Chrysler CEO Takes Future As Brand Turns 100

Chrysler CEO Takes Future As Brand Turns 100​

Christine Feuell Outlines Chrysler’s Roadmap In Milestone Year​

As Chrysler approaches its historic 100th birthday, speculation about the future of the brand continues to swirl. But according to Chrysler CEO Christine Feuell, there’s no need to worry.

In an interview with the Detroit Free Press, Feuell pushed back on constant rumors that the iconic American brand could be on the chopping block under Stellantis, the company that formed in 2021 after the merger of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) and France’s PSA Group.

Chrysler CEO Takes Future As Brand Turns 100

Chrysler CEO Christine Feuell reassures fans about the brand's future as it celebrates its 100th anniversary in a recent interview.

moparinsiders.com

 

[TripleT]

Medium is too small for the USA marker CUSW is not the far of the Large, expect the Large to be next minivan. Once this occurs it could be offered elsewhere. Europe does not really embrace that size vehicle as a van although it could be offered, where it would work is China.

 

[patfromigh]

Medium is too small for the USA marker CUSW is not the far of the Large, expect the Large to be next minivan. Once this occurs it could be offered elsewhere. Europe does not really embrace that size vehicle as a van although it could be offered, where it would work is China.

There are 3 van platforms. They are different from the car platforms. I'm not including the ProMaster Rapid sold in Latin America in this. The large van platform is what the Ram ProMaster uses.

I stated in my post the CUSW based van platform is gone. It has been replaced by a new and different platform.

Learn more about the medium platform here. Ram’s Future Van: E-Scudo to Lead the Charge in U.S. Market

We might learn more about the Stellantis Pro One initiative on June 8, because Ram Trucks is part of that.

 

[TripleT]

There are 3 van platforms. They are different from the car platforms. I'm not including the ProMaster Rapid sold in Latin America in this. The large van platform is what the Ram ProMaster uses.

I stated in my post the CUSW based van platform is gone. It has been replaced by a new and different platform.

Learn more about the medium platform here. Ram’s Future Van: E-Scudo to Lead the Charge in U.S. Market

We might learn more about the Stellantis Pro One initiative on June 8, because Ram Trucks is part of that.

Large as in STLA Large not in Physical size. Those Vans are very commercial and drive and feel like commercial vehicles. Have experience with them in the EU.

The Pacifica is a premium product and belongs on a premium platform. That doesn't mean those vehicles shouldn't be offered as RAMs that should be. But not so much Chryslers.

Not a fan of Medium platform... wish the SUSW was the bases of the next gen not the severally limit PSA hand me down.

 

[BWS1]

Chrysler niche as luxury domestic Sedans ... DIED... especially when Dumbler made it Plymouth. Aside, from this time the 90s Chrysler for the most part was a fancy version more mainstream brands like Maxwell, Plymouth, Desoto, Dodge, hell one was even a Eagle.

Look at what Vbon pointed at... All just Equipment levels of other branded care .. Labaron - Aries or Lancer depending on the year, 300M - the was a Eagle. PT Cruiser - Plymouth, Concorde - Intrepid... Town and Country -Voyager or Caravan. Sebring -Stratus or Avenger.... The 300 was sell less per dealer the Fiat 500 which was under 2

PLEASE this doesn't mean I don't like Chrysler .... it just mean we have to realistic. It not Monopoly money. Nostalgia is not a ROI. All cars are well equipped these days. Slapping Wire wheels, overstuffed seats, chrome grill, and landau roof appeals to no one in the vast market these days.

They need to find profitable niche in NA. Pretending the Chrysler was something it not doesn't help is just fan fiction.

I'd suggest high tech, high comfort, People movers.

The semi-annual lecture about what Chrysler never was, is, or will be. Thanks. You and Alexa won a long time ago. They don’t need to bring it back. They killed it. Let it die. The ones like me will go search out a real 300 letter car from old or a pristine C body and enjoy them. But please , save the pompous lecture. It’s old now.

