Rumorpile: Fiat Chrysler Automobiles Put A Number of Products On Delay

The Ram 1500 and Wrangler are both still doing so well that is makes sense to delay them. The rest are a bit worrying.

The Ram 1500 and Wrangler are both still doing so well that is makes sense to delay them. The rest are a bit worrying.

No.. this was essentially what I was referencing yesterday, but was too lazy to post the article .

Let's be honest.. if this were a certain other company people would be in arms ready to riot. Hell  technically the Cruze is still selling damn well, but let GM push it back another year and bloodshed will follow. 

Not to mention the article clearly states what Sergio is doing.. he is biding time to try and wait for a partner that will enable him to rebadge instead of redesign. GM was the perfect source.. as he could have gotten the K2X platform under the Ram styling. Mary said no.. so now.. I would imagine he is knocking on Mark Field's door. Ford and FCA OR FCA and Nissan/Renault together would make them instantly a single maker larger than GM and VW and on par for Toyota's spot. This would then spawn GM or VW .. or/and Toyota to merge with someone else as well. This is for bragging rights.. its for better positioning and negotiating with suppliers and tax makers.

I think part of this is related to the CHerokee's issues.  The Patriot sold almost 11k units last month, the Compass anothr 5k, the CHallenger is having it's best sales ever,  the Charger sales are basically holding pat and the police market will help it out, as said the Wrangler and Ram are doing great.  The only worry IMHO is the dart, though it is on an upward sales swing.  Journey also isn't selling bad and at this point the developement costs are all paid off so I can guarantee they are making decent money and letting the various Jeep models carry the sales crown. 

How do you think it is Cherokee related?

All the quality issues on launch because it was rushed to market.  That happens again and I DO believe FCA will be in trouble. 

Segio is an Idiot for putting money into Alfa Romeo if the story is true. That is a dead dog, let it go into the history books and spend the freaking billions on correcting all the poor quality parts that have gone into the current products.

This is a sucky situation. Chrysler was already in a position where most of its releases are refreshes (and a few Jeep branded Fiats), and the only major powertrain developments are the hellcat and outsourced 9-speed transmissions that haven't been particularly well received.

While other automakers are debuting new cars, new platforms, and new engines, are we seeing Chrysler dead in the water for the next 18 months? I do not like Marchionne's current approach for "industry consolidation" whatsoever.

Well the rwd 8 speeds are really good. There are pentastar v6 changes in the works, what they really need is a new 4 cylinder family. Zf can keep working on the 9 speed.

Platforms they're actually Okay also.. What else do they need platform wise? Maybe a small/mid truck, but that's about it. The new minivans will be here shortly

all of this is inconsequential because the real deal... the truth of the matter... what is being shown here... is that Chrysler, despite the bankruptcy ,is for all intent and purposes are having money issues. They are unable to launch products... new products that are going to take it into the next 10 years without help

Well the rwd 8 speeds are really good. There are pentastar v6 changes in the works, what they really need is a new 4 cylinder family. Zf can keep working on the 9 speed.

Platforms they're actually Okay also.. What else do they need platform wise? Maybe a small/mid truck, but that's about it. The new minivans will be here shortly

The 8 speed trans is outsourced too. ZF doesn't need to work on the 9-speed, Chrysler still needs to tune it properly. Platform-wise, their full size RWD cars are ancient and overweight, their high-volume compact car is floundering and overweight, their new midsize car is quite nice, but also overweight at a time when everyone else is in the process of shedding pounds. 

And the worst hurdle for Chrysler right now is that they DESPERATELY need some competitive 4-cylinder engines, which you mentioned.

I thought they were in a better position financially because Jeep is basically printing money. I hope that the Fiat side of operations isn't becoming a leach.

The 9SPD issues are also in other brands too. It's a ZF thing.

Not surprising, they have no money.  This is why they want to sell.  The Jeep brand has big value and pickups make profit.   Most of their other stuff nothing special and could be a product that is co-developed or badge jobbed from another company.  I don't get how they even stay competitive, they always have dated product.

and Carlos Ghosn is now stating that he has no desire for partners either... as I bet Sergio came knocking on his door as well. 

Business Insider Story

all of this is inconsequential because the real deal... the truth of the matter... what is being shown here... is that Chrysler, despite the bankruptcy ,is for all intent and purposes are having money issues. They are unable to launch products... new products that are going to take it into the next 10 years without help

That is a stretch.  if ALL of the products were being put off for years, you may have a point.  The fact is the major products are simply months and tweaks and updates to improve them and their quality makes a LOT more sense than the diatribe you just spewed.  IMHO, they are going o have a lo of touble with the new Wrangler.  How do you improve cafe, keep the loyalists happy, and keep the price reasonable.  Same with the Ram, it needs to get lighter and better FE, but sense sales keep falling for the Aluminum F-150, you have to wonder what is he best way to achieve this and i believe this is the true delay for the Ram.  I wonder if the fact the Dart is delayed means that  it's survival may be in question because isn't the Chrysler 100 a new compact sedan based on the same platform?  LXs just ot a major new refresh with updates as extensive under the skin as out, so 4-5 years seems about right there.  Having a refresh, especially one as major as what the LXs just went through for just a ear or 2 makes absolutely no sense, especially when sales are on the rise.  Again, you WANT them to fail so you will see issues everywhere. 

 

Well the rwd 8 speeds are really good. There are pentastar v6 changes in the works, what they really need is a new 4 cylinder family. Zf can keep working on the 9 speed.

Platforms they're actually Okay also.. What else do they need platform wise? Maybe a small/mid truck, but that's about it. The new minivans will be here shortly

 

The 8 speed trans is outsourced too. ZF doesn't need to work on the 9-speed, Chrysler still needs to tune it properly. Platform-wise, their full size RWD cars are ancient and overweight, their high-volume compact car is floundering and overweight, their new midsize car is quite nice, but also overweight at a time when everyone else is in the process of shedding pounds. 

 

And the worst hurdle for Chrysler right now is that they DESPERATELY need some competitive 4-cylinder engines, which you mentioned.

 

I thought they were in a better position financially because Jeep is basically printing money. I hope that the Fiat side of operations isn't becoming a leach.

