Chrysler to cut numerous model

[Flybrian]

Chrysler set to ax models
Up to 5 that compete with other company vehicles are likely to go

October 17, 2007 | BY TIM HIGGINS | Link to Original Article @ Detroit Free Press

Chrysler LLC could cut as many as five nameplates within the month as part of its quick and dramatic makeover as a newly private company.

It's "highly likely" Chrysler's top brass will approve plans to kill vehicles this month, a person familiar with the situation told the Free Press. About five vehicles are being considered for elimination, but the source would not reveal which ones.

The boardroom drama could help explain why the UAW was unable to win the same sort of future-product guarantees in its tentative labor deal with the Auburn Hills automaker as it did in its deal with General Motors Corp.

The product review comes as the automaker is seeking to get its tentative agreement with the UAW ratified by rank-and-file union members.

GM has already won ratification of what analysts see as a potentially transformational contract that can give Detroit automakers nearly equal labor costs to Toyota Motor Corp.'s nonunionized U.S. factories.

But Chrysler union local leaders have complained that unlike the GM contract, the proposed Chrysler deal fails to reclassify lower-paid temporary workers as permanent hires and lacks the kind of plant-by-plant outline of possible future products listed in the union's description of the GM agreement.

Bob Nardelli, who became Chrysler's chief executive officer in August, shortly after Cerberus Capital Management took majority control, indicated in a September speech that the company could reduce its model offerings.

Once Chrysler's product evaluation committee makes its decision about eliminating nameplates, it's believed the decision will be sent to Cerberus management for approval.

Chrysler officials say the company has been meeting about the product lineup, assessing the vehicles sold by the company and contemplating what needs to be cut.

"We have models that overlap, where we have two or three vehicles that serve the same market segment and maybe the same customer and actually compete with each other to some extent," Chrysler President and Vice Chairman Jim Press told reporters last week. "We also have markets where we have insufficient coverage. Where we don't have enough product."

Press did not discuss specific model eliminations. A Chrysler spokesman declined to comment.

The likeliest models to go

Auto industry analysts predict the Chrysler Pacifica, Dodge Dakota, and Jeep Commander and Compass could face elimination. A company insider included those vehicles among a list of vehicles facing review. The source and another familiar with Chrysler's design pipeline also questioned the future of the Chrysler Sebring and Dodge Durango.

The Chrysler Sebring is being considered for a complete makeover, though if that is not feasible, the car will probably be eliminated, the company insider said.

Yet another person familiar with Cerberus' thinking said the private equity firm questions why Chrysler's lineup includes the Dodge Durango SUV, which has seen its U.S. sales slide 30% this year.

A Cerberus spokesman did not respond to an inquiry regarding this story.

The number of eliminations "could go higher in the sense that products as we know them today, but something will take their place, just not a direct next-generation replacement," analyst Catherine Madden of Global Insight said.

The Durango is built at the Newark, Del., assembly plant, which will be closed in 2009.

"I think the Durango is dead in the water. I won't order a Durango anymore. I told my guys don't ever order another Durango," said Carl Galeana of Galeana Automotive Group, which includes Van Dyke Dodge in Warren.

The UAW's summary of the tentative labor agreement with Chrysler says the automaker's next generation crossover will be built at the Jefferson North Assembly Plant in Detroit, where the Jeep Grand Cherokee and Jeep Commander are currently made.

The idea of fewer Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep nameplates in North America was first hinted at in February when then-CEO Tom LaSorda unveiled the company's plan to stop losses. The plan called for avoiding nameplate redundancies.

Looking for a new image

Chrysler lost $680 million last year and $2 billion in the first three months of this year. Its U.S. sales are down 3% so far this year while its market share has remained steady -- something its Detroit rivals can not claim. The automaker wants to recast its brands' images, Press said, making Chrysler seen as upscale; Jeep as rugged and off-road capable; and Dodge as high-volume cars and trucks.

"There are probably a lot of things being rethought at Chrysler right now," said Erich Merkle, director of forecasting for IRN Inc. "Just because you have a platform doesn't necessarily mean it has to go across all three divisions."

Upset at UAW

Several local UAW leaders are unhappy that the tentative agreement does not give specific future-product guarantees at many of the assembly plants -- including the Sterling Heights Assembly Plant, which makes the Sebring, and the Belivdere Assembly Plant in Illinois, which makes the Jeep Compass and Patriot. The UAW's summary of the agreement says only that vehicles at those plants will continue through the product lifecycle.

"Virtually no Chrysler plant received commitment beyond the scope of their current product," Bill Parker, president of Local 1700 and chairman of the union's Chrysler bargaining committee, wrote in an opinion against the deal.

The Chrysler Sebring was redesigned and launched last year. Its convertible sibling followed with a launch earlier this year. Both were widely panned by automotive critics.

The week Nardelli was made Chrysler's CEO, Los Angeles Times critic Dan Neil welcomed him with a review of the Sebring convertible, recommending that he drive a 2008 Limited model with a retractable hardtop. "See, Bob, that's a bad one.

"Not just bad, but a veritable chalice of wretchedness, a rattling, thumping, lolling tragedy of a car, a summary indictment of Chrysler's recent management and its self-eradicating product planning, all cast in plastic worthy of a Chinese water pistol."

Jim Hall, vice president for industry analysis in the Southfield office of consultant AutoPacific, said Chrysler could be looking to just recoup the expense of tooling for the Sebring -- something that takes three years from the vehicle's launch.

"If they are planning on integrating their retail outlets into a single Chrysler -- large C -- dealership, then they've got to trim the overlap in the product," Hall said.

Chrysler has already made one high profile change to the product plan this year.

In July, about two months after the Cerberus acquisition was announced, Chrysler pulled the plug on plans for the Chrysler Imperial, which was going to be a full-size luxury sedan built on the same platform as the Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger and Magnum.

[regfootball]

someone please tell me, other than Jeep, what Chrysler has in the pipe in the future to get excited about.

With GM you have the lambdas, the zetas, the next vette, camaro, and all sorts of things.

I think the Dodge Journey will do well, but otherwise, the new vans are lukewarm and there's not much else to get pumped about.

[Drew Dowdell]

Chrysler should cut the PT Cruiser, Sebring, 300 models other than the C, Aspen, Crossfire and Pacifica.

Dodge should cut the Caliber, Avenger, non 5.7 Magnum and Chargers, Durango, Dakota, Nitro, Sprinter and should redesign the Ram.

Jeep should cut the Compass, Liberty, Patriot and Commander

That will leave them with just their competitive vehicles.

[cire]

I can see the Commander going. The few that Jeep did sell only ate into Grand Cherokee sales. I think I read that Jeep plans on making the Grand Cherokee larger to offer 3 rows of seats in the next generation. If Jeep does this, the Commander would definitely be redundant in Jeep's lineup.

