Chrysler Could be America's Benz, BMW

[MyerShift]

Um, well, here you go. I had to laugh myself but I would most certainly welcome such a development, should it come to any sort of fruition, with wiiiide open arms.

Chrysler's Jim Press Aspirations

[evok]

Just like British Rover.

[CARBIZ]

Jim: PUT DOWN THE BONG!

[Paolino]

Yeah, okay... I am sure that all that's wrong with the Sebring is it's being powered by the wrong wheels.

Yeah, speaking of the Sebring, where's that 2009 refresh I've been waiting for since the car debuted? If you look on the website, it says 2009 Sebring, yet it's the same damn car with the ugly ridges in the hood, and the same $h!tacular interior. What happened to the spy photos of the "necessarily refresh"?

[smk4565]

Jim Press is delusional, never in a million years will the best Chrysler product be on par with the worst BMW product. Chrysler can't even build a product as well as Hyundai, how will they compete with Mercedes. Chrysler will serve out the next couple years as a top supplier to Avis and Enterprise before going into liquidation.

[smk4565]

Yeah, okay... I am sure that all that's wrong with the Sebring is it's being powered by the wrong wheels.

Yeah, speaking of the Sebring, where's that 2009 refresh I've been waiting for since the car debuted? If you look on the website, it says 2009 Sebring, yet it's the same damn car with the ugly ridges in the hood, and the same $h!tacular interior. What happened to the spy photos of the "necessarily refresh"?

Not sure, but the 2011 300 gets a refresh and a new interior. Problem is that car came out in 2005, so it will be getting a mid-cycle refresh at 6 years old. Sebring came out in 2007, maybe 2013 is their MCE year.

[ZL-1]

*sarcasm*

Give me 1 trillion dollars and I can turn Tata into the new BMW!

*sarcasm*

Edited December 23, 2008 by ZL-1

[Sal Collaziano]

To me, the 300C is Chrysler's best product - and it doesn't hold a candle to the 750Li..

[Z-06]

*sarcasm*

Give me 1 trillion dollars and I can turn Tata into the new BMW!

*sarcasm*

That possibly might happen before Chrysler can be a BMW.

[Intrepidation]

In theory it could work. Decades long past, Chrysler could run with the best Cadillac had to offer. Cadillac is working it's way out of the mud and towards becoming The Standard of the World again. Who would have thought 15 years ago that Cadillac would have a BMW killer (CTS-V)?

It's certainly possible, any brand can move upmarket (look at Hyundai), and it would get rid of any overlap with Dodge, but requires time, patience and investment into the product to make it happen. I'd love to say I could see it happening, but as of right now he's off his rocker.

[mustang84]

Jim Press is delusional, never in a million years will the best Chrysler product be on par with the worst BMW product. Chrysler can't even build a product as well as Hyundai, how will they compete with Mercedes. Chrysler will serve out the next couple years as a top supplier to Avis and Enterprise before going into liquidation.

Eh, never say never...

Sure, Chrysler is a long way off and on its death throws, but that doesn't mean it will always be that way. Look at Ford coming back into the game with its new product. Chrysler just hasn't made the tough decisions yet that they need to be making.

[smk4565]

*sarcasm*

Give me 1 trillion dollars and I can turn Tata into the new BMW!

*sarcasm*

They do have Jaguar, and the XF is the best mid-size luxury sedan on the market right now. Edmunds.com and Motor Trend comparison winner, Car and Driver 10 Best, Automobile Magazine All Star.

Does Jim Press know that a 300 starts around $25,000 and the full size Mercedes starts at $90,000? Or that BMW and Mercedes aren't using the same V6 from 1997 in their 2009 cars? Or that M-B and BMW don't sell 60% of their cars to rental car companies?

[Blake Noble]

They do have Jaguar, and the XF is the best mid-size luxury sedan on the market right now. Edmunds.com and Motor Trend comparison winner, Car and Driver 10 Best, Automobile Magazine All Star.

I believe the XF was developed using Ford's money and Ford engineers. Sorry, just because Tata owns Jaguar doesn't mean that development credit transfers automatically over to them.

