Allpar Forums banner

UF "200" engines

18K views 110 replies 35 participants last post by  jimboy 
#1 ·
Hello,
What is the latest info about UF's coming engine lineup: are 2.4 and 3.2 the only ones and is the earlier speculated 1.4 MA "officially" canceled now? And was 1.4 also planned with 9spd like 2.4 and 3.2 or with dual clutch tranny?

UF for Europe as Lancia will naturally be offered with diesel, but do you see that there would be demand/businesscase for diesels to available also in US?

Btw, will Dart 1.4 MA become available with 9spd or stay dual clutched when automatic is chosed?

Thanks
 
#4 ·
This whole turn of events is intriguing. Wondering if there are any tricks up their sleeve for the 2.4s MPG. Perhaps they have a magic way to match the 2.0 MPG. Negating the the need for it.
 
#7 ·
Thanks guys for answers.

Looks like the 1.4 will be not be introduced in UF at all, and will be dropped from dart as well (besides Aero-version)


Apparently there is no diesel market growinnf for US in that segment?


What is you preditions, will the new 2.0 Hurricane se UF's enginebay
 
#8 ·
kakoktim said:
What is you preditions, will the new 2.0 Hurricane se UF's enginebay
It's already been noted in the aforementioned thread, UF gets the Hurricane, as confirmed by reliable sources.
 
#9 ·
MoparNorm said:
It's already been noted in the aforementioned thread, UF gets the Hurricane, as confirmed by reliable sources.
This makes more sense, I don't recall that Sergio dictated the 2.4 would be used when mentioning the 38 MPG of the next car. And it's hard to envision the leap it would take given the current 2.4 tigersharks unimpressive MPG. That said, the hurricane would have to be awfully far along if the 200 is to debut with it.

With all of that done, I'd imagine the Dart with the 2.0 and 9 spd would finally address that.
 
#10 ·
bumonbox said:
This makes more sense, I don't recall that Sergio dictated the 2.4 would be used when mentioning the 38 MPG of the next car. And it's hard to envision the leap it would take given the current 2.4 tigersharks unimpressive MPG. That said, the hurricane would have to be awfully far along if the 200 is to debut with it.

With all of that done, I'd imagine the Dart with the 2.0 and 9 spd would finally address that.
Of interest, they aren't calling the UF anything model specific, only "mid sized", no 200 label, no Lancia label, no Alfa label, so several variants may be possible.
 
#11 ·
I hate the "200" moniker. I think they should come out with a new name and use "200" as the base trim level, "Lancia" as the Euro touring package trim level and "Imperial" for the Lincoln/Lexus Es competitor trim level. Call the car an "Airflow" or "Newport" or "Windsor". I hate alphanumeric naming, it hurts Acura, Lincoln, Cadillac and certainly did Pontiac and Saturn no good.
How about:

Airflow 200 --base model---rental car---cloth---2.4 with optional V6
Airflow 200e --fuel saver---Hurricane engine and aero aids
Airflow 200C --leather package---more electronics---2.4 with optional V6
Airflow Lancia---Euro touring package--mostly the same car Europe gets with Lancia grille, handling package, nicer leather and wheels
Airflow Imperial--top of the line with V6, special trim, unique grille, almost all options standard, two tone paint, really nice wheels
 
#13 ·
bumonbox said:
This makes more sense, I don't recall that Sergio dictated the 2.4 would be used when mentioning the 38 MPG of the next car. And it's hard to envision the leap it would take given the current 2.4 tigersharks unimpressive MPG. That said, the hurricane would have to be awfully far along if the 200 is to debut with it.

With all of that done, I'd imagine the Dart with the 2.0 and 9 spd would finally address that.
It may take a lot more than DI, and I really don't know what Mazda did to their 2.5L engine aside from DI, but the mileage from 2013 to 2014 models with the 2.5L went from 20/28 to 28/39. Same displacement, 40% increase in gas mileage, with more power to boot.

I'd imagine that the 2.4L Tigershark equipped with DI, and yes I know it's not just as simple as "bolt-on", but if it were done, would increase gas mileage by at least 30% and power by at least 10%.
 
#15 ·
srt4evah said:
It may take a lot more than DI, and I really don't know what Mazda did to their 2.5L engine aside from DI, but the mileage from 2013 to 2014 models with the 2.5L went from 20/28 to 28/39. Same displacement, 40% increase in gas mileage, with more power to boot.

I'd imagine that the 2.4L Tigershark equipped with DI, and yes I know it's not just as simple as "bolt-on", but if it were done, would increase gas mileage by at least 30% and power by at least 10%.
Mazda did a fair bit more than slap DI on the engine. Adding DI to the engine would almost assuredly not increase gas mileage by "at least 30%". If that's all it took, fair bet they would have done it. Alas, the topic about the pentastar getting wards 10 best has commentary from inside Chrysler. Indicating that the benefit for NA was not huge. Perhaps didn't justify the costs. Also indicated that DI engines are likely to have a harder time meeting new emisions regs. In either case, I can't think of any car in which DI was added and it added 30% just like that. Mazda did quite a bit to the engines (Skyactiv technology is ultimately just a marketing term, but refers to a number of changes to the engines, IIRC much higher compression being a change, and I believe the benefits of DI are better realized with that combo. However there are drawbacks to all of that as well)

I think it's a fair bet that a 10% increase is closer to reality. So 3-4 MPG maybe. Plus the 9 SPD, they might be able to milk the extra MPG from there. But that's hard to say.
 
#16 ·
Lancia as a trim level?! It's a brand, for God's sake!
Like SRT and Mopar?

I can see your scheme being implementable - desirable is another question.