I also understand eliminating the Compass. It was redundant with the Patriot and didn't really fit in with Jeep's rugged, off-road capable brand image. I am not totally convinced that the Patriot fits in either, but I think Jeep gave it a package to make it more off-road capable than the Compass. The Patriot definitely looks more the part than the Compass. I think both vehicles kind of watered down Jeep's brand image.

I'm surprised the Durango is on the list, but the Aspen isn't. I thought the Aspen was also a sales flop. Why would the Durango be on the chopping block, but not the Aspen?

From what I understand, the compact/midsize pickup market is shrinking. It is still sad to see Dodge exit this segment and give it up to Toyota. If it is a losing game, I guess maybe the money needed to fix the Dakota's flaws could be better spent elsewhere. It's still kind of sad to see it go.

If the Pacifica could be redesigned to exceed the standard set by the Buick Enclave, it could provide Chrysler with a sales success. Crossovers are red hot right now. I can't see Chrysler giving up on the large crossover segment. I don't see customers heading to the company's minivans or the Aspen as alternatives; I see customers looking elsewhere. Chrysler needs to completely redesign the Pacifica to be competitive in the large crossover segment.

The Sebring is yet another example of Chrysler coming to a gunfight armed with a razor blade. The midsize sedan segment is still a hot segment, but it is also a very competitive one. The 2007 Sebring needed to exceed the standards in the segment to make an impact. Instead, it arrived with an awkward exterior design and an interior with poorly assembled, cheap materials (although it did offer some clever features).

I think Chrysler has two options for the Sebring:

1) Try to redesign it on its current front wheel drive platform (maybe with a longer wheelbase). It needs a beautiful exterior design, a class leading interior, and competitive engine/transmission combos. The Sebring name might be so damaged that a model name change might be required to get people to take a look at this car.

2) Go a completely different direction and design a rear wheel drive midsize sedan on a shortened 300 platform. This could take Chrysler upscale and offer something unique in the market; an affordable, rear drive, near luxury midsize sedan. If executed to a high level, it could make as big a splash in the market as the rear drive 300. A name change would definitely be in order; I would recommend Concorde, Cordoba, LeBaron, or New Yorker. A coupe-cabrio could also be spun off this vehicle. All wheel drive could be offered as an option for those who live in cold climates.

[VenSeattle]

Holy Hell.... Cutting the Sebring right after introducing it?!? :rotflmao:

I need popcorn.

[Hudson]

The last time I saw a Chrysler plan, there was no Chrysler Aspen in there. The next-generation Durango was planned to share much with the next-generation Jeep Grand Cherokee and the Commander would be merged in as a 7-passenger version of the next Grand Cherokee. They screwed up the Sebring (both sedan and convertible) which was a nice car in its last generation and a terrible one in the current generation. I thought the Compass could have been some sort of rally-like vehicle (STI or Evolution), but they just made it this cheap "chick Jeep" instead.

Do something about the quality of all of the interiors, especially the front-wheel drive models. Merge the Magnum into the 300 and/or Charger. Replace (don't eliminate) the Pacifica with something a bit more competitive. And then they'll have a start.

[the_yellow_dart]

Everything else on that list I agree with, but the Pacifica I see a fair bit and the Sebring is just plain stupid to cut.

[pow]

CHRYSLER

300 - the sort of people who like it already bought one

Aspen - dump

Pacifica - worst in class

PT - see "300"

Sebring - worst in class

Sebring cabrio - always popular

T&C - will sell well, regardless of quality

Crossfire - see "300"

DODGE

Avenger - worst in class

Caliber - Thrifty, Dollar, National

Charger - see "300"

Grand Caravan - see T&C

Magnum - see "300"

Viper - low-volume

Challenger - niche

Dakota - not bad

Durango - outclassed

Nitro - outclassed

Journey - has hope

Ram - not bad

Sprinter - not bad

JEEP

Wrangler - cool

Patriot - not-so-cool

Compass - not-so-cool

Liberty - cool

Grand Gherokee - always sold OK

Commander - pointless

Being bold with design is OK, but being the outlier in a segment isn't. The Sebring is too small for a midsizer (Camry, Accord, Fusion), the Caliber isn't available as a sedan (Civic, Corolla, 3), the Patriot and Compass are too small (RAV4, CR-V, Escape), the Nitro is too trucky (RAV4, CR-V, Escape???), the Durango isn't a proper full-sizer (Tahoe, Expedition, Armada), the Aspen is too cheap (Escalade, Navigator, GL450)...

They have very few products that fit easily into segments, meaning very little will show up on the radar of comparison shoppers. It's okay for icons like the Wrangler and Viper, but hard for new products.

[Satty]

I though the whole Chrysler lineup had been cut and thats why sales were in the $h!ter.

The Sebring vert has good sales numbers because they're fleeted like mad.

[Cory Wolfe]

Chrysler to cut numerous model? You no say!

Holy Hell.... Cutting the Sebring right after introducing it?!? :rotflmao:

I need popcorn.

For real.

[Paolino]

I thought the Commander was already getting axed?

The Durango? Oh yeah, those are the ugly things with a ridiculous name. I remember seeing a few of them on the road.

Sebring? Did they try with that one? It's like they had 2 innovative thoughts in the whole car and let the rest go out the window. A complete redesign? Yeah, that's what you should have said before you produced the current turd.

The Aspen is a joke.

Crossfire? Nice try.

What is Chrysler Corp's next ingenious move... to bring back the Neon?

[Sixty8panther]

The crossfire is just lame, the Aspen is a joke and the PT Cruiser would be relevant & probably a strong

seller with all new & exciting skin. Drop the first two but do the PT Cruiser over in early-1930s retro skin.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Auto industry analysts predict the Chrysler Pacifica, Dodge Dakota, and Jeep Commander and Compass could face elimination.

Why eliminate the Dakota? Unless they see it competing with the Ram.

If I were in charge, I would eliminate the Dakota and replace it with a more niche specific Jeep entry and then give Dodge a true compact pick up. I would kill the Commander and Compass, then if the market justified it, introduce an extended version of the Grand Cherokee to cover Commander ground. Or just build a bigger GC in the first place; the Liberty can cover GC ground.

A company insider included those vehicles among a list of vehicles facing review. The source and another familiar with Chrysler's design pipeline also questioned the future of the Chrysler Sebring and Dodge Durango.

The Durango is not a bad idea, just a bad execution... Same can be said for the Sebring. It's subpar and drags the entire Chrysler division down with it. They need a SERIOUS (not Avenger cloned) entry that is more luxurious, to compete where they eventually WANT to compete.

Yet another person familiar with Cerberus' thinking said the private equity firm questions why Chrysler's lineup includes the Dodge Durango SUV, which has seen its U.S. sales slide 30% this year.

Chrysler Corp. needs at least one large SUV... Durango is still larger than GC isn't it? Maybe Jeep could occupy that part of the line up with my affore mentioned GC.

