What's new
Mopar Insiders Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Chrysler is here to stay

Is Mazda a premium brand?
It is trying to be with a price of a mainstream brand. Chrysler can start with this as an example. Premium build and quality at the cost of a mainstream. Time will take its course with the general public, and Chrysler then can change its general image.

Mazda is rumored to introduce in 2023 a RWD mid-size sedan. Yes, we would expect %10-15 price increase of the current model and FWD design. But it shows it can be done.
 
The only reason that Chrysler 200C would have out sold Guilia... is dealer network size plain and simple and PHEV would have sat on the lot collecting dust.

And at that it would command a lower margin then both the Alfa and a Dodge version.

On top of that could one imagine Chrysler customers dealing with finicky nature of a Semi-exotic.

Chrysler has not shifted it Demographic in a way Dodge has..... one has to understand the Tradition Luxury buyer or near Luxury buyer is a aging out. In the USA is meant Large, Soft ride, and highly appointed. The highly appointed has left the building as now everything from the high end jeep to economy oriented Compass can be had highly appointed. Large Sedan and Mid-Sized Sedans have been replaced with the SUV and CUV. And the taste for a soft ride has nearly gone to zero.

The reality is Chryslers primary Demographic is aging out, and trying to present it as a "Drivers" brand is in direct conflict with the Dodge who has successfully converted it demographic. Present itself as a Luxury SUV conflicts with Jeep. One can point to other Corporation making the transitions but generally they are single or double marketing brand companies.

Lefts face it this supposed rich history of the Chrysler brand is fallacy, It real history starting with it beginning is the slap some Chrome on another brands and that started with Maxwell. Through the years it was the largest model of the other brands with the best appointments and sometime the biggest powertrain. A brief time in the 90s it had some unique models but again they were in a currently dying segment but still high end Dodge of the ununited dealer network, the polar opposite of Plymouth. The PT cruiser meant to be the corner stone of a rebirth of the Plymouth brand, but was pulled the rug by the Germans, who frankly view the entire corporation as Plymouth and treated it as such. Look no further then the absolute horror or the penny pinched interiors.

The Empty Niche inside the Corporation is BEV and High automation and Tech. High tech segment. If there is a place for Chrysler to shift it Demographics it is here, and is in line with the people moving approach of the Minivan. Other wise it is Buick importing vehicles to fill the Niche that is aging out, with just enough margin and sales to warrant the logistics and rebranding.
 
Is Mazda a premium brand?
It is trying to be with a price of a mainstream brand. Chrysler can start with this as an example. Premium build and quality at the cost of a mainstream. Time will take its course with the general public, and Chrysler then can change its general image.

Mazda is rumored to introduce in 2023 a RWD mid-size sedan. Yes, we would expect %10-15 price increase of the current model and FWD design. But it shows it can be done.

Mazda is a single brand corporation with no toes to step on, no margin to eat in trying push a transition of demographic. The decision is easy what brand will the new vehicle be offered under. Mazda.

Ford facing similar decisions Lincoln or Ford.... Toyota- Lexus or Toyota .... Honda Acura or Honda..... Nissan Infiniti or Nissan ..... the only company close is GM which has a worse cluster of interwoven toe stomping.
 
Well said. That's exactly what I was eluding to as Chrysler becoming the hybrid/electric brand for North America. Peugeot/Citroen/DS models can easily be reskinned for the US market, but still maintain versatility and uniqueness.
This seems to be a 200 class replacement IFF that car segment stabilizes. The oil market will drive some of the changes - and IIRC there is an all E version of this that would have to be crash tested and modified for NA safety standards. Opel Insignia GS | Premium class | Opel Ireland

Otherwise, the Voyager and Pacifica are good for NA, and likely for EU as well. Jeep offers underpinnings for small Chrysler vehicles that appeal to non Jeep style buyers (Compass size would make good Chrysler if they can make the ride/height adjustments) and I agree with others, keep the 300 with the 80s style queues
I don't think Clown car is a appropriate characteristic. It is a A-Segment vehicle which is a niche size in the USA. Even GM with it massive dealer network could sell very many.

The real key is availability, and network size.

My daughter love theirs and was voted best car in her class.