Edited December 24, 2008 by YellowJacket894

[§carlet §wordfish]

Maybe in 20 years or so.

[Robert Hall]

Well, Chrysler was of Daimler's US brands..

[balthazar]

>>"Or that M-B and BMW don't sell 60% of their cars to rental car companies?"<<

In Germany they do- mercedes: 50% and BMW: 67% rental/fleet. That pretty much averages to the neighborhood fo 60%. No doubt fleet sales in the rest of europe are high, too; no reason to think Germany would be an anomoly here.

XF Jag needs a bunch more refinement to compete with the class leaders- it's not there, yet. And reliability remains the perpetual question...

Edited December 24, 2008 by balthazar

[Northstar]

There's absolutely no way Chrysler can compete with BMW. They don't have the money to invest in the products to make them as good as BMWs nor the image to compete in such a price range.

[Chris_Doane]

Not sure, but the 2011 300 gets a refresh and a new interior. Problem is that car came out in 2005, so it will be getting a mid-cycle refresh at 6 years old. Sebring came out in 2007, maybe 2013 is their MCE year.

The 2011 cars are not refreshes. They are total redesigns on a new platform.

What happened to the spy photos of the "necessarily refresh"?

Mmm...I think you might be remembering something that doesn't exist?

[FAPTurbo]

Haha, wow.

They should set their sights on Hyundai first.

[SAmadei]

Yeah, okay... I am sure that all that's wrong with the Sebring is it's being powered by the wrong wheels.

Yeah, speaking of the Sebring, where's that 2009 refresh I've been waiting for since the car debuted? If you look on the website, it says 2009 Sebring, yet it's the same damn car with the ugly ridges in the hood, and the same &#036;h&#33;tacular interior. What happened to the spy photos of the "necessarily refresh"?

Love your review of the Sebring... I couldn't describe it better... I think the only things they get right with the Sebring is that the wheels are round and that it doesn't normally drive sideways.

I am still pulling for Chrysler, though. I used to cheer for underdog AMC, as well. A history of beautiful cars of questionable quality. I've seen several new Challengers in person, and the car has great presence... I hope that the Challenger is still loved after racking up some miles.

[Intrepidation]

Not sure, but the 2011 300 gets a refresh and a new interior. Problem is that car came out in 2005, so it will be getting a mid-cycle refresh at 6 years old.

Or that BMW and Mercedes aren't using the same V6 from 1997 in their 2009 cars?

As usual, you are mistaken. As Chris said, the 300 (and Charger) are redesigns on the new LY platform (an evolution of the LX)

When they debut they will have the new Phoenix V6 engines, one of the most advanced in the world, and apparently and 8-speed automatic. MB and BMW can't match that.

Chrysler being a t the same level as the Germans could be done, they can beat the Germans at their own game. Remember the ME-412? They were going to build it. It was better than the SLR can was far more cost effective. That's Why Daimler killed it. What an embarrassment it would be to have the American company show up the German company. However, it takes money, time, and product to move a brand upmarket.

Edited December 24, 2008 by Dodgefan

[smk4565]

>>"Or that M-B and BMW don't sell 60% of their cars to rental car companies?"<<

XF Jag needs a bunch more refinement to compete with the class leaders- it's not there, yet. And reliability remains the perpetual question...

The XF's reviews rate it #1 in the class. Yes the AJ V8 is old, but it sounds good and the car is fast. But a new 5 liter V8 is coming soon. Jaguar ranks 10th in JD Power reliability (which studies 2005 cars, not the XF) but that was higher than Mercedes and Audi. They rank #9 in initial quality, higher than Cadillac, BMW and Audi. Jaguar is currently #1 in both customer service and sales satisfaction. If reliability is a problem with Jaguar, it is a problem with the 27 brands that rank below it as well.

[cletus8269]

If reliability is a problem with Jaguar, it is a problem with the 27 brands that rank below it as well.

im going to go out on a limb and say that last sentence is prolly going to get some flame thrown at it in a later point in time. just because one company has a "reputation" or something of that ilk, doesnt mean the ones behind it are struggling with that same problem.