It's funny though, because if in fact they are moving Chrysler up the ladder, an Imperial style sedan could work. (Especially if the LY 300 replacement loses some weight)

But I agree that the Imperial was a waste of time in the current iteration of the concept.

P.S. I completely forgot about the Aspen... LOL. That shows you how much it matters

Edited October 17, 2007 by FUTURE_OF_GM

[Bimmer325]

There's no way the Sebring can survive a typical 5+ year model cycle as it is.

Chrysler needs to take it back to the drawing board.

[enzl]

Here's my take:

The Aspen/Durango plant was a goner long before the run-up in fuel prices. It was going to a GC platform anyway, with the production realities of the GC & the failure of the Commander, this just seals the deal.

The Pacifica has always been a flop--although I don't mind the vehicles themselves. The Crossfire was also doomed. So you've already got some planned consolidation.

The rest is easy. The Compass is likely gone (I think that plant will be sending spare capacity overseas.) The Sebring needs an emergency redo (or a shortened LY replacement, as mentioned somewhere else.) The PT will likely be supplanted by a Chrysler Journey-twin, so net-net. there's no loss of product.

If the Chinese send us a Dodge A/B segment car--you're still looking at mostly a similarly sized lineup, as the Viper may be finished.

I'm just not sure how many models will realistically get cut, as most mentioned above seem to be relatively recent intros.

Edited October 18, 2007 by enzl

[Oracle of Delphi]

Chrysler sell Jeep to GM. GM keep the good Jeep models and merge Hummer and Jeep into one brand.

[BrewSwillis]

Most of you people seem to have no idea how an automobile company runs. They need to produce as many vehicles or mix of vehicles that will keep a factory busy, for at least two shifts. They also have to produce something that will sell, while keeping those plants busy, to keep inventory from piling up. They can't just ax vehicles and leave factories running at half capacity.

You can't "get rid" of the Sebring, because Sterling Heights Assembly would only be producing the Avenger, and would not fill the plant's capacity. They just need to fix the Sebring, and make it competitive. This basically just means making the interior more upscale, and getting the new Phoenix engines done, and in the vehicle with 5 or 6 speed transmissions. Give the base 4cyl the 5 speed also.

The Nitro is selling slowly because it's a truck based SUV with poor fuel economy. Not much as far as interior upgrades will help the Nitro. The Nitro, however, is built along side the Liberty....so again, there is really no reason to "get rid of it".

The Compass helps fill the capacity at Belvidere. As long as it's selling and keeping Belvidere's capacity up, keep it, or replace it with something that will sell better.....but do not just get rid of it, and lose the capacity. Get a new PT Cruiser going to take it's place.

While the Commander is helping keep the Grand Cherokee plant running, it does not really accomplish what it was intended to be....which was a Grand Cherokee sized Jeep with a 3rd row. This doesn't work, as the GC platform doesn't allow enough room for a real 3rd row that adults can use. The Commander needs to be redesigned with a real 3rd row...which may mean moving to a new platform (next Durango or Ram)....or it should just be axed. I don't know what it's sales numbers are off hand, but the Toyota Land Cruiser only sold 3700 units last year....and I'm sure the Commander sold at least 10 times as many.

There is nothing "wrong" with the Durango. It's problems come from being a large gas guzzling SUV. It should actually go a bit larger, and compete with the Tahoe. If the Aspen were included from the beginning of the design, it could be more differentiated from the Durango, and play in between the Yukon and Escalade territory. This move would however make a smaller car based CUV a necessity, and I don't know if the Dodge Journey and it's Chrysler counterpart would successfully fill that gap.

The Dakota needs to be redesigned to be smaller, and get better fuel economy. Besides, it's too close to the Ram in size anyway. They need to go back and look at the M-80 concept. Build a Jeep pickup along side of it to keep capacity up.

The bottom line is that American automakers need to keep their plants running. If they are not running at near full capacity, they are wasting money. And if they are running at full capacity, but not selling the cars, they are also wasting money. The Japanese automakers have very few plants and employees in the US, but they have built flexible manufacturing into their plants, so that they can make many different vehicles in the same plant. If one of their models is not selling, they can just chose to build a different one. What the Big 3 really need to do is to close plants and consolidate manufacturing. This is not something that I'm hoping for, or looking forward to....but it's the only way they can compete with all of the unfair competition from the Asian countries. If there was not so much unfair competition from the Asians taking away loads of market share, then the Big 3 could keep all of their plants at capacity, be making money, and in turn be putting some of that profit back into R&D and nicer vehicles. The American automakers are in a downward spiral that will not end until the foreign automakers are put on a level playing field as the US automakers.

[FloydHendershot]

Here's my input. Cerberus needs to make a profit first and that's it.

Volume is not a priority, but don't fool yourselves they want to succeed otherwise it's a bust. They've asembled quite the team to see this works.

Maybe one day sell it off for more than what they paid.

[Cory Wolfe]

Most of you people seem to have no idea how an automobile company runs. They need to produce as many vehicles or mix of vehicles that will keep a factory busy, for at least two shifts. They also have to produce something that will sell, while keeping those plants busy, to keep inventory from piling up. They can't just ax vehicles and leave factories running at half capacity.

Apparently, neither does Chrysler itself going by your words.

[Intrepidation]

First: Reg, shut it...I don't have the patience to spoon feed you answers.

Second...I see the need to cut models but I question some of the possible nominations.

Dakota? What product does that overlap exactly in the Chrysler lineup? It would be a move as stupid as Ford's or GM's to walk away from a segment.

Durango...there is a place for a traditional SUV...anyway why would you nominate it and not the Aspen? That makes no sense in Chrysler's lineup. It does need a redesign or something though.

Pacifica...it should be redesigned to better compete with the Lambdas...you don't just walk away from the fastest growing segment.

Commander...there is, unfortunately, no place for it...at least it was a real Jeep

Compass...get rid of it...it was a mistake from the beginning and whoever thought it up should be fired.

Sebring...extreme makeover yes...but don't walk away from the very competitive midsize segment...unless the actually place to move Chrysler upmarket.

Crossfire...it still looks good I think but is an underachiever everywhere else...it should be discontinued...redesign it why Chrysler is making profits again maybe

FYI: Chery is not going to be designing a B-segment car for Chrysler...they no longer want to have it made in or by China.

[Lamar]

Chrysler should cut the PT Cruiser, Sebring, 300 models other than the C, Aspen, Crossfire and Pacifica.

Dodge should cut the Caliber, Avenger, non 5.7 Magnum and Chargers, Durango, Dakota, Nitro, Sprinter and should redesign the Ram.

Jeep should cut the Compass, Liberty, Patriot and Commander

That will leave them with just their competitive vehicles.

Sounds like a sure-fire plan for disaster to me. Or is that what you were going for?

[BrewSwillis]

Apparently, neither does Chrysler itself going by your words.

