"Jim Higgins" <gordian238 (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote

NPR's "Talk of the Nation" addressed the Chrysler sell off yesterday
( http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...oryId=10189837 ). I
didn't get a chance to hear the whole program, but what I did hear was
interesting. They made Cerberus sound very mysterious. They discussed
some of the reason why they were interested in Chrysler. Of course
there were divergent opinions on what would happen. Possibilities
included splitting off the valuable parts (the financing arm and Jeep)
and trashing the rest, or turning it around as a going concern.

Since this was NPR, they had to spend some time praising Toyota. One
of the participants referred to Toyota as the "greenest" auto company,
which is not true (Honda has a higher fleet fuel economy average). On
the flip side, at least one of the participants pointed out that
Toyota was emulating the big three by building larger and less
environmentally friendly vehicles. He also pointed out that the new
Tundra was one of the largest and least efficient vehicles sold in the
US. Of course the other panelist mentioned hybrids - Toyota gets a lot
of "green" cover from those.

They had a few people call in and opine about how if Chrysler would
only build small cars they would be just fine. One panelist pointed
out that the foreign manufacturers had substantial labor cost
advantages over Chrysler. The callers also tended to ignore the
reality that Chrysler's most profitable models are also it least fuel
efficient models.

One caller, a Camry Hybrid owner, called in to praise his Camry - he
really had to nothing to say about Chrysler. I was disappointed when
no one pointed out that his Camry Hybrid cost at least $5k more than a
comparable non-hybrid Camry while getting maybe 4 mpg better on
average. Even with $4 gas it will take a long time to recover the
additional cost (well over 150,000 miles, if ever).

I haven't been a big fan of Chrysler for a long time (last time I
owned one was the early 80's), but I am sad to see it being trashed. I
hope Cerberus can turn it around. I fear they will just strip it down,
sell the good parts, and give the rest to the Chinese to use as an
entree into the US market.

Ed

C E,
I agree with you. I used to love Chrysler products.

But, like you, I just got turned off, mostly because of their quality
downward spiral.

That said, I should mention that I don't have direct experience-haven't
owned a Chrysler product since 70s.

"C. E. White" <cewhite3 (AT) removemindspring (DOT) com> wrote


"Jim Higgins" <gordian238 (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote

NPR's "Talk of the Nation" addressed the Chrysler sell off yesterday
( http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...oryId=10189837 ). I
didn't get a chance to hear the whole program, but what I did hear was
interesting. They made Cerberus sound very mysterious. They discussed
some of the reason why they were interested in Chrysler. Of course
there were divergent opinions on what would happen. Possibilities
included splitting off the valuable parts (the financing arm and Jeep)
and trashing the rest, or turning it around as a going concern.

Since this was NPR, they had to spend some time praising Toyota. One
of the participants referred to Toyota as the "greenest" auto company,
which is not true (Honda has a higher fleet fuel economy average). On
the flip side, at least one of the participants pointed out that
Toyota was emulating the big three by building larger and less
environmentally friendly vehicles. He also pointed out that the new
Tundra was one of the largest and least efficient vehicles sold in the
US. Of course the other panelist mentioned hybrids - Toyota gets a lot
of "green" cover from those.

They had a few people call in and opine about how if Chrysler would
only build small cars they would be just fine. One panelist pointed
out that the foreign manufacturers had substantial labor cost
advantages over Chrysler. The callers also tended to ignore the
reality that Chrysler's most profitable models are also it least fuel
efficient models.

One caller, a Camry Hybrid owner, called in to praise his Camry - he
really had to nothing to say about Chrysler. I was disappointed when
no one pointed out that his Camry Hybrid cost at least $5k more than a
comparable non-hybrid Camry while getting maybe 4 mpg better on
average. Even with $4 gas it will take a long time to recover the
additional cost (well over 150,000 miles, if ever).

I haven't been a big fan of Chrysler for a long time (last time I
owned one was the early 80's), but I am sad to see it being trashed. I
hope Cerberus can turn it around. I fear they will just strip it down,
sell the good parts, and give the rest to the Chinese to use as an
entree into the US market.

Ed

Are we thus to assume that qualifies you as an expert on Chryslers "quality
downward spiral?" LOL

mike


"newman" <stevef74dummy (AT) verizon (DOT) net> wrote

Mike Hunter wrote:
At least he lives in this universe rather than the flight from reality
that you inhabit.

Another 'expert' opines LOL

mike

"Jim Higgins" <gordian238 (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote

"newman" <stevef74dummy (AT) verizon (DOT) net> wrote

Oh, good lord. So, you had a bad experience with Chrysler in the 70's
and that tore it for you, for the rest of your life? That's, like, 30 years
ago,
man. Just about everyone working at Chrysler today was hired years
afterwards. They don't deserve your idiot comments.

I sure hope that at least a few people you know are still carrying a
grudge against you for something you did 30 years ago!! Maybe you
might benefit from a little of what you dish out to others.

Ted

'68 Torino
'78 Dat 510
'78 Kawasaki KZ650
'80 Honda 750K, C, & F
'81 Dat 210
'84 Olds Ciera
'85 Chevy wagon
'94 T&C
'95 T&C