What’s Going On with the Chrysler Brand?

What’s Going On with the Chrysler Brand?​

A Legacy at 100, But What's Next?​

Chrysler is turning 100 on June 6, 2025, yet there has been little fanfare surrounding this milestone. Once a cornerstone of American automotive innovation, the brand has been reduced to just one vehicle in its lineup—the Chrysler Pacifica—two if you count the budget-friendly Voyager (Grand Caravan in Canada). While other Stellantis brands, such as Dodge, Jeep®, and Ram, continue introducing new models and performance variants, Chrysler remains in limbo with no significant updates.

What's Going On with the Chrysler Brand?

Chrysler is turning 100 on June 6, 2025, yet there has been little fanfare surrounding this milestone. Once a cornerstone of American automotive innovation, the brand has been reduced to just one vehicle in its lineup—the Chrysler Pacifica—two if you count the budget-friendly Voyager (Grand...

moparinsiders.com

 

[redriderbob]

Interesting conversation folks. And all pie in the sky. As I’ve said before several times, and oh how it pains me to say, Chrysler is gone. This outfit is bleeding, and there will be no resources dedicated to resurrecting Chrysler. And no don’t sell it to the ChiComms. Let it go away with some dignity. And brace yourself. Up next - Dodge.

100% wrong!!!

 

[cygnus]

@redriderbob is the next Durango still a go?

 

[cygnus]

Anything named that would be an instant flop in today's market. The would appeal to my parents and spouses' parent but are not buying new cars because they think their driving days are over.

I will agree that Chrysler cannot / should not use the LeBaron name on any upcoming vehicles.

 

[Mike201]

Can’t agree Chrysler should be all BEV/EV. I honestly don’t think there is enough demand for EV’s for Chrysler to survive with all new vehicles at the same time. Tesla owns the market and coming in with all new EV’s to a brand that has been quiet for almost a decade won’t work. Offer all new vehicles in both ICE and EV’s. Once Chrysler gets back in the game again, cut back on the ICE vehicles, like Caddy did.
The loyal Chrysler buyers are mostly older folks, who don’t want to deal with EV’s. Get them back, make nice vehicles that not only attract the older crowd, get the family’s, middle age. Most younger Mopar gear heads drive Dodges. When they get older they stay brand loyal and end up in a Chrysler.

 

[Mike201]

Is it really? Most of Chryslers "Iconic" history is of being a Trim Level of Dodges and Plymouths.

Founded as repurposed Maxwell.

As for EU brands getting attention... REALLY? Basicaslly it is all the same old car with different Coachwork. Lancia has been ignored for over a decade, Fiats best selling car didn't get an ICE model. Opel is just plainer versions of Peugeot. Vauxhall the same. Citroen ugly versions sort stuff. So not sure that is correct assestment.

If I remember correctly, Walter P. Chrysler was already established with his own brand when he bought Maxwell. Maxwell became Plymouth.
I also thought Chrysler, until recently was the top of the line and Plymouth and Dodge were the stripped-down, low-cost Chryslers? Not that Chrysler started as low value Plymouths and Dodges and trim was slapped on to upgrade them as Chrysler's, has been noted here many times by many commenters.

 

[BWS1]

100% wrong!!!

Then show me something, anything, Anywhere, to prove otherwise . How many more years go by before some
Real iron hits the road. I believed in the resurrection rumors and promises in 20,21,22,23,24. I’m all out of believing . Who and how many are working in Auburn Hills to pull this off? Jeep and Ram will hang around as long as they show the return . The rest is a pipe dream.