Well, I have a feeling Chrysler will be shutting down plants and consolidating into more flexible plants. A friend that works at SHAP said that they were supposed to be able to build any of the Belevidere cars on their line.....however, it didn't happen. I have a feeling that one of those plants will shut down, and production of both vehicles will combined on a flexible assembly line for the next generation. I'm sure this will happen to other plants as well.

So, unfortunately, I think Cerberus does know what to do, and it probably means downsizing and cutting jobs. Thanks Japan and the American government!

[VenSeattle]

So, unfortunately, I think Cerberus does know what to do, and it probably means downsizing and cutting jobs. Thanks Japan and the American government!

Well, in this case, I seriously think it's mostly due to the product and not Japan or the US Government.

[Drew Dowdell]

Sounds like a sure-fire plan for disaster to me. Or is that what you were going for?

I guess you didn't catch that my "plan" leaves Chrysler with the T&C and 300c, Dodge with Magnum/Charger, Ram, and Caravan, and Jeep with the Wrangler and Grand Cherokee.

Those are the only models Chrysler hasn't managed to F up.

[regfootball]

it only took like 7-10 years for DCX to mess up what they had.

they had the 300/concorde/intrepid/LHS which sold very well to mainstream buyers across the board.

their vans were top of class.

they a unique sized BOF SUV, the durango, that sold like hotcakes.

sebring coupe and stratus avenger coupe sold big.

sebring convertible was the unquestioned sales king.

the neon, cirrus, stratus all sold in big volume. the cirrus and stratus competed well.

The Dakota was raping sales from undersized Ford and Chevy and japan inc pickups.

Liberty and Grand Cherokee were sales stars.

fast forward to today. as Oldmoboi said, those wanted the extreme out of mainstream bling of the 300/magnum/charger, already had one. Now its on fumes because their look and persona is way too bling.

the avenger / sebring we get now is compromised on many fronts and is not large enough for the segment they are supposed to compete in.

The new vans are messed up. Not beyond repair, but they definitely lack what the prior gen had.

Caliber is nice, but has a severly compromised interior.

dodge's trucks are aging.

Nitro adds more out of the mainstream bling to go with a poor interior.

sebring convertible is under onslaught from superior power hardtop cars.

the new durango is caught in the crossfire of the crossover downsizing. Journey comes to market with a questionable interior despite other obvious good qualities.

Patriot and Compass and Commander are black marks on the jeep star even though the new Liberty and 4 dr wrangler offset that.

Key crossover segements like Pacifica and PT Cruiser are aging.

i sure hope Cerebus has a plan.

Edited October 18, 2007 by regfootball

[CMG]

The C&G crowd is typically hilarious.... from reg (as always usual) on down the line......

The Dakota will never sell until it's LOOKS are addressed. The previous version of the Dakota had better appeal. REDESIGN the Dakota, get it back on top with looks and the sales will follow.

Durango- see Dakota. The LOOKS are what is lacking, the trucks are decent. Tweak here and there after a complete redesign of the exteriors.

Aspen is a nice vehicle. Keep it, and introduce the Phoenix engine into it in 2010.

Crossfire needs a styling facelift, it's been around for a few years, people look at stuff that looks fresh.

Tweak the 300/Charger/Magnum as needed over the next few years. Maybe add a ute!

Challenger needs a V6 offered at a very affordable price, and the 6.4 SRT version with everything in between. It'll do well I'm betting, much to many posters here dismay......

Nitro is a bland SUV, it needs more spice IMO. Too boxy like the fake Hummers (H2 and H3)

Sebring needs tweaking, maybe add an SRT version- the Phoenix 4.0 V6 would be a good candidate..? :AH-HA_wink:

Dodge Ram, keep on the same track, great trucks, great looks. Again- powertrain options should include the NEW 4.7 and Phoenix engines when they come out.

Viper just needs a few tweaks as the years go by, and small increments in power and it will continue to sell and be a brand earner of bragging rights as well... maybe take the 600hp version and toss a blower on it- get the masses on their heels...? LOL

Caliber is too Japanese looking for my tastes, but apparently it's priced right because I see them evvvvverywhere. A looks makeover would improve them in my eyes, but they seem to sell...?

Jeep Comanche needs a facelift, along with the Compass.

Jeeps in general stay on course. Keep the SRT version as the flagship.

Overtake Toyota as the number 1 manufacturer and go from there.....

LOL

[bring_BUICK_back]

I am an owner of a Jeep Commander and I think it is just fine. I see plenty of them out here.

At least Chrysler tries to make their cars and trucks unique and in your face.

[Flybrian]

Aspen is a nice vehicle. Keep it, and introduce the Phoenix engine into it in 2010.

The Aspen is a joke. It adds nothing but laughter to the Chrysler brand. Also, if Chrysler is doing what it seems like they're doing and trying to consolidate their retailers as much as possible, why does Chrysler as a brand need any SUV? Jeep can be Chrysler's SUV outlet; maybe a nice Lambda-style crossover for Chrysler itself.

Sebring needs tweaking, maybe add an SRT version- the Phoenix 4.0 V6 would be a good candidate..? :AH-HA_wink:

Sebring is likewise a joke. No explanation needed. And even if it weren't such a joke, its been labasted so much in the media is futile trying to prove otherwise.

Jeep Comanche needs a facelift, along with the Compass.

Jeeps in general stay on course. Keep the SRT version as the flagship.

Compass needs to either die or be made into what it was supposed to be - a cheap, semi-credible rallye-esque car with a non-crummy interior. Commander needs to be taken upscale...way upscale. Jeep still has more cred than Chrysler will for years to come, so why not market a very luxuriously trimmed Grand Commander at Range Rover levels?

[Windy-57]

First off, some of the vehicles Chrysler will "cut" will be replaced.

Durango - Gone, but replaced with a Grand Cherokee-based model

Aspen - Just plain Gone

Commander - Gone, but replaced with a 3-row Grand Cherokee

Compass - Hopefully gone, but I have a feeling the bean counters like that model and it will stick around

PT Cruiser - Gone, but replaced with a Caliber cousin

Pacifica - Maybe gone with the birth of the upcoming Journey cousin, but I still see a market for the Pacifica to compete with the Lambdas. In the end, cost issues may spell its doom as the new version was supposed share the R-Class structure and the question looms over what it will share a platform with now...back to the minivans? Other than that, the Pacifica is a good, albeit outdated, model in one of the hottest segments in the market.

Sebring - If it's gone, it will be replaced. There is no way, absolutely no way, that Chrysler will not have a midsize sedan entrant. Yes, the current model sucks, but it's better than nothing. I'd expect the next model to target the LaX.

Crossfire - Most likely gone and don't expect a firepower to replace it anytime soon. Chrysler will use their money to get their core products back in line, then address the exciting ones.

Nitro - Tough call. Sure, it's in a shrinking market, but you get costs savings from sharing the Liberty structure and you're sure not going to get rid of that. The numbers may look better on this vehicle than market perceptions may indicate.