 

I have to disagree on a number of points.  First, the 9 speed is having issues in basically every vehicle it is in, including the TLX and RR Evoque.  Second, look at other actual fullsize platforms and you will see the weight is similar or even heavier compared to the  LXs.  They could improve this issue immensely anyways simply by going aluminum blocks on the Hemi.  in any case sales are up, the cars, especially the Charger Hellcat and Scat Pack, are getting excellent reviews on not only  power, but handling too.  Remember, demand is so high for the Hellcat, which is a VERY profitable product, they had to stop taking orders.  The 200 is selling like gangbusters, never thought I would see them selling over 20k units a month.  Also under MT's real MPG the 200 beats nearly all comers including a lot of cars that "claim" superior FE.  Weight is not an issue here since it is not a sportscar and still gets that FE and drives quite nice.  I also don't think weight is a major issue for the dart, but rather I do agree they need a new family of 4 cylinders, the world engines despite updates , are nealy a decade old.  New 4 cylinders are coming and no delay was mentioned for those, so about 1-1.5 years out.  Also, the 8 speed, at least most iterations for FCA, are built at Chrysler plants under conract from ZF.  It seems like the 9 speed was rushed to markets and I know the 8 spent quite a few years in developement and is wonderful in every application it is in.  My brother's A5 wih the 2.0T matches up beautifull with it.  The 9 speed seems half baked.  Ram and Jeep are certainly the cash cows, but Chrysler and Dodge are also profitable.  Fiat just isn't a good fit here and they have been hit hard by the financial crisis in Europe which sucks.  If Sergio wants a partner, I think Mazda would be great.  They could use skyactive and Mazda could use the Pentastar V6 with their own touches ie, my biggest fault with the 6 has been it's lack of a more lusty engine option.  Heck, they are already going to be making a Miata based roadster. 

 

all of this is inconsequential because the real deal... the truth of the matter... what is being shown here... is that Chrysler, despite the bankruptcy ,is for all intent and purposes are having money issues. They are unable to launch products... new products that are going to take it into the next 10 years without help

That is a stretch.  if ALL of the products were being put off for years, you may have a point.  The fact is the major products are simply months and tweaks and updates to improve them and their quality makes a LOT more sense than the diatribe you just spewed.  IMHO, they are going o have a lo of touble with the new Wrangler.  How do you improve cafe, keep the loyalists happy, and keep the price reasonable.  Same with the Ram, it needs to get lighter and better FE, but sense sales keep falling for the Aluminum F-150, you have to wonder what is he best way to achieve this and i believe this is the true delay for the Ram.  I wonder if the fact the Dart is delayed means that  it's survival may be in question because isn't the Chrysler 100 a new compact sedan based on the same platform?  LXs just ot a major new refresh with updates as extensive under the skin as out, so 4-5 years seems about right there.  Having a refresh, especially one as major as what the LXs just went through for just a ear or 2 makes absolutely no sense, especially when sales are on the rise.  Again, you WANT them to fail so you will see issues everywhere. 

 

Your total post is wrong, with exception to one part.. the last sentence.. if they aren't ACTUALLY American... Eff 'em... 

 

 

all of this is inconsequential because the real deal... the truth of the matter... what is being shown here... is that Chrysler, despite the bankruptcy ,is for all intent and purposes are having money issues. They are unable to launch products... new products that are going to take it into the next 10 years without help

That is a stretch.  if ALL of the products were being put off for years, you may have a point.  The fact is the major products are simply months and tweaks and updates to improve them and their quality makes a LOT more sense than the diatribe you just spewed.  IMHO, they are going o have a lo of touble with the new Wrangler.  How do you improve cafe, keep the loyalists happy, and keep the price reasonable.  Same with the Ram, it needs to get lighter and better FE, but sense sales keep falling for the Aluminum F-150, you have to wonder what is he best way to achieve this and i believe this is the true delay for the Ram.  I wonder if the fact the Dart is delayed means that  it's survival may be in question because isn't the Chrysler 100 a new compact sedan based on the same platform?  LXs just ot a major new refresh with updates as extensive under the skin as out, so 4-5 years seems about right there.  Having a refresh, especially one as major as what the LXs just went through for just a ear or 2 makes absolutely no sense, especially when sales are on the rise.  Again, you WANT them to fail so you will see issues everywhere. 

 

 

 

 

Your total post is wrong, with exception to one part.. the last sentence.. if they aren't ACTUALLY American... Eff 'em... 

 

My post is 100% correct regardless of where a manufacturer's headquarters is located.  And the last part of your post tells me ALL I need to know about your intentions.  Go back to the GM threads and ruhaha GM in the thread about their criminal actions with the ignition fiasco.......

I'm not sure what Mopar was thinking by announcing this. Delaying any new model in a challenging marketplace is not good. The trucks will be fine for now, as will Jeep... and the 200 looks to be making inroads with a fresh platform. But the reality is that the big RWD models need to lose weight and the Hemis need to be upgraded with aluminum blocks and DI.

Fiat, on the other hand, not so much. I don't mind it as a small-car brand in NA, but it and Alfa Romeo are taking up way too much thought (and likely cash) in the grand scheme of things. And the brand snobbery with Maserati must stop. Follow GM's lead and let the Maser's sedan platform trickle down to make a great new 300/Challenger/'cuda/whatever.

 

 

Well the rwd 8 speeds are really good. There are pentastar v6 changes in the works, what they really need is a new 4 cylinder family. Zf can keep working on the 9 speed.

Platforms they're actually Okay also.. What else do they need platform wise? Maybe a small/mid truck, but that's about it. The new minivans will be here shortly

 

The 8 speed trans is outsourced too. ZF doesn't need to work on the 9-speed, Chrysler still needs to tune it properly. Platform-wise, their full size RWD cars are ancient and overweight, their high-volume compact car is floundering and overweight, their new midsize car is quite nice, but also overweight at a time when everyone else is in the process of shedding pounds. 

 

And the worst hurdle for Chrysler right now is that they DESPERATELY need some competitive 4-cylinder engines, which you mentioned.

 

I thought they were in a better position financially because Jeep is basically printing money. I hope that the Fiat side of operations isn't becoming a leach.

 

I have to disagree on a number of points.  First, the 9 speed is having issues in basically every vehicle it is in, including the TLX and RR Evoque.  Second, look at other actual fullsize platforms and you will see the weight is similar or even heavier compared to the  LXs.  They could improve this issue immensely anyways simply by going aluminum blocks on the Hemi.  in any case sales are up, the cars, especially the Charger Hellcat and Scat Pack, are getting excellent reviews on not only  power, but handling too.  Remember, demand is so high for the Hellcat, which is a VERY profitable product, they had to stop taking orders.  The 200 is selling like gangbusters, never thought I would see them selling over 20k units a month.  Also under MT's real MPG the 200 beats nearly all comers including a lot of cars that "claim" superior FE.  Weight is not an issue here since it is not a sportscar and still gets that FE and drives quite nice.  I also don't think weight is a major issue for the dart, but rather I do agree they need a new family of 4 cylinders, the world engines despite updates , are nealy a decade old.  New 4 cylinders are coming and no delay was mentioned for those, so about 1-1.5 years out.  Also, the 8 speed, at least most iterations for FCA, are built at Chrysler plants under conract from ZF.  It seems like the 9 speed was rushed to markets and I know the 8 spent quite a few years in developement and is wonderful in every application it is in.  My brother's A5 wih the 2.0T matches up beautifull with it.  The 9 speed seems half baked.  Ram and Jeep are certainly the cash cows, but Chrysler and Dodge are also profitable.  Fiat just isn't a good fit here and they have been hit hard by the financial crisis in Europe which sucks.  If Sergio wants a partner, I think Mazda would be great.  They could use skyactive and Mazda could use the Pentastar V6 with their own touches ie, my biggest fault with the 6 has been it's lack of a more lusty engine option.  Heck, they are already going to be making a Miata based roadster. 

