Marchionne Floats Out the Idea Of Next 300 Being Front-Wheel Drive

Will someone please yank the cord on Serg's golden parachute already!?

I could see it. The 300, technically, doesn't need to be RWD anyway considering its not really considered a performance car.

BTW.. Am I the only one experiencing any lag when posting? Mine says "Saving" for like 60 seconds.. I then click out of it and it is posted.. but it just seems to take a while. Similar thing happened at MT Forum

No lag here.

While yes the 300 could go FWD, bigger question is should it? NO, they have been down the road before and it was a failure. RWD is where the 300 needs to stay.

+1 for Drew, the Board needs to pull his rip cord and let him leave. Sergio is an IDIOT! Worst thing to happen to FCA.

I could see it. The 300, technically, doesn't need to be RWD anyway considering its not really considered a performance car.

 

BTW.. Am I the only one experiencing any lag when posting? Mine says "Saving" for like 60 seconds.. I then click out of it and it is posted.. but it just seems to take a while. Similar thing happened at MT Forum

I'm seeing it... I may reboot the server in a moment if it continues

 

I could see it. The 300, technically, doesn't need to be RWD anyway considering its not really considered a performance car.

 

BTW.. Am I the only one experiencing any lag when posting? Mine says "Saving" for like 60 seconds.. I then click out of it and it is posted.. but it just seems to take a while. Similar thing happened at MT Forum

 

I'm seeing it... I may reboot the server in a moment if it continues

 

Thanks. I went so far as to use a different browser

Another potential Marchionne massacre. What a colossal idiot!

Thing is, I think that a mid-size FWD based on the Pacifica would be fine, Chrysler needs a new Concord around the Accord/Camry in size..... but the 300 should remain RWD/AWD

Rebooted

Good 'ol ReBoot...

Will the Charger go FWD or does this mean the Charger and 300 are no longer twins?

So they kill the FWD 200, to make the 300 FWD baed on that Pacifica platform?  I get why they want to platform share to save money, and the LX platform is old.  But FCA has a rear drive platform for Alfa Romeo, they could build Charger and 300 on that.

FCA is so screwed up though, Sergio is just making a mess.  If the 300 goes to the Pacifica platform, I hope it has Stow and Go seats.

Looks like it can no longer be a luxury car if it is FWD.. such a shame.. 

On a brighter note, the Camaro z/28 is officially a luxury car as we saw it testing at The 'Ring! 

Looks like it can no longer be a luxury car if it is FWD.. such a shame.. 

 

On a brighter note, the Camaro z/28 is officially a luxury car as we saw it testing at The 'Ring! 

+1 So true.

Yet then that also means all those MB and BMW FWD appliances are not Luxury auto's either. Just another Chevy / Toyota competitor.

Marchionne floats an idea.

The thing is that there are plenty of "luxury" vehicles avail currently that use FWD over RWD . The XTS, ES350, A6, Lacrosse, MKS, MKS, upcoming Continental, and even the Impala LTZ (tell me its not a luxury vehicle simply because of the name and a thousand lil angels will instantly call U a fool)to name a bunch. RWD is not the epitome of luxury.. in fact one could argue that in reality.. true luxury is AWD. 

Well, I guess we'll have to see. I'm not totally against the idea. Except being RWD is what made the vehicle a bargain. And trading away the ZF HP8 for the ZF HP9.....I dunno....

..I would just like to clarify that I was making fun of somebody else who IS hung up on the whole RWD=Luxury thing.. 

But then again, I'm all for American cars to stop being the value-minded nonsense that forces them to compromise on profitability and quality.

 

The thing is that there are plenty of "luxury" vehicles avail currently that use FWD over RWD . The XTS, ES350, A6, Lacrosse, MKS, MKS, upcoming Continental, and even the Impala LTZ (tell me its not a luxury vehicle simply because of the name and a thousand lil angels will instantly call U a fool)to name a bunch. RWD is not the epitome of luxury.. in fact one could argue that in reality.. true luxury is AWD. 

 

"If it Ain't RWD... It Ain't worth driving", "RightWD"... etc.. WTF IS WRONG WITH U PEOPLE???

 

Why are so many of U guys hung up on RWD as the saving grace for all performance oriented cars??? I have a real issue with this especially concerning Luxury and mainstream vehicles. The truth is LARGE-LUXO cars should ALL BE AWD all the time. There is no plausible reason why they wouldn't be in fact. They have the price tag to seemingly have customers demand that they show up with all the goods... especially advanced drive-line engineering.

