NO, NO, NO, this is FUGLY! and where is the CHRYSLER part in it?

 

How about the Citroen C4 as the entry level CHRYSLER? It’s taller than a normal hatchback but shorter than a crossover. It’s killer app is a cushy suspension . I don’t think you could invent a better all new car for Chrysler. I wouldn’t even restyle it. Just call it the Chrysler Citroen C4. Calling it that is the best of all worlds since CHRYSLER brand has no history of small cars and you get to introduce an exotic to America brand without actually going through with the huge effort to introducing a new brand. Just cherry pick Citroen’s coolest vehicle. Maybe Dodge could have the more carlike Opel version of the Peugeot 308.

 

No, the C4 is far beneath Chrysler. There should be no 3 cylinder Chryslers ever, nor ones with a mere 13 cu ft trunk. That's the same kind of insult as the Fiat Tipo becoming a Chrysler 100. Chrysler is not a cheap brand like Fiat and Citroen. It is like Alfa, Lancia and DS. Give the cheap economy cars to Dodge, or revive Plymouth for them.

"Tavares said the brand is in need of a talented and visionary CEO who perhaps can make Chrysler what it once represented. "It is an opportunity for us to make the brand rebound," he said. "We do not forget that Chrysler was in the past the expression of the automotive American technology, the best technology available at that point in time."

Tavares calls Chrysler a 'pillar' of Stellantis, says brand has a future

Jeep and Ram may produce the profits in North America, but Chrysler sits alongside Fiat and Peugeot as hallmarks of the American, Italian and French heritage of Stellantis

www.detroitnews.com

The C4 is on the cheaper EMP1/CMP platform with a twist beam rear axle. The DS4 is on EMP2. The DS4 should be upgraded to get an independent rear suspension and stretched to increase its cargo capacity. Then it would be worthy of being a Chrysler.


The 155 PS 1.2T EB engine is the top engine in the C4. The DS 4 gets the 225 PS 1.6T Prince engine, or an available plug in hybrid 1.6T with the same total output.

C4 / EMP1/CMP // DS 4 / EMP2

Wheelbase	2,670 mm (105.1 in)
Length	4,360 mm (171.7 in)	4,400 (173.2)
Width	1,834 mm (72.2 in)	1,830 (72.0)
Height	1,525 mm (60.0 in)	1,470 (57.9)

Notice the strange bulbous styling of the C4, the pre refresh Cherokee style front end, weird fake vent side trim and uninspired tablet from the dashboard interior. Also note the woefully inadequate 380 L/ 13.4 cu ft cargo area.

EMP2 / 1.6T Prince / Aisin 8 speed would be very competitive in the US.

EMP1/CMP and 1.2T EB is an unacceptable combination for the US market, it would have to be modified for 1.3T/1.5T GSE or 1.6T Prince.

In short, the C4 is completely unacceptable for the US market, the DS 4 would make a great Chrysler.

What is needed to make DS 4 a high selling Chrysler is a leather free base interior and a station wagon / shooting brake variant. The base model needs to make all of the electronics like active suspension, head up display etc. and sunroof optional, 180 and 225 PS 1.6T and plug in hybrid available.

 

 

Hearing this and reading the article honestly made me so happy. I am smiling ear to ear right now. I am so happy Chrysler is a PILLAR and has a future. I hope a promising and strong future. I might have a car to buy someday to replace my current sports sedan.

"The most requested video type I've had this past month is to make a series on Canadian City Flags. So initially I was going to do a single video for the whole country, but now I've broken it down to this... as shown in the photo. West/Central/East. I know this isn't proper geographical breakup of Canada, but for the amount of flags by region, this allows each video to be about the same length. I messed around with several versions but think this fits best. Do you think this is an okay split for the flag videos? Also in the upcoming video I would like to have a small section for each province/territory pointing out some of the bad flags in each. Might be kind of fun. It's also much harder to find good quality imagery of Canadian flags, as well as much less info than the US city flags. If you haven't seen my US City Flags trilogy, please check it out! I think you will enjoy it. I really did. Have a nice week everyone."

This in itself is the most information we've heard about Chrysler as a brand in YEARS. The most information on its future, the most anything.

 

Well, this will shut up the folks that blab on without facts!!

 

Actions speak louder than words. We've been told for years of new Chrysler-branded products coming. Hopefully this time it really happens.

