Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Do you currently drive a 2019 Ford Ranger and live in Michigan?
A reporter would like to talk to you; please reach out to [email protected] for more details.
Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Can Chrysler Turn It Around in Bankruptcy?

Anyhow, here's the story.

This says the Top Execs have been warned.
Seems Chrysler does this every few years(sort of like Nissan): have a few decent years, then sales go South for a few years.

What gives here?
One guy said all their cars look like trucks. Another said there stuff looks good, if it were 2001.
Have heard various comments of cheap interiors( behind most competitors), lack of warranty(they did have a 7/100K, then dropped it a few years ago).
GM even has, at least, 5/100K.
Is it they depended too much on large vehicles to make money, and now that small cars sales are up, they are behind?
One thing that is sort of odd, is that when the Caliber came out, "Dodge" said it was to replace the Neon. How?
I know some younger kids(16-25, men and women) who are mad, and said the Caliber Does Not = Neon replacement(rumors are there will be something slightly smaller than the old Neon coming out, and a car-like vehicle?).

What is Chrysler doing wrong, or right?

I did look at the new Sebring, and in Blue, and in person, it was tolerable(unlike early internet photos).
It beat the Aztek, at least.

Anyhow, it was not bad, but MSRP is kind of "up there", for me, anyway.You can get a Fusion or Sonata for less, for example(I-4's).
Maybe even a few others.

What can they do for a turn-around(for what seems like the 52nd time in 27 years).
take care/not offense.


  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,994
    Well hopefully some of the new products will help them out. I still am yet to see Chrysler execute a decent interior. :surprise:

  • Yes, I must agree with you there, about interiors.
    I drove the Sebring and it was acceptable, but the grey interior, plastics, all of it, did not really seem like it belonged in a nearly 19K msrp car. Felt more like it should be in a cheaper car(well, some of the chepaer cars, around 14-15K, I have seen, have better interior materials, or looked better, at least).
    Same for the Caliber(and PT) I tested in March of this year.
    Also, the cloth seats on the PT were not very good, and hard as rocks.
  • Karen_SKaren_S Posts: 5,092
    Title fixed. :)
  • from the looks of it, this thread won't be around very long anyhow.
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,994

    you and I both know Chryslers current management approach is killing them. They spend so much money on radical unique designs, and leave out interior quality, gadgetology, ergonomics. The plastics found in a Jeep compass are the same grade as my Uncles 1984 Ford Ranger. I honestly couldn't tell the difference. It's one thing to have a hard plasticky dash, but seriously a few hundred more dollars would help alot. Hell even if it costs you a grand or two, it's worth it to the customer and he/she still gets a good deal. The Chrysler 300C was the most over-rated car over the last few years. It has a decent exterior, but that's about it. The interior quality is no better than that found in the last generation 300M. In some ways I think the old M was better in design. Chrysler, thinks because they throw a Hemi engine in it with a few leftover Mercedes parts they were going fly off the shelf. Well they did for a couple of years. Chrysler is in serious trouble and their new products are going to save the day IMHO. The Sebring, is another rental special with a lack-luster engine, The new Avenger isn't all that exciting, the Nitro, Compass, Patriot, are nothing special either. What the heck is up with that 4 door deep ? My gawd that beast is ugly. The PT Cruiser, is old and tired and DCX let that car flounder. I guess they were to worried about making a SLR McLaren, instead of concentrating on its core business and buyers. The last good car that Chrysler ever had IMHO was the Dodge Stealth which of course was a rebadged Mitsubishi. I've never been much of a fan of chrysler cars, not because I never wanted to be but because they try to be radical. It took me a decade to finally warm up to the Rams grill. I still prefer Fords and GM's grills better. The trucks are pretty much worthless and the only thing that saves that division is the over-hyped old men still like the out-dated Cummins, which has been surpassed in technology by GM's Duramax, and Ford's Powerstroke. Hell Ford, owns part of cummins, lol. :confuse: The Hemi is a good engine if you like getting 12-14 mpg. what a joke :(

    Well I'll stop my rant, since I know their are a few loyalist. Hopefully that 'tinament' on wheels called SMART will save the company. Well that's if our government stops the carbon copy cheaper Chin-E smart from gobbling up sales first. :surprise:

  • yer right. the interiors are pretty bad.
    I agree 100%.
    I would pay alittle extra for better materials.
    That Smart? I dunno what they are thinking. The thing is barely over 8 feet, total length!
    Most cars have wheelbases that long, even some of the sub-compacts.
    That's one scarey(hit a deer with this thing... no thanks), over-priced vehicle.
    I looked at a G5, and it had a nicer looking interior.
  • lemkolemko Philadelphia, PAPosts: 15,306
    I think I'd rather have a motorcycle than a Smart. Back in the early days, motorcycles were seen as a cost-effective alternative to cars.
  • carguy58carguy58 Posts: 2,303
    "I drove the Sebring and it was acceptable, but the grey interior, plastics, all of it, did not really seem like it belonged in a nearly 19K msrp car. Felt more like it should be in a cheaper car(well, some of the chepaer cars, around 14-15K, I have seen, have better interior materials, or looked better, at least)."