 

The problem is from an R&D perspective. Besides the Hellcat, what have they been doing? They released the 3.2L Pentastar in the Cherokee last year and haven't used it in anything else, so it's seeing incredibly limited production. They don't design the transmissions in house was my point about that, which isn't a problem in itself until you look at the lagging engine development. They are far behind the product momentum of the industry, and this latest announcement in combination with merger talks makes it look like Sergio is running blind.

I'm not sure what Mopar was thinking by announcing this. Delaying any new model in a challenging marketplace is not good. The trucks will be fine for now, as will Jeep... and the 200 looks to be making inroads with a fresh platform. But the reality is that the big RWD models need to lose weight and the Hemis need to be upgraded with aluminum blocks and DI.

Fiat, on the other hand, not so much. I don't mind it as a small-car brand in NA, but it and Alfa Romeo are taking up way too much thought (and likely cash) in the grand scheme of things. And the brand snobbery with Maserati must stop. Follow GM's lead and let the Maser's sedan platform trickle down to make a great new 300/Challenger/'cuda/whatever.

The irony is that current Maser sedan platform is actually based lossel on LX and the tt V6 loosely on the Pentastar.  You are right, they need to let the updates on the Masers trickle down.  In it's current form  LX is a good platform.  It handles well, the steering, amazingly, gets acolades, it rides great, and in reality weight is in line with most RWD cars it's size.  The Hemi is the sticking point, every Hemi below the Hellcat (for now) should have an aluminum block PERIOD.  hat would easily remove weight and improve weight distriburion in one fell swoop.  I also don't want to see the Challenger get smaller because i is unique and not really a Camaro and Mustang competitor, it is MUCH more a grand tourer.  Now, give us a smaller lighter platform and pu a new CUda or Demon on it.  Here is where Alfa could be of use, sharing such a platform.  IMHO, Alfa could be good, just no idea how in hell they fit it in an already crowded hierarchy. 

 

 

 

Well the rwd 8 speeds are really good. There are pentastar v6 changes in the works, what they really need is a new 4 cylinder family. Zf can keep working on the 9 speed.

Platforms they're actually Okay also.. What else do they need platform wise? Maybe a small/mid truck, but that's about it. The new minivans will be here shortly

 

The 8 speed trans is outsourced too. ZF doesn't need to work on the 9-speed, Chrysler still needs to tune it properly. Platform-wise, their full size RWD cars are ancient and overweight, their high-volume compact car is floundering and overweight, their new midsize car is quite nice, but also overweight at a time when everyone else is in the process of shedding pounds. 

 

And the worst hurdle for Chrysler right now is that they DESPERATELY need some competitive 4-cylinder engines, which you mentioned.

 

I thought they were in a better position financially because Jeep is basically printing money. I hope that the Fiat side of operations isn't becoming a leach.

 

I have to disagree on a number of points.  First, the 9 speed is having issues in basically every vehicle it is in, including the TLX and RR Evoque.  Second, look at other actual fullsize platforms and you will see the weight is similar or even heavier compared to the  LXs.  They could improve this issue immensely anyways simply by going aluminum blocks on the Hemi.  in any case sales are up, the cars, especially the Charger Hellcat and Scat Pack, are getting excellent reviews on not only  power, but handling too.  Remember, demand is so high for the Hellcat, which is a VERY profitable product, they had to stop taking orders.  The 200 is selling like gangbusters, never thought I would see them selling over 20k units a month.  Also under MT's real MPG the 200 beats nearly all comers including a lot of cars that "claim" superior FE.  Weight is not an issue here since it is not a sportscar and still gets that FE and drives quite nice.  I also don't think weight is a major issue for the dart, but rather I do agree they need a new family of 4 cylinders, the world engines despite updates , are nealy a decade old.  New 4 cylinders are coming and no delay was mentioned for those, so about 1-1.5 years out.  Also, the 8 speed, at least most iterations for FCA, are built at Chrysler plants under conract from ZF.  It seems like the 9 speed was rushed to markets and I know the 8 spent quite a few years in developement and is wonderful in every application it is in.  My brother's A5 wih the 2.0T matches up beautifull with it.  The 9 speed seems half baked.  Ram and Jeep are certainly the cash cows, but Chrysler and Dodge are also profitable.  Fiat just isn't a good fit here and they have been hit hard by the financial crisis in Europe which sucks.  If Sergio wants a partner, I think Mazda would be great.  They could use skyactive and Mazda could use the Pentastar V6 with their own touches ie, my biggest fault with the 6 has been it's lack of a more lusty engine option.  Heck, they are already going to be making a Miata based roadster. 

 

 

The problem is from an R&D perspective. Besides the Hellcat, what have they been doing? They released the 3.2L Pentastar in the Cherokee last year and haven't used it in anything else, so it's seeing incredibly limited production. They don't design the transmissions in house was my point about that, which isn't a problem in itself until you look at the lagging engine development. They are far behind the product momentum of the industry, and this latest announcement in combination with merger talks makes it look like Sergio is running blind.

 

Their engine lineup isn't particularly that old.  The 5.7 hemi was completely redone in 09, 6.4 was brand new in 11 along with the 3.6 pentastar.  The 2.4 4 was just redone last year.  New Hemis and updated Pentastars with DI are coming, but they are hardly old.  GM's DI 3.6, Ford's 3.5 V6, and Nissans VQ have all been around far longer than any of these and GM's basic V8 architecture which appeared in 1996 in the 97 Vette was only replaced in 2013 on the 2014 Vette. 

 

 

 

 

Well the rwd 8 speeds are really good. There are pentastar v6 changes in the works, what they really need is a new 4 cylinder family. Zf can keep working on the 9 speed.

Platforms they're actually Okay also.. What else do they need platform wise? Maybe a small/mid truck, but that's about it. The new minivans will be here shortly

 

The 8 speed trans is outsourced too. ZF doesn't need to work on the 9-speed, Chrysler still needs to tune it properly. Platform-wise, their full size RWD cars are ancient and overweight, their high-volume compact car is floundering and overweight, their new midsize car is quite nice, but also overweight at a time when everyone else is in the process of shedding pounds. 

 

And the worst hurdle for Chrysler right now is that they DESPERATELY need some competitive 4-cylinder engines, which you mentioned.

 

I thought they were in a better position financially because Jeep is basically printing money. I hope that the Fiat side of operations isn't becoming a leach.