 

I have owned a 1997 Sebring coupe (Mitsubishi Eclipse with a trunk), a 1999 Cirrus and presently own a 2015 200 Limited, none of these cars are upscale but the definition of mass market. IMHO, Chrysler is a slightly above mass market brand just like Peugeot and should be paired with Peugeot. DS is an Audi Mercedes Volvo competitor and too expensive to be sold as a Chrysler. Chrysler is Stellantis North America‘s minivan brand which further makes it a mass market brand. North America needs an entry level vehicle and a joint Chrysler Citroen badged Citroen C4 with it’s cushy suspension seems perfect. It’s better to not dilute Dodge’s hard fought for performance image with an economy car. Like it or not CHRYSLER is not a premium brand anymore. It might stand one “halo” car like a 300 replacement but across the board is a fools errand.

 

DS is just Chrysler that is missing a base trim with cloth seats and plastic in the interior instead of leather. When your top model has a 1.6T you aren't an Audi/Mercedes/Volvo competitor, you're an overpriced Chrysler. If DS were a runaway success in Europe you could convince me otherwise, but it isn't.

Stellantis needs to abandon the FCA brand mismanagement, and from Tavares' comments that is exactly what they are planning to do.

I can really respect those calling for Dodge to be RWD/AWD performance, Jeep to be AWD only, and reviving Plymouth for cheap cars. They have a consistent brand marketing vision.

Those perfectly fine with 3 and 4 cylinder FWD Jeeps sold around the world who insist that Dodge should just be RWD/AWD performance in North America only are just apologists for the failed Fiat brand marketing model.

Stellantis has 4 North American brands, CDJR. With so few brands, they shouldn't be confined to one segment. Dodge should be "core" (lower mainstream) and upper mainstream (performance). Chrysler should be upper mainstream (near luxury) and premium. In Europe they have 7 brands that should keep to their "core" (lower mainstream), upper mainstream and premium lanes.

Fiat and Alfa need to go back to Europe. Continuing with them in the US is a fool''s errand.

 

Pillars can be removed and replaced, just sayin. That being said, I like what I’ve heard of Mr Tavares and what I’m hearing from him. I’ve said actions speak louder than words...and I still do...but I think he’ll at least try, and if it fails it won’t be due to a lack of effort.

 

Tavares calls Chrysler a 'pillar' of Stellantis, says brand has a future
"There is a future for Chrysler among the 13 other brands of Stellantis NV because it is a "pillar" of the transatlantic automaker, CEO Carlos Tavares said during his first visit to North America since creation of the new company."

"The company needs a few more months to determine the best positioning — or "vision destination" — for the brand, Tavares said."

He seems like a breath of fresh air. The core brands of the company should be the pillars. After all without Chrysler, Peugeot, and Fiat there would be no Stellantis. I suppose I should include Opel too?

 

He seems like a breath of fresh air. The core brands of the company should be the pillars. After all without Chrysler, Peugeot, and Fiat there would be no Stellantis. I suppose I should include Opel too?

Yes!...Ja!...Sim!...Oui!

 

I have one of the K - LeBaron convertibles, yes mechanically and primary structure is still Aries/Reliant under the skin. That said, even this one which had the base 2.2L TBI engine, still has a very nice interior, full power, including the driver's 6 way seat. I am using the running gear from my totaled 1985 in it. As far as humble bases for luxury cars, the FWD Lincoln Continental was just a gussied up Taurus until Ford put the DOHC 4.6L engine in them in 1995. It was still based on the Taurus platform, but had air suspension, loads of special options and no longer looked like a Taurus/Sable clone.

All the newer Cadillacs seem to now have Chevy LS engines, in fact other than the FWD V6 cars all you are getting is a dressed up Chevy. Look at Cadillac Escalades, Lincoln Navigators etc. take a big SUV, load it with options and dress it up, and put a brand name affiliated with premium quality on it and it commands a higher price.

If Tavares wants to market Citreon models as an upmarket line, why not bring the DeSoto name back? It was at one time very much a premier brand and that was probably what contributed to it's demise. Ford has resurrected an old model name for their newest Lincoln offering, Corsair, that was one of the big (Mercury body) Edsels in 1958, granted most people today don't associate that name with Edsels.

There are definitely names that Stellantis owns that are better forgotten, Aspen and Volare for a couple. Citreon for years was a niche market car, you either loved them or hated them, but they were very technological vehicles, their hydraulic system has been licensed to Rolls-Royce for years for the suspension and brakes.

 

If Tavares wants to market Citreon models as an upmarket line, why not bring the DeSoto name back?

Would you, today, name a car after a famous slave trader who kidnapped a native American leader, demanded a ransom, and killed him after they got the ransom?