[Brougham-Holiday]

Who would have thought 10 years ago that Cadillac would build a world class sport sedan?

Who would have thought 15 years ago that Hyundai would build a V8 luxury sedan?

Who would have thought 25 years ago that Toyota/Honda/Nissan would build luxury cars?

Jim Press is one of the guys from Toyota that ran the company while it ate GM/Chrysler/Ford's lunch, I don't see anything here thats funny. Chrysler used to build world class luxury cars (Imperial) and is in need of significant changes to stay alive.

[Intrepidation]

Who would have thought 10 years ago that Cadillac would build a world class sport sedan?

Who would have thought 15 years ago that Hyundai would build a V8 luxury sedan?

Who would have thought 25 years ago that Toyota/Honda/Nissan would build luxury cars?

Jim Press is one of the guys from Toyota that ran the company while it ate GM/Chrysler/Ford's lunch, I don't see anything here thats funny. Chrysler used to build world class luxury cars (Imperial) and is in need of significant changes to stay alive.

Exactly right.

[ZL-1]

It will take massive amounts of money, time, management and strategic planning skills. It's not impossible, but I'd bet more money on Chrysler going into bankruptcy/liquidation.

[smk4565]

Who would have thought 10 years ago that GM and Chrysler would both be facing bankruptcy.

The reason Chrysler won't ever be Mercedes is money. It costs well over a billion dollars to develop a car like the S-class. Chrysler can't spend $1.5 billion on a car that will sell 15,000 units a year. Chrysler is out of cash, doesn't make profit, and is deep in debt, they won't come up with the money. And to be like Mercedes they would need 5 or 6 models that are great, not just 1 sedan on the LY platform.

Edited December 24, 2008 by smk4565

[Intrepidation]

Who would have thought 10 years ago that GM and Chrysler would both be facing bankruptcy.

The reason Chrysler won't ever be Mercedes is money. It costs well over a billion dollars to develop a car like the S-class. Chrysler can't spend $1.5 billion on a car that will sell 15,000 units a year. Chrysler is out of cash, doesn't make profit, and is deep in debt, they won't come up with the money. And to be like Mercedes they would need 5 or 6 models that are great, not just 1 sedan on the LY platform.

It starts with one, and goes from there.

[MyerShift]

It starts with one, and goes from there.

One.

Like the CTS for Cadillac.

[Satty]

Or like the 2005 Chrysler 300 that made Chrysler the most profitable company in the world?

[2QuickZ's]

Not sure, but the 2011 300 gets a refresh and a new interior. Problem is that car came out in 2005, so it will be getting a mid-cycle refresh at 6 years old. Sebring came out in 2007, maybe 2013 is their MCE year.

Also, if I'm not mistaken, the interior was refreshed for MY08.

[Intrepidation]

Also, if I'm not mistaken, the interior was refreshed for MY08.

Correct.

[CARBIZ]

To me, the 300C is Chrysler's best product - and it doesn't hold a candle to the 750Li..

Nor to the Bentley Arnage!

[MyerShift]

Nor to the Bentley Arnage!

Well, we're just glad the thought of comparing a Chrysler to a Bentley crossed your mind at all. *Ha ha ha! :-D

[regfootball]

Or like the 2005 Chrysler 300 that made Chrysler the most profitable company in the world?

funny how just a scant product development cycle ago, the press said we needed rear drive and v8's because that was where the market and profit was.

like 2 years later, that type of vehicle was being scorned from mountaintops.

the 05 300 was a benchmark that also was the starting point for the major tectonic shift in the market we got through to this point now today where no one really knows what the next big thing is.

sad thing is, chrysler waited far too long for a refresh and really skimped on the interiors.

in fact, if you really think about it, most brands that get scorned, its still about styling and interiors. some may say quality, some 'technology', but the reason high priced cars sell like they do is luxury and pampering interiors.

[regfootball]

by the way, it was like even as recent as 2003 and such that the press was saying all brands needed to have full product lines and that every manufacturer had to become a niche manufacturer and plug every little niche in the market. flood the market with as many models as you could.

and now they whip the manufacturers that did that.