 

I have to disagree on a number of points.  First, the 9 speed is having issues in basically every vehicle it is in, including the TLX and RR Evoque.  Second, look at other actual fullsize platforms and you will see the weight is similar or even heavier compared to the  LXs.  They could improve this issue immensely anyways simply by going aluminum blocks on the Hemi.  in any case sales are up, the cars, especially the Charger Hellcat and Scat Pack, are getting excellent reviews on not only  power, but handling too.  Remember, demand is so high for the Hellcat, which is a VERY profitable product, they had to stop taking orders.  The 200 is selling like gangbusters, never thought I would see them selling over 20k units a month.  Also under MT's real MPG the 200 beats nearly all comers including a lot of cars that "claim" superior FE.  Weight is not an issue here since it is not a sportscar and still gets that FE and drives quite nice.  I also don't think weight is a major issue for the dart, but rather I do agree they need a new family of 4 cylinders, the world engines despite updates , are nealy a decade old.  New 4 cylinders are coming and no delay was mentioned for those, so about 1-1.5 years out.  Also, the 8 speed, at least most iterations for FCA, are built at Chrysler plants under conract from ZF.  It seems like the 9 speed was rushed to markets and I know the 8 spent quite a few years in developement and is wonderful in every application it is in.  My brother's A5 wih the 2.0T matches up beautifull with it.  The 9 speed seems half baked.  Ram and Jeep are certainly the cash cows, but Chrysler and Dodge are also profitable.  Fiat just isn't a good fit here and they have been hit hard by the financial crisis in Europe which sucks.  If Sergio wants a partner, I think Mazda would be great.  They could use skyactive and Mazda could use the Pentastar V6 with their own touches ie, my biggest fault with the 6 has been it's lack of a more lusty engine option.  Heck, they are already going to be making a Miata based roadster. 

 

 

The problem is from an R&D perspective. Besides the Hellcat, what have they been doing? They released the 3.2L Pentastar in the Cherokee last year and haven't used it in anything else, so it's seeing incredibly limited production. They don't design the transmissions in house was my point about that, which isn't a problem in itself until you look at the lagging engine development. They are far behind the product momentum of the industry, and this latest announcement in combination with merger talks makes it look like Sergio is running blind.

 

Their engine lineup isn't particularly that old.  The 5.7 hemi was completely redone in 09, 6.4 was brand new in 11 along with the 3.6 pentastar.  The 2.4 4 was just redone last year.  New Hemis and updated Pentastars with DI are coming, but they are hardly old.  GM's DI 3.6, Ford's 3.5 V6, and Nissans VQ have all been around far longer than any of these and GM's basic V8 architecture which appeared in 1996 in the 97 Vette was only replaced in 2013 on the 2014 Vette. 

 

Your definition of "redone" is way too flexible. The 5.7L hemi was "completely redone" in 2009 (major exaggeration) but the GM 3.6L is somehow much older? The 3.6L came out in the early/mid 2000s, then was upgraded with VVT in the mid 2000s, then received direct injection in 2007-2008 for 300 hp/270 lb-ft and was overhauled again in 2011 and dubbed the LFX with up to 320 hp/275 lb-ft. Now GM is releasing a brand new 3.6L engine--not a rehash of the last one despite similar displacement--with 335 hp/284 lb-ft.

As for V8s, since the 5.7L hemi, GM has had the 6.2L LS3 and L99, the supercharged LS9 and LSA, and now the Gen 5 V8s: 5.3L, the 6.2L LT1, and the supercharged LT4. The '97 LS1 has almost as little in common with the LS3 as that engine does with the LT1.

Let's look at GM's other new engines since 2012: the 2.5L 4-cylinder with 196 hp, the 2.0T (again, not a rehash of the first gen, despite displacement) with 270 hp/295 lb-ft, the 3.6T V6 in two flavors LF3/LF4 with up to 465 hp/445 lb-ft, and next year debuts a 3.0T in the CT6, a 1.5T and new hybrid system in the Malibu, and a new 1.4T (again, no relation) in the upcoming Cruze.

Chrysler's 2.4L engine might be new-ish and warmed over by Fiat, but it's still one of the worst 4-cylinders on the market, same goes for the 2.0L. The world engines were a failure, adding "multi-air" was putting a bandaid on a broken bone.

The only valuable parts of this company are Jeep brand, Ram pickups, and minivan.  Maybe Alfa Romeo and Maserati to the right buyer.  VW, Ford, Mazda, GM, Nissan or anyone else can make small sedans and inline fours and V6s.  Jeep is a unique product and brand that other big car companies can't duplicate.  Pick up truck and minivan would fill gaps at VW or Mazda, but don't do much for Toyota or Nissan.

Sergio might want to sell this company in pieces if that is his goal.

Gm's 3.6 is currently much older than the pentastar.  That was my point.  YES GM is offering a new 3.6 after what, 15 years of improving on the old one?  The 3.6 Pentastar is ONLY 5 years old and the great thing about it is that even without DI it is fully competitive power and FE wise with others that have DI. The 09 refresh on the 5.7 Hemi was pretty major and was a mojor update to power AND efficiency.  5.7 liters and up to 395 HP and 25 MPG is pretty good.  And yes, you are correct the LS3 is pretty different than the LS1, but still it was way older than the 6.4 is now.  As for all the new engines, look where basically all those turbo motors are going, Cadillac.  There is a reason for that as they are in a different league than Chrysler, Dodge, or Chevy and it is VERY important to keep them fresh and even more important they aren't sharing too much with the "lesser" brands.   Also, the 2.4 anyways is NOWHERE near as bad as it is made out to be.  I had one for 126k miles, ZERO issues and got over 30MPG in a boxy AWD Patriot.  Have also been in a number of newer cars and they are even better in them.  Heck, My brother had a 15 Malibu 2.5 and a 14 200 rental 4 cylinder the next week and BOTH accelerated about the same and even the sound and feel were roughly the same.  Compare such things basically back to back and it really makes you wonder where some of he supposed bad stuff comes from.  Also, that 200 had 50k miles of rental abuse and ran and drove great. 

The only valuable parts of this company are Jeep brand, Ram pickups, and minivan.  Maybe Alfa Romeo and Maserati to the right buyer.  VW, Ford, Mazda, GM, Nissan or anyone else can make small sedans and inline fours and V6s.  Jeep is a unique product and brand that other big car companies can't duplicate.  Pick up truck and minivan would fill gaps at VW or Mazda, but don't do much for Toyota or Nissan.

 

Sergio might want to sell this company in pieces if that is his goal.

This post just shows you have no knowledge about the company..............  at all............

And the 09 5.7 Hemi WAS heavily updated for 09

he 2009 Hemi was extensively modified to increase both power and gas mileage. Changes included a higher compression ratio, better-flowing heads, intake, and exhaust, and an active intake manifold. This is a new technology that takes advantage of Chrysler advances in the 1960s; it switches from long runners to short runners by moving a flapper door, to switch from better torque at low engine speeds to higher horsepower as rpms rise.