But if one doesn't think PSA models are quirky one hasn't driven them. They are for sure.
The clown car comment is the comment I hear from those in my circle who see the vehicle. I've also heard roller-skate and death-trap (even though safety rating matches that of previous minivans). I have one person (family member) who purchased the car because it was unique - but after having it for a while - would love to dump it as it has been finicky, requests higher grade fuel, and the fad simply wore off. This surely is not the view of everyone, I see people who comment on that they are cute. I actually do not mind driving it other than the interior is not my style.
 
While the car market may be small in the North American market now. If Chrysler would have brought the 200C Concept styling to the Giulia's "Giorgio" architecture and offer an PHEV powertrain it would easily out-sold the Giulia here. Midsize RWD-based sedan...

The 200c interior is highly effective. The rotary dial shifter takes getting used to. But ergonomically it fits an average person well in the front seat. The rear is a little low - but why people harp on that so much (when most of the time you don't drive with more than 1 passenger if that) escapes me.
 
Would it have commanded the price premium that would justify that investment? Especially because PHEVs were more expensive to develop then...
I think they should've launched a midsize Doge sedan one or two years after the Giulia. They didn't do it.

And as Bili say, I am very skeptical about the upside potential of Chrysler. It does not have the perception of a premium brand in the US market. It just doesn't.
And other american premium brands face many challenges into growing their sales numbers and are constantly lambasted as failures.
Cadillac, Lincoln and Buick are always criticized as failures. I don't think that Chrysler would fare better than them, and to me this shows the limited market there is for another american luxury/premium brand.

Could they make Chrysler a Chevy and Ford competitor? Maybe... But I think Dodge has more chances of success in that regard.
Maybe they should just try to build the Apple car instead.
I think we have seen there are no shortage of critics. Apple had so many and people said why would I invest in a company that does not make a profit (Tesla) and does not produce a product (Google). It is easy to be a critic, it is bold to be an innovator and try to show people you do not want a faster/less sticky horse. You don't want a bigger walkman. You really can't use a digital yellow pages phone book....
 
Jeep offers underpinnings for small Chrysler vehicles that appeal to non Jeep style buyers (Compass size would make good Chrysler if they can make the ride/height adjustments) and I agree with others, keep the 300 with the 80s style queues
But that would require some re-engineering to reduce the weight requirement that comes with current Jeeps to get into what would be acceptable weight for fuel economy for something that doesn't need to go off-road. Experts can fill in the details, but the numbers I'm guessing are not small. Why go with SUSW/CUSW based Jeep derivative architecture if EMP2/derivatives already exist? Pretty sure they're lighter. The only issue I'm aware of technically is apparent lack of mechanical AWD support, but I don't see that being a problem especially if you design for electric RWD in the electrified versions.
 
It took some time for Walter Chrysler and his company to sort out the brands of Chrysler, DeSoto, and Dodge. Plymouth was always the bottom rung, an entry level brand. It had older features, smaller engines, and less flamboyance. The first Plymouth was a badge engineered Chrysler model, and there would be other Plymouth models through the years, which were also a previous year Chrysler with a new Plymouth front clip, interior and engine.

Some say DeSoto was created as ruse to convince the heirs to quit stalling and sell Dodge. In any case, they did sell and put Chrysler, the company, on a solid industrial footing. Dodge was more than a brand, it was a manufacturing powerhouse with foundries, machine shops and factories. Dodge gave Chrysler the capacity to build enough Plymouths to make that brand number 3 in sales from the Depression until the Forward Look era. Dodge, the brand, was absorbed with some indigestion. Dodge used different engines and came into the Chrysler house just as the corporation was phasing in the next generation of four main bearing six cylinder engines. The corporate straight eights were being changed as well. The first Chrysler engineered Dodges were placed above DeSoto.

DeSoto was on the rung above Plymouth and below Dodge in the early 1930s. They received racier styling than Plymouth along with six cylinder engines instead of the Plymouth fours. Dodge offered sixes and some large majestic eight cylinder models encroaching on the Chrysler brand position. The corporate brand arrangement was a work in progress as DeSoto briefly offered an eight as the Depression tightened its grip on the economy.