 

[Mopar426]

Glass half full = They were going to go all in as Chrysler the EV tech brand, kinda, as long as it wasn't a SUV, truck or car that remotely competed with anything else they made under the Stellantis banner ( the real issue ). Then the EV fad burned out and now they really dont know what to do with Chrysler except to just bring the 300 back.

 

[TripleT]

Glass half full = They were going to go all in as Chrysler the EV tech brand, kinda, as long as it wasn't a SUV, truck or car that remotely competed with anything else they made under the Stellantis banner ( the real issue ). Then the EV fad burned out and now they really dont know what to do with Chrysler except to just bring the 300 back.

EV fad didn't end, it never was, at least the steep adoption curve that the product planners hoped, regulators wanted to enforce, or the green movement anticipated.

That doesn't mean it still isn't growing and is a vital part of market share. The top selling car in the World and forth best selling car in the USA is a EV. That is a massive amount of market share just punted to in the parlance of established automakers is basically a start up.

If STLA choose to ignore it like some here are projecting their own personal desires unto to market and use the previously mentioned overreach as confirmation bias, STLA will continue to lose market share as it continues to be a important part of the market that STLA especially in USA is massively behind.

Where is a Chrysler product even sniffing a the Top ten let alone the top 4? 300 a Nostalgia car hit a styling dead end with the slow death of the near-Luxury sedan, sales were just sad, no way justifying a ROI. But that should be the new plan.

But we are here saying the STLA should NOT have a competitor in one of few growing segments and NOT playing against the Top selling car in the world?

Sounds like suicide to me. How about still competing but with smart option that they Y doesn't offer or likely never will. a REV?

 

[patfromigh]

If STLA choose to ignore it like some here are projecting their own personal desires unto to market and use the previously mentioned overreach as confirmation bias, STLA will continue to lose market share as it continues to be a important part of the market that STLA especially in USA is massively behind.

But we are here saying the STLA should NOT have a competitor in one of few growing segments and NOT playing against the Top selling car in the world?

Sounds like suicide to me. How about still competing but with smart option that they Y doesn't offer or likely never will. a REV?

It appears to me that Stellantis in North America isn't ignoring the current market dynamics, it's more like they simply aren't paying close attention. I offer the lack of offering a range extender option as proof of this. (As you pointed out.) With all the recent management changes in the Stellantis universe, I don't know what the current status of Leap Motors in the organization is, but they now have vehicles in production which offer a range extender. The managers in the Stellantis Ivory Tower should be aware of this fact. Toyota made their electrification plans public a year ago and are currently rolling out actual products. Some of these new products have pure battery electric drives, while other vehicles will have a generational leap in plugin hybrid technology.

This is strictly my opinion based on personal observation, but the reason that the plugin vehicles from CDJR don't sell is their marketing is an ongoing disaster. The engineering focus was misdirected by the previous CEO and the result is the present day Charger Daytona debacle. Focussing exclusively on battery electric drive while decimating the engineering ranks kneecapped mild and plugin hybrid development. The Pacifica's hybrid system became stagnant and was leapfrogged by Ford, Toyota, and the Koreans.

Getting back to the Chrysler brand specifically, the Halcyon concept and the Charger Daytona EV have one thing in common. Nobody asked for this. In the Charger's case it is overpriced and overweight. There is nothing Chrysler about the Halcyon. In a typical Marxist maneuver, it is a rebuke and total break with the past. On the other end of the spectrum would be a Chrysler 300 based on the new Charger, it will fail because the idea is well past its sell by date.

The Chrysler concepts we stood up and saluted are the Citadel and the Chrysler 200. Although the Citadel concept was introduced over 25 years ago, amazingly Honda thought it was fresh enough to copy some of the elements for an upcoming EV, while an unnamed Chinese brand will be using a descendent of the hybrid system, but with an e-axle in the rear instead of the mechanical driveshaft of the concept. The Chrysler 200C concept, which toured the auto show circuit in 2009, demonstrates what a battery electric Chrysler sedan should be, a contemporary design that retains the brand's DNA. It and the other CDJ plugin concepts on the auto show tour featured a range extended electric drive. This technology is what supports the New Energy Vehicle initiative in East Asia.