Magnum - Had a good run, but has faded. Still, the Charger and 300 aren't going anywhere and every Magnum you sell chips into the fixed costs, so maybe it sticks around?? Toss up on this one.

I'd have to say that those are your top candidates for the axe. We'll see.

[MyerShift]

I don't think that Chrysler ought to cut the Sebring so much as completely make it over.

Without a decent midsize entry somewhere, Chrysler might as well shut down.

[Ravenfreak13]

In reality, the sebring really just needs a few exterior tweaks(c pillar blackout, lights size) and the interior needs a quality update.

[CMG]

The Aspen is a joke. It adds nothing but laughter to the Chrysler brand.

If someone posted that the Olds Aurora was "a joke" and "added nothing but laughter to the Oldsmobile brand" you would probably just roll your eyes at the comment.

Would you not?

The Aspen is actually a very nice vehicle, my friend owns one, and the interior is VERYYY nice, it drives nice, and it looks good IMO.

The Aurora does absolutely nothing for me whatsoever, so I guess it's a "to each his own" situation, once again.

DRIVE an Aspen. That's my suggestion.

Sebring is likewise a joke. No explanation needed. And even if it weren't such a joke, its been labasted so much in the media is futile trying to prove otherwise.

The media has claimed domestic cars in general are a joke.

Do I care what the media prints? LOL

NOOO, I care what I buy that sits in my driveway. The Sunfire/Cavalier were jokes for over a decade, people still bought them. I would take a Sebring LONG before a Sunfire/Cavalier, or many other GMs for that matter. I've driven one, they aren't luxury cars, but they aren't sold as luxury cars. They aren't sports cars, but they aren't sold as sports cars.

They are decent daily drivers. If making derogatory comments about them somehow makes the cars in YOUR driveway appear better to you, then who am I to comment?

:AH-HA_wink:

Compass needs to either die or be made into what it was supposed to be - a cheap, semi-credible rallye-esque car with a non-crummy interior.

LOL

Post a link to where you found what cars and trucks "were supposed to be made into".

LOL

The Compass isn't good looking IMO. The interior of most Jeeps throughout history have never been opulent, more VERY spartan for sure. Why would you possibly think a Jeep that is inexpensive would have an expensive interior?

I just shake my head at this forum sometimes, it's like you guys all had girlfriends stolen by Chrysler drivers in the past, and now you feel the need to release your whining anger on the vehicles on the internet.

LOL

Commander needs to be taken upscale...way upscale.

Why???

Jeep still has more cred than Chrysler will for years to come, so why not market a very luxuriously trimmed Grand Commander at Range Rover levels?

Cred is a word kids use. Look, that shiznit has street cred!

LOL

Alot of other forums have more unbiased views of "cred" than this one when it regards brands other than what a few of you dream about at night.

Did you see the latest statistics in the other C&G thread where Chrysler came out ahead of GM and GM actually was the worst of Ford, GM and Chrysler? Any comment on that, or just excuses?

:AH-HA_wink:

[Lamar]

I guess you didn't catch that my "plan" leaves Chrysler with the T&C and 300c, Dodge with Magnum/Charger, Ram, and Caravan, and Jeep with the Wrangler and Grand Cherokee.

Those are the only models Chrysler hasn't managed to F up.

No, I got it. But like it or not, Chrysler and Dodge are volume marques. They wouldn't survive with just that many models.

Well, Chrysler wouldn't. Dodge might do ok.

Jeep is more of a niche marque... I remember when they only had a couple of models and they did fine.

[CMG]

First off, some of the vehicles Chrysler will "cut" will be replaced.

Durango - Gone, but replaced with a Grand Cherokee-based model

Aspen - Just plain Gone

Commander - Gone, but replaced with a 3-row Grand Cherokee

Compass - Hopefully gone, but I have a feeling the bean counters like that model and it will stick around

PT Cruiser - Gone, but replaced with a Caliber cousin

Pacifica - Maybe gone with the birth of the upcoming Journey cousin, but I still see a market for the Pacifica to compete with the Lambdas. In the end, cost issues may spell its doom as the new version was supposed share the R-Class structure and the question looms over what it will share a platform with now...back to the minivans? Other than that, the Pacifica is a good, albeit outdated, model in one of the hottest segments in the market.

Sebring - If it's gone, it will be replaced. There is no way, absolutely no way, that Chrysler will not have a midsize sedan entrant. Yes, the current model sucks, but it's better than nothing. I'd expect the next model to target the LaX.

Crossfire - Most likely gone and don't expect a firepower to replace it anytime soon. Chrysler will use their money to get their core products back in line, then address the exciting ones.

Nitro - Tough call. Sure, it's in a shrinking market, but you get costs savings from sharing the Liberty structure and you're sure not going to get rid of that. The numbers may look better on this vehicle than market perceptions may indicate.

Magnum - Had a good run, but has faded. Still, the Charger and 300 aren't going anywhere and every Magnum you sell chips into the fixed costs, so maybe it sticks around?? Toss up on this one.

I'd have to say that those are your top candidates for the axe. We'll see.

Most insightful while intelligent post in this thread IMO.

[CMG]

Jeep is more of a niche marque... I remember when they only had a couple of models and they did fine.

Exactly.

Jeep should be doing what Jeep does best, and that does not include building "upscale" luxury vehicles.

They carved a niche for themselves, and should stay true to it, or reasonably anyways.

[Flybrian]

If someone posted that the Olds Aurora was "a joke" and "added nothing but laughter to the Oldsmobile brand" you would probably just roll your eyes at the comment.

Would you not?

The Aspen is actually a very nice vehicle, my friend owns one, and the interior is VERYYY nice, it drives nice, and it looks good IMO.

The Aurora does absolutely nothing for me whatsoever, so I guess it's a "to each his own" situation, once again.

DRIVE an Aspen. That's my suggestion.

Besides being completely false, your attack on my car proves nothing. The Aspen is a joke because it sells poorly and adds nothing worthwhile to the Chrysler lineup. The fact is that truck-based SUVs that don't have some sort of following are next on the industry's chopping block - that includes the Infiniti QX, Lexus GX, Mountaineer, Trailblazer/Envoy, Sequoia, Armada, and yes the Aspen. It may take longer or shorter, but I have no reason to believe any of those can survive in the current market in their current form for much longer. And unless the Aspen has been that much improved from the Durango in terms of ride quality and handling, I don't need to drive one.

The media has claimed domestic cars in general are a joke.

Do I care what the media prints? LOL

NOOO, I care what I buy that sits in my driveway. The Sunfire/Cavalier were jokes for over a decade, people still bought them. I would take a Sebring LONG before a Sunfire/Cavalier, or many other GMs for that matter. I've driven one, they aren't luxury cars, but they aren't sold as luxury cars. They aren't sports cars, but they aren't sold as sports cars.

They are decent daily drivers. If making derogatory comments about them somehow makes the cars in YOUR driveway appear better to you, then who am I to comment?