The new variable valve timing system used hydraulic cam phasing, relatively simple and inexpensive. The hydraulic roller camshaft had oil passages in front to drive the cam phaser sprocket, and increase valve lift. A new piston/rod assembly had thinner walls with a stronger-alloy pin.

All the ports were redesigned, with a raised exhaust floor; the new intake valves were 2mm larger. Other upgrades were a stronger crankshaft, dual-mass crankshaft damper, floating pin pistons, new valve springs, and higher oil pump capacity. The results were better reliability and gas mileage, with more horsepower and torque at every point in the engine’s speed range.

Gm's 3.6 is currently much older than the pentastar.  That was my point.  YES GM is offering a new 3.6 after what, 15 years of improving on the old one?  The 3.6 Pentastar is ONLY 5 years old and the great thing about it is that even without DI it is fully competitive power and FE wise with others that have DI. The 09 refresh on the 5.7 Hemi was pretty major and was a mojor update to power AND efficiency.  5.7 liters and up to 395 HP and 25 MPG is pretty good.  And yes, you are correct the LS3 is pretty different than the LS1, but still it was way older than the 6.4 is now.  As for all the new engines, look where basically all those turbo motors are going, Cadillac.  There is a reason for that as they are in a different league than Chrysler, Dodge, or Chevy and it is VERY important to keep them fresh and even more important they aren't sharing too much with the "lesser" brands.   Also, the 2.4 anyways is NOWHERE near as bad as it is made out to be.  I had one for 126k miles, ZERO issues and got over 30MPG in a boxy AWD Patriot.  Have also been in a number of newer cars and they are even better in them.  Heck, My brother had a 15 Malibu 2.5 and a 14 200 rental 4 cylinder the next week and BOTH accelerated about the same and even the sound and feel were roughly the same.  Compare such things basically back to back and it really makes you wonder where some of he supposed bad stuff comes from.  Also, that 200 had 50k miles of rental abuse and ran and drove great. 

The only valuable parts of this company are Jeep brand, Ram pickups, and minivan.  Maybe Alfa Romeo and Maserati to the right buyer.  VW, Ford, Mazda, GM, Nissan or anyone else can make small sedans and inline fours and V6s.  Jeep is a unique product and brand that other big car companies can't duplicate.  Pick up truck and minivan would fill gaps at VW or Mazda, but don't do much for Toyota or Nissan.

 

Sergio might want to sell this company in pieces if that is his goal.

This post just shows you have no knowledge about the company..............  at all............

What does FCA do better than the other guys?

VW makes better small cars than Fiat.  If you are looking for South American or European sales, the Up!, Polo, Golf, etc are a lot more competitive.  VW's global weakness is on mid-size to large sedans in the USA and they don't have a pick up truck or minivan.  Toyota has all the bases covered, Honda does cars and minivans better than FCA, GM and Ford do cars and trucks better than FCA.  None of the big 5 car companies need FCA.

Jeep is the one prize that any company could use, because people buy Jeep for the look, the brand image, the off road recognition, etc.  It wouldn't matter if the Jeep had a Pentastar V6 or a Ford V6 or Toyota V6 under the hood.  Jeep could fit in with almost any of the big carmakers and not be an overlap to their existing product lines. 

Gm's 3.6 is currently much older than the pentastar.  That was my point.  YES GM is offering a new 3.6 after what, 15 years of improving on the old one?  The 3.6 Pentastar is ONLY 5 years old and the great thing about it is that even without DI it is fully competitive power and FE wise with others that have DI. The 09 refresh on the 5.7 Hemi was pretty major and was a mojor update to power AND efficiency.  5.7 liters and up to 395 HP and 25 MPG is pretty good.  And yes, you are correct the LS3 is pretty different than the LS1, but still it was way older than the 6.4 is now.  As for all the new engines, look where basically all those turbo motors are going, Cadillac.  There is a reason for that as they are in a different league than Chrysler, Dodge, or Chevy and it is VERY important to keep them fresh and even more important they aren't sharing too much with the "lesser" brands.   Also, the 2.4 anyways is NOWHERE near as bad as it is made out to be.  I had one for 126k miles, ZERO issues and got over 30MPG in a boxy AWD Patriot.  Have also been in a number of newer cars and they are even better in them.  Heck, My brother had a 15 Malibu 2.5 and a 14 200 rental 4 cylinder the next week and BOTH accelerated about the same and even the sound and feel were roughly the same.  Compare such things basically back to back and it really makes you wonder where some of he supposed bad stuff comes from.  Also, that 200 had 50k miles of rental abuse and ran and drove great. 

The only valuable parts of this company are Jeep brand, Ram pickups, and minivan.  Maybe Alfa Romeo and Maserati to the right buyer.  VW, Ford, Mazda, GM, Nissan or anyone else can make small sedans and inline fours and V6s.  Jeep is a unique product and brand that other big car companies can't duplicate.  Pick up truck and minivan would fill gaps at VW or Mazda, but don't do much for Toyota or Nissan.

 

Sergio might want to sell this company in pieces if that is his goal.

This post just shows you have no knowledge about the company..............  at all............

The current 3.6, the LFX, came out in 2012 Model year. We're currently in 2015 Model year. 2015 - 2013 = 2 years old.  It is a redesign of the LLT with new cylinder heads, an integrated exhaust manifold (meaning basically a completely redesigned block), new intake manifolds, fuel injectors, intake valves, and more. 

I really really like the Pentastar and I feel it is one of the best V6es on the market today... but lets keep it real about the GM 3.6 shall we?

 

Gm's 3.6 is currently much older than the pentastar.  That was my point.  YES GM is offering a new 3.6 after what, 15 years of improving on the old one?  The 3.6 Pentastar is ONLY 5 years old and the great thing about it is that even without DI it is fully competitive power and FE wise with others that have DI. The 09 refresh on the 5.7 Hemi was pretty major and was a mojor update to power AND efficiency.  5.7 liters and up to 395 HP and 25 MPG is pretty good.  And yes, you are correct the LS3 is pretty different than the LS1, but still it was way older than the 6.4 is now.  As for all the new engines, look where basically all those turbo motors are going, Cadillac.  There is a reason for that as they are in a different league than Chrysler, Dodge, or Chevy and it is VERY important to keep them fresh and even more important they aren't sharing too much with the "lesser" brands.   Also, the 2.4 anyways is NOWHERE near as bad as it is made out to be.  I had one for 126k miles, ZERO issues and got over 30MPG in a boxy AWD Patriot.  Have also been in a number of newer cars and they are even better in them.  Heck, My brother had a 15 Malibu 2.5 and a 14 200 rental 4 cylinder the next week and BOTH accelerated about the same and even the sound and feel were roughly the same.  Compare such things basically back to back and it really makes you wonder where some of he supposed bad stuff comes from.  Also, that 200 had 50k miles of rental abuse and ran and drove great. 