At least Plymouth was named after good, healthy twine.

From history.com: ( Hernando de Soto )

The 16th-century Spanish explorer and conquistador Hernando de Soto (c. 1496-1542) arrived in the West Indies as a young man and went on to make a fortune in the Central American slave trade. ... by 1530 he was the leading slave trader and one of the richest men in Nicaragua.
...
In 1532, De Soto acted as Pizarro’s chief lieutenant in the former’s conquest of Peru. Before Spanish forces defeated the Incas at Cajamarca that November, de Soto became the first European to make contact with the Inca emperor Atahualpa. When Pizarro’s men subsequently captured Atahualpa, de Soto was among the emperor’s closest contacts among the Spaniards. Pizarro’s men executed Atahualpa, the last Inca emperor, in 1533, though the Incas had assembled a huge ransom in gold for his release; de Soto gained a fortune when the ransom was divided.
...
With no success finding the gold they sought, the Spaniards headed back south into Alabamatowards Mobile Bay, seeking to rendezvous with their ships, when they were attacked by an Indian contingent near present-day Mobile in October 1540. In the bloody battle that followed, the Spaniards killed hundreds of Indians and suffered severe casualties themselves.

 

Very encouraging words. However I'll believe it when I see a new vehicle that isn't a rebadged Pacifica wearing a Chrysler logo.

 

Tavares calls Chrysler a 'pillar' of Stellantis, says brand has a future
"There is a future for Chrysler among the 13 other brands of Stellantis NV because it is a "pillar" of the transatlantic automaker, CEO Carlos Tavares said during his first visit to North America since creation of the new company."

"The company needs a few more months to determine the best positioning — or "vision destination" — for the brand, Tavares said."

This thought process should have been initiated in conjunction with the merger negotiations and been agreed to by all parties involved PRIOR to the contract signing. This is just another indication of management/leadership shortcomings and reflect poorly on the ability of the new entity to prosper in this and the future automotive environment. This prior entity has been plagued by: poor quality, ill-conceived marketing, ineffective brand management, ill advised communication from the top officers, and too many apathetic dealers.
Yet the "new kid on the block" needs MONTHS to figure out what to do with what he has got !!
We have ideas RIGHT HERE at ALLPAR.

 

That would violate the laws governing mergers between publicly traded companies.

 

Honestly, this falls in line with about what could be expected. I'm sure Tavares has given the brands here in the states a good look over. Now, he needs someone to implement a plan. Unfortunately, or maybe fortunately, it's not the crack management in Auburn Hills. They wouldn't know what to do with Chrysler if it bit them on the back side. Chrysler the brand, needs new blood if it's to have a new life. If I were him I would look way outside the company for that talent. One company comes to mind as to where to look. And it's not a Japanese company, but one in the general area though.

 

I’m very happy to hear Chrysler has a future, but that future shouldn’t be rehashed European cars. ICE is a dying breed. With the relaunch of Chrysler they need to look to the future, and the future is BEVs or at a minimum PHEV.

 

Peugeot has an upscale luxury brand called DS. I wouldn't have a problem with using the DS brand as a starting point for some new Chryslers. Of course, like any other brand from Europe, it would need some modifications for the American market. From what I've read about the DS brand, though, they're pretty darn respected over there!

 

Respected but low sales that fail to meet goals, just like Alfa.

 

The Ram brand needs to end and go back to the model name under the Dodge brand. Until someone figures that out the Dodge and Ram brands will always be mismanaged.

 

Exactly where is the mismanagement? Right where people think a now near-luxury pick-up truck deserves to go back to the brand that's known for "cheap" interiors and 700hp for the same price you get a "nice" interior for a pick-up truck that has the same hp, actually tows, etc.
Why people think the Ram brand is wrong is just absolutely beyond me. You want to dilute the name of Dodge to the point Stellantis will go from 13 brands to 1: just sell Dodge's everywhere, because they can be known as the guys that sell everything.
Wrangler? It's a Ramcharger.
Quattroporte? No, that's a Polara.
Ypsilon? Omni.
Renegade, Compass, Cherokee? Neon, Caliber, Nitro.
2008, 3008, 5008? St. Regis, Coronet, Caravan.
Just a full brand where every vehicle competes with each other. Rebadge and sell everything under Dodge. 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️
That's all I ever read when someone says "Ram should be Dodge again".
That ship sailed when the Laramie Longhorns started coming out the same time people called the new Dodge interiors and drivetrains terrible.