 

[vbondjr1]

BWS1 may have a point about Chrysler being dropped due to the fact that outside of the Minivan, the Chrysler brand doesn't have anything relevant. They scrapped a fairly decent design with the airflow and then came out with that Halycon thing and the only thing that looks good on that is the wheels. Stellantis is putting in effort into the Dodge brand at least so I don't see that brand going anywhere for awhile. I talk alot about repurposing the brands and all, but the flip side of that coin is that just like Plymouth got merged into Chrysler, if Chrysler fades, Jeep has already positioned itself to step in as the Mopar luxury brand. A Grand Cherokee has more luxury than any Chrysler-badged product as does the Grand Wagoneer and Jeep sells in volume, As does Ram. Dodge still has three models but is suffering from trying to get back on their feet after Carlos destroyed everything but I think they'll be okay. The Durango is about to get a refresh and the Charger is going to do well once the six pack cars are on the streets and we all know a V8 will be back in short order under the hood of something so that will make alot of people happy. The hornet needs a bit of tweaking but it's not the worst thing out there. Personally, I'd lower it and remove the hybrid system out of it, drop in a 305hp 3.6L Pentastar V6 with a performance rear biased AWD system, but that's just me.

 

[cgseller]

Chrysler should be the only brand in the portfolio that has EVs. The EV Charger is a flop and the EV Wagoneer S is a flop. The Recon EV will also be a flop. Dodge and Jeep owners do not want full BEV.

It would have been unique for Chrysler to have its own unique BEV offerings for STLA Large, with uniquely design interior and infotainment.

By the way, what I’ve described is essentially what GM has done with Cadillac.

This would be at least a suscient strategy

RAM REV delayed - make it a Chrysler (at least initially) (actually would rather say Chrysler Ramcharger than Ram 1500 Ramcharger)
4 door BEV sedan - make it a Chrysler over a Dodge Charger 4door
Minivan - keep i t a Chrysler BEV or ReEV. (and let the ICE people go to Toyota or Kia if they keep an ICE) You could always do a RAM Minivan again for ICErs
Jeep Cherokee* - EV version is a more plush ride EV (even if Jeep has an EV version)

you can finish the list on your own. This way - as the political roller coaster happens - you have your eggs in both baskets and can shift your chickens around to where they continue to lay. If BEV does really take off like in Norway - you are already in the space with an opportunity to shift quickly.

Companies that hedge and keep options open I feel will be successful over the next five to eight years in this pivotal timeframe.

 

[patfromigh]

The investment for STLA Large BEV should be totally written off and replaced with series hybrid on STLA Large, for 2028 MY and beyond.

The present state of the art marries pure battery electric and series hybrid drivetrain engineering together. A company is flushing development money down the toilet if they choose to design an exclusive pure battery electric drive vehicle or an exclusive series hybrid one. Pure battery electric drive has established a solid beachhead in the marketplace, which can't be ignored. Range and charging anxiety is creating the demand for extended range powertrain designs. Those who can afford to charge at home might still prefer a BEV. Others will hold out for a range extender. Much of the engineering and pieces can be shared between a BEV and an EREV /ReEV series hybrid.

Let me say this, the torque converter is dead. There still will be torque converter transmissions in the future, but not like it used to be. The torque converter will be replaced by electric motors. Some transmission will also have clutches depending on the hybrid design (like Honda). ZF has shown a generator which replaces the torque converter, but lacks the transmission behind it. That design is for a possible extended range EV.

Where Stellantis messed up is having too many people work from home instead of Auburn Hills. Isolation is very bad for design. Does anyone else remember how the AMC engineering strategies revived Chrysler as a company?

 

[cygnus]

Well, packaging for a unibody with a series hybrid in a D or E segment SUV hasn't been done before and the packaging for a series hybrid is...way different than a BEV. But your first sentence is true - pure BEV is foolish in North America.

Current state of the art series hybrid is the BYD Shark (which is Body on Frame) -

Mazda is exploring series hybrid with the rotary engine - Mazda dedicated EV platform spawning first model in 2027

 

[patfromigh]

A pure BEV design by itself is foolish. Going forward there will be battery electric drives with a range extender option. Various Chinese manufacturers now offer what they call an extended range EV (EREV). The EREV models are typically unibody C and D segments with an IC engine driving a generator.

Mazda will market the EZ-6 in other markets as the Mazda 6e. The Motor Authority article didn't mention that. Maybe they should have read the Mazda newsletter more closely. Although the EZ-6 is built by Changen, it is still has an EREV option which is a series hybrid. I don't know why the MX-30 with the rotary engine wasn't offered in the US. Everybody thinks Americans want massive EVs with huge battery packs, we don't. Americans like simple elegant solutions.

