That’s funny, I know about it and I’m retired from FCA since 2016!
Maybe you’re out of the loop??

 

Okay, why doesn't management fix these problems if everyone knows about it? Just keep selling the same old cheap stuff and hope consumers don't notice? Are they that stupid?

 

Did something happen to Chrysler? (Other than having next to nothing to sell?)

 

Did something happen to Chrysler? (Other than having next to nothing to sell?)



Well you can share if you'd like instead of further keeping Mr. Source out of the loop.

There will be 3 new chrysler models a compact and midsize CUV on the EMP2 platform and a large CUV from the Pacifica.

 

You mean JDP? Wy would they call attention to failure instead of to the massive achievement of Ram and Dodge being near the top?

I've written about what I believe happened, on these forums

 

Honestly, it doesn't make any difference to the consumer why it happened or continues to happen. They expect, for the hard earned money they fork out, they should get a quality vehicle. If they can't do that with all of the lines they sell then discontinue the ones they have no interest in, (Chrysler) and stop the bleeding.

 

At the 20:43 minute mark, Roman interviews Mike Koval, CEO of Ram, about placing #1 in the JD Power Initial Quality Survey. Some interesting comments from Mike.

Basically, if true, then many of our suspicions that some brands are handled better than others.


(2) I Finally Drive The New Ford Raptor: Here’s What It’s Like AND What Ram's CEO Has To Say About It! - YouTube

 

OMG, it's like a tale of two different companies when you listen to this interview. Ram and Jeep are one, and the rest belongs to someone else. Jeep only applies to any vehicle that's not fwd based either. Those are thrown in with the rest of the unwanted vehicles.

 

This has been obvious for about the last 6 years now. Zero investment on the Chrysler/Dodge side. ALL the development and design going to Jeep and Ram. They even went so far as to throw the 200 under the bus only a year after the all new model was launched. "It didn't sell well". No kidding. I guess when you don't do any marketing beyond the vehicle launch I'm not sure what anyone expected to happen.

Dodge went from 6 models to 3. Chrysler from 3 to 2. All of those remaining were launched over a decade ago with the exception of Pacifica.

 

Why hide what? What happened?
Most useless post I've read on here in ages...

 

I do think thread starters should indicate just what the @$&# they're posting about in the OP, or not post. Maybe that's just me, IDK.

 

The 200 (UF-body) and Pacifica (RU-body) were refreshing new Chryslers. The 200 was cancelled before its time, but assembly capacity at Sterling Heights for Ram 1500 was more important. I get that.

The PUG and 948TE is a world-class powertrain. The Hybrid needs refinement I hear.

Chrysler needs new product. The 300 is nice, but getting obsolete.

If RU/UF-inspired architecture with some Alfa-DNA is planned, that would be good to see.

 

Still China is essential for Chrysler if only for reduced ev techy r&d engineering and supply chain sourcing etc, given the sheer scale of bev and digital techy stuff there (assuming that any new chryslers will emphasize such.) Also good scope for cost and riak sharing with foxconn say or chinese jv partner or say samsung or...tesla china? Apple in china? Etc

 

I feel like there should be a higher standard for what comments deserve to be their own threads.

 

China is essential for Chrysler? Um, no.

 

I mean China is one of the largest automobile markets in the world, so why wouldn’t it be?

 

China is important not just as a target market for manufacture and sales. China enables much cheaper product development, validations, a rich and competitive supply chain esp for bev and other techy stuff and software. Going to china also enables therefore cost competitiveness for brands like chrysler that for now have little pricing power a priori in usa market. Not for nothing is the import content of hyundais toyotas and say hondas or nissans etc assembled in usa for usa consumer so high. Can chrysler compete cost wise if china andor europe is not in the financial costing etc mix? With high 'domestic' content of parts, elevated development costs and usa or canada costs of manufacture, like jeep or ram or it seems the dodge brand can? Maybe. Or not?