 

I have yet to see anyone out at the track with an S-Class, XJ, 7Series/B7, LS460, or A8/S8. Not even the AMG versions. It's actually preposterous when U think of it. The average buyer of these cars is normally in the $150K annual income ($250K household) demographic, and age is normally about 55+.. unless it's a USED car. With the exception Bob Lutz.. I dunno that many guys above that age that are out at the track in their Exec Saloon. Hell it's hard enuff finding an M5 or CTS-v at the track. People with the means to own a $60-100K+ car would have the means to buy a purpose built track car if need be.

 

95% of the car buyers don't know a thing about platforms. I'm a "car guy" and with the exception of GM and some BMWs I have almost no clue what the other makers are using under which vehicle. What matters to me is ultimately performance, prestige, and comfort in a vehicle such as this. And that perplexes me on so many levels as to why VW gets a way with providing Audi and Lamborghini with FWDAWD-Only cars.

 

Now don't misconstrue... I am not an advocate of FWD, but I recognize that it better suits the driving ability of that 95% I mentioned above. For some reason I find, more often than not, on these forums that many forum goers feel that limitation of choice is the desire of most Luxury buyers. As a luxury buyer I whole-heartedly would like to disagree with that notion. Marketing should certainly steer buyers in the direction of the AWD version for profit reasons, not to mention performance credibility, but the majority of buyers of say.. an RX or SRX-type vehicle is female, the crossover segment is predominately female, this is the gender that actually created the need for the V6 in a Camaro/Mustang. The segment does not demand super performance. This is the same for the large saloon class as well though. What it does demand is luxury, styling, and envy. The XTS still, IMO, should be AWD for marketing purposes. That is the absolute only reason the Audi A8 sells AWD-only here, yet offers a FWD version in Europe. Americans are too stuck on what they perceive as high-class as opposed to what is. It's stressful.

 

 

 

#####################################

 

 

“If I’d have asked my customers what they wanted, they would have told me ‘A faster horse."

 

Henry Ford

 

 

"Rebelling against change is human, but sometimes progress has to happen via the worst possible scenarios. My point being is that the Combustible engine will hopefully not be our 'Horse and Carriage.'

 

That lasted for 5000 years."

 

Cmicasa the Great XvX   

 

This rant....especially these quotes:

“If I’d have asked my customers what they wanted, they would have told me ‘A faster horse."

 

Henry Ford

 

 

"Rebelling against change is human, but sometimes progress has to happen via the worst possible scenarios. My point being is that the Combustible engine will hopefully not be our 'Horse and Carriage.'

 

That lasted for 5000 years."

 

Cmicasa the Great XvX   

 

 

COULD BE USED TO DEFEND ELECTRIC VEHICLES let alone FWD versus RWD....

So funny!!!

As long as a Chrysler 300 could be in Acura TLX territory, Im fine with it.

It wasnt too long ago when a 300M was FWD....and a damn fine automobile at that!

Honestly, I think Id rather rock the 300M from the early 2000s than the long in the tooth 300C in 2016...OK maybe...the HEMI version is excluded in this rant..but drop a Pentastar V6 in the FWD 300M and Varvatos can go screw himself with his 300 limited V6 trim jobs!!!!

^^^^^^ what he said, assuming Dodge still has RWD.

Chrysler would want to sell as many of the next 300's with AWD anyways, just to keep the pricing justified.  Plus, then it amortizes the AWD system development to enable it to be put into the Pacifica, which will give that a competitive advantage (although likely forcing the AWD Pacifica to lose stow n go).

Chrysler sold a lot of Concorde / LHS / 300's in the day

No one is buying a 300 anymore to circle the Nurburgriung.  I would $h! my pants if i new someone was auto crossing with their 300.  A charger, maybe.  The luxo buyer here is going to but this for cush and pony up for AWD

Well, I think it makes sense.

Anyways, pretty clear the Alfa platform will stay in Alfa.

300M was to me a jelly bean blah car. Yea they did have a performance version of it, but the car over all was just blah IMHO.

Their CAFE numbers have to be horrible too.  Fiat has no sales, Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200 are about to die, they just doesn't have much of anything to get to 50 mpg target.   Wouldn't surprise me at all if the next Chrsyler 300 is front wheel drive with a 4 cyldiner engine, maybe that Hurricane turbo 4. 

Their CAFE numbers have to be horrible too.  Fiat has no sales, Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200 are about to die, they just doesn't have much of anything to get to 50 mpg target.   Wouldn't surprise me at all if the next Chrsyler 300 is front wheel drive with a 4 cyldiner engine, maybe that Hurricane turbo 4. 

