yep, I think a whole lot of Americans are concerned about Fiat quality build. Those of us interested will check in to it as best we can and then report on it. Eh?
Heck, I know people who weren't even born when Fiat finally left our shores, who still know the "Fix It Again Tomorrow/Tony/Twice/Thrice" jokes! So IMO, Fiat will have a bit of a quality perception to overcome.
Even if they re-badge them as Chrysler's they will have a reliability image to over come. Though the Dodge Cummins PU is still arguably the best out there.
Obviously, they forgot "Subaru" known to have 0% return for repair. It wouldn't look good on their plot!
1st: Toyota 4.8% 2nd: Mazda 5.8% 3rd: Honda 6.2% Suzuki 8.2% Hyndai 8.2% BMW 9.3% Volvo 9.4% Nissan 9.6% Saab 10% Skoda 10.1% Ford 11.1% Audi 11.1% Mercedes 11.4% Citroen 11.4% Mitsubishi 11.4% Alfa Romeo 11.7% Kia 11.8% Peugeot 12.2% Jeep 12.4% Renault 13.1% Opel 13.2% Volkswagen 13.3% Daewoo 13.7% Chrysler 14.3% Seat 14.3% Lancia 14.6% Fiat 15% Rover 16.1% Land Rover 19.7%
Fiat is known to have frequent problems repairable at low cost. This is true when you live over here and you are 5 miles from away from the garage :shades:
That is a pretty interesting list,but really does not mean very much.Does it mean returning one time for a minor problem,multiple returns,major problems...or what? One of these lists can be weighed in favor of whoever the list makes wants to.Then which model has the most problems? They are hardly all the same.A four wheel drive SUV will not have the same issues as a small 4 door sedan.A vehicle with a 4 cylinder engine might have different issues than a V6 or a V8...An automatic has different issues than a manual transmission equipped sports car.In other words,it really gives very little useful information.
I see (from your list) that Fiat is way down near the bottom. It also ranks at the bottom in England. (and we are getting Fiats to replace or mingle with Chrysler)??? :sick: :sick: :sick:
Hi mickeyrom, In the EU, most issues on mid-cost models concern cheap materials and assembly, the higher end issues concern technology. The whole spectrum of vehicles has mechanically reliable safety elements, the higher end also includes reliable engines and transmissions.
Those who buy the first 3 makes have a high probability of never going for repair, those who fall between 5 and 10% expect an issue, the rest have an explanation to why they bought their specific vehicle. Most people are in the 3rd case and don't complain: there is no class action here nor any equivalent to the lemon law. You simply have to pay. There is a simple saying: if you receive an incentive/rebate when you buy a vehicle, you pay it back with high interest. The first 3 makes don't buy their customers, whatever model you choose.
Engine and transmission rebuilding is no longer profitable here, SUVs are integrated in the mass with sedans and sport cars because of speed limitations. Those who practice off-road activities pay more attention to their vehicles because this is a passion and thus do preventive maintenance.
I hope this gives you a clearer view about the way the comparison was made. Parcel postage service is increasing; this should give you a clue
The actual Fiat 500 has 3 engines; 1.2, 1.4 and 1.3 Turbodiesel (69, 100 and 75hp) 1.2 (Pur02 version) is around 38 MPG US combined (es. BMW 335i is 20 MPG), 1.3 TDiesel is 43,5 MPG combined. In 2010 there will be the new engine "SGE" 900cc with Multiair and an evolution of the Multijet diesel engine (with a Start/Stop system(the Pur02 actual version)... around 54 MPG) The 500 prototypes with the new gasoline engine (Turbo with 70hp) are around 53,7 MPG US Combined (3,4 l for 100km in the "optimistic" European omologation trip)!