Then the Airflow happened. Every division except Chrysler was six cylinder only. The massive Chrysler Imperial Eights with the open body styles were dropped and replaced with the radically different Airflow cars. DeSoto shared the Chrysler Airflow bodies on shorter wheelbases and powered by six cylinder engines. All DeSotos were Airflows, while the six cylinder Chrysler models had more conventional styling. DeSoto sales remained low until that division received some conventionally styled models, but the DeSoto brand climbed above Dodge on the corporate ladder until the bitter end.

Imperial was a premium Chrysler model and not a separate brand. Before the Airflow a Chrysler Imperial would approach the Cadillac, Lincoln and Packard price range, but the Chrysler division would not compete directly against the luxury makes except for Limousines. It wasn't until Imperial became a separate brand in the 1950s that it would compete against the luxury brands. Let me interject here, luxury is not the right word to use, the correct term is prestige. Cadillacs and Lincolns had prestige because they offered large multi-cylinder engines under long hoods while Imperials were only sixes and straight eights. It wasn't until the Hemi V8 that the Imperial was prestigious. A Limousine was not necessarily prestigious, because during those years prior to Imperial as a separate division, cities like New York required taxis had to be limo length and be able to accommodate steamship trunks. Because of these requirements all the Chrysler brands offered long wheelbase models. Plymouth offered LWB sedans until the war years. Dodge dropped their LWB model after 1952 while DeSotos went a year longer. Cadillac and Packard also offered taxi models. It was mostly DeSoto and Checker owning the LWB taxi market after Plymouths dropped its long sedans. Plymouth sedans would lend themselves to the shorter taxis in middle American cities for decades after.

When Imperial separated from Chrysler, the Chrysler brand would reach into DeSoto's price territory. Meanwhile Dodge was reaching up from below. This killed the DeSoto brand. That was sixty years ago. Meanwhile the elites started driving imports eschewing the domestic brands. Imperial failed as a brand and its final models were rebadged as Chryslers. Then everything was downsized. During the K-car era Chryslers were often badge engineered Plymouths. It wasn't until the Camelot like early years of Auburn Hills that Chrysler would once again reach higher with the LH sedans.

Today Chrysler as a brand with only two models competes against Cadillac, Lexus and Lincoln. This is not because Chrysler is reaching upward again, it is because these former luxury brands went down market as the sedan market collapsed. The Chrysler Pacifica offers appointments that better the smaller Cadillac and Lincoln Crossovers, despite the Chrysler being a minivan. Today the well heeled elites either drive high end trucks or Teslas depending on their political leaning. Trucks and minivans can be absolutely luxurious. Can these same vehicles have prestige among buyers? Tesla has prestige, but isn't very luxurious. Yes Tesla has a lot of tech, but that is a cheap but pricey substitute for a pleasant interior ambiance.

Chrysler, as a brand, should follow the example of Ram Trucks. Not by selling pickups, but by selling compelling products that rise above the bland offerings of competitive makes. The Pacifica does this, but the feat has to repeated in the arenas where the customers flock to.
 
Last edited:
But that would require some re-engineering to reduce the weight requirement that comes with current Jeeps to get into what would be acceptable weight for fuel economy for something that doesn't need to go off-road. Experts can fill in the details, but the numbers I'm guessing are not small. Why go with SUSW/CUSW based Jeep derivative architecture if EMP2/derivatives already exist? Pretty sure they're lighter. The only issue I'm aware of technically is apparent lack of mechanical AWD support, but I don't see that being a problem especially if you design for electric RWD in the electrified versions.

Worst than that....

You build a Chrysler CUV on compass capacity you suffer a loss plus the development cost. You have one less Jeep to sell, to sell a Chrysler at a diminished margin. This what management suffers when making the decision. To put Chrysler in that market you have to chose to lose revenue. Which is irresponsible. The only way Chrysler works is where there is excess capacity, and a cost structure to manufacture is less..... UNLESS you can come up with another value structure that pushes the margin up around comparable margin of another brand.

It simple for people on forum .... to say do this and do that. Especially to keep it favorite sports team, I mean brand, living. But if your a person responsible to share holders, investors, and ultimately a large network of employees and suppliers dependent on your health. You cannot make decision based on passionate intangibles. The fact is every rebadged Chrysler is a margin loser to other branding and that is specifically why the models have dried up. And it not form lack of consideration or product development. Many have made it to the implementation stage and were still born.