FCA's CAFE numbers are horrible. FCA ranks last among major auto makers at 20.8.

The company actually has to purchase CAFE Credits from others  

http://www.autonews.com/article/20151216/OEM11/151219893/fiat-chrysler-buys-emissions-credits-from-tesla-toyota-honda

 

Their CAFE numbers have to be horrible too.  Fiat has no sales, Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200 are about to die, they just doesn't have much of anything to get to 50 mpg target.   Wouldn't surprise me at all if the next Chrsyler 300 is front wheel drive with a 4 cyldiner engine, maybe that Hurricane turbo 4. 

 

 

FCA's CAFE numbers are horrible. FCA ranks last among major auto makers at 20.8.

 

The company actually has to purchase CAFE Credits from others  

 

http://www.autonews.com/article/20151216/OEM11/151219893/fiat-chrysler-buys-emissions-credits-from-tesla-toyota-honda

 

Awesome Post, this is interesting to see that MB is failing the emissions and has to buy credits to be in compliance globally. Guess that quality MB auto's are not that clean.

So the Early Credits reporting shows just how bad some companies are.

Compliance is interesting that it shows MB and Kia as both FAILING to be compliant.

Compliance Balance is interesting to see who has the most credits for offset.

Compliance program is interesting to see how they use it.

Very interesting 93 page report. Worth looking at if you want a good look at the auto industry. I can clearly see the drive for EV auto's will make or break the auto industry as the green credits you get for having EV and Hybrids is worth it IMHO.

2014GreenhouseGasReport.PDF

I'm glad you posted that because I read through a fair amount of that detailed report but I had no way to copy and paste it from my work computer. 

I feel like we're being had on these low displacement turbo engines.....   They may look good on EPA tests, but they haven't been impressing me in practice.

I feel like we're being had on these low displacement turbo engines.....   They may look good on EPA tests, but they haven't been impressing me in practice.

Do any of the 2.0T from any manufacturer get the mpg they're rated for?  I mean every company offers a 2.0T at this point, including MB, BMW, Audi(I guess they're going to a 1.8t?).

Do any of those get the job done? 

He's only floating the rumour. But then again....

fuelly had a couple reports on the new Malibu 2.0 premier.  low 20's.  The previous malibu 2.0 and current fusion 2.0 are in that range as is the Regal 2.0.

I think this is why you're seeing the displacements for those turbos ever shrinking.  The EPA and fuelly etc. numbers show the mpg's improve when say you go to a 1.5t instead of the 2.0.

BUT

then you lose the power..........

everything goes in cycles.  govt got ballsy forcing insane mpg standards.  so most of the lineups need smaller motors.  Those who opt for the bigger motors pay much more $$$ and don't get the mpg benefits.

in the end your real mpg still comes down to weight, aerodynamics, gearing.

Look at the new Cruze vs the old one.  If you see them on the lot side by side, you see how much narrower and sleek the front of the car is.  Its quite a bit lighter and has improved engine and tranny.  It gets an amazing combined mpg increase from 30 to 35 for what is essentially the same transport pod.

Look at the Regal's fuelly numbers, any engine.  All pretty bad.  I think the Verano was brought in to pump up CAFE.  Now they may dump verano.  I think the new Regal next year will probably have the 1.5t as a base motor as well.  Regal's mpg should go way up and be a much larger car (malibu clone).  The 2.0 won't improve much tho.

Malibu 2.0 gets the new 9 speed auto for 2017 now I guess, BTW

This is what I believe will also push for VOLT type powertrains as more electric motors get built and for those that do not need the long range, then pure EV as 200+ miles will cover the commuter car with errands being run before, during or after work.

Petro powered only auto's are on their way out over the next 10-15 years. All depends on how well the BOLT and Ioniq do along with the updated Leaf.

Would it mean no V8 for the future?

Perhaps they will have a plug-in if they use the same underpinnings as the Pacifica. 

That's gonna be a huge turnaround. Then again, a lot of SUVs became mall finders just recently, and their sales went through the roof.

But I think FCA can certainly do really well with the interior. It might be an epic Buick Lacrosse competitor.

The 300 was originally floated as being the next step to take Chrysler up scale and do what Cadillac is doing. But under FCA they have little interest in the 300 and have changed it's mission as being the new cheap luxury car. They have really discounted the car to the point you can get one for the price of a Malibu now. Good value for the customer between recalls but not good for Chrysler's image. 

