Mercedes and Chrysler will share more;

[Variance]

By JENS MEINERS AND HARALD HAMPRECHT | AUTOMOTIVE NEWS

AutoWeek | Published 01/26/06, 9:00 am et

Dieter Zetsche is getting serious with plans to make Daimler- Chrysler’s Mercedes and Chrysler divisions work more closely together.

The new chairman, who took over January 1, sees engines and transmissions, assembly processes and purchasing as areas where cooperation can be improved.

“We think the biggest opportunity lies in sharing all know-how and technological processes. There is opportunity in sharing parts as well,” Zetsche said at the Detroit auto show.

Asked about the possibility that Chrysler vehicles could be built in Mercedes’ plants and vice versa, Zetsche said: “Plant sharing is not an objective in itself. It would be interesting to have flexibility ‘in case of.’ ”

Zetsche, 52, also is CEO of Mercedes Car Group, a position he took over temporarily September 1 but now intends to hold for the foreseeable future. Until September, Zetsche was CEO of Chrysler.

M Class/Jeep sharing

One option for sharing is in the development of next-generation Mercedes and Chrysler SUVs.

Frank Klegon, Chrysler’s vice president of product development, said: “The successors to the Jeep Cherokee and the M class won’t necessarily have identical platforms, but they will surely have many more common modules and systems,”

Thomas Weber, D/C board member for research and development, said: “We don’t want any common platforms, but we are discussing an intelligent module strategy. This isn’t putting a new hat on an old floor pan.”

Technology sharing between Mercedes and Chrysler likely will go in just one direction – from Mercedes to Chrysler.

“I don’t really see a transfer from Chrysler to Mercedes, but we will have integrated committees and common standards,” Weber said.

That makes sense, analysts say.

“On the technological side, clearly the expertise is at Mercedes-Benz,” said Georg Stürzer, an automotive analyst with HypoVereinsbank in Munich.

Stürzer said: “But in terms of production efficiency, Chrysler is ahead of Mercedes in some respects.”

Link: http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/arti...1024/LatestNews

[-Camaro-]

Weak. Can't they make their own cars? I have no respect for a company that freeloads off of another to make good vehicles. I thought this was a merger?

[caddycruiser]

Weak. Can't they make their own cars? I have no respect for a company that freeloads off of another to make good vehicles. I thought this was a merger?

And you get that impression from what? Each still does completely their own thing, but they started to figure out over the years, why go and spend all the money and time developing things like a completely new rear suspension for the 300/Charger/Magnum, when MB had a fully tested and proven design already that would work perfectly? Same goes for other bits like seat frames and steering columns...you don't see them, but the fact that they are "shared", per say, is part of the reason why the pricing on the cars is so great.

That IS the point of a merger...combining minds and resources to make as productive of an operation as possible. Even with this article...it's not like they want to pull a GM, and just make the same vehicle across 3 divisions, differentiated by only a new fascia and some stickers. No MB will ever be even remotely close to a Chrysler, and visa vera...

Edited January 26, 2006 by caddycruiser

[Flybrian]

No MB will ever be even remotely close to a Chrysler, and visa vera...

:AH-HA_wink:

[BrewSwillis]

:AH-HA_wink:

You forgot one:

I think cargo vans may be the exception.

[Hudson]

Weak. Can't they make their own cars? I have no respect for a company that freeloads off of another to make good vehicles. I thought this was a merger?

Two things:

First...you "have no respect for a company that freeloads off of another?" Like the Geo/Chevrolet Prizm? Like the Pontiac GTO? Like the Chevrolet Aveo? Like the Saturn Aura? Like the Geo/Chevrolet Tracker? Shall I go on?

Second...if you believe DaimlerChrysler to be a merger, then they're the SAME company. It would be like Chevrolet rebadging an Opel Astra (Brazil) or Saturn rebadging the Opel Antara.

[pow]

Hopefully this doesn't result in a compromise of quality. Mercedes's reputation for overengineering details would be tarnished even further if an S-class shared the seat tracks with a Stratus. These parts are critical safety components, and just because the buyer doesn't see it in the showroom, doesn't mean he won't notice it a few years down the line.

[BrewSwillis]

....Mercedes's reputation for overengineering details would be tarnished even further if an S-class shared the seat tracks with a Stratus....

Oh, and there will no longer be a Stratus to share seat tracks with anyway. The next gen will be called Avenger.....and will probably have MB seat tracks. Maybe more people will buy Avengers if they know that they will be getting MB seat tracks??