If I ran the circus, Chrysler would be a people mover brand as was proposed before all the net zero craziness, but with a new energy twist under the hood.

 

[TripleT]

It appears to me that Stellantis in North America isn't ignoring the current market dynamics, it's more like they simply aren't paying close attention. I offer the lack of offering a range extender option as proof of this. (As you pointed out.) With all the recent management changes in the Stellantis universe, I don't know what the current status of Leap Motors in the organization is, but they now have vehicles in production which offer a range extender. The managers in the Stellantis Ivory Tower should be aware of this fact. Toyota made their electrification plans public a year ago and are currently rolling out actual products. Some of these new products have pure battery electric drives, while other vehicles will have a generational leap in plugin hybrid technology.

This is strictly my opinion based on personal observation, but the reason that the plugin vehicles from CDJR don't sell is their marketing is an ongoing disaster. The engineering focus was misdirected by the previous CEO and the result is the present day Charger Daytona debacle. Focussing exclusively on battery electric drive while decimating the engineering ranks kneecapped mild and plugin hybrid development. The Pacifica's hybrid system was stagnant and was leapfrogged by Ford, Toyota, and the Koreans.

Getting back to the Chrysler brand specifically, the Halcyon concept and the Charger Daytona EV have one thing in common. Nobody asked for this. In the Charger's case it is overpriced and overweight. There is nothing Chrysler about the Halcyon. In a typical Marxist maneuver, it is a rebuke and total break with the past. On the other end of the spectrum a Chrysler 300 based on the new Charger will fail because the idea is well past its sell by date.

The Chrysler concepts we stood up and saluted are the Citadel and the Chrysler 200. Although the Citadel concept was introduced over 25 years ago, amazingly Honda thought it was fresh enough to copy some of the elements for an upcoming EV, while an unnamed Chinese brand will be using a descendent of the hybrid system, but with an e-axle in the rear instead of the mechanical driveshaft of the concept. The Chrysler 200C concept which toured the auto show circuit in 2009 demonstrates what a battery electric Chrysler sedan should be, a contemporary design that retains the brand's DNA. It and the other CDJ plugin concepts on the auto show tour featured a range extended electric drive. This technology is what supports the New Energy Vehicle initiative in East Asia.

If I ran the circus, Chrysler would be a people mover brand as was proposed before all the net zero craziness, but with a new energy twist under the hood.

I would GO DIRECTLY AT the Y. But with REV. Tall Car, Fastback (which I personally hate) CUV, STLA large short.. Full EV and REV run by the 2.0 or even the 1.3.

Maybe that is what is planned, if so show it, and get the show on the road.

Plan is simple ... why it hard you got me.

Pacifica - add more classic but sporty style STLA large large. 3 powertrains Hybrid, EV, and REV ... no pure ice waste of money in this class.

ChrYsler - maybe call 200 whatever - Tall Car Fastback CUV STLA Large Short. EV and REV only. make sure it is tall not swoopy.

Portal - Upright MPV STLA medium Punch Hybrid and EV... 2 Row and 3 Row. But very upright so package narrow but comfortable seating otherwise. Give it some old school minivan feel, removable seats on the rail system shown for the truck. So the seating option is just that a option that can even be leased or bought latter.

If they need a Halo car.... 200ish basically a USA version of Alfa sedan with a formal grill, assembled here. Honestly top version the Pacifica should be the Halo car.

Fast impractical and low belongs to Dodge.

As for value brand give Fiat to every dealer in good standing. 500, Panda, and Tipo

 

[Hemidakota]

Sorry, Bob, I’m done waiting. I now have a second Chrysler 300, a fully loaded 2018 model with 34,000 miles, and I'm currently addressing the glue adhesive issues with the panels (thanks to Johnson Controls’ ineptitude). Once that’s resolved, I’m selling it. I need a car with self-driving capability and more advanced driver assistance features. I can’t keep waiting on promises that will never materialize.