I expect that the 300 will take the path of the 200 hand be more of a mid size AWD FWD car shared with who ever they work with. 

The Dodge is a wild cars. I would say there is a large group inside Dodge fighting for a new car but I can see many at FCA also showing no interest. They want Truck and Jeep profits to float the rest of FCA and just do not make enough from the RWD cars to make them of value to them. 

I think the Hell Cat was a cry for help from the Dodge staff as they brought back this older program to keep the car viable in the public eye as FCA drains them of profits and presents them with a lack of funding. 

At one time they said that they would get the Alfa platform but with the issue that car has had and the set backs at Alfa that could be a problem now. 

Sergio really has no clue what he is doing and at the rate he is going he will damage Ferrari to the point it may be in trouble before he is done. He is good at money but needs a real product staff to do the work on the divisions. Right now all he has is Jeep and Ram and nothing else. 

The Google deal is not a big deal as Google is not going to replace any major MFG as they can't even replace Apple or Samsung in the pad market. They do have a lot of money and I could see them buying FCA and going it on their own as they will tire of the FCA money drain. 

fuelly had a couple reports on the new Malibu 2.0 premier.  low 20's.  The previous malibu 2.0 and current fusion 2.0 are in that range as is the Regal 2.0.

 

I think this is why you're seeing the displacements for those turbos ever shrinking.  The EPA and fuelly etc. numbers show the mpg's improve when say you go to a 1.5t instead of the 2.0.

 

BUT

 

then you lose the power..........

 

everything goes in cycles.  govt got ballsy forcing insane mpg standards.  so most of the lineups need smaller motors.  Those who opt for the bigger motors pay much more $$$ and don't get the mpg benefits.

 

in the end your real mpg still comes down to weight, aerodynamics, gearing.

 

Look at the new Cruze vs the old one.  If you see them on the lot side by side, you see how much narrower and sleek the front of the car is.  Its quite a bit lighter and has improved engine and tranny.  It gets an amazing combined mpg increase from 30 to 35 for what is essentially the same transport pod.

 

Look at the Regal's fuelly numbers, any engine.  All pretty bad.  I think the Verano was brought in to pump up CAFE.  Now they may dump verano.  I think the new Regal next year will probably have the 1.5t as a base motor as well.  Regal's mpg should go way up and be a much larger car (malibu clone).  The 2.0 won't improve much tho.

 

Malibu 2.0 gets the new 9 speed auto for 2017 now I guess, BTW

Yes it is the whole package as they are going into all areas of Engine efficiency, Aero, Stop Start, Weight etc. GM and most other MFG are not leaving any stone un turned as the numbers they will have to meet are way out of reach. 

The government is forcing them to turn to Hybrid as a standard feature and even more electrics. That is why they are willing to build them at a loss now to help spur grow of suppliers and development to drive cost down for later. 

Now one thing I think we will see more of in the Turbo engines is more torque. GM learned on the 2.0 with the performance upgrade that increasing the torque brought them 1-2 MPG more even with an additional 55 HP with it. I experienced this and saw others see it too.. I asked Bill Duncan of the Performance Drive train at GM and he said yes it was a real increase. They did not expect it but said it was a true gain. 

Now at 3200 LBS i see 25-26 in mostly city driving. This is even with full boost launches from time to time. From what Bill told me the reason I see good MPG is that the torque gets me up to speed and then I am off throttle. The DI engine cut the fuel off if you coast. I played with this some when I have driven and I see major gains by lifting off the throttle going down hills and coming up to lights. I do not see the same gains in a normal injection car. 

Note too the added torque take more boost and does require premium only so this is a major issue for the regular cars as people tend to be afraid to spend the extra couple bucks for gas. 

you're at 3200 pounds.  the new Malibu 2.0 is heavier than the 1.5......i forget what C/D weighed it at, but it think it was like 3450 or something.  So right there i would say if you just use weight as a factor, the inverse of how much the Malibu weighs vs. the 3200 is about .927.....927x25.5 = about 24 mpg..... the first few reads on Malibu 2.0 mpg in fully is near that...like 23 and change.  

I was just reading Malibu forum and some folks in colder time of year were about 24-27 mpg with the 1.5 and city driving.  Now some are seeing 27, 30, 32 in more combined overall driving in warmer weather...with what lets face it is a larger car.  One person reported 40+ on a highway trip.  Maybe when the 9 speed teams with the 1.5, the Malibu will deliver some eye popping mpg.