Chrysler cannot be just rebadged models even with PSA, it must find a new niche or is just Buick. Which is ok but not a long term play
 
Today Chrysler as a brand with only two models competes against Cadillac, Lexus and Lincoln. This is not because Chrysler is reaching upward again, it is because these former luxury brands went down market as the sedan market collapsed. The Chrysler Pacifica offers appointments that better the smaller Cadillac and Lincoln Crossovers, despite the Chrysler being a minivan. Today the well heeled elites either drive high end trucks or Teslas depending on their political leaning. Trucks and minivans can be absolutely luxurious. Can these same vehicles have prestige among buyers. Tesla has prestige, but isn't very luxurious. Yes Tesla has a lot of tech, but that is a cheap but pricey substitute for a pleasant interior ambiance.

Chrysler, as a brand, should follow the example of Ram Trucks. Not by selling pickups, but by selling compelling products that rise above the bland offerings of competitive makes. The Pacifica does this, but the feat has to repeated in the arenas where the customers flock to.

There's one obvious area that Chrysler can get into, by leveraging the successful Pacifica. EVs. Cut all the legacy ICE and completely transform it into the EV brand of the group.
Launch a midsize sedan at a sensible price. Launch a people moving crossover at a decent price. In essence, look at VW's EV plans for the US and go after that.
 
It simple for people on forum .... to say do this and do that. Especially to keep it favorite sports team, I mean brand, living. But if your a person responsible to share holders, investors, and ultimately a large network of employees and suppliers dependent on your health. You cannot make decision based on passionate intangibles. The fact is every rebadged Chrysler is a margin loser to other branding and that is specifically why the models have dried up. And it not form lack of consideration or product development. Many have made it to the implementation stage and were still born.

Chrysler cannot be just rebadged models even with PSA, it must find a new niche or is just Buick. Which is ok but not a long term play
Certainly. On the opposite side of that coin, I don't have a problem supporting AR staying in the US while driving a Dodge Challenger and a WK Jeep. It seems like a brand with a history and international potential. Some of the detractors of expanding AR act like the world is getting poorer, let alone this country. With OECD predicting a consistent GDP growth rate to double by 2058, investing in a brand like AR looks like a good call from my admittedly limited perspective.

That is true for "rebadging" and generally not a good idea in an ever-shrinking market. Not a fan. But that's not what I'm getting at, which is stuff that's not directly competing against Jeep: road biased vehicles that don't have Jeep's fuel economy tradeoffs, and are not just "badge engineered" whatever, be it a Peugeot, Citroën, Opel, AR, Fiat, Jeep, or Dodge.
 
There's one obvious area that Chrysler can get into, by leveraging the successful Pacifica. EVs. Cut all the legacy ICE and completely transform it into the EV brand of the group.
Launch a midsize sedan at a sensible price. Launch a people moving crossover at a decent price. In essence, look at VW's EV plans for the US and go after that.
Really, in the immediate terms, PHEVs would make as much sense for the larger vehicles on this side of the big pond. If you're going on any sort of trip in the next decade, a midsize or larger PHEV crossover or minivan is a no-brainer.
 
There's one obvious area that Chrysler can get into, by leveraging the successful Pacifica. EVs. Cut all the legacy ICE and completely transform it into the EV brand of the group.
Launch a midsize sedan at a sensible price. Launch a people moving crossover at a decent price. In essence, look at VW's EV plans for the US and go after that.

No way anyone in there right mind launches a Mid-sized sedan in this currently climate. It be better to take money a flush it down the toilet to watch is swirl.
 
Certainly. On the opposite side of that coin, I don't have a problem supporting AR staying in the US while driving a Dodge Challenger and a WK Jeep. It seems like a brand with a history and international potential. Some of the detractors of expanding AR act like the world is getting poorer, let alone this country. With OECD predicting a consistent GDP growth rate to double by 2058, investing in a brand like AR looks like a good call from my admittedly limited perspective.

That is true for "rebadging" and generally not a good idea in an ever-shrinking market. Not a fan. But that's not what I'm getting at, which is stuff that's not directly competing against Jeep: road biased vehicles that don't have Jeep's fuel economy tradeoffs, and are not just "badge engineered" whatever, be it a Peugeot, Citroën, Opel, AR, Fiat, Jeep, or Dodge.