I do agree with dropping the alphanumeric, but I am pretty sure it will indeed be 200. I can't see Sebring coming back, unfortunately. The scathing comments about Sebrings are now reaching back to the originals which tended to do extremely well in reviews of the times
 
#18 ·
Dave said:
'Like SRT and Mopar?

I can see your scheme being implementable - desirable is another question.

I do agree with dropping the alphanumeric, but I am pretty sure it will indeed be 200. I can't see Sebring coming back, unfortunately. The scathing comments about Sebrings are now reaching back to the originals which tended to do extremely well in reviews of the times"

I don't think the 200 model name has built up enough goodwill for such an important car, especially one with upscale ambitions. BTW, where's Francois Olivier been lately? I think they need some marketing help, he should send me an e-mail.. Maybe the late launches of the Cherokee and Dart GT have stifled things. But then what do I know, I predicted the "Dart" name a year before it came out.

BTW, this new d-class is going to get a lot of attention as a Lancia, the American side needs to leverage that somehow.
 
#19 ·
I don't think the 200 model name has built up enough goodwill for such an important car, especially one with upscale ambitions.
So what's your suggestion? Do the usual Chrysler thing of making a new name? Pick out the last downsized-Chrysler names? (Cordoba, New Yorker, Fifth Avenue, LeBaron)? The first and last of those are linked to less than perfect memories and the middle two may annoy people in New York-hating parts of the country.
 
#21 ·
It's going to be very hard selling a car named 200 over $30,000 . Using it as a trimline will save what little brand equity it's earned. How about "Newport" ? That was a very successful name for Chrysler. Then adding prestigious names like Lancia and Imperial can get them into higher transaction prices over the $30,000 and $40,000 barriers.

Newport 200----$24,995
Newport Lancia Touring----$29,995
Newport Imperial----$39995
 
#22 ·
I like Newport, a lot. I'd want to put it on a slightly larger RWD car, though. Maybe a Challenger-sized sedan, like the 200C Concept.

I'd leave "Lancia" in Europe, unless they merge the brands and call it "Chrysler Lancia." And I'd save "Imperial" for a flagship sedan.

Maybe the upper trim level will have a slightly different front clip like the Cherokee Trailhawk (even though it would only be cosmetic, not b/c of the approach angle). Chrysler 200 Touring, 200 Touring L, and 200 S; and Chrysler 200C, 200C Super S, and 200C Luxury.
 
#23 ·
kakoktim said:
Thanks guys for answers.

Looks like the 1.4 will be not be introduced in UF at all, and will be dropped from dart as well (besides Aero-version)


Apparently there is no diesel market growinnf for US in that segment?


What is you preditions, will the new 2.0 Hurricane se UF's enginebay
If our own ChryFI people are thinking in those terms, I think that's a mistake. Chev Cruze - a direct competitor - is hitting the US Market first (from a US marque). Sergio and Crew have dropped the ball by watching that turn of events occur. How could they allow a direct competitor to field a Fiat co-developed SDE in the States when Fiat is so tightly tied-up with our own girls and boys in Auburn Hills?!? I think that's just one way to spell 'Embarrassing'. The chuckles reverberating in the halls of GM's main office will get louder over time.

Fiat, if not ChryFi itself, has the Diesels that should've been sent from Turin to the States in inventory just gathering dust ( or at least, that's what I suppose ... in other words, I'm only slightly exaggerating ).
 
#24 ·
I´d stay away from Lancia completly...
in us they may have been a strange eurocar but in europe they bhave stood for
everything between lousy econo rustbuckets to slightly expensive crappy rustbuckets.
I´m surprised that Lancia is still around.
 
#25 ·
billfrombuckhead said:
It's going to be very hard selling a car named 200 over $30,000 . Using it as a trimline will save what little brand equity it's earned. How about "Newport" ? That was a very successful name for Chrysler. Then adding prestigious names like Lancia and Imperial can get them into higher transaction prices over the $30,000 and $40,000 barriers.

Newport 200----$24,995
Newport Lancia Touring----$29,995
Newport Imperial----$39995
But Newport, Imperial and Lancia don't have any brand equity. At least with younger buyers.

If the next 200 is as good as it's supposed to be/needs to be to beat the others, it will sell
 
#26 ·
UN4GTBL said:
But Newport, Imperial and Lancia don't have any brand equity. At least with younger buyers.

If the next 200 is as good as it's supposed to be/needs to be to beat the others, it will sell
I'd say Imperial and Lancia are stronger brands than "200" which is alphanumeric code for "rental car". We need to get customers thinking up to pay profits. Also "200" makes the new car a lesser to the "300" which I think is giving away the upside to a new product that has features and benefits beyond the 300 to many customers. Some will prefer front wheel drive, a smaller size, new styling language, etc. Why not make the top of the line d-class co-equal to the older rear wheel drive 300? Naming the top model an Airflow Imperial would create that dynamic and allow Chrysler to sell $25,000 cars and $40,000 cars with the same sheetmetal but different drivetrains and amenities. I'm sure Chrysler could do a better job with this than the Fusion vs MKZ disaster Ford has with the Ford looking better than the Lincoln.

Personally, I like "Airflow", one of the greatest Chryslers ever made even if it was ahead of it's time. There's even one in the Toyota car museum. They made models called "Airflow Imperials" back in the mid 30's. Why not hark back to a time when Chrysler indisputably made the best car in the world.

And another thing, calling it a "200" also hurts the "300". Instead of the "300" being a modern extension of a car that was once one of the best in the world from a great historical line of cars, it merely becomes the larger rental car.

And one more thing, if someone wants a touring package, why not give them the European version of the car you already build, with a name from one of the most fabled rally racing motorsports manufacturers ever. I think using the Lancia name is better than calling the car the 200 Touring or 200 S.
 
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