    Which Sebring did you drive the 07 or the 01-06 model? I did see the 07 Sebring at an auto show a couple weeks ago. Dissapointing on the interior because it was cheap like you said. When you touch the plastic it feels hard as did the 05 Pacifica's interior plastics at an auto show I went to in Feburary. The Pacifica was an 05 leftover and the MSRP was somewhere in the 34K range but they were willing to sell it for somewhere in the 27K range. That what the sticker in the window of the Pacifica said at that particular autoshow.

    Another thing is a Chrysler isn't even reliable as a Ford.
  • carguy58carguy58 Posts: 2,303
    "One thing that is sort of odd, is that when the Caliber came out, "Dodge" said it was to replace the Neon. How?
    I know some younger kids(16-25, men and women) who are mad, and said the Caliber Does Not = Neon replacement(rumors are there will be something slightly smaller than the old Neon coming out, and a car-like vehicle?)."

    The difference between the Neon and the Caliber is obvious I mean the Neon is a 4dr car while the Caliber is a wagon/hatchback. I even thought of that when the Caliber came out I was like this is a wagon and not a Sedan. Even with that said I think the Caliber was doing very well at initial launch and Chrysler wasn't even meeting demand of the Caliber when in first came out. I haven't really been following Chrysler sales of late though to see if the Caliber is sustaining its early sales success that it had.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 23,490
    Dodge had sold 59,758 Calibers, including 8,877 just for that month. That's well down from what the Neon used to do when it was in its prime, but the Caliber is a slightly more nichey product, and I'm sure it has a higher profit margin. Plus, I'd imagine that fewer of them are ending up in rental fleets.

    One thing I'll say for Chrysler, is that I think the quality of their hard plastics is actually pretty good. They usually have a nice texture. The problem however, is that they rely way too much on hard plastics. I'd like to see more cars with interiors the way they used to be...carpeting on the lower door panels and cloth inserts to coordinate with the seats.
  • ea1420ea1420 Posts: 22
    I think their interiors and their lack of warrenty are the biggest factors. I just bought a new car and I was looking at the PT Cruiser. I loved the way it handled and it had a great amount of space. However, Fisher Price toys have better finishes. And when you can pretty much go to any dealership (including Honda and Toyota) and get 5 years and 60,000 miles on the drive train the 3 year, 36,000 miles warrenty doesn't cut it. Particularly, when Chrysler isn't exactly known for it's reliability.
  • grbeckgrbeck Posts: 2,361
    Yesterday I stopped at the local Chrysler-Dodge-Jeep dealer to check out the new offerings (dealers are closed by law on Sunday in Pennsylvania, so I didn't have to worry about any sales representatives desperate for a sale).

    The Chrysler Sebring doesn't look too bad on the inside (the cars were obviously locked, so I couldn't touch the interior).

    The outside, however, looks disjointed. There is just way too much going on up front, with the straked hood, the big chrome grille and the huge headlight assembly. The back end, meanwhile, looks like it was lifted from a Toyota Corolla.

    Apparently, all of the effort was put into the front. The stylists ran out of ideas once they got beyond the front pillar.

    Another browser was there in a 1995 Honda Accord LX sedan. What struck me was how much the Sebring resembles the Accord in profile, except that the Accord is a more coherent and balanced design.

    The Chrysler marque needs a good follow-up to the 300, and this car isn't it. The 300 recalls the 1950s and 1960s, when the Chrysler marque still meant something.

    It restored some luster to the Chrysler nameplate, which, like Buick, Pontiac and Mercury, has fallen on hard times. Unfortunately, there is nothing special about the Sebring...and in a few months it will compete directly with the Dodge Avenger. The Avenger is a better fit with the Dodge brand. The Sebring should at least have more presence, and a more coherent design.

    And please, no four-cylinder Chryslers! Every Sebring on the lot but one had the four cylinder. Leave that market to Dodge!