Like I said the new Cruze has real mpg improvements........but it weighs about 10 percent less (rough calc)  right there you get 10% mpg improvement.  

The torque on the new Cruze 1.4 is highlighting what you said.....I really like the torque on some of these new turbo cars.  Surprisingly the Civic turbo did not have that same torque lunge.  Honda is still learning turbo.  

I don't know of anyone who likes auto stop.  Friend has it on his Malibu fleet car and says he doesn't mind it but it makes me mad we don't get a defeat switch.  The fact we don't has to have something to do with meeting the federal reg and that incenses me.

I do believe govt is forcing us into hybrids and that is maybe fine......but until price and packaging are not compromised because of it, and it gets more reliable and less quirky, it's not going to take hold asap.

I believe the carmakers are stalling a bit at least for powertrains here in the US to see if new influence arrives in washington and they maybe undo or modify this federal overreach and some of these useless POS CAFE regs into something more flexible and beneficial for everyone.

I don't know if FCA needs both Chrysler and Dodge.  They need Ram and Jeep.  But the Pacifica could be a Dodge, if the 300 were FWD, why not make it a Dodge if the Charger continues as RWD.  If the LX platform is dead, and the Dart is dead, then the Journey can become a Chrysler, Pacifica and 300 stay at Chrysler.   There just doesn't seem to be enough product to feed two brands.

And neither brand will be luxury or performance, because Sergio thinks Alfa Romeo is luxury and performance, and Maserati super luxury and performance.   All FCA needs is one middle of the road brand, with a minivan, a crossover and a couple sedans.  

I don't know if FCA needs both Chrysler and Dodge.  They need Ram and Jeep.  But the Pacifica could be a Dodge, if the 300 were FWD, why not make it a Dodge if the Charger continues as RWD.  If the LX platform is dead, and the Dart is dead, then the Journey can become a Chrysler, Pacifica and 300 stay at Chrysler.   There just doesn't seem to be enough product to feed two brands.

 

And neither brand will be luxury or performance, because Sergio thinks Alfa Romeo is luxury and performance, and Maserati super luxury and performance.   All FCA needs is one middle of the road brand, with a minivan, a crossover and a couple sedans.  

I totally agree, I still think there is consolidation needed in the auto market and Chrysler has had a good run, but I believe it can quietly go into the history books.

you're at 3200 pounds.  the new Malibu 2.0 is heavier than the 1.5......i forget what C/D weighed it at, but it think it was like 3450 or something.  So right there i would say if you just use weight as a factor, the inverse of how much the Malibu weighs vs. the 3200 is about .927.....927x25.5 = about 24 mpg..... the first few reads on Malibu 2.0 mpg in fully is near that...like 23 and change.  

 

I was just reading Malibu forum and some folks in colder time of year were about 24-27 mpg with the 1.5 and city driving.  Now some are seeing 27, 30, 32 in more combined overall driving in warmer weather...with what lets face it is a larger car.  One person reported 40+ on a highway trip.  Maybe when the 9 speed teams with the 1.5, the Malibu will deliver some eye popping mpg.

 

Like I said the new Cruze has real mpg improvements........but it weighs about 10 percent less (rough calc)  right there you get 10% mpg improvement.  

 

The torque on the new Cruze 1.4 is highlighting what you said.....I really like the torque on some of these new turbo cars.  Surprisingly the Civic turbo did not have that same torque lunge.  Honda is still learning turbo.  

 

I don't know of anyone who likes auto stop.  Friend has it on his Malibu fleet car and says he doesn't mind it but it makes me mad we don't get a defeat switch.  The fact we don't has to have something to do with meeting the federal reg and that incenses me.

 

I do believe govt is forcing us into hybrids and that is maybe fine......but until price and packaging are not compromised because of it, and it gets more reliable and less quirky, it's not going to take hold asap.

 

I believe the carmakers are stalling a bit at least for powertrains here in the US to see if new influence arrives in washington and they maybe undo or modify this federal overreach and some of these useless POS CAFE regs into something more flexible and beneficial for everyone.

Here is your problem both Left and right will not back off CAFE. There are too many voters today that believe in Global Warming and other Eviro concerns for many to step out of line on this. While one side will go extreme the other will at least hold the line. Even the Automakers are not fighting it anymore because of consumer perceived  impact. While they are not the majority they are a growing group of younger buyers that tend to think about this. 

The lack of defeat switch to me is not good but it could make it easier to deal with now than when they are forced into it to meet government standards. 