The only valuable parts of this company are Jeep brand, Ram pickups, and minivan.  Maybe Alfa Romeo and Maserati to the right buyer.  VW, Ford, Mazda, GM, Nissan or anyone else can make small sedans and inline fours and V6s.  Jeep is a unique product and brand that other big car companies can't duplicate.  Pick up truck and minivan would fill gaps at VW or Mazda, but don't do much for Toyota or Nissan.

 

Sergio might want to sell this company in pieces if that is his goal.

This post just shows you have no knowledge about the company..............  at all............

What does FCA do better than the other guys?

 

VW makes better small cars than Fiat.  If you are looking for South American or European sales, the Up!, Polo, Golf, etc are a lot more competitive.  VW's global weakness is on mid-size to large sedans in the USA and they don't have a pick up truck or minivan.  Toyota has all the bases covered, Honda does cars and minivans better than FCA, GM and Ford do cars and trucks better than FCA.  None of the big 5 car companies need FCA.

 

Jeep is the one prize that any company could use, because people buy Jeep for the look, the brand image, the off road recognition, etc.  It wouldn't matter if the Jeep had a Pentastar V6 or a Ford V6 or Toyota V6 under the hood.  Jeep could fit in with almost any of the big carmakers and not be an overlap to their existing product lines. 

 

That is your OPINION.  IMHO, Ram is the best fullsize, Durango EASILY the best 3 row SUV, CHallenger/Charger EASILY the best fullsize AND the Charger is the top selling car to law enforcement agencies.  As a whole Nothing rivals Jeep, the 200 offers luxury and features other midsizers can touch for thousands less comparatively.....  i can go on if ou wish.......

LFX WAS NOT a brand new engine, but a VERY MUCH needed update to the trouble prone DI 3.6.  That family of engines started as non-DI back in the early 2000s so no, nowhere near a 3 year old architecture.

The current 3.6, the LFX, came out in 2012 Model year. We're currently in 2015 Model year. 2015 - 2013 = 2 years old.  It is a redesign of the LLT with new cylinder heads, an integrated exhaust manifold (meaning basically a completely redesigned block), new intake manifolds, fuel injectors, intake valves, and more. 

I really really like the Pentastar and I feel it is one of the best V6es on the market today... but lets keep it real about the GM 3.6 shall we?

LFX WAS NOT a brand new engine, but a VERY MUCH needed update to the trouble prone DI 3.6.  That family of engines started as non-DI back in the early 2000s so no, nowhere near a 3 year old architecture.

 

The current 3.6, the LFX, came out in 2012 Model year. We're currently in 2015 Model year. 2015 - 2013 = 2 years old.  It is a redesign of the LLT with new cylinder heads, an integrated exhaust manifold (meaning basically a completely redesigned block), new intake manifolds, fuel injectors, intake valves, and more. 

 

I really really like the Pentastar and I feel it is one of the best V6es on the market today... but lets keep it real about the GM 3.6 shall we?

How many times can you change the handle of a broom and the head of the broom and it still be the same broom?

If over the years the block has been changed, and the heads have been changed, and the intake has been changed, and the pistons have been changed, and the valves have been changed, and the valve train has been changed..... and every other component has been changed.... how is it not a new engine?

The LY7 is only a distant relation to the LFX... sharing basically only the displacement. 

I'm looking forward to the Pentastar adding Direct injection, that should make that engine even greater. 

Still same family. And please realize they had to update it. My brother an 09 cts and the 3.6 did was garbage. Burned oil and to be rebuilt under a huge gm service campaign. The penta star has had no such issues and was new for 11. It WILL be getting do in the next couple years.

 

That is your OPINION.  IMHO, Ram is the best fullsize, Durango EASILY the best 3 row SUV, CHallenger/Charger EASILY the best fullsize AND the Charger is the top selling car to law enforcement agencies.  As a whole Nothing rivals Jeep, the 200 offers luxury and features other midsizers can touch for thousands less comparatively.....  i can go on if ou wish.......

 

And outside of the USA none of that stuff sells.  Jeep is the only brand they could sell outside of the USA.  Which makes it the only brand of value in the FCA portfolio.  Sergio is trying to merge because he knows FCA can't survive as is.  With longer and longer product cycles, too many brands, too many single market products, he knows the clock is ticking.  No one is buying what he is selling though.

Stew, man, we're not trying to troll Chrysler here, the LFX vs pentastar debate is getting off track. The issue here is that Chrysler is developing powertrain and platforms too slowly and suddenly they're delaying products amidst Sergio's quest for a merger.

Let's just say it looks bad, I mean you have to at least see that, or see why other people get that impression.

That's always been my sticking point about FCA. They've made great in-roads with sales. They've radically increased their market share across multiple segments. But Sergio knew that when buying Chrysler. He saw the little money pit that would allow Fiat to get on its feet. 

But the well's going to run dry soon; so the delay of product is only going to make the haste of finding a partner self evident.  

A pairing with Mazda is quite frankly, a terrible idea. Mazda doesn't need anything from FCA. 

As for Ford, GM, Nissan/Renault, Hyundai/Kia, Toyota, Honda, VW Group.... the list will go on; well, FCA has nothing to offer to them to share because Jeep's platforms could be shared but the products would always be bespoke; which would involve really costly re-engineering. 

Products might sell well for FCA US LLC, but it's quite clear that Sergio's desire to make Alfa Romeo whole again is going to drag the rest of the firm under. It's not that there's a big drive for better product offerings for the lesser brands; but FE standards and emmissions compliance is forcing the hands of other automakers to pour money into their bread and butter vehicles. 

So again, it seems like Chrysler is being used by the parent company to keep the parent company afloat. We all know what happens to the "gotta have" division when it's sucked completely dry to keep the have-nots alive. Like seriously; look at the botched launch of Fiat. Look at the blatant fact that Alfa Romeo and BMW haven't been put together in decades. Look at the fact that Maseratis have quite a few Chrysler LX parts-bin quality. All of those truths hurt FCA, they really do

 

 

That is your OPINION.  IMHO, Ram is the best fullsize, Durango EASILY the best 3 row SUV, CHallenger/Charger EASILY the best fullsize AND the Charger is the top selling car to law enforcement agencies.  As a whole Nothing rivals Jeep, the 200 offers luxury and features other midsizers can touch for thousands less comparatively.....  i can go on if ou wish.......

 

And outside of the USA none of that stuff sells.  Jeep is the only brand they could sell outside of the USA.  Which makes it the only brand of value in the FCA portfolio.  Sergio is trying to merge because he knows FCA can't survive as is.  With longer and longer product cycles, too many brands, too many single market products, he knows the clock is ticking.  No one is buying what he is selling though.