 

[Hemidakota]

I would have purchased the next 300 Manta Ray design if they had built it. Besides, Chrysler needs to return to its engineering grass roots.

 

[patfromigh]

I would GO DIRECTLY AT the Y. But with REV. Tall Car, Fastback (which I personally hate) CUV, STLA large short.. Full EV and REV run by the 2.0 or even the 1.3.

I think they should give the hatch back design of the 1980's LeBaron GTS and Dodge Shadow / Plymouth Sundance twins another chance. I'm referring to the hatch itself not the styling for the rest of the vehicle. North America is pretty much stuck with the 1.6L EP6. The tooling is installed in Dundee. Rumor has it the 2 liter GME EVO will also have a hybrid version as well.

Definite yes on the Portal. Hopefully the Trump tariffs will keep the Punch transmission out of North America. Since the STLA platforms are multi energy the Chrysler brand should offer BEV and ReEV as the primary options where practical. The smaller vehicles can get by with a hybrid drive replacing the front e-drive with the rest still using some of the EV battery pack and rear e-axle.

While not meant to be a halo vehicle, I still think a Chrysler passenger version of the Scudo van would be modern version of the pre-1984 Plymouth Voyager.

 

[redriderbob]

 

[TripleT]

Sorry, Bob, I’m done waiting. I now have a second Chrysler 300, a fully loaded 2018 model with 34,000 miles, and I'm currently addressing the glue adhesive issues with the panels (thanks to Johnson Controls’ ineptitude). Once that’s resolved, I’m selling it. I need a car with self-driving capability and more advanced driver assistance features. I can’t keep waiting on promises that will never materialize.

I have a 4xE JGC Summit.... Better seating position than 300, more room an cargo, Level 2 autonomy, air suspension, better in the snow, one of the nicest interior ever done by Mopar, self parking, are the safety gimmicks, awesome sound system, faster then Eagle car, can drive 25 mile without using any gas. Truly a wonderful luxury vehicle.

Truly more luxurious than any Chrysler ever made, And I frankly not sure what promises one is talking about, there was a new 300 at the implementation stage, it would have ridden on the CUSW likely sourced in Brampton. When the Lincoln Continental failed, it was killed, not by STLA by FCA.

 

[TripleT]

I would have purchased the next 300 Manta Ray design if they had built it. Besides, Chrysler needs to return to its engineering grass roots.

Pretty sure the Mantra Ray was the concept for CUSW vehicle





Right in the same wheel house... Massive failure.

 

[XRT2SRT]

I would cull the Grand Wagoneer/Wagoneer L from JEEP and position them under CHRYSLER (as an Imperialistic B series X of the future) immediately after reintroducing the next 300 (LB/LB+) sedan(s). Leaving the lesser Wagoneer to soldier on as the top JEEP (redesigned). From there, add STLA-M cuv/sedan and convertible called CUDA. Design, stling and content must match or exceed that of the best in class, globally!

 

[TripleT]

And now you don’t get the Job the L was one the best selling vehicle in STLA North America …. Risking that in brand loyalty to only exists in few die hards would be suicide …. My guess they would sell less than a 1/4 and at nearly no margin

 

[Mopar426]

Just because a Tesla sells well doesn't mean thats going to translate to a Chrysler, IMO it would do even worse than the EV Charger. Tesla sold well because of brand prestige, they even ate Mercedes lunch. Now bringing back their engineering prowess is something (mentioned above). Why aren't they taking their van-equity and turning it into something bigger? Look at all the soccer moms driving 100K SUV's. They could offer a REV van or CUV that could blow the ritzy SUVs out of the water in the people mover dept. Especially if they tie creature comforts into the battery pack and inverter. Stow and go? How about it turns into a lounging area where mom can watch Netflix with cold AC while the kids are in piano class. They need to get creative again.