Chrysler could offer something like the Halcyon sedan concept as an electric with an optional ICE range extender, but they had better keep it very far away from any French overlord influence. Such a vehicle should be designed here, styled inside and out here, and use an engine made in America. I don't care where the batteries come from.

 

[jimboy]

Jeep has toyota'ed itself out of the market with far too many variants that are far too similar, and really don't fall under the Jeep brand definition at all.
Yes, some Jeeps have moved upmarket to replace Chrysler, but there is still room in the Market place for a mid luxury CAR, that isn't a boy racer,(Dodge), and offers a more traditional vehicle than Jeep. The 2005 300's were sensational cars that created a whole new niche of vehicles which the current Dodges are derivatives of, and outsold the dodge brand handily. Chrysler needs to reproduce that vehicle in a modern format, that includes ICE HEV and BEV variants.
The DS4 and/or DS7 would be good starting points to give Chrysler something to sell immediately here while they work on a new sedan and large crossover/suv. There is still space in the Market for a more luxurious and classic sedan along with a RAM DTS model, simply by losing one of the 2 Wagoneers and making it a more luxury/comfort oriented vehicle than the current Wagoneers are. Most could be done with a fairly minimal investment using existing platforms, etc, and reducing Jeep variants down to a more sustainable amount and keeping them more brand oriented.
Most of the smaller Jeeps would work better as Chrysler/Dodges anyways, especially since none of them are particularly good sellers under the Jeep umbrella. Both Dodge and Chrysler could do a far better job with them, since they aren't really Jeeps at all. If you look at Jeep sales critically, you'll find that they haven't increased share, but simply spread it over models they don't really need or know how to market effectively as Jeeps, and Jeeps resale values for 90% of it's models are crap. It's become a "one and done' brand without repeat buyers, again on 90% of its models with only Wrangler retaining a loyal following, (possibly GC, But I'm not even sure about that) So let them be Jeeps overseas if necessary, but put them under Dodge and Chrysler in N/A , where they correctly belong. That would solve a lot of Stellantis' lack of N/A product without having to build/design a whole range of vehicles for just one market.

 

[TripleT]

The idea that CUV would sell better as Chyrsler or Dodge ...... is just simple brand fan fantasy. The only thing they would do as those Brands would be sell less and sell at lower margins.

No sure where the assertion that they fail as Jeeps as we are currently down in NA to a single affordable model. The Compass.

This is not to say that Dodge and Chrysler shouldn't get CUVs because that is basically all that sells anymore but lets not be unrealistic with the justification.

 

[jimboy]

Dodge did very well with the Journey, Chrysler would have done much better with Aspen had they given it a year or two, and I'm talking about renegade, avenger, wagoneer. The compass was a dodge derivative, except they updated the compass version and deleted the dodge ( Caliber). And the compass is as close to a jeep as a mackeral is to caviar. It is in fact more of a chrysler than a jeep and you know it.
You keep insisting Chrysler is a dead brand, well thats because someone tried to kill it. I say give it a real chance and it can become a solid earner for Stellantis. You are always negative about any possible solution other than deleting Chrysler, it seems to be a personal bug for you, why not kill dodge instead? Oh yeah, Dodge got development dollars, and chrysler didn't. Try playing a little fairer with each brand,you might just be surprised.

 

[james.mooney.]

Dodge did very well with the Journey, Chrysler would have done much better with Aspen had they given it a year or two, and I'm talking about renegade, avenger, wagoneer. The compass was a dodge derivative, except they updated the compass version and deleted the dodge ( Caliber). And the compass is as close to a jeep as a mackeral is to caviar. It is in fact more of a chrysler than a jeep and you know it.
You keep insisting Chrysler is a dead brand, well thats because someone tried to kill it. I say give it a real chance and it can become a solid earner for Stellantis. You are always negative about any possible solution other than deleting Chrysler, it seems to be a personal bug for you, why not kill dodge instead? Oh yeah, Dodge got development dollars, and chrysler didn't. Try playing a little fairer with each brand,you might just be surprised.