 

There is not a problem with that.  There are plenty of cars that are specific to the US, ie Accord and Passat.  They are still profitable.  A vehicle does NOT have to be global PERIOD.  They moved over 20k 200s last month, nearly 20k LX cars, they have the stronger hold in the car part of the market.  The Surango would never be considered for gthe global market because the design and size is strictly designed for the US market.  I could go on.  

CPm you are correct, off topic and I understand where it looks bad.  The issue is that if the reason was totally bad the core products would have been pushed forward MORE than just a few months.  IMHO, they want to get the quality right and they have to conetrate on what brings in the most profit, Jeep and trucks (All the big 3s major money makers are SUVs and trucks BTW).  You just can't say it is being delayed for bad reasons or has ANYTHING to do with wanting a merger because there is simply no evidence to support it.  If I am not mistaken there delays compared with the first 5 year plan also and it worked out.  Look at the sales, I would have pause on puttting new product out too quick myself.  Get the most you can from existing products and platforms.  In any case all of the big 3 extend platforms.  W-body or panther anyone?  15 years of Fox bodies, and up until recently the average time for a truck as 10 years or better and Honda used a 6 year standard product cycle.

Stew I'm starting to think that U are not just a fan of Chrysler.. but an engineer of Chrysler.. U are taking this $h! way to personal. 

The only place U really see a true bump with the Chrysler is when the legs are stretched and the 3.. count em 3... I said 3 extra gears allow it to cruise a lil easier down the road.. 

 

Stew I'm starting to think that U are not just a fan of Chrysler.. but an engineer of Chrysler.. U are taking this $h! way to personal. 

 

That being said:

 

My HUGE Impala V6   Horsepower: 305/ Torque: 264  and a 6 speed

 

vs

 

the smaller Chrysler 200 with   Horsepower: 295/ Torque: 262  with an EFFIN 9 Speed, yet here are the results... 

 

 

 

I'd say GM's 3.6L is a lil better sorted out.. and I look forward to the one that is coming in less than 6 months

The only place U really see a true bump with the Chrysler is when the legs are stretched and the 3.. count em 3... I said 3 extra gears allow it to cruise a lil easier down the road.. 

 

I don't see how you get that.  the 200 has considerably better HP WITHOUT DI.  the Charger can be had with the same HP and STILL considerably better HP.  Even the 2014 200 with the old 6 speed auto gets better MPG, so nice try, but no cigar......  Hell, even the old 5 speed in the Charger provides up to 305 HP and better MPG.

And with all the GM ranting you do, ou are FAR worse than me, apparently you must be a GM engineer?  I am just making actual valid points, you are the other hand, well, you are helping me out.......

Also, there isn't much weight difference between our "huge" Impala and a 200 so that is a total copout.......

And just wanted to add casa, yes Mopar is my favorite, but unlike you and Wings I give credit where due to other brands and don't just try to spread nagativity about brands that aren't my number 1 favorite. 

All Auto Makers have their day. GM I think is going to have theirs coming up, Dodge is having theirs now and Ford had theirs. It always seems to rotate around who has the best at various times.

I don't see how you get that.  the 200 has considerably better HP WITHOUT DI.  the Charger can be had with the same HP and STILL considerably better HP.  Even the 2014 200 with the old 6 speed auto gets better MPG, so nice try, but no cigar......  Hell, even the old 5 speed in the Charger provides up to 305 HP and better MPG.

 

 

 

And with all the GM ranting you do, ou are FAR worse than me, apparently you must be a GM engineer?  I am just making actual valid points, you are the other hand, well, you are helping me out.......

 

The Impala has two listings, one is rated 19/29 mpg, which is the one I've typically seen posted in mag reviews. I'm not sure why it makes a difference, but the 19/29 rating says it's the flex fuel capable version.

I've never been a fan of "power without direct injection" arguments. Engines are either making power and efficiency or they aren't. The LFX version of the GM 3.6L was released at roughly the same time as the Pentastar 3.6L and it makes more power. Max output versions compared (Camaro vs Challenger) the Camaro makes 18 more horsepower and 10 more lb-ft of torque from 3564 cc (LFX) compared to 3604. We can talk all day about what might be coming out in a couple years, but it's not under the hood so you might as well be arguing horsepower per liter with a Corvette Stingray owner that just smoked a Boss 302 at the strip.

It's not some unfair advantage that GM engineers embraced DI. It has it's drawbacks. Ford has advanced Ti-VCT to make more power in its N/A performance engines, Fiat has multi-air variable lift.

Fair enough, but up to 305 without DI, without multiair is impressive.  Also, no DI has it's advantages such as sheer smoothness.  Every DI engined car i have been in idles like  a diesel truck (includes LFX, pre LFX, and the eb 2.0).  Less NVH to state it that way.  I like the LFX more than it's pre refresh predesessor, BUT I don't see how it is a superior engine..........  at all.  In fact since we went from sedans to the MUCH heavier and larger fullsize CHallenger vs the Camaro, I have doubts that the LFX makes as much power as they state in that application.  IE, a CHallenger V6 is a mid 14 seconds car, so is an LFX gen 5 Camaro auto.  A last gen CTS with the LFX took nearly 7 seconds to hit 60........  IMHO, it is about even powerwise with the curent pentastar and still posts worse MPG in every single configuration discussed.  So that is my point, Casa stated the LFX superior, facts and figures prove otherwise. 

Fair enough, but up to 305 without DI, without multiair is impressive.  Also, no DI has it's advantages such as sheer smoothness.  Every DI engined car i have been in idles like  a diesel truck (includes LFX, pre LFX, and the eb 2.0).  Less NVH to state it that way.  I like the LFX more than it's pre refresh predesessor, BUT I don't see how it is a superior engine..........  at all.  In fact since we went from sedans to the MUCH heavier and larger fullsize CHallenger vs the Camaro, I have doubts that the LFX makes as much power as they state in that application.  IE, a CHallenger V6 is a mid 14 seconds car, so is an LFX gen 5 Camaro auto.  A last gen CTS with the LFX took nearly 7 seconds to hit 60........  IMHO, it is about even powerwise with the curent pentastar and still posts worse MPG in every single configuration discussed.  So that is my point, Casa stated the LFX superior, facts and figures prove otherwise. 

Your performance figures are a little off. The best the Challenger has ever done is high 14s and the Camaro V6 has always been faster with the exception of the much heavier convertible.

2010 Camaro V6 6-speed manual

0-60: 5.9 sec

1/4 mi: 14.5 @ 99

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2010-camaro-v6-vs-genesis-coupe-v6-comparison-tests

2012 CTS LFX V6 6-speed auto (4072 lbs)

0-60: 6.2 sec

1/4 mi: 14.7 @ 98 mph

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2012-cadillac-cts-36-sedan-test-review

2015 Challenger V6 8-speed auto (3946 lbs)

0-60: 6.2 sec

1/4 mi: 14.7 @ 97

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2015-dodge-challenger-v-6-8-speed-test-review

Slowest possible Camaro:

2012 Camaro V6 Vert 6-speed auto (4105 lbs)

0-60: 6.6 sec

1/4 mi: 14.9 @ 95

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/convertibles/1109_2012_chevorlet_camaro_rs_45th_anniversary_convertible_first_test/

Can't both engines be really good?  The Pentastar has gotten me fantastic mileage and has great power characteristics. So has the GM 3.6 LFX. 