    There were several Jeep Compasses on the lot. From the side, it evokes the AMC Gremlin, with an upswept rear window and chopped off back end. I guess it will appeal to the people who have been yearing for the return of the old Gremlin-based Eagle cars. But what will Chrysler do after those 20 people buy one?

    Overall, I'd say that Chrysler is in for rough sledding over the next year.
  • lemkolemko Philadelphia, PAPosts: 15,306
    ...Chrysler has GOT to build that Imperial. If the 300 is the poor man's Bentley, the Imperial could be the poor man's Rolls-Royce Phantom. They'd go over big in Philly! Heck, I might just get one in a funky dark red enamel and silver metallic to recall my awesome 1985 Chrysler Fifth Avenue.
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 23,490
    I saw an '07 Sebring in the parking lot at the grocery store. I have to admit that it was better looking in person than in pictures, but it still does nothing for me.

    I'm also a little confused at their engine choices. Standard is a 2.4 4-cyl with something like 172 hp. Next up is a 2.7 DOHC V-6 that used to put out 200 hp, but nowadays I think it choked down to 190. Then at the top of the heap is a 3.5 SOHC which puts out 250 hp in the Charger/300, but I think it might be a bit less here.

    Why the need for the midrange engine? Especially one that's not that big of a step up from the base engine. Honestly I think they should phase out the 2.7. Even though I have that engine in my 2000 Intrepid and I haven't had any problems with mine (125,000 miles, knock on wood), they are prone to sludging. And they're VERY expensive to replace when they go bad. They're also VERY expensive to build new, in the first place. I think Chrysler would be better off just dumping it and if they need a lower-output V-6, just de-tune the 3.5, or offer a smaller-displacement version of it. The 3.2 that Chrysler offered from 1998-2001 in the Intrepid/Concorde was a smaller-displacement version.

    And yeah, Chrysler should stop making 4-cylinder versions. Definitely. IMO, a 4-cylinder Chrysler is a Plymouth!
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,994
    I agree Chrysler needs to build the Imperial, but it has to have the Gadgetology, for somebody like me to look at it seriously. :)

  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,994
    Analyst: Building small car in China would jolt UAW 1148/AUTO01


    P.S. Well it appears I will have to "BLACK BALL" Chrysler in the future. :mad:
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,994
    Nassau, Jeep Trailhawk to be displayed at Detroit show 1148

  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,994
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,994
    Redesigned 2008 Chrysler Town and Country caught


    P.S. GM, Ford, give up the Minivan. I guess Chrysler thinks they can nab some sales still, eh ?
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,994
    Automaker will give bonuses for every '07 model they take before year's end with their full allotment. /AUTO01

  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,994
    Automaker's reliance on trucks and SUVs makes for a gloomy November even as industry outlook is unclear. 1148

  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,994
    Chrysler hopes to hook female Sebring buyers 14


    P.S. Is Chrysler trying to become the new Mercury, and be more feminine ? :surprise:
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,994
    Chrysler's new Sebring design is sporty, luxurious and has room for the kids

  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,994
    With dealers steaming and new vehicles piling up, executive is at center of tensions

  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,994
    After meeting this week with DCX board, CEO LaSorda to unveil plan in mid-February. 1148

  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,994
    CEO LaSorda urges creative thinking to assist automaker; Zetsche of DCX says stay focused.

  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 23,490
    I just found out that for 2007, Chrysler's offering a stripper version of the Charger with the 2.7/4-speed automatic, and no ABS. For 2006, the base Charger had a 3.5/5-speed, and ABS standard. :sick:

    Now there was a fleet/rental edition of the 2006 Charger that only had the 2.7/4-speed, but it was kept out of the public eye for the most part.

    Now they do offer the 3.5/5-speed/abs as a bundle for like $1,000 on the base Charger, or you can get the SXT package, which includes that stuff and some other goodies. Still, the whole thing reeks of cost cutting to me, and I think is only going to serve to cheapen the name. IMO it's a hark back to the late 70's/early 80's when they were putting slant sixes in St. Regises and Miradas.

    Oh, and it looks like they also discontinued my favorite color, "Magnesium". Damn you, DCX. Damn you all to hell!! (sorry, I caught "Planet of the Apes" on tv over the weekend :) )
  • hwyhobohwyhobo Posts: 265
    I just read this line in the Nassau announcement:

    Nassau is powered by a 6.1-liter HEMI and runs to 60 mph in five seconds.

    Nassau looks like a beautiful car, but with a plethora of gas-sucking Hemi-powered cars already, why won't Chrysler introduce a good-looking car like Nassau with a fuel-efficient powerplant like the BLUETEC? I don't get it. :confuse:
This discussion has been closed.