:AH-HA_wink:

You're comparing the new Sebring to a J-car. That says it all right there. But seriously, you say that Sebrings 'aren't luxury cars...they are decent daily drivers.' Is that what Chrysler is supposed to be, a decent daily driver? I would hope the premium brand that Chrysler is trying to become would be aiming for the stars rather than settling for the horizon. Why not give the car a serious and thorough restyle inside and out, up the material quality, drop that junk 2.7l V6 (why is it even in there? Because its flex-fuel?), make the 3.5l a midlevel engine, and throw in a high-level V6 with ~270hp.

LOL

Post a link to where you found what cars and trucks "were supposed to be made into".

LOL

The Compass isn't good looking IMO. The interior of most Jeeps throughout history have never been opulent, more VERY spartan for sure. Why would you possibly think a Jeep that is inexpensive would have an expensive interior?

I just shake my head at this forum sometimes, it's like you guys all had girlfriends stolen by Chrysler drivers in the past, and now you feel the need to release your whining anger on the vehicles on the internet.

LOL

(from DaimlerChrysler Press Release) Sleek and sophisticated with a rally car toughness, the Jeep® Compass concept would deliver Jeep fun, freedom and capability, broadening the global appeal of Jeep and attracting new buyers who might not have previously considered the brand.

There is a difference between ruggedness and just plain cheap. The Compass is just plain cheap. How can you not see that? Either the Compass a rugged, though Jeep and needs non-flimsy componants to match that or it needs to be the suave urban Jeep the marketeers want it to be and it needs dressing up.

Why???

Way too much overlap within the Jeep lineup. If you don't see that, you must work for Chrysler.

Cred is a word kids use. Look, that shiznit has street cred!

LOL

Alot of other forums have more unbiased views of "cred" than this one when it regards brands other than what a few of you dream about at night.

There is no question in anyone's mind Jeep has more credibility among buyers of all vehicles brands and types than Chrysler. One of the most surprising things Chrysler learned in the late-80s was that Jeep buyers had median incomes twice as much as Chrysler/Dodge/Plymouth owners and Jeep products shared driveways with Mercedes, BMW, etc. Still true today. Why not exploit that with a rich, luxurious Grand Commander?

Did you see the latest statistics in the other C&G thread where Chrysler came out ahead of GM and GM actually was the worst of Ford, GM and Chrysler? Any comment on that, or just excuses?

:AH-HA_wink:

What?

Exactly.

Jeep should be doing what Jeep does best, and that does not include building "upscale" luxury vehicles.

They carved a niche for themselves, and should stay true to it, or reasonably anyways.

Land Rover carved a niche for themselves, too, and - Freelander aside - stays true to it. Why can't Jeep be the American Land Rover, at least with one or two offerings while keeping the rest affordable? And if Jeep heritage is so vital, wtf is the Compass doing there?

[Ravenfreak13]

Sebring is a nice car, I would know, I drive one every day. So until you sit in it, drive it, live with it, you can't make any judgements with the exception of design which has actually grown on me a lot since people all around me like it.

It just needs to tweak a few things, like steering which is a bit loose. And some design things etc.

PT Cruiser could make a comeback if someone at Chrysler actually cared about it.

Aspen doesn't do much for me. Just add a high trim level to durango and voila! you have aspen in dodge skin.

300 is fine with the exception of the base model which either A) cease to exist or B) be packaged correctly with a good engine.

Pacifica should stay being that it was one of the original crossovers and it has a very sophisticated style.

The vans will be no problem for chrysler.

Dodge is pretty well off with the exception of a few outdated products which and easily be fixed.

Jeep should drop the compass.

[Intrepidation]

I think Chrysler should move upmarket and begin to be the premium brand it used to be. It should be Chrysler LLC's Cadillac. Dodge is for the everyman and Jeep is for SUV/Offroad lovers.

You could even Toy with the idea of bring plymouth back so you could continue to build the PT Cruiser (but redesigned) something like the Pacifica, a compact sedan, and maybe a compact CUV.

If you did that then it would eliminate overlap between Dodge and Chrysler. As it stands there's not enough to differentiate the two brands and they compete with each other on the same level. I would like Chrysler to keep it's names like 300, Sebring, Imperial and so on...as it would be nice to see a luxury brand with real names and that's proud of it's heritage.

Just a thought.

[CMG]

Besides being completely false, your attack on my car proves nothing.

"Attack on your car?

LOL

I asked if somebody applied the same nonsensical comments to your Aurora I wondered how you would react. Reread. Where is there an "attack", except your futile attempts at insulting other brand cars.

Again.

:AH-HA_wink:

The Aspen is a joke because it sells poorly and adds nothing worthwhile to the Chrysler lineup.

That's your opinion, and not one based on your actually DRIVING an Aspen, as you admit you haven't. So basically it's a baseless opinion, is it not? That you also say you "don't need to drive one" tells me your opinions are based on perception of something you know nothing about. You judge it, but have never driven it.

You're comparing the new Sebring to a J-car. That says it all right there.

I compare it to affordable GM vehicles of any kind in the same class.

But seriously, you say that Sebrings 'aren't luxury cars...they are decent daily drivers.'

That's exactly what I said. And the Sebrings are NOT intended to be luxury cars. They aren't priced like a top end luxury car and don't perform like a top end luxury car. It ain't rocket science IMO.

Is that what Chrysler is supposed to be, a decent daily driver?

To me that's exactly what it is. I see Raven likes his, he has people admiring his. I would assume Raven, who OWNS AND DRIVES a Sebring would have a more informed vision of what the Sebring is truly like. Have you ever driven a Sebring? Ever?

I would hope the premium brand that Chrysler is trying to become would be aiming for the stars rather than settling for the horizon.

Chrysler is an upscale vehicle, but not a top of the line vehicle USUALLY. The base Chryslers are no better (or worse) than the Buicks or Oldsmobiles of past/present. They were upscale to the Chevrolet division supposedly, were they not supposed to be? :AH-HA_wink:

Why not give the car a serious and thorough restyle inside and out, up the material quality, drop that junk 2.7l V6 (why is it even in there? Because its flex-fuel?), make the 3.5l a midlevel engine, and throw in a high-level V6 with ~270hp.

Most likely that WILL happen IMO. Those changes would require a higher prcietag to go along with the upgrades however.

(from DaimlerChrysler Press Release) Sleek and sophisticated with a rally car toughness, the Jeep® Compass concept would deliver Jeep fun, freedom and capability, broadening the global appeal of Jeep and attracting new buyers who might not have previously considered the brand.

There is a difference between ruggedness and just plain cheap. The Compass is just plain cheap. How can you not see that? Either the Compass a rugged, though Jeep and needs non-flimsy componants to match that or it needs to be the suave urban Jeep the marketeers want it to be and it needs dressing up.