[torobud]

Weak. Can't they make their own cars? I have no respect for a company that freeloads off of another to make good vehicles. I thought this was a merger?

Wow - just wow dude

Are you mad that Tahoe and Yukon share parts too? Damn the freeloading GMC anyway...

[pow]

Oh, and there will no longer be a Stratus to share seat tracks with anyway.  The next gen will be called Avenger.....and will probably have MB seat tracks.  Maybe more people will buy Avengers if they know that they will be getting MB seat tracks??

Yeah... a $20K car will use the seat track from a $100K car. Heh, I still think there'll be a compromise... a good thing for Chrysler buyers, a bad thing for MB buyers.

[Flybrian]

I think the worst thing for Mercedes buyers is the fact they own and drive a Mercedes. At when a Chrysler falls apart on you, you know you spent less than $40,000.

Again, I do laugh at the idea that Mercedes will be really 'brought down' by Chrysler. They've been cheapening themselves up pretty well lately without any help.

[Hudson]

I think the worst thing for Mercedes buyers is the fact they own and drive a Mercedes. At when a Chrysler falls apart on you, you know you spent less than $40,000.

Again, I do laugh at the idea that Mercedes will be really 'brought down' by Chrysler. They've been cheapening themselves up pretty well lately without any help.

Don't blame Chrysler. Mercedes-Benz was "cheapening themselves up" (shouldn't that be DOWN?) for years before the "merger." The 1990 S-Class was the last "old school" Mercedes-Benz, back when they designed a car and then priced it. Which means that the first generation C-Class was among the first of these new cars and that was nearly half a decade BEFORE the merger. Anyone remember the problems with the first generation M-Class...which was a pre-merger vehicle as well.

[Robert Hall]

Don't blame Chrysler. Mercedes-Benz was "cheapening themselves up" (shouldn't that be DOWN?) for years before the "merger." The 1990 S-Class was the last "old school" Mercedes-Benz, back when they designed a car and then priced it. Which means that the first generation C-Class was among the first of these new cars and that was nearly half a decade BEFORE the merger. Anyone remember the problems with the first generation M-Class...which was a pre-merger vehicle as well.

Yes, those old W126 and W140s are the cars running for 250, 350k or more miles... the diesels even longer. That's back when M-B built their cars to be the best of the best..no cheapening of components. I love the '80s and early '90s Benzes...

[Flybrian]

Don't blame Chrysler. Mercedes-Benz was "cheapening themselves up" (shouldn't that be DOWN?) for years before the "merger." The 1990 S-Class was the last "old school" Mercedes-Benz, back when they designed a car and then priced it. Which means that the first generation C-Class was among the first of these new cars and that was nearly half a decade BEFORE the merger. Anyone remember the problems with the first generation M-Class...which was a pre-merger vehicle as well.

Oh, I realize this. I was making light of the fact that everyone does blame Chrysler and thier 'inferior' products with my "At least when a Chrysler..." statement.

[MyerShift]

Chrysler's quality in the late `90's was technically better than Mercedes-Benz.

Chrysler was striving to make changes and improve interiors before the takeover.

Take the previous generation Grand Cherokee. The materials on the interior are vastly better than in the current, new one. I blame Mercedes-Benz on this one. They make Chrysler cut back when they themselves stumble. Kind of like Ford and Volvo.

Chrysler may yet be the ones to save the company. Chrysler used to (hopefully still does) respond quickly to market changes.

All hail the Five-Pointed Star!

[Carguy]

Chrysler's quality in the late `90's was technically better than Mercedes-Benz.

Chrysler was striving to make changes and improve interiors before the takeover.

Take the previous generation Grand Cherokee. The materials on the interior are vastly better than in the current, new one. I blame Mercedes-Benz on this one. They make Chrysler cut back when they themselves stumble. Kind of like Ford and Volvo.

Chrysler may yet be the ones to save the company. Chrysler used to (hopefully still does) respond quickly to market changes.

All hail the Five-Pointed Star!

The only reason for this is because the GERMAN OVERLORDS under estimated the AMERICAN QUALITY to begin with! MB lost it a little for a while in their quality but their sales did not reflect that due to PERCEPTION and SNOB APPEAL. To bad OUR automakers dont have that ADVANTAGE!--------THANKS ALOT AMERICA BASHERS!!