[Satty]

The 300 was a bland brick with a blingy grille and a cheap interior gussied up with tortoise shell, it was half-assed. Chrysler assumed the RWD, V8, "THAT THANG GIT A HEMI?!?!?!" crowd was a lot larger than it turned out to be.

[Intrepidation]

The 300 was a bland brick with a blingy grille and a cheap interior gussied up with tortoise shell, it was half-assed. Chrysler assumed the RWD, V8, "THAT THANG GIT A HEMI?!?!?!" crowd was a lot larger than it turned out to be.

That's funny, because as I recall, when it debuted it was hailed as having a well executed, quality interior. Apparently so does InsideLine

As we noted earlier, the interior is a wonderful blending of old and new with retro-looking instruments and completely modern digital displays for trip, climate and audio information. When simply looked upon as a modern car, the 300C offers all the comfort, style and features you'd expect from a near-luxury car. In fact, the 300 probably offers more features than you would expect for the price. The leather is soft, an area Chrysler has overlooked in the past, and the materials have both a high-quality look and feel. We'd love it if the center stack was trimmed with real aluminum or other metal, but we're the first to admit that the metallic-looking plastic is the most convincing substitute we've seen in any car.

I have yet to get someone to give me a real reason why they think it's cheap beyond "it's cheap."

The 300 was and is noted for it's responsive handling relative to anything else in it's class, as well as RWD, V8, and the 3.5 V6. No one called it bland, and if that's what you truly think of it, that's fine, but what the hell do you call a Corolla then?

The same edmunds review:

Bottom Line:

A terrific car overall, the 300C offers a lot of performance and features for the money. In short, a car that lives up to its heritage-invoking name.

Find Motor Trend and Car and Driver road tests and they say about the same thing.

It was not a half-assed car.

Edited December 25, 2008 by Dodgefan

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

That's funny, because as I recall, when it debuted it was hailed as having a well executed, quality interior. Apparently so does InsideLine

I have yet to get someone to give me a real reason why they think it's cheap beyond "it's cheap."

The 300 was and is noted for it's responsive handling relative to anything else in it's class, as well as RWD, V8, and the 3.5 V6. No one called it bland, and if that's what you truly think of it, that's fine, but what the hell do you call a Corolla then?

The same edmunds review:

Find Motor Trend and Car and Driver road tests and they say about the same thing.

It was not a half-assed car.

+1

The LX cars were awesome. And I hope the follow ups will be just as good.

I think some people on here hate on the LX cars because *GASP* black people buy them...

See, that's the problem with american cars. When they ARE well done, they attract a following that forms an emotional attachment. Then these ASSETS are spun by the haters and media as 'bad image'

Examples:

"rednecks buy Pontiacs" (No doubt because of the very loyal muscle car crowd) "Cadillacs are bling-bling and ghetto" (because of the hip hop following) "Hummers are driven by pricks that are compensating" (Because of the off road loyalists that choose the brand) "Buicks are driven by old people" (Because of their WEALTHY, LOYAL customer base)

However, since 1) japanese appliances don't really form an emotional, loyal following and 2) mostly yuppie white people (read, the haters -- the people who control image) buy the asian brands. Nothing is ever said about them.

The one exception might be the Prius, which is getting it's due now because of it's relatively passionate following from the 'hollier than thou' crowd.

It's bullsh*t.

Edited December 25, 2008 by FUTURE_OF_GM

[MyerShift]

So, then, if we shall view this as positive potential, let's then discuss the chance of a bright future for Chrysler because some of you seem to support GM entirely but say let Chrysler die, well then, whatever.

Let's view this as, "Please, let's discuss the possible outcome should Chrysler be able to take this seriously. If they are successful, and what will it mean for the rest of the industry?"

[CARBIZ]

My first 3 vehicles were Dodge, so I've always had a soft spot for Chrysler. My dad always bought 300s in the '60s when Chrysler engineering was top notch.

I don't hope or wish Chrysler would die, but we are seeing a repeat of the mid-50s crunch in more ways than one: too many brands, lacklustre economy, fracturing markets. Brands have to go, and since the Japanese 5 are protected at home, it will have to be one of the Detroit 3.