The press release is a PRESS RELEASE. It doesn't say what you claimed, it says "rally car toughness". Which basically mean NOTHING. It's advertising, it's meant to imply the vehicle is tough, not opulent, it doesn't say ""it was supposed to be - a cheap, semi-credible rallye-esque car with a non-crummy interior."" anywhere. Where is the interior reference? It is supposed to be a "rallye-esque" car, and rallye cars don't have 20 speaker stereos and connolly leather...

Way too much overlap within the Jeep lineup. If you don't see that, you must work for Chrysler.

So if my opinion differs from yours I "must work for Chrysler"?

LOL

Good thing I think there are too many Jeep models! LOL I think EVERY manufacturer has too many SUVs and too many overlapping lines of vehicles.

One of the most surprising things Chrysler learned in the late-80s was that Jeep buyers had median incomes twice as much as Chrysler/Dodge/Plymouth owners and Jeep products shared driveways with Mercedes, BMW, etc. Still true today. Why not exploit that with a rich, luxurious Grand Commander?

What?

Why not exploit them with rich luxurious Compasses too?

*fails to see the connection between outdoor loving jeep enthusiasts and opulent interiored luxury vehicles*

I guess if a Jeep is meant for off road fun and rallye races I just think the high quality pile carpeting *might* get a little dirty in the mud races..?

[Cory Wolfe]

Fly is the most insightful and intelligent person posting in this thread.

[CMG]

Fly is the most insightful and intelligent person posting in this thread.

LOL

Get yer nose outta his hose!

:AH-HA_wink:

[regfootball]

where chrysler is in a kerfuffle is that many of its models are repellant to the typical soccer mom type of thing. your average uptight suburban middle aged woman with kids and spouse, and that lady usually controls the checkbook and what they buy. something like a charger or 300 does not appeal to them as family transport. nor would an avenger.

women like that do not like bling in their vehicles. but they sure love dull Japanese vehicles. As much as you might think its nice for chrysler to contrast that, the reality is it hurts their ability to appeal to enough people to keep sales numbers up.

[CMG]

where chrysler is in a kerfuffle is that many of its models are repellant to the typical soccer mom type of thing. your average uptight suburban middle aged woman with kids and spouse, and that lady usually controls the checkbook and what they buy. something like a charger or 300 does not appeal to them as family transport. nor would an avenger.

women like that do not like bling in their vehicles. but they sure love dull Japanese vehicles. As much as you might think its nice for chrysler to contrast that, the reality is it hurts their ability to appeal to enough people to keep sales numbers up.

Huh?

My wife is middle aged, has kids (and a spouse) and she is a soccer mom. She controls the checkbook, and she bought a Dodge Magnum R/T, which she loves. She also bought aftermarket "bling" wheels for it, as well as a couple other things, which SHE picked out. She's even looking at an aftermarket hood.

Where is your theory now reg?

LOL

Are you guys a comedy act or what?

Informative, not usually, but ENTERTAINING, you are second to none!

[BrewSwillis]

where chrysler is in a kerfuffle is that many of its models are repellant to the typical soccer mom type of thing. your average uptight suburban middle aged woman with kids and spouse, and that lady usually controls the checkbook and what they buy. something like a charger or 300 does not appeal to them as family transport. nor would an avenger.

women like that do not like bling in their vehicles. but they sure love dull Japanese vehicles. As much as you might think its nice for chrysler to contrast that, the reality is it hurts their ability to appeal to enough people to keep sales numbers up.

I think you are actually wrong in that assessment. Dodge was targeting their vehicles to males, and found out that females were very receptive to that type of marketing. They found out that alot of women actually like some badassness in their vehicles. When a couple is married, isn't it always the guy who has to drive the 5 year old Camry?? Women want to be seen as powerful in this day and age.

You constantly bring up this accusation that the 300 and Charger are bling-mobiles.....but I think you were either lulled to sleep by all other automakers current offerings, or you live in California, or a ghetto somewhere, where every LX vehicle is riding on 24"s, and has lambo style doors. How can an ultra conservative boxy 300 be a bling-mobile that scares soccer moms? The 300 is a large conservative sedan. It just does it so well, that it looks like a fine tailored tuxedo, instead of a suit from Men's Warehouse.

[VenSeattle]

I think you are actually wrong in that assessment. Dodge was targeting their vehicles to males, and found out that females were very receptive to that type of marketing. They found out that alot of women actually like some badassness in their vehicles. When a couple is married, isn't it always the guy who has to drive the 5 year old Camry?? Women want to be seen as powerful in this day and age.

Apparently too few men and not enough of those women are out there that are interested, or Dodge and Chrysler wouldn't be cancelling products and rushing to reinvent themselves as they continue to lose billions. (of course there's not an exact number, but nothing has really changed since the buy out except sales have continued to plummet.)

You constantly bring up this accusation that the 300 and Charger are bling-mobiles.....but I think you were either lulled to sleep by all other automakers current offerings, or you live in California, or a ghetto somewhere, where every LX vehicle is riding on 24"s, and has lambo style doors. How can an ultra conservative boxy 300 be a bling-mobile that scares soccer moms? The 300 is a large conservative sedan. It just does it so well, that it looks like a fine tailored tuxedo, instead of a suit from Men's Warehouse.

:rotflmao:

You are delusional... The Lucerne and Avalon are the ultra conservative large sedans in this segment. The 300's styling was never perceived or advertised as subtle. It was designed from the beginning to intentionally polarize and inject some blood into the Chrysler brand, which it did for a while. What you're mistaking as "conservative" was Chrysler's lack of quality, detail, and finish which left the 300 as a faux premium/luxury sedan that had RWD once the hip-hop fad faded away. Now the over publicized in-your-face 300 is dated and starting to rot on the vine with the rest of Chrysler’s neglected products.

Here are a few comments about this ultra conservative boxy 300:

Edmunds:

The 300's styling is unmistakably American. The large chrome grille, double-lens headlights, high beltline, bulging fenders and large wheels give it a strong presence on the road.

MotorTrend:

...the audacious Chrysler 300... Stylistically, the Chrysler 300 is a sort of Dorian Gray among automotive shapes. Handsome and chic in 2004...

It's no longer 2004... but the 300 still is. Fads never age well.

CarandDriver

In length, the Chrysler 300 is shy of both the new Five Hundred and LaCrosse. But its visual presence dominates them easily; you notice this car.

Ohhhhh Yeeaaaaahhhh.... real ultra conservative...

[Flybrian]

"Attack on your car?

LOL

I asked if somebody applied the same nonsensical comments to your Aurora I wondered how you would react. Reread. Where is there an "attack", except your futile attempts at insulting other brand cars.

Again.

:AH-HA_wink:

Its nonsensical when applied to my car because the Aurora did appeal to a different clientele than the traditional Oldsmobile, it was a luxury benchmark in powertrain and refinement, and did shake up the field. The Aspen is a joke because its a very lightly reskinned Durango (which is not a refined vehicle as is) and adds nothing unique in features or even design language. Chrysler admits it adds nothing because they are going to dump it shortly.

