What's new
By:
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!

What is SRT working on...?

Rustydodge said:
The platform isnt ideal for charger/challenger, but parts of the architecture/design will be.

I think its silly to view the FCA brands as isolated towers each developing their own thing. Auto manufacturers don't re-make the wheel every time they come out with "new" stuff. I bet next gen challenger/charger will utilize bits of design/architecture that were developed/learned for guilia just like the next gen grand cherokee will., despite what dodge Dodge or Jeep marketing material might say.
Click to expand...
Using a modified L platform with giulia bits would be a way to update the charger/challenger while keeping them and the Alfa cars in their own lanes. Nobody wants to pay 90K for a Giulia quad knowing he could have bought a Dodge version with a 392 hemi for 40K. It works out for the Cadillacs and Camaros using the exact same platform but they are trying to build up Alfa as a premium euro performance brand, so I get it.
 
Mopar426 said:
Using a modified L platform with giulia bits would be a way to update the charger/challenger while keeping them and the Alfa cars in their own lanes. Nobody wants to pay 90K for a Giulia quad knowing he could have bought a Dodge version with a 392 hemi for 40K. It works out for the Cadillacs and Camaros using the exact same platform but they are trying to build up Alfa as a premium euro performance brand, so I get it.
Click to expand...
And this is the sane as what I understood when the late Sergio mention it is that the updated L platform will be keep the same points as the current one but gets bits and pieces from the Guilia platform
 
You are looking at the front of the vehicle on the right, and the front of a jet fighter plane on the left.
 
there are a lot of journey owners / fans out there i for one would to see them build a rear wheel journey helltract, i think that they would sell !
 
Mopar392 said:
And this is the sane as what I understood when the late Sergio mention it is that the updated L platform will be keep the same points as the current one but gets bits and pieces from the Guilia platform
Click to expand...

Giorgio is the mix... We'll see Giorgio used for FCA US products starting with WL74 and WL75. If they can receive HEMI then it's good enough for next generation E segment RWD cars from FCA US.
 
Bili said:
Giorgio is the mix... We'll see Giorgio used for FCA US products starting with WL74 and WL75. If they can receive HEMI then it's good enough for next generation E segment RWD cars from FCA US.
Click to expand...
WL74 and WL75 are the new Grand Cherokee (2 rows and 3 rows)?
 
same build point structure, development, and materials that mimic the success of the G... the question is that the GG or something new like GL. G was way to small for the class and drivetrain.
 
Ok what is that pic supposed to be. It looks possibly like a fighter plane. What is next to it?
 
TripleT said:
same build point structure, development, and materials that mimic the success of the G... the question is that the GG or something new like GL. G was way to small for the class and drivetrain.
Click to expand...


I disagree on size. It's easily done with adding more metal between B and C pillar line. Giorgio in Stelvio's form is as wide as Charger both vehicle width and track width.

So only drawback or possible obstacle is how to fit HEMI inside. Longer snout? Longer cowl? Maybe both?
 
Bili said:
I disagree on size. It's easily done with adding more metal between B and C pillar line. Giorgio in Stelvio's form is as wide as Charger both vehicle width and track width.

So only drawback or possible obstacle is how to fit HEMI inside. Longer snout? Longer cowl? Maybe both?
Click to expand...

You mean if you can move the build points you can use the build points???? That not what a platform is a platform is the build points. The idea the just stretching that architecture unchanged would be optimal is also incorrect that is old now Ford Model. The whole idea was by the time you move the build points to properly work with the size and powertrain, you have something brand new, one might as well apply the technology to existing build spots and save the current carriers and millions of dollars.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top