 

While K-cars weren't perfect they didn't start squeaking and rattling within a year or two. My Ram truck I've owned for almost twenty years is still rattle free. My wife's Commander is also squeak free and the cloth interior, while plain and boring wears like iron. Say what you will about Daimler but the chassis parts and other things they used back then seem to be far better then what's been in use recently. Oh and both have over 200,000 miles on them.

 

While K-cars weren't perfect they didn't start squeaking and rattling within a year or two.

My father's Reliant rattled and squeaked out of the showroom. It also regularly lost wheel covers (to the point that he stopped buying new ones) and had speakers that would buzz every time the bass from an FM station made them buzz.

I think people romanticize the past quite a bit. A Jeep Cherokee, the modern CDJR version of a K-car, is 100x better in every way (including fit, finish, comfort and NVH).

 

Tavares calls Chrysler a 'pillar' of Stellantis, says brand has a future
"There is a future for Chrysler among the 13 other brands of Stellantis NV because it is a "pillar" of the transatlantic automaker, CEO Carlos Tavares said during his first visit to North America since creation of the new company."

"The company needs a few more months to determine the best positioning — or "vision destination" — for the brand, Tavares said."

 

The first reasonable assumption is that Stellantis needs to amortize the use of its current platforms. That means, no discrete new platforms for Dodge or Chrysler. The only question is whether to configure current platforms for existing brands, new brands, or, both. What Tavares just said is Chrysler is in the mix as of now with no particulars attached. Good news for the Chrysler brand....so what about Dodge? With Jeep and Ram covering the 4WD and pickup crowd, are both of the formerly FCA brands (Chrysler and Dodge) necessary to cover the spectrum? My guess is no. Minivans, sedans and FWD crossovers could all reassemble under the Chrysler brand. In that scenario, Dodge (I think), becomes a question mark.

 

This is exactly why Dodge should get the upper mainstream (Peugeot) cars and SUVs and Chrysler the premium (DS) cars and SUVs. The Italian brands become essentially the same as Chrysler and Dodge, reskins of the French cars.

 

Citroen is now a budget brand and won’t come to America as a brand and I doubt as any models. I like the C4 as it’s a unique form factor with quirky but tasteful styling and I think it would be a great entry level electric car for Chrysler that would sort of stand on it’s own If badged as a “CHRYSLER Citroen C4”. Ralph Gilles had a similar Citroen Cactus in Detroit several years ago so it’s on his radar.

IMHO, Stellantis has a perfect mix of brands as it is and they just need to artfully fill the spaces.

 

He may have said Chrysler was a pillar but the foundation under it has been eroding away for a long time.

 

Lets look at something, for years the auto industry did pretty darn well without government intervention. Then we were suddenly saddled with emission controls, many of which worked very well. Air pumps were a horsepower draining stopgap, then came EGR systems and if anyone can explain how making an engine essentially eat it's own exhaust and run better It would be interesting. Then came the catalytic converters, which were spotty to say the least. GM, AMC and Chrysler used the AC (GM) bed type which looks like a large flat muffler filled with gravel. Ford and the European cars I used to work on (Mercedes-Benz, Jaguar and MG) used a monolithic style that has lots of tiny passages through what looks like ceramic. These flow much more freely then the bed type.

The result, in 1965 a Lincoln Continental with a 430 ci V8 and easily weighing well over 5500 lbs could get 16-18 mpg highway, a 1975 Chevy Nova with a 250 ci 6 cyl and probably weighing around 3000 lbs, was lucky to get 10 mpg due to the emission systems (lean mixture, EGR, air pump, and the bed type converter). Now they are pushing for almost unobtainable fuel economy and automakers are achieving most of it and still have decent performance. On rattles, my son had a 1999 Mustang convertible, while it was in the shop for a dealer caused electrical fire (car was originally a rental unit) V6 auto with GT brakes. He borrowed my 1985 LeBaron convertible and his first comment was how much tighter the body was than the Mustang.

Trucks, my 1986 F350 is very noise free with the windows up at speed, down is a different story, the passenger side front shoulder belt flaps like a flag in a hurricane. Truck is 35 years old, still has the original king pins and muffler. It is not gas mileage champ, the 460 loves gas, but I have yet to find something it won't pull and that's what the truck was built for.