 

[TripleT]

Just because a Tesla sells well doesn't mean thats going to translate to a Chrysler, IMO it would do even worse than the EV Charger. Tesla sold well because of brand prestige, they even ate Mercedes lunch. Now bringing back their engineering prowess is something (mentioned above). Why aren't they taking their van-equity and turning it into something bigger? Look at all the soccer moms driving 100K SUV's. They could offer a REV van or CUV that could blow the ritzy SUVs out of the water in the people mover dept. Especially if they tie creature comforts into the battery pack and inverter. Stow and go? How about it turns into a lounging area where mom can watch Netflix with cold AC while the kids are in piano class. They need to get creative again.

Really not the point the point is that people say the class is dying it is not, the Y is the best selling car in the world. That they have NO offering in that range is MIND Boggling. Selling people on EV muscle is a stretch, even the EV muscle Tesla's are modestly sold but a high margin. A quick, efficient, cost effective, and usefull Mid-Sized CUV with like you said cool packaging for the interior. That is the wheel house.... AND FOR GOD SAKES yes make REV version, be ahead and a leader again. Tesla won't but be dang sure GM and Ford are working it.

When you look through the TOP 10 Vehicles aside form Pickups STLA is missing in nearly each class. Now much of the just pure poor launch commitment and idle capacity. Again we like to nit pick on individual products but NA biggest issue is lack of any product to sell. WagoneerS ahead of KM..Donk. ChargerEV first...DONK ... Brampton idle because new Compass doesn't have NA or any STLA medium has NA appropriate powertrain DONK. RAMPAGE on dead NA platform DONK... Idle Belvedere DONK ..... DONK DONK DONK DONK..... finally entering the EV market isn't a DONK being so late to party is. but REV ahead of the field would help... but with so many donks I not confident.

 

[patfromigh]

Toyota had a DONK with their BZ4X. It was pretty lackluster and had a weird name. The regular customers just couldn't relate to it and EV buyers could find better toys elsewhere. Now a few years later Toyota is back in the game with the BZ series along with an all-electric C-HR. The "Beezy" name is cute rather than the hard to remember BZ4X confusion. The drive-trains are improved and there is an entry level front wheel drive with a smaller battery pack and motor. The mileage range has improved greatly across the lineup. The styling has been toned down and there is a range topping BZ Woodland with 375 hp from front and rear e-drive units. Don't call it a station wagon, although that's what it is.

It was the early adopters that drove the EV"s exponential sales growth until last year. They're gone now. In a way it was a fad, but now the cold harsh reality of how does an auto maker sell battery electric drive to real people. The answer is by listening to the customers. Toyota does this fairly well, but Stellantis is doomed. Another thing Toyota does well is using EV hardware in their hybrids sharing investment costs across a larger number of products.

 

[TripleT]

Toyota had a DONK with their BZ4X. It was pretty lackluster and had a weird name. The regular customers just couldn't relate to it and EV buyers could find better toys elsewhere. Now a few years later Toyota is back in the game with the BZ series along with an all-electric C-HR. The "Beezy" name is cute rather than the hard to remember BZ4X confusion. The drive-trains are improved and there is an entry level front wheel drive with a smaller battery pack and motor. The mileage range has improved greatly across the lineup. The styling has been toned down and there is a range topping BZ Woodland with 375 hp from front and rear e-drive units. Don't call it a station wagon, although that's what it is.

It was the early adopters that drove the EV"s exponential sales growth until last year. They're gone now. In a way it was a fad, but now the cold harsh reality of how does an auto maker sell battery electric drive to real people. The answer is by listening to the customers. Toyota does this fairly well, but Stellantis is doomed. Another thing Toyota does well is using EV hardware in their hybrids sharing investment costs across a larger number of products.

They cannot just punt, it is suicide. They have to re-engage in meaningful manner. Toyota has been pragmatic which should be no surprise.

STLA went from 0- to total commitment... the opposite of pragmatic. and haven't actual launched anything but the EV Charger that after 18month should have been perfect, but a lovely as it is seems unfinished. Its not a bad idea to launch and adjust.