If GM 'absorbed' Chrysler, kept Jeep and maybe the minivans, it would be fine by me. GM could use a 5% market share bump right about now and maybe then Chrysler could live on in memory. However, if Tata or another foreign manufacturer grabbed Chrysler, then conceivably GM could be the one going down and Chrysler would be just another foreign-owned entity anyway.

Lesser of two evils, IMO.

[A Horse With No Name]

Too bad Chryco can't stay in doing just minvans and a couple of Jeep products. I mean, BMW, Lotus, MINI, Smart, etc. are niche brands that do fine...why can't Chrysler become a niche brand?

Chris

[MyerShift]

If Chrysler does achieve the status somehow of being America's Premiere Luxury brand, as in our MB or BMW, then that would be comparatively make Chrysler as niche status as opposed to what it currently is.

Edited December 27, 2008 by MyerShift

[Intrepidation]

Too bad Chryco can't stay in doing just minvans and a couple of Jeep products. I mean, BMW, Lotus, MINI, Smart, etc. are niche brands that do fine...why can't Chrysler become a niche brand?

Chris

Because image conscious buys are moving away from minivans to less practical, "more stylish" crossovers. Jeep sure, but again the problem. If You downsize the company to that size, making nothing special or exclusive, you loose lots of money, customers, and of course the layoff would be massive.

Bad plan.

[Robert Hall]

I've always liked the 300, the Charger less so (just don't care for the styling). Both cars offer a nice alternative to the deadly dull V6 FWD appliances that the mainstream loves.

[CARBIZ]

Not an entirely implausible idea, cire, although Renault and AMC tried it already. On the outside, the 'merger of equals' sounds like a great idea and each company brings its own strengths to the table; however, mergers have been historically unsuccessful. Renault has a lot of interesting products in South America, and as much as I'd personally hate to compete against them, the concept you're proposing makes sense - ON PAPER.

However, there are probably too many egos/petty fiefdoms to be conquered to make it work. After all, I remember thinking a decade ago how the Daimler/Chrysler merger made sense and we all know what a disaster that turned out to be.

[Z-06]

Holy Snikes - ye forget Dod-ge CARAVAN? What about full size BOF or Unibody Utes and those e-vehicles of Chry?

I personally think US has many brands, and adding Renault will be one more brand too many especially when it will bring nothing on the table for the company. Yeah granted you will make those B, C and D models above or below the Nissan's but it will be the case of Pontiac vs. Chevy or Saturn vs. Chevy like Carbiz says.

I do not find the partnership working because other than increased market share and some truck input, Chrysler will have nothing to offer to R-N while providing them with liability as an added bonus.

On that note, I think one of the reason why there was a strong motion for forcing GM, F and DC into bankruptcies might have been the fact that these foreign companies were forcing hands of the senators. Bankruptcies would have enabled them to get the Big3 assets without the burden of liabilities, a possible conspiracy theory for someone to validate. GM and F especially have great investment in R&D especially in engine tech, hybrid and alternate fuel resources despite of their economic health which would have been a great inheretence for Nissan which especially does not have a depth of R&D.

[MyerShift]

Hmm. I believe that if Chrysler is to survive or exceed at being independent, then those vehicles created to save them instead of the bad ones they have now (Sebring/Avenger) would hopefully be the best in most every way.

[Sixty8panther]

I love the 300C but it's not a flagship in the same

category as a BMW 760iL or M.B. S-class.

Yeah, okay... I am sure that all that's wrong with the Sebring is it's being powered by the wrong wheels.

hahaha-ha. True dat, but it's the most glaring mechanical detail.

Almost as horrific as FWd is the Sebring's disgusting styling.

[Intrepidation]

I love the 300C but it's not a flagship in the same

category as a BMW 760iL or M.B. S-class.

Well naturally, the suspension design comes from the E-Class not the flagship S-Class :wink:

hahaha-ha. True dat, but it's the most glaring mechanical detail.

Almost as horrific as FWd is the Sebring's disgusting styling.

At least the last gen was pleasant to look at even if it was FWD. Except the interior...that thing was terrible.