I think it would be wise to use the worldwide and lower cost manufacturing site to fill in the gap while trying to transform the Demographic to high margin and a longer term play then the Buikization. Even before the merger I was a advocate of the Tipo making the showrooms, and now with the Cross version it seems to be a no brainer. Pick the closest PSA model to NA taste, which probably is Opel, rebadge and equip the interior and bridge the gap until more products can be developed in the High Tech People movement Niche. Keep the investment low using parts bin components limited to front grill inserts and rear lighting.

This a practical bridge, and I do mean worldwide. If the USA doesn't get a model offered in other parts of the world as a Chrysler for some sort of pollical or sociological reason when other brands like Buick and Volvo are doing it, I find that just sad.
 
But that would require some re-engineering to reduce the weight requirement that comes with current Jeeps to get into what would be acceptable weight for fuel economy for something that doesn't need to go off-road. Experts can fill in the details, but the numbers I'm guessing are not small. Why go with SUSW/CUSW based Jeep derivative architecture if EMP2/derivatives already exist? Pretty sure they're lighter. The only issue I'm aware of technically is apparent lack of mechanical AWD support, but I don't see that being a problem especially if you design for electric RWD in the electrified versions.
Good point, the platform portfolio just expanded.
 
I don't want a crossover with only a motorcycle motor in it. Any product imported with a Chrysler badge had better be ready for North American driving conditions and consumer tastes, or it will be a stake pounded in the heart for the brand. I don't care where it is built. I've said this often, Americans love imports, but hate foreign cars.

Jeep does offer the GSE-T 1.3 in its smaller models, but that turbo Firefly engine acquits itself by the low end torque it produces. I'm not necessarily against small displacement engines. I am against slapping a grill on something and calling it a day, which GM has done too many times.

With the advent of electrification, small displacement engines work well when combined with electric motors. If a Chrysler crossover appears in the showroom with a three cylinder Firefly engine, an eFlite transaxle, and a rear electric axle, that could be suitable for our market, if the engineering people here have a chance to test and refine it for our market.

Don't forget both the Cimmaron and Catera we offered to fill in and buy time until a proper Cadillac model could be built
 
I don't want a crossover with only a motorcycle motor in it. Any product imported with a Chrysler badge had better be ready for North American driving conditions and consumer tastes, or it will be a stake pounded in the heart for the brand. I don't care where it is built. I've said this often, Americans love imports, but hate foreign cars.

Jeep does offer the GSE-T 1.3 in its smaller models, but that turbo Firefly engine acquits itself by the low end torque it produces. I'm not necessarily against small displacement engines. I am against slapping a grill on something and calling it a day, which GM has done too many times.

With the advent of electrification, small displacement engines work well when combined with electric motors. If a Chrysler crossover appears in the showroom with a three cylinder Firefly engine, an eFlite transaxle, and a rear electric axle, that could be suitable for our market, if the engineering people here have a chance to test and refine it for our market.

Don't forget both the Cimmaron and Catera we offered to fill in and buy time until a proper Cadillac model could be built

This is a odd thing.... we have a small margin Brand. Literally the only thing it can sell is Minivans. They sell what 2 300 per dealer per month and way less of transaction then the Charger that has versions north $80K.

So the company struggles with anything to fill the lineup. The Brand is literally on life support, if anything Fiat PSA should have done WPC and slapped their name on Cars and claim it as their brand. Now all of sudden one can afford to be picky.

If one wants to be selective on what can carry the name they might as well kill it. Selling product to make brand viable at loss isn't a option. Be picky at the brands own risk.
 
According to statements made by Mr. Tavares during his Detroit visit, nothing will happen to the Chrysler brand until a new leader is chosen and that person makes an acceptable business case for each new product. I have not received any phone calls as of this moment. Is the Auburn Hills facility even on a bus line? If not, that would be a deal breaker for me.

It seems to me if the Pacifica really is a slow seller, a vehicle based on the Portal concept could go into Windsor. There already is a plugin drivetrain for that platform.
 
Last edited:
No way anyone in there right mind launches a Mid-sized sedan in this currently climate. It be better to take money a flush it down the toilet to watch is swirl.
Tesla launched the Model 3 and they're doing quite well. Anything EV has market right now.
 
Back
Top