rear legroom. Yeah the prices are crazy.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
It’s not just selling price. I think the “roots” of the failed Dart/200 and the not moving as well as expected Cherokee and Pacifica make them more expensive to build. Just my guess, I have no inside information. If you want to succeed in the lower price segment, you can’t have a pricey “platform”.
It is true, Fiat modified the platform to make it wider for the US, that made them heavier and more expensive. They had nothing the right size for a midsize car.

Stellantis wouldn't have to do anything with the Peugeot EMP2, their products in Europe are the right size already. The exception is the full size pickup wide Pacifica, the Pacifica is Ducato/ProMaster full size commercial van wide. They ought to do a replacement platform for both vans. Calling them minivans at this point is ridiculous, they are just low roof full size vans.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
Yes Jeep is the SUV brand so I don't see the need to muddle the waters by adding a SUV or crossover to the Chrysler brand. It's just gonna confuse the buyers more as to what they are.
No need to be preaching to the choir here, lol. I know. Jeep should have a small CUV thing, but Chrysler also needs one.

The Buick Encore had been one of Buick's best selling vehicles for over five years and is still one of their best selling and highest rated vehicles. It really helped Buick sales in the US when it was released and was a capable little vehicle. Chrysler does indeed need a small, luxurious little run-about like the Encore.

The Trax has never been nearly the success as the Encore... even scoring poorly in some reviews. But if Chrysler can aim at the Encore or higher, they could have a successful vehicle in the segment. Kudos for Buick even offering AWD in the Encore and both the Encore/Trax have a spacious interior despite their diminutive size.
If Chrysler doesn't get a SUV or crossover because that's Jeep's territory, they might as well just kill Chrysler now and not waste any more money on it.
Because the small FWD/AWD Jeeps suck for anyone not looking for an off road Jeep. They suck gas compared to the competition. Their sales suck compared to the competition. This is perfectly fine if they are understood as niche off road biased alternatives to Dodge and Chrysler SUV that take on the mainstream. As implemented by Fiat as putting all their eggs in the Jeep basket it was a stupid act of brand mismanagement.

You must have missed my post #61. CR-V, RAV4, Rogue and Highlander and their Acura, Lexus and Infiniti platform mates are the reasons Dodge and Chrysler need SUVs.

Dodge needs to be the division competing with CR-V, RAV4, Rogue and Highlander at 102.4", 106.3", 110.2" and 114.2". The AWD hybrids can be the "international" Jeeps. These go on Peugeot EMP2 replacing Renegade, Compass, Cherokee and Commander/Grand Commander.

You also must have missed my recent post on the sales numbers page. I post it again below but bottom line up front SUVs are nearly half the market, cars and pickups are just under 1/4 of the market each.

Numbers by segment are out at GCBC.

Small cars 1,253,775.
Includes several small midsize models, specifically Civic 114 cu ft, Elantra 113 cu ft, Impreza 112 cu ft and Forte 111 cu ft.
Midsize cars 980,754** (1,089,605).
Kia K5 strangely missing from their list driving the number under 1 million, number with K5 1,089,605. Of course Accord, Sonata, K5 and Legacy are actually large.
Large cars 130,466.
The 112 cu ft Maxima and 119 cu ft Avalon are ignorantly placed in this category by the website. Maxima isn't even close to large, having slightly less interior room than Civic sedan.
Sports cars 264,475.
Sports car numbers are strangely inflated, counting A5, 2 series and Giulia as sports cars. 2 Gran Coupe and Giulia are as normal as small compact and small midsize sedans get (ignoring that Giulia is still RWD, a very small minority of midsize cars). A5 is the now rarely seen in the US midsize liftback sedan, that doesn't make it a sports car.

All cars 2,738,321

Small SUV 3,336,191
Midsize SUV 2,796,967
Large SUV 393,643

All SUVs 6,526,801

Pickups all sizes 2,842,479

It is clear that SUVs are now the most popular vehicle, it is also clear that most of them are just raised FWD/AWD compact and midsize station wagons and hatchbacks. At the smallest level they don't even raise them, they just throw CUV on them and count them as if they were SUVs (UX, C-HR, X2, Venue, Countryman, MX-30, Kicks, X1).

Cars remain about as popular as pickup trucks. Stellantis has its work cut out for it restoring Dodge and Chrysler to the mainstream segments (small and midsize cars and SUVs).
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
The problem is Wrangler.

You can't do the same design but smaller with the Wrangler like you can with the Grand Cherokee design. It would make Wrangler less desirable, because if you can't afford the big one, you can get the smaller one. Wrangler is peak Jeep. They want to keep it that way, even if the masses/purists want all Jeeps with Wrangler capability.

So what do you do?
Make a trim level of every Jeep more capable off-road than any other car in it's class. Trailhawk.

Trailhawks are pretty good off-road. Some people love them, purists hate them, but nobody is going to say their cr-v is going to out perform it off-road; at least not stock v stock. Laugh and point, but it gets the job done. What brand do you see get brought out more in winter than in summer? Jeep.