Regardless of what we may believe each brand stands for, a Jeep-branded CUV will outsell a Chrysler-branded CUV every time.

Restyle the Compass, put a Chrysler badge on it, and watch sales plummet.

It's cynical and it's not what fans want, but Stellantis is going to brand and market models to maximize sales and profits, and that means branding UVs as Jeeps.

Besides nostalgia, and as much as I hate to say it, it gets harder and harder to justify the Chrysler brand's existence.

Chrysler uses to be an upmarket, "near-luxury" brand. That market position no longer exists as the mainstream brands have moved upmarket and now even overlap with luxury brands (see Toyota/Lexus, Nissan/Infiniti, etc.). There is no longer any daylight between mainstream and luxury.

There are also very few vehicles that Chrysler could sell which would not sell better as a Dodge, Jeep, or Ram. Trucks and UVs are the biggest sellers and covered by Jeep and Ram. Passenger cars (sedans, hatchbacks, etc.) are a shrinking and very competitive market, dominated by Japanese and Korean brands, and it would be very difficult for Chrysler to regain a foothold there. That leaves the minivan, and the most famous name in minivan history is "Dodge Grand Caravan," which could be brought back to replace the Pacifica.

I just do not see how Chrysler is going to be able to ever be a volume brand again, and I do not know if the relatively small sales they will be able to make are worth the investment in developing new vehicles.

 

[AlexB]

Dodge did very well with the Journey, Chrysler would have done much better with Aspen had they given it a year or two, and I'm talking about renegade, avenger, wagoneer. The compass was a dodge derivative, except they updated the compass version and deleted the dodge ( Caliber). And the compass is as close to a jeep as a mackeral is to caviar. It is in fact more of a chrysler than a jeep and you know it.
You keep insisting Chrysler is a dead brand, well thats because someone tried to kill it. I say give it a real chance and it can become a solid earner for Stellantis. You are always negative about any possible solution other than deleting Chrysler, it seems to be a personal bug for you, why not kill dodge instead? Oh yeah, Dodge got development dollars, and chrysler didn't. Try playing a little fairer with each brand,you might just be surprised.

Journey is a subprime failure,only lasted because of Mexico labor.

 

[TripleT]

Dodge did very well with the Journey, Chrysler would have done much better with Aspen had they given it a year or two, and I'm talking about renegade, avenger, wagoneer. The compass was a dodge derivative, except they updated the compass version and deleted the dodge ( Caliber). And the compass is as close to a jeep as a mackeral is to caviar. It is in fact more of a chrysler than a jeep and you know it.
You keep insisting Chrysler is a dead brand, well thats because someone tried to kill it. I say give it a real chance and it can become a solid earner for Stellantis. You are always negative about any possible solution other than deleting Chrysler, it seems to be a personal bug for you, why not kill dodge instead? Oh yeah, Dodge got development dollars, and chrysler didn't. Try playing a little fairer with each brand,you might just be surprised.

Honest assessments you seem to take personal. I give all sorts of solutions but one has to be realistic about where Chrysler is after Daimler demolished it by making sure that did not compete with Mercedes and then positioned it as Plymouth.

The reason Chrysler products don’t clear the implementation gate is because the ROI doesn’t work out. That’s on consumers not me.

Fair doesn’t have anything to do with it.

Nostalgia isn’t a payback, and reality is Chrysler was never a volume brand except when it resold an Eagle and a Plymouth when those brands were killed. Chrysler for most of its history were Luxury Trim packages of Dodge, Plymouth, or DeSoto.

 

[redriderbob]

 

[redriderbob]

@redriderbob is the next Durango still a go?

Yes

 

[TripleT]

It is an Error not to sell Pacifica in the world biggest Market in the world, that is fond of Minivan, When the STLA large conversion is made they should make this reintroduction. Nothing would secure the brand more.