Re: Fiat to create Ram brand, rush new Chrysler models

#1

Fix
It
Again
Tomorrow

Fix
It
Again
Tony

#2

In article <4ACBE88B.F66FF185 (AT) Man (DOT) com>, MoPar (AT) Man (DOT) com says...

<clip>

Quote:

It's going to take these waps two years to re-badge their Fiat
golf-carts as Chryslers?
chop

Get your insults correct MP - M,

Back during the great immigrant influx in the late 1800s - early
1900s, illegal immigrant Italians that were busted had the booking
form marked WOP (With Out Papers). It soon became an insult.

#3

erschroedinger (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:

Quote:

There are stricter fuel economy standards on the horizon, in case you
hadn't noticed.

And there are new election cycles on the horizon. Not sure it will do
any good - but we can hope.

--
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

#4

Erroneous Maximus wrote:

Quote:

It's going to take these waps two years to re-badge their Fiat
golf-carts as Chryslers?

Get your insults correct MP - M,

Back during the great immigrant influx in the late 1800s - early
1900s, illegal immigrant Italians that were busted had the
booking form marked WOP (With Out Papers). It soon became an
insult.

I stand corrected.

#5

MoPar Man wrote:

Quote:

The LH platform is a much more sane platform to base FWD and RWD mid and
large sedans on compared to the LX. The shortfall of the LX chassis is
it's size and weight, and it's primary design goal to result in an
elevated (higher-riding) car, partly because (so the theory goes) people
like to ride higher, and also because of the demands of AWD (which is a
completely assinine option for a sedan).
Mopar,

Chyrsler has always had "chair high seating" going back to the days of
WPC himself. Keller demanded that people sit up and be able to wear a
hat,remember? My 41 Windsor sits nice and high, easy to get into and
out of. Our PTs and our present Caliber, sit high and are very
comfortable. I never liked having to bend down and feel like sitting on
the floor.

#6

This NG has several people who can't handle the idea of an American iconic
brand going down the tube and having foreign shareholders who may rescue
bits of it. Fiat may not be an ideal partner but at least it is somebody.

DAS

To send an e-mail directly replace "spam" with "schmetterling"
---
"Bill Putney" <bptn (AT) kinez (DOT) net> wrote

Quote:

erschroedinger (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:

There are stricter fuel economy standards on the horizon, in case you
hadn't noticed.

And there are new election cycles on the horizon. Not sure it will do any
good - but we can hope.

--
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address
with the letter 'x')

#7

So how come you aren't working at Chrysler?

DAS

To send an e-mail directly replace "spam" with "schmetterling"
---
"MoPar Man" <MoPar (AT) Man (DOT) com> wrote

[...]

Quote:

The LH platform is a much more sane platform to base FWD and RWD mid and
large sedans on compared to the LX. The shortfall of the LX chassis is
it's size and weight, and it's primary design goal to result in an
elevated (higher-riding) car, partly because (so the theory goes) people
like to ride higher, and also because of the demands of AWD (which is a
completely assinine option for a sedan).
[...]

Chrysler was allowed to go into bankruptcy and stiff all of it's
shareholders and creditors, especially Cerebus. It emerged with $15
billion courtesy of the US and Canadian gov'ts. It didn't need to be
merged with Fiat. It could have been run under a board and CEO and
management chosen from within US/Canada.

Chrysler *HAS* their own small concept car designs that they *DID* show
at auto shows over the past 5 - 10 years. Some are (or were) closer to
being production-ready than others.

#8

Dori A Schmetterling wrote:

Quote:

So how come you aren't working at Chrysler?

Don't get me started.

A lot of good people either left or were shown the door.

And were is Max Power?

#9

C-BODY (AT) webtv (DOT) net wrote:

Quote:

Having a "Car Dodge" and a "Truck Dodge" manager allows each to
concentrate on the strengths of each and build upon past
accomplishments, rather than one person trying to do both.

It's never "one person trying to do both". There are always going to be
VP's and other managagers that control what happens with every sub-brand
or line within a given division. Makes no difference if you break apart
the cars and vans and trucks and give them their own divisions.

Dodge trucks are iconic.

Dodge car models are iconic.

You take a Dodge Ram and call it something else, you've just thrown away
years of brand identity building and marketing value.

Quote:

I see this as a positive,

It's window dressing.

Quote:

A lot of what Fiat seems to be trying to do makes some sense.

No, it doesn't. What will save Chrysler is offering profitable sedan's
that don't look weigh 2 tons.

The following numbers are total US sales year-to-date 2009, and the
percentage change as compared to the same time period in 2008.

Clearly, sales of Ram trucks are good (as compared to other models) and
the Wrangler, Journey and Challenger are selling much better than the
industry average on a year-over-year basis.

Once you get to the -40% point (Durango to Charger) are selling worse
than the industry average. I'm surprised to see Caliber at -60%, and
Nitro at -55%. An indication that the US consumer has no desire for
small cars.

The 300 performs poorly - at -43%, but it shows that the US consumer
would rather buy a 2-ton beast of a car vs the Nitro or Caliber
econo-box.