That's your opinion, and not one based on your actually DRIVING an Aspen, as you admit you haven't. So basically it's a baseless opinion, is it not? That you also say you "don't need to drive one" tells me your opinions are based on perception of something you know nothing about. You judge it, but have never driven it.

I've driven a Durango. Please tell me what Chrysler engineers would've added to the jerky, disconnected, unsteady experience besides an analog clock.

I compare it to affordable GM vehicles of any kind in the same class.

So, you're comparing the Sebring to a J-body. Enough said.

That's exactly what I said. And the Sebrings are NOT intended to be luxury cars. They aren't priced like a top end luxury car and don't perform like a top end luxury car. It ain't rocket science IMO.

Difference among luxury and premium and cheap-with-shiny-$h!-glued-on is something Chrysler hasn't quite figured out with the lower-rung Sebrings.

To me that's exactly what it is. I see Raven likes his, he has people admiring his. I would assume Raven, who OWNS AND DRIVES a Sebring would have a more informed vision of what the Sebring is truly like. Have you ever driven a Sebring? Ever?

Can't stop vomiting enough to get behind the wheel. Sorry.

Chrysler is an upscale vehicle, but not a top of the line vehicle USUALLY. The base Chryslers are no better (or worse) than the Buicks or Oldsmobiles of past/present. They were upscale to the Chevrolet division supposedly, were they not supposed to be? :AH-HA_wink:

And yet lies another problem with the Chrysler organization - no luxury division. Also, no real volume budget division to dump some of the 'necessary trash.' Ford and GM both have these.

Most likely that WILL happen IMO. Those changes would require a higher prcietag to go along with the upgrades however.

Good. About time.

The press release is a PRESS RELEASE. It doesn't say what you claimed, it says "rally car toughness". Which basically mean NOTHING. It's advertising, it's meant to imply the vehicle is tough, not opulent, it doesn't say ""it was supposed to be - a cheap, semi-credible rallye-esque car with a non-crummy interior."" anywhere. Where is the interior reference? It is supposed to be a "rallye-esque" car, and rallye cars don't have 20 speaker stereos and connolly leather...

I still don't understand why you defend the Compass, a vehicle so woefully misplaced that every moment it continues to exist, more essence is being sucked out of Jeep.

Why not exploit them with rich luxurious Compasses too?

*fails to see the connection between outdoor loving jeep enthusiasts and opulent interiored luxury vehicles*

I guess if a Jeep is meant for off road fun and rallye races I just think the high quality pile carpeting *might* get a little dirty in the mud races..?

Last time I checked, most Jeeps stayed on the road unless you consider popping the curb at Arby's "offroading." And that's not a slight at Jeep owners; its a fact that the vast majority of SUV buyers don't do jack $h! with any of their vehicles' capabilities. They do, however, want luxurious interiors. Again, please rationize a case against a powerful, agile, capable Range Rover-killing Grand Commander.

[Ravenfreak13]

This is becoming rediculous. Be mature.

[CMG]

Its nonsensical when applied to my car because the Aurora did appeal to a different clientele than the traditional Oldsmobile, it was a luxury benchmark in powertrain and refinement, and did shake up the field. The Aspen is a joke because its a very lightly reskinned Durango (which is not a refined vehicle as is) and adds nothing unique in features or even design language. Chrysler admits it adds nothing because they are going to dump it shortly.

And the Aurora was "dumped" in 2003 because IT "admittedly adds nothing" to the Oldsmobile brand too? Right? The Aurora was dropped was it not ???

I've driven a Durango. Please tell me what Chrysler engineers would've added to the jerky, disconnected, unsteady experience besides an analog clock.

Strange, I've driven MANY Durangos, for long trips too, never was it "jerky, disconnected and unsteady". Did you drive one during an earthquake? Was the earthquake a 6+ on the richter scale?

So, you're comparing the Sebring to a J-body. Enough said.

Actually, if you actually READ what I posted- I compare the Sebring to ANY vehcile GM puts out in the same class and find the Sebring much more attractive to own than what you attempt to portray.

It's not a Bentley, but compared to a Sunfire/Cavalier it's close....

:AH-HA_wink:

LOL

Difference among luxury and premium and cheap-with-shiny-$h!-glued-on is something Chrysler hasn't quite figured out with the lower-rung Sebrings.

You keep trying to smear a label on the Sebring. GM cars in the same price range don't have opulent interiors either. Have a look at the new Malibu interior and try to judge it with the same standards you apply to the brands that aggravate you.

Can't stop vomiting enough to get behind the wheel. Sorry.

Maybe you are pregnant? Is this comment automotive related, or just silly?

And yet lies another problem with the Chrysler organization - no luxury division. Also, no real volume budget division to dump some of the 'necessary trash.' Ford and GM both have these.

Chrysler has luxury cars, mini vans, family sedans etc. It is a car MAKE as well, and has higher trim level vehicles as well as lower trim level vehicles.

I still don't understand why you defend the Compass, a vehicle so woefully misplaced that every moment it continues to exist, more essence is being sucked out of Jeep.

Ummm..... I'm not a big fan of the Compass.

Where you get an impression I'm a fan I'll never know...

[CMG]

This is becoming rediculous. Be mature.

I think some of them are just trying their best to bust balls for various reasons.

:AH-HA_wink:

Take what they post with a grain of salt.

[regfootball]

Again, please rationize a case against a powerful, agile, capable Range Rover-killing Grand Commander.

I KNOW!!! EXACTLY>! that is one niche that Jeep needs to be in!

re: brew and cmg. first off, on the bling issue. A good 15-20% of the unique chargers, 300's, and magnums I see everyday have one of the following

-blingy custom paint job or decals

-oversized blingy dubs

-window tint. keep in mind, i am not in florida or east LA.

-billet grille

now, no doubt part of that is because there is a chrysler dodge jeep dealer by my house. but my assessment is the cars I see on the road everyday.

I like the magnum as much as anyone too (except for the cabin claustrophobia and dreadful interior). But I live dead square in suburbia with oodles and oodles of ovulating soccer moms and I gotta tell you.......they are NOT driving those Chryco products. Where I do see a few of the Chryco sedans is near the apartments in the older part of town where, shall we say, its not real affluent.

I work in a large office building. That is a great cross section of what the working moms around here drive. It ain't 300's or magnums or chargers. there are a few chargers in the area here, but young guys drive them. The 300's people drove for fashion, they already traded in for other cars.

I go to the malls, there are many of them around here. i do not see women in chargers or magnums or 300's.

The pre 08 style caravans are popular here. Durangos were too until this new body style. I have not seen the new Caravans take off yet. I will bet the Journey does well, although I still think they swung and missed on the interior. but we'll see. The pacifica was popular at one time but is really getting killed now by the lambdas and japanese pricey models.

the grand cherokees are piling up in dealer lots, but I like the GC. Hard to see. I think if the GC got better mpg.

Edited October 19, 2007 by regfootball