I was raised on Chrysler products and had a number of minivans starting with a 1989 Grand Caravan with a 3.0L Mitsubishi oil leak special and an A604. That one sold both my wife and I on those, went to a 1993, 3.3L and A604, My new wife had a 1997 Grand Caravan 3.3L and A604, but it had a load miles so she sold it and kept the 93. We sold it when we bought a 2003 T & C 3.8L and 41TE, then traded it in on a 2005 T & C with Stow-n-Go seats, still 3.8L. The only vehicles I have ever had to put catalytic converters on were my 1987 Horizon (it internally disintegrated) and the 2005 T & C (it broke the flex joint). The 2005 also drove me crazy trying to get the correct, from Chrysler O2 sensors. Front one went bad, it took 3 tries to get the correct one that wouldn't set a code for heater voltage (one was a Denso, the other two Mopar) last Mopar was the right one.

It was things like that that sent me back to Ford on the family vehicles, I had a 1994 Taurus from April 2009 until last September, it had a bad crank journal when I bought it as a commuter car (5 miles each way). When we traded in the 2005 T & C on a 2011 Ford Flex after we drove one at the local dealer, that left us with no currently operational Chrysler vehicles (convertible is a project car), The Taurus was traded on a 2009 Flex with factory tow package. I had tried to get a hitch so I could haul my Aluma utility trailer with it, but only Chrysler had one that fit the Stow-n-Go models, $300 + and discontinued when I was looking.

Right now, due to several problems with past Chrysler products, I will not be buying one any time soon. Maybe if the quality returns, I might consider one.

 

Basically any effort would be better than what the Chrysler brand has experienced in almost ten years.

 

Hope they keep the 300,I like the size and love the HEMI V8...at least offer a hybrid Hemi because I will always have a V8..

Now,I sure hope they give the Chrysler brand a whole line-up...GM/Ford ditched it's cars leaving The Koreans/Japanese full control...Also Chrysler needs suv's of all sizes...Chrysler used to have high end vehicles to average Joe vehicles..Example..Newport to Imperial...Today those would be suv's/crossovers and YES lets have at least the 300 a performance/luxury/muscle sedan for buyers like myself...We bought 5 brand new 300's so far..plus a Charger & 3 Challenger's.Wife has a new 300 HEMI and stilll cruises my old 2011 6 speed standard Challenger R/T classic(she wont let it go)! Anyways,too busy gotta run!!

KEEP CHRYSLER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

US/Canadian Taxpayers saved Chrysler. Fiat did not put any money into the company in 2009.

90%+ of FCA's profits over the last 10 years came from vehicles FCA did not design (Daimler/Cerberus vehicles)

Pentastar, ZF 8-speed, WK2 Grand Cherokee, interior upgrades were all done before the bankruptcy, not by FCA.

Chrysler 300 had a bold styling refresh slated for 2011 until Sergio watered it down, then tried to reverse some of it in 2015.

ZF 9-speed was FCA's first cheapened transmission for North America that took 4 years to sort out due to short cuts in design.

2.4 engine is bashed regularly in the US for poor NVH, poor power delivery and lack of reliability.

Dart/200 were Fiat-designed on the inferior CUSW and needed to be cancelled quickly.

200 was a copy of Hyundai Sonata styling and failed.

Cherokee is a fleet queen with heavy discounts and less interior cargo room than a Compass.

Compass Trailhawk just lost to Bronco Sport for off-road capability due to inferior design. It is neither economical nor capable.

Pacifica replacing Town & Country, believing people would not see it as a minivan was a major blunder and waste of a well-known nameplate. It gained the company NOTHING.

Since the 200, Chrysler and Dodge have not received an all-new vehicle (Pacifica is an exception) and only had their lineups cut back.

If we get new Dodge vehicles on Giorgio, the credit will go to Tavares, not to Marchionne.
If we get new Chryslers on PSA platforms, the credit will go to Tavares, not to Marchionne.
If Jeep gets a more focused branding, the credit will go to Tavares, not to Marchionne.

In other words, 10 years have gone by and the North American market still supports the company in profits and has received little in return.

If the company can suddenly find the money to give all brands multiple vehicles, we will know that FCA was starving certain brands.

 

US/Canadian Taxpayers saved Chrysler. Fiat did not put any money into the company in 2009.

No money and no effort whatsoever? I presume that many companies wanted whole Chrysler Group at the time. At least that's what can be read between the lines.

And then if someone looks carefully the truth is defeating for Chrysler Group. No one wanted Chrysler Group besides Fiat Group.

90%+ of FCA's profits over the last 10 years came from vehicles FCA did not design (Daimler/Cerberus vehicles)

Not true. When you type something like this you should say "in my opinion".

Pentastar, WK2 Grand Cherokee

Yes

ZF 8-speed, interior upgrades were all done before the bankruptcy, not by FCA.