 

Obviously global platform sharing in most market segments is necessary for economies of scale. Models built on those platforms in China or the US/Canada do not necessarily have to be shared outside those markets. In fact tailoring to those markets which make up 50% of the world market can have advantages compared to companies that sell global models.

Aside from Maserati, Jeep and Opel, Stellantis really doesn't have brands with global appeal. Even Jeep sales outside North America are very small, and Opel is confined to Europe. Fiat and Alfa have virtually no appeal in North America. US and Chinese consumers have the same brand preferences, except US consumers don't want Chinese brands. What they want is Asian, German and US brands. The US brands besides Jeep and the European brands besides Opel and Maserati should be seen as half the world brands. Subcompact, Compact and Midsize SUVs and cars need to share platforms and components under the skin worldwide, they should not share sheet metal.


Best selling segments in the US and what Stellantis sells in them.

First half of 2021
Subcompact SUV 665.036 (#10 Renegade, a moderate performer, #29 500X an abysmal performer)
Compact cars 745.330 (Not present)
Midsize cars 765.825 (#25 Giulia an abysmal performer)
Large pickups 1.166.475 (#2 Ram a top performer)
Midsize SUV 1.614.971 (#2 Wrangler a top performer, #4 Grand Cherokee a top performer, #16 Durango a poor performer)
Compact SUV 1.966.581 (#11 Cherokee a moderate performer, #17 Compass a poor performer, #35 Stelvio an abysmal performer)

What Chrysler and Dodge should be selling in them:

Subcompact SUV = PT Cruiser / Raider People in this segment don't want real off road performance. HR-V is a wagon, Crosstrek is a jacked up Impreza. Renegade/500X were heavy for no reason.

Compact Cars = Daytona/Laser/Shadow/LeBaron GTC The people in this segment are here for 2 reasons. Low price and low center of gravity. Don't bother with high roofs here, send those people over to look at the PT Cruiser and Raider. 50"-53" is fine here.

Midsize Cars = LeBaron GTS / Stealth (Mitsubishi got the Lancer name) See compact car above.

Midsize SUV FWD/AWD vehicles are half the segment. 3 row Journey / Durango / T&C

Compact SUV FWD/AWD vehicles are over 90% of the segment. 2 row Aspen / Nitro

 

The parallels with Buick are uncanny for Chrysler, henceforth. Partly shared with european brands/manufacture/models/sourcing etc (exGM opel...to lancia) and partly via China. Especially if focussed on BEV and connected tech etc.

 

At this point any company that helps China strengthen its supply chain for electrification is cutting its own throat in the long run.

Supply chains for electrification needs to created in domestic markets or China will come and destroy domestic manufacturers.

That is what PSA, now Stellantis, set out to do....with plants in Germany, France, Italy and Canada. To get ahead technologically and reduce electrification costs and strengthen supply chains before cheap Chinese imports arrive into EMEA and North America and undercut the domestic manufacturers at their own game.

 

Well, you all talk like Chrysler is dead already, I call B.S.
Chrysler's problem is lack of investment, pure and simple. 15 years ago Chrysler was outselling Dodge as a brand, lots of product, variety, and style. No offense to you non-North Americans here, but you don't really seem to understand America's attachment to Nameplates and brands. For example, look how long Jeep survived producing VERY questionable product, and with the right investment has become the jewel in the crown for ex-Chrysler/FCA. The simple fact that so few of us here have advocated for so long to save Chrysler(brand), should tell you a little about how N/A's feel about their vehicles. The rest of the world has never had the love of vehicles engendered in N/A, so you don't really understand the depth of our passion. Blithely assuming the loss of Chrysler will mean nothing to the company or shipping it lock stock and barrel to China or wherever wouldn't affect our feelings or buying decisions is short sighted, and shows me a lack of perception about the automobile in North America. Decisions made regarding the future of this Iconic brand need to be made by someone who understands North American tastes and attitudes toward cars. I'm not really sure who is left that can provide that insight or intelligence for Chrysler.
And guess what, I know all about margin and profitability, blah, blah, blah, a good Brand manager will design a vehicle that sells well, represents the Brand and provides a healthy profit to the company, otherwise they aren't good. With the current choice of hardware and software available from the new Parent, the only reason Chrysler can't be revived to it's former glory, is incompetence or lack of will.