They're both perfectly good engines, but I'm not going to ignore bad "facts" skewed in both directions. The CTS somehow takes 7 seconds to reach 60 mph, but V6 Challengers are supposedly running mid 14s? Not happening.

 

Fair enough, but up to 305 without DI, without multiair is impressive.  Also, no DI has it's advantages such as sheer smoothness.  Every DI engined car i have been in idles like  a diesel truck (includes LFX, pre LFX, and the eb 2.0).  Less NVH to state it that way.  I like the LFX more than it's pre refresh predesessor, BUT I don't see how it is a superior engine..........  at all.  In fact since we went from sedans to the MUCH heavier and larger fullsize CHallenger vs the Camaro, I have doubts that the LFX makes as much power as they state in that application.  IE, a CHallenger V6 is a mid 14 seconds car, so is an LFX gen 5 Camaro auto.  A last gen CTS with the LFX took nearly 7 seconds to hit 60........  IMHO, it is about even powerwise with the curent pentastar and still posts worse MPG in every single configuration discussed.  So that is my point, Casa stated the LFX superior, facts and figures prove otherwise. 

 

Your performance figures are a little off. The best the Challenger has ever done is high 14s and the Camaro V6 has always been faster with the exception of the much heavier convertible.

 

2010 Camaro V6 6-speed manual

0-60: 5.9 sec

1/4 mi: 14.5 @ 99

 

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2010-camaro-v6-vs-genesis-coupe-v6-comparison-tests

 

2012 CTS LFX V6 6-speed auto (4072 lbs)

0-60: 6.2 sec

1/4 mi: 14.7 @ 98 mph

 

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2012-cadillac-cts-36-sedan-test-review

 

2015 Challenger V6 8-speed auto (3946 lbs)

0-60: 6.2 sec

1/4 mi: 14.7 @ 97

 

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2015-dodge-challenger-v-6-8-speed-test-review

 

Slowest possible Camaro:

2012 Camaro V6 Vert 6-speed auto (4105 lbs)

0-60: 6.6 sec

1/4 mi: 14.9 @ 95

 

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/convertibles/1109_2012_chevorlet_camaro_rs_45th_anniversary_convertible_first_test/

 

Thank you for proving my point.  14.7 IS mid 14s, if on the high side.  Notice i also said AUTOMATIC V6 gen 5 Camaro, ou posted the coupe time for a manual, an auto is a dead hear with a Challenger which is?????  An auto.  For the weight difference alone a V6 Camaro SHOULD be quicker, but isn't......    I will admit I was a little off on the CTS time, but I do not think that is the same test I saw.  In any case, the boss is right, both are great engines, both are equally good, thought the Pentastar is the MPG champ and the very times you posted show the true power is basically qual, be it the GMs are actuall over-rated or simply a result of powerbands.

The only thing keeping the Challenger even with the afformentioned 4072 lb CTS was the gearing advantage of the nice ZF 8-speed auto. You can see the horsepower advantage in the trap speed, if the Challenger was making the same power, with a 100 lb weight advantage, plus the better gearing down low, it would be ahead of the pudgy Cadillac, but it's not, it's down 1 mph in the trap speed. The math works out just like it should.

And then there's the current gen CTS V6 weighing in at 3840 with an 8-speed:

0-60: 6.0 sec

1/4 mi: 14.6 @ 99 mph

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2014-cadillac-cts-36l-v-6-sedan-test-review

I also found this archived comparo of automatic pony cars from Motor Trend.

Camaro Automatic (pre-LFX, 312 hp) 14.5 @ 98

5-speed Chally 3.6L 14.8 @ 95

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1102_2011_chevrolet_camaro_vs_dodge_challenger_vs_ford_mustang_vs_hyundai_genesis_coupe_v_6_comparison/specs.html

 

 

Stew I'm starting to think that U are not just a fan of Chrysler.. but an engineer of Chrysler.. U are taking this $h! way to personal. 

 

That being said:

 

My HUGE Impala V6   Horsepower: 305/ Torque: 264  and a 6 speed

 

vs

 

the smaller Chrysler 200 with   Horsepower: 295/ Torque: 262  with an EFFIN 9 Speed, yet here are the results... 

 

 

 

I'd say GM's 3.6L is a lil better sorted out.. and I look forward to the one that is coming in less than 6 months

The only place U really see a true bump with the Chrysler is when the legs are stretched and the 3.. count em 3... I said 3 extra gears allow it to cruise a lil easier down the road.. 

 

I don't see how you get that.  the 200 has considerably better HP WITHOUT DI.  the Charger can be had with the same HP and STILL considerably better HP.  Even the 2014 200 with the old 6 speed auto gets better MPG, so nice try, but no cigar......  Hell, even the old 5 speed in the Charger provides up to 305 HP and better MPG.

 

And with all the GM ranting you do, ou are FAR worse than me, apparently you must be a GM engineer?  I am just making actual valid points, you are the other hand, well, you are helping me out.......

 

Actually.. MOPAR FAN.. the Charger does not come with the 292 horsepower, 260 lb-ft of torque.. even Dodge lists it as such on their website. U can bump it to 300HP.. 300HP... 300HP with the Rallye  The Challenger comes with 305 horsepower, 268 lb-ft of torque.

But alas.. U missed the part where I was speaking strictly of the Impala.. or Lacrosse.. or XTS.. or SRX. See a pattern???

In the RWD applications the LFX makes between 318-323HP.. So I am missing where this "Pentastar making BETTER HP BS is coming from.." DI or not.. that's FCA's folly, not mine.  (where's that wink Smilie?? Oh.. here)   In the mean time.. the LGX is on the way in a few months with 335HP or more.. 

As for me working for GM.. naaaaah.. I work for myself.. and is part of the reason why it took me so long to answer this BS U were kicking.. I was making some doe so I can buy me another Cadillac

 

Also, there isn't much weight difference between our "huge" Impala and a 200 so that is a total copout.......

No that is effin PATHETIC.. that a car the size of an Impala.. is similar in weight to a GOD DAMN mid-sizer that is actually smaller than many mid-sizers.

Tell Fiat to stop feeding that fat ass Chrysler lasagna with a cannoli chaser  

Peak hp numbers are misleading.  The power band matters more because rarely are you driving with the engine at 6,000 rpm.  Plus torque affects acceleration, horsepower affects top speed.  Torque is the more important thing to compare.