No

Chrysler 300 had a bold styling refresh slated for 2011 until Sergio watered it down, then tried to reverse some of it in 2015.

At least start to be consistent in your critics. Once is Sergio who made calls, the other time it's not him.

ZF 9-speed was FCA's first cheapened transmission for North America that took 4 years to sort out due to short cuts in design.

2.4 engine is bashed regularly in the US for poor NVH, poor power delivery and lack of reliability.

Dart/200 were Fiat-designed on the inferior CUSW and needed to be cancelled quickly.

All mentioned above were Chrysler calls. Back then the name was Chrysler. FCA name came much later. Italian R&D centers had nothing to do with any of the mentioned products.

Cherokee is a fleet queen with heavy discounts and less interior cargo room than a Compass.

Have you ever watched cargo room test for both or tried to fill them? You would be surprised.

Compass Trailhawk just lost to Bronco Sport for off-road capability due to inferior design. It is neither economical nor capable.

I would like to see this test outside of US. Oops! Bronco Sport as it is with protruding tires is not legal outside of NAFTA.

I really like Motor Trend as the Ford's marketing spot. I really do. Ford did it flawlessly. Marketing deal.

It will be interesting to see review against Cherokee. You know, buyers can opt for Cherokee inside of Jeep world. Ford customers can opt... for nothing.

If we get new Dodge vehicles on Giorgio, the credit will go to Tavares, not to Marchionne.

If we get the new vehicles on FCA platforms credit belongs to FCA. To Marchionne and/or Manley.

In other words, 10 years have gone by and the North American market still supports the company in profits and has received little in return.

Actually North American part of received too much in some aspects. It got all attention in first half of 2010's. Some results were suboptimal. And I'm talking about US engineered products. Such products were killed and replaced by new products. That money is thrown in the wind.
We can argue that Chrysler brand had frozen or had slowed down North American development, i.e. Jeep and Ram. Scarce resources were used and they failed.

f the company can suddenly find the money to give all brands multiple vehicles, we will know that FCA was starving certain brands.

More money? Hmh. You should listen Tavares' press conference. AFAIK something what he is talking about have started under FCA. Besides joint FCA-PSA or if you prefer Stellantis project will not come to fruition before calendar 2024. So all before it is for sure FCA.

 

JL/JT is s profitable, and was designed under FCA. WL74/75 will be successful, and was designed under FCA. Offering both DT/DS combo was spot spot on, has been very profitable. You can't say there haven't been hits under FCA leadership - that's false.

Sergio loved the high end of the market, realized he couldn't compete with other automakers in the low end of the market. No shame in that, GM/Ford derive less than 15% of EBIT from the low end of the market.

WS...should be successful, over time. I'm a little less confident in that one. I think sales for Wagoneer will initially be tepid because they'll price it sky high, but once the LWB variants/4xe versions come out and the Durango version is introduced for .GOV fleet sales/lower trim level & price point, the platform as a whole will be very profitable. It's just going to take 2-3 years after Wagoneer launch for all of these models/trims/powertrain variants to be made available.

 

JL/JT are more of an evolution of JK than something "all-new". They didn't screw up a winning formula.

WL74/75 are nicely styled and seem to be what the market wants, but they are neither a success nor failure yet.

DT/DS while pickup sales are exploding is not an achievement....it is riding a wave.

Manley benefitted from the rise in CUV sales while leading Jeep, not because he delivered incredible Jeeps. The decline in Jeep sales is evidence that Manley did not make the brand stronger nor more competitive. In fact, Jeep is weaker in the market today because it is trying to be all things to all people.

Sergio's quest for "margins" was driven by a need to dress the company up for a merger. Without a merger, the volume decline would result in plant closures. They needed a merger to get volume.

His obsession caused the company to purchase cheaper and cheaper parts that have resulted in massive warranty costs and recalls.....but those happen after the margin numbers are published.

Not everything FCA did was bad. They catered to enthusiasts with the Hellcats in Charger, Challenger, Grand Cherokee and Durango. Ram TRX is incredible and a great engineering feat. I like the styling of the Renegade and Compass, but not their lack of power and capability. The Grand Cherokee L is awesome in styling. I am excited to see this product in person. Wagoneer/Grand Wagoneer are a styling miss....too bland like so many other products during the FCA era. But Wagoneer/Grand Wagoneer interior is amazing. FCA has done a great job with interiors on most vehicles. Again, Renegade/Compass are cheap, but the refresh seems to fix that.