 

They seem to understand it quite well when it comes to Alfa and Fiat. They just don't understand it for Chrysler and Dodge because they are ignorant of the strength and depth of the Chrysler and Dodge lineups in the '80s and '90s.

 

Yes. Except that the financial case for andor against new Chrysler models is full of pretty thorny and weedy devilish details. I.e., Risk.

.... given the enfeeblement of the Chrysler brand over many a year, preDaimler, preFca, fca and currently. Wherever the merely moralistic Blame(s) may lie. Speaking financially ONLY, that is.

 

Speaking Financially only, the entire automobile industry is non-viable, as is well known in high finance. High cost, low margin, spotty quality, subject to whims and fashion etc. Why hasn't any of the worlds many Billionaires invested heavily in auto's? Not counting Elon Musk! No return on investment, yet people continue to want cars, so we continue to make them.

 

They can do an incremental new fwd alfa or lancia or fiat at lowered costs and risks in europe given post merger scale economies, even if say a new Lancia Delta or Alfa Giullietta is europe only or even Italy only (lancia.)

Chrysler though will do larger volumes at relatively high costs and prices: i.e., risks are much greater, investment outlays higher too. Etc

 

....which is why new Chryslers shared with China market and with Lancia (again) andor Peugeot etc, including manufacture in china andor europe(?), may really help the financial 'cause'.

 

[Deleted at poster's request.]

 

That only the two remain suggests American car buyers aren’t so much attached to the Chrysler brand.

 

You are 100% wrong.

It is the intentional starvation of the brand that caused it to only have two models, not the market. It is incompetent management that has proven it knows nothing about brand management. It could not launch Fiat and Alfa successfully in North America. It has failed Maserati. It shrank Dodge to only 3 vehicles and put it in a niche that is not sustainable. Jeep has been diluted, damaging the brand.

 

A factor to consider here is that people who are say, about 30 years old and younger generally don't have the passion for cars that many older people do. They have grown up in an era of non-distinctive, bland styling and colors, where even the advertising, what little there is, does not engender the passion and excitement that existed 45-50 years ago. They see cars as appliances, and evaluate their purchases accordingly. Gadgets/electronics are generic, and they will buy according to price and availability, with some consideration to utility. It's not just Chrysler, there is little brand attachment other than what is associated with reliability and cost of ownership.

 

Heck some of the youngsters don't even want to drive. My stepdaughter had us hauling her butt around to work and any other place. Her Mom, like most moms was okay with it. She was "scared" to get behind the wheel. I said she needs to learn to drive and move out, she was like 20 at that time. Both happened. Lol

 

Here's the thing.
Chrysler's (the brand) reputation was poor several times in history. In many cases, it was a single product that transformed the brand (though lack of follow up meant the brand faded again).
Here are a few examples:
1975 Cordoba
1982 LeBaron convertible
2000 PT Cruiser
2005 300
(I omitted minivans because they were primarily Dodge/Plymouth vehicles at th launch and the 1996 redo - which were the hottest points.)
Chrysler needs another breakout product. It's happened before and can happen again.

 

One thing that I IMHO that needs to change fundamentally at the NA operations is waiting till mid cycle to basically do nothing to their products. There are some minor tweaks, but thats pretty much it. Granted, not all companies do major changes, but it seems to be the direction they're moving. While this minivan is better looking then the RT was, it's still not as sharp as the 96 versions were. I'm sure that style won't fly today, but there are some things style wise, interiors not included, that are just off.