Durango 3,416 -80%
Sebring 17,431 -72%
Aspen 5,852 -67%
Commander 8,843 -61%
PT Cruiser 16,760 -60%
Caliber 29,814 -60%
Dakota 8,894 -59%
Viper 367 -58%
Compass 10,025 -55%
Nitro 13,645 -55%
Sprinter 5,403 -52%
Avenger 27,331 -49%
Patriot 25,596 -46%
300 29,322 -43%
Charger 46,110 -43%
Liberty 32,653 -40%
Caravan 64,912 -37%
Town & Country 61,715 -35%
Grand Cherokee 39,890 -30%
Ram Pickup 143,205 -27%
Wrangler 65,045 0%
Journey 37,842 6%
Challenger 18,878 124%

Not included are models which were discontinued in 2008 - which were
Magnum, PT Cruiser convertible, Crossfire and Pacifica. The Magnum was
the first Dodge based on the LX platform (essentially a station-wagon
version of the 300). It was replaced by the Journey - which could be
why the Journey is posting a positive % change.

As far as total sales by BRAND, Jeep did best with a net change of -32%,
followed by Dodge at -37% and Chrysler at -52%.

Chrysler desperately needs better sedans, and Fiat can give it NOTHING
on that front.

Quote:

The worst thing Fiat is planning to do is try to upscale Chrysler
models to Cadillac level.

Cadillac has wrecked their image with the way their cars have looked in
the last 10 years. Complete crap. Chrysler's 300N concept car that was
shown at the '2000 Detroit Auto Show could easily have competed against
Cadillac and Lincoln.

Back in the day, the 300M was very close to being a direct competitor to
the Lincoln LS.

#10

On Oct 9, 9:59*pm, MoPar Man <Mo... (AT) Man (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

C-B... (AT) webtv (DOT) net wrote:
Having a "Car Dodge" and a "Truck Dodge" manager allows each to
concentrate on the strengths of each and build upon past
accomplishments, rather than one person trying to do both.

It's never "one person trying to do both". *There are always going to be
VP's and other managagers that control what happens with every sub-brand
or line within a given division. *Makes no difference if you break apart
the cars and vans and trucks and give them their own divisions.

Dodge trucks are iconic.

Dodge car models are iconic.

You take a Dodge Ram and call it something else, you've just thrown away
years of brand identity building and marketing value.

I see this as a positive,

It's window dressing.

A lot of what Fiat seems to be trying to do makes some sense.

No, it doesn't. *What will save Chrysler is offering profitable sedan's
that don't look weigh 2 tons.

The following numbers are total US sales year-to-date 2009, and the
percentage change as compared to the same time period in 2008.

Clearly, sales of Ram trucks are good (as compared to other models) and
the Wrangler, Journey and Challenger are selling much better than the
industry average on a year-over-year basis.

Well, only on a % basis; not on a sales volume basis.

Quote:

Once you get to the -40% point (Durango to Charger) are selling worse
than the industry average. *I'm surprised to see Caliber at -60%, and
Nitro at -55%. *An indication that the US consumer has no desire for
small cars.

Yet they buy Civics and Corollas. Does that tell you something?

Quote:

The 300 performs poorly - at -43%, but it shows that the US consumer
would rather buy a 2-ton beast of a car vs the Nitro or Caliber
econo-box.

Durango * * * * * 3,416 *-80%
Sebring * * * * *17,431 *-72%
Aspen * * * * * * 5,852 *-67%
Commander * * * * 8,843 *-61%
PT Cruiser * * * 16,760 *-60%
Caliber * * * * *29,814 *-60%
Dakota * * * * * *8,894 *-59%
Viper * * * * * * * 367 *-58%
Compass * * * * *10,025 *-55%
Nitro * * * * * *13,645 *-55%
Sprinter * * * * *5,403 *-52%
Avenger * * * * *27,331 *-49%
Patriot * * * * *25,596 *-46%
300 * * * * * * *29,322 *-43%
Charger * * * * *46,110 *-43%
Liberty * * * * *32,653 *-40%
Caravan * * * * *64,912 *-37%
Town & Country * 61,715 *-35%
Grand Cherokee * 39,890 *-30%
Ram Pickup * * *143,205 *-27%
Wrangler * * * * 65,045 * *0%
Journey * * * * *37,842 * *6%
Challenger * * * 18,878 *124%

Not included are models which were discontinued in 2008 - which were
Magnum, PT Cruiser convertible, Crossfire and Pacifica. *The Magnum was
the first Dodge based on the LX platform (essentially a station-wagon
version of the 300). *It was replaced by the Journey - which could be
why the Journey is posting a positive % change.

Replaced? Not really. The Journey is smaller, front-wheel drive, and
based on the same Mitsubishi platform as the Avenger, Caliber, et al.

Note the Durango and Aspen are now gone.

Quote:

As far as total sales by BRAND, Jeep did best with a net change of -32%,
followed by Dodge at -37% and Chrysler at -52%.

Chrysler desperately needs better sedans, and Fiat can give it NOTHING
on that front.

Anything would be better than the Sebring/Avenger. Heck, the K-cars
were better.

Quote:

The worst thing Fiat is planning to do is try to upscale Chrysler
models to Cadillac level.

Cadillac has wrecked their image with the way their cars have looked in
the last 10 years. *Complete crap. *Chrysler's 300N concept car that was
shown at the '2000 Detroit Auto Show could easily have competed against
Cadillac and Lincoln.

Because luxury car makes are so front-wheel drive these days, right?
All those fwd BMWs and Mercedes and Jaguars?

BTW, Ford is taking Lincoln downscale, more in competing with Buick.

Quote:

Back in the day, the 300M was very close to being a direct competitor to
the Lincoln LS.

Except one was fwd and offered a V6 and the other rwd with a V8?