As for my Turbo 2.0 vs a Bu the gearing would also be different as well a better tranny. 

As it is the 08 Bu V6 I have is around 3600 pounds and gets 23-25 MPG on the same drive. It lacks the torque and acceleration the HHR does. It is not bad just not the same. 

Torque is the trick as it not only helps in performance but feel of a car as this is what pushes you back in the seat not the HP alone. 

But weight loss has other benefits. It makes for faster stopping cars. Better Handling along with the performance and MPG. GM's move to make the cars lighter is going to be a boon to them as so many others are not light and are in some cases getting heavier like the Mustang. 

Next the Trucks will see more cuts in weight and I suspect it will not be all Aluminum as they will use the mixed approach like they did on the CT6.  They are not far off the Fords now with steel so GM I feel has an edge yet here as they did it the hard way with engineering first. 

Engine downsizing isn't going away, I think you'll see a turbo 4 in the Silverado in the early 2020s.  The 2.0T could easily be the base engine.  I would bet in 2025 only Silverado HD 2500 and 3500s have a V8, by then even the Ford Super Duty might be ecoboost V6 as the big engine.

HD's are not mandated by regulations to provide FE ratings.

If that changes, then you might....might just see downsizing or a big focus on FE there.

Engine downsizing isn't going away, I think you'll see a turbo 4 in the Silverado in the early 2020s.  The 2.0T could easily be the base engine.  I would bet in 2025 only Silverado HD 2500 and 3500s have a V8, by then even the Ford Super Duty might be ecoboost V6 as the big engine.

I see even a bigger shift. 

The Half Ton Trucks will be impacted even more with the coming CAFE. vs. the 3/4 and one tone. I expect at some point the mid size trucks which more are coming to take the half ton slot at the last possible moment and the 3/4 ton ratings take the full size slot from the half ton. 

Think about it, The Three tons would just be like a heavy half used to be where it can be classed as a 3/4 ton but generally appear as a half ton and the fuel requirements will decline. Then the mid size will carry on as a listed half ton with a smaller package to meet the CAFE. 

Just slapping a 2.0 Turbo into a Silverado will just not do it. 

The whole way trucks are offered will fundamentally change as it just can't continue this way. 

This is why GM did what they did, The Ranger is coming and Ram is now looking to move into the mid size segments. 

It would be an enormous step backwards for FCA of they were to go down this road.

Remember kids: Childish posters kill forums

...but not before they get all childish and assume certain posters associate all RWD with luxury, because childishness and ignorance go hand in hand

It's actually about economics of scale this time. Try and keep up, certain reflexive downvoter :D

Economies of scale?

I would think the Pacifica platform is the one they would want to have a lot of vehicles based off of. I don't think the Alfa Romeo Platform is a good fit for a large American sized sedan. Unless the 300 is going on a major diet and price class increase. Because essentially Alfa-based 300 could be a very different vehicle than what we're used to right now.

If they get the right AWD system, they get the look right, a FWD 300 may not be ideal from an ehtusiast's appeal, but I think MOPAR fans can, and will warm over to it.

Unless they've got something else in the works - say a future common RWD for all of FCA US, so Jeep would get their version, which they would modify for their RWD SUV use, and Chrysler would get it for their 300 and other CUV planned, and then we have the underpinnings for Challenger and all of SRT.

If the minivan can't sell enough copies on its own then there are bigger issues. Even throw in a half-hearted crossover if you have to.

The Alfa platform, however, is a white elephant if they don't develop mainstream Dodges and Chryslers off of it, pronto. You might get away with a FWD-based 300... but good luck with getting a Charger and Challenger off dat.

But since spite is a powerful motivator, I will also mention that a revival of the Imperial brand using that platform would be a great second luxury brand for Detroit.

Well it sound like China may be buying the car business from FCA or at least parts of it. 

FCA needs money and here is a ready made dealer network for the Chinese to make a move into this country as well improve the products of their own brands. Yes even a FCA car is better than some of theirs. 

Might be interesting to watch to see what happens and if this is the past that is taken. 

The Chinese seem to have done great things for volvo.

The best thing they can do is fire Sergio on day Zero.

His euro-snobbery, like that of the Germans in the DaimlerChrysler days, is both illogical and counterproductive. The Alfa platform appears to be capable of great things if the Giulia QF is anything to go by. But it needs to pay for itself, simple as that. And as nice as it would be to see Alfa come back from the brink it ain't gonna happen immediately. An additional 100k units per year stuffed with (mostly) Hemis would be a huge help.