I argue that they are doing things exactly right. I still would love to see a renegade-based quad-cab baby truck along the lines of Maverick. Maybe not use Comanche for the name though. 🤔
There already is a cheap Wrangler, 2 doors and a subcompact car wheelbase, it's the one real purists want.

Trailhawks are right for Jeep, but Jeep ought to at least mean as much as Subaru and be all AWD. Dodge and Chrysler need FWD/AWD SUVs to compete with Honda/Toyota/Nissan and Acura/Lexus/Infiniti respectively, the little Jeeps just aren't competitive with them. Not giving SUVs to Dodge and Chrysler is all kinds of wrong in a market that is half SUV.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
The real Purists? How are you defining that? 🤦‍♂️
The ones who have been fans since before there was a 4 door and know that the wheelbase is so short because it improves off road performance.

Fans who have been following it know that the reason a Wrangler 2 door is longer and wider than a CJ7 is safety regulations. You can't lift a little SUV that much and still be safe on road. Trailhawks are as good as it is going to get at those compact SUV sizes.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
I hang around with a lot of hard core Jeepers. I’m not one by the way. I never go much beyond better slightly larger tires. The idea these serious Jeep people prefer the 2 door for its shorter length just isn’t true anymore. Most all the recent big builds are the 4 doors and an increasing number are Gladiators.
There are really two groups of hard core Jeepers. The older "Eastern" one that goes back 60+ years likes the narrow and short Jeep that can go where a wide and long pickup can't, often between trees. The newer "Western" one likes the illegal in 20 states mini monster truck with tires sticking outside the bodywork that make it pickup truck wide and quite tall. They both can go places that the other kind can't. Read the off road magazines and they will be filled with "Western" style trucks and stories about off roading in the west.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
I’m in the eastern US, where big 4 door Wrangler builds dominate the others. Sure there are older Jeeps line XJs and TJs around but 4 door JKs and JLs dominate the builds.
The minute you talk about builds you aren't talking about the majority of people who take their Wranglers off road. You can off road a stock Wrangler.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
That is mostly the bad reliability record talking, not the ability or enjoyment of the vehicle they chose. Plus dealer treatment of clients after purchase at some dealers is still less than optimal at cdjr/f.

I'm in one of the Grand Wagoneer groups and while yes, teething issues are a thing in the first year, at that price point, or any, really, people shouldn't be having to deal with returns/buy backs because they've spent more time in the shop than in their driveway.

Reliability needs to step way way up, and not just that "initial quality" one. Long term. Even at the renegade level, many are happy but the electrical/tech stuff seems to be problematic.

They love their cars when they can drive them.
No, the sales of the little Fiat based Jeeps stink because they guzzle gas compared to the competition. When the competition gets 30 mpg combined and your vehicle gets 25 mpg combined you aren't going to be near the top of the segment for sub/compact SUVs.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
When your jeep has the aero of the broad side of a barn, and the weight of a 4wd car, you're not gonna get 30mpg. That's just accepted by anyone who buys one.. it's not like they don't see it. lol

I get it, you're one of those people that just doesn't like them. We are mutually opposed in this.
Part of the problem is that there are no other options. You either get a Jeep with the built-in disadvantages, or you shop elsewhere. There is no Chrysler or Dodge option for those who want the 30mpg.
I think a small Jeep should be off road biased, I like the Renegade, Compass and Cherokee Trailhawk for what they are, although they should all get the 1.3T and 2.0T. They are just aimed at a small niche.

What I don't like is the indefensible argument that "Jeep is the SUV brand, Chrysler and Dodge don't need SUVs in their lineups." The Renegade, Compass and Cherokee are simply incapable of filling Stellantis need for a mainstream subcompact and compact SUV, that should be filled by Chrysler and Dodge, the mainstream brands.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
The 2022 Jeep Renegade the only engine available is 1.3l it is standard equipment across the board or at least that is what the website is saying right now. I didn't mind the 2.4l granted they are not a speed demon by any means but it isn't pokey slow either. If you learn to adapt your driving style it is adequate. I average about 28mpg on the freeway and 23-24mpg in the city. Far from our Ram with 16 on a good day with a strong Texas Tailwind behind it.
Far from my Prius at 35 on a bad day. The Renegade just isn't competitive with the Asians, and comparing it with the Ram shows you just don't get it.

Also the Compass and Cherokee can't be had with a 1.3T, they still have to put up with the 2.4, while you can't get a 2.0T in Compass or Renegade.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
What about bringing the diesel here or dropping the 2L turbo from Wrangler in it? That thing has more than enough kick for a renegade.
The 2.0T that gets better mileage than the 2.4 in the Cherokee is a no brainer, of course the Renegade and Compass should be modified to take it. Federalizing a small 4 cylinder after Dieselgate? Absolutely not, even without the tougher emissions regulations coming that is a terrible idea.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top