[77 Monaco Brougham]

(as I now take my foot out of my mouth).

Famous last words of every 21st. Century Husband!

 

[DustDevl340]

I love my Voyager but it was my first car, and my parents had a Grand Voyager. But I understand why people swoon over Toyotas and Hondas. The Chrysler vehicles require you maintain them and on occasion replace major components. I got my Voyager with 130,000 miles and now its over 300,000 but there's been a lot of work done to it. By 130,000 it was on its 2nd compressor, its had carb swaps, trans swaps, numerous more compressor swaps, and pretty much all the bushings replaced. Now much of that is the car going from 20 years old to 40 years old, and 170,000 miles of driving. And it being my first car, I'd accepted that's what people did to their cars because my peers with Honda and Mitsu's were under their cars too.

But after owning my Honda and keeping it stock, I've complained that the car is boring. Short of spark plugs and oil changes, and replacing the radio with an Android Auto unit, its needed nothing and is at 12 years and 115,000 miles. That said the TPMS had kicked the bucket, but Discount Tire will fix as part of their service usually. And all that work that my peers were doing on their Hondas in the 2000's was to make more power and make it less reliable.

That said when it comes time to replace the Honda (which at this point will be 2029), I'm really eyeing a Wrangler 4xe. Why? Despite all its flaws, there's something about this company and its cars that I love and feel for despite its quirks. Nothing in the other brands even comes close in the "feel" dept. Look at the new Civic or the Rav4. My parents have moved on from GM to Mazda, all of those are just blech to me. My exwife when we were married had a Subaru, and while looking at the car it looked great and kind of gave me that feeling, one look at trying to change the sparkplugs, or driving with that slushy CVT completely ruins the experience.

We love our Wrangler 4XE. Trouble free so far. Other than a busted wiper linkage but the dealer couldn't possibly have done any more to resolve that issue. And you're right about feel. This Wrangler is fun in ways no other car I've owned has ever been. We loved it's predecessor 2018 Jeep Compass Trailhawk as well but this one's off the charts.

 

[suzq044]

Its simple the middle of the latch is the release and the bump on the right side is the lock button !

Yes. I didn't even know I could arm it from the hatch. Lol

 

[suzq044]

Anyway. Video. Teaser thing.

 

[suzq044]

I had two open tabs, and kept flipping between the two. There aren’t huge differences, but that’s nothing that replacing the vehicle with a new model couldn’t fix. Lol. Isn’t it due for a replacement, it feels like it’s been around forever, and not in a good way?

I must admit I‘ve never been a fan of Renegade, it’s my least favorite Jeep, the styling is cartoonish IMO. No offense to anyone here who owns one, or just purchased one (as I now take my foot out of my mouth).

Hey, if I could get a decently equipped JL for under 20k.i might've done that, lol. I take no offense.

 

[Adventurer55]

I have never owned anything but Mopars and Jeeps after they became Mopars. I won't ever change that. I'll admit, the last few years of Sergio and the crack management team, have tarnished my attitude a bit, but I'm willing to see what Carlos can do.

 

[Lanciahf]

Yeah sure, when Carlos is able to close any of the under utilized factories in Italy I’ll believe FCA is gone.

FCA doesn't exist.

https://www.stellantis.com/content/dam/stellantis-corporate/news/press-releases/2021/october/28-10-2021/en/20211028_Stellantis-Q3-2021-Shipments-Revenues_EN.pdf

 

[tomaz]

Yeah sure, when Carlos is able to close any of the under utilized factories in Italy I’ll believe FCA is gone.

oh Like Belvedere & Windsor too? ok

 

[David S]

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.

 

[Lanciahf]

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.

 

[David S]

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.

 

[Dave Z]

oh Like Belvedere & Windsor too? ok

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.

 

[David S]

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.

 

[valiant67]

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.

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.

 

[Dave Z]

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?

 

[valiant67]

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.

 

[Adventurer55]

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 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.

 

[unverferth]

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).

 

[David S]

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.

 

[Adventurer55]

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.