I suspect that as 2010 models appear, Chrysler will rely heavily on Jeep branded vehicles for sales volume, and as Fiat enters the picture, it will be at low initial volume. The marketplace will guide the company. Don't forget that Fiat owns Alpha Romeo. And Fiat has many vehicles to offer that far exceed the meager size and power of the "500". I'm looking forward to the entire process unfolding a menu of new alternatives to the current offerings in the American market.
In the North America marketplace in 2011 there will be only 3 cars with an italian brand (Ferrari and Maserati is another target) - Fiat 500 ("Small" platform) - Alfa Romeo Mito ("B-Evo") - Alfa Romeo "940 project" ("C-Evo") There will be a little suv, Jeep "Panda" ("Small"), clone of the Fiat Panda 4x4 Cross. In 2012: - Alfa Romeo "944 project" ("D-Evo"), station wagon version from 2013 - Alfa Romeo "new Brera" ("D-Evo") - Alfa Romeo new Spider ("D-Evo") - Fiat new Punto ("B-Evo") These cars are confirmed in the project plan of the group and will be made in north america, in the Chrysler factories. These 4 platforms are the base of the new versions of actual Dodge, Chrysler and Jeep cars and the new small-size cars with american brand. Alfa Romeo probably will construct 3 more cars: a little suv (size of BMW X1 on "C-Evo" platform), a big sedan (like Mercedes E-class, on "LX" platform (300C)) and a Big SUV ("2011 Jeep Gran Cherokee Platform"). The marketplace will guide the company, ok, Fiat has many other small cars in european market that could be good for US marketplace, and has another brand "Lancia" with other models.
I hope they can hold on long enough for success to take hold. It would be intriguing to have a European based car line available, with at least some carrying Chrysler brand names, and not be clones from Germany. :shades:
If they only offer the cheapo gas versions of the Fiat & Alfa, they are doomed to failure. Only the diesel models that get great mileage will be winners for Chrysler. They need some winners to stay in business.
How do you figure? Diesel is what it is, but in America it has yet to really catch on as a desired alternative. I am not against diesel, but the populace of American vehicle operators seems to be little interested in it. Alfa and Fiat gasoline models selling at popular prices at least have a shot at success. Perhaps some "brand engineering" with name plates would boost sales.
That is the problem. The rebadged Fiats will be competing against a plethora of gas options. Who in their right mind would buy a Chrysler gas econobox over a Korean or Japanese? VW is gaining market share in the USA with the new diesel Jetta. A 70 MPG diesel Fiat 500 would tempt me for a runabout car. Remember about the time Fiat gets up to speed the Indians will be flooding the market with super cheap cars. I don't think the new Chrysler has a chance at surviving with UAW built econoboxes. UNLESS they offer a big mileage advantage. That is only possible with hybrid or diesel.
Update. The Fiat 500 with a 100 HP gas engine with 0-62 MPH at 10.5 seconds only gets a combined 37 MPG. The same 500 with a diesel engine is 56 MPG combined. And the diesel version is only $330 more than the gasser.
About whatI would get from 3 vehicles that I owned in the 80's - an Escort, a Sentra, and a CRX. It's not that great when you realize that that sort of mileage was possible was from engine and transmission technology of 30 years ago.
I agree with gagrice - if Chrysler/Fiat comes here with small relatively expensive cars, that get 37mpg or so, they won't be a big hit. In order to really succeed they are going to need to offer something exceptional. If I wanted to buy a premium small car, I'd get a Mini; if I wanted low price and high mpg I'd get a Ford Fiesta, Hyundai, Nissan Versa or Honda Fit.
With the possible exception of the Fiesta which I know nothing about,none of the cars mentioned will get combined 37MPG.Check it out anywhere you like.Actually none are even rated at 37 highway.I'll that 37 any time I can.
Comparing the Fiat 500 to the smallest 3dr Yaris, both with 100 HP gas engines, the Yaris gets a combined mileage 46 US MPG. It is bigger and a direct competitor in the UK. My son in law has the US model Yaris and gets 40 MPG on a regular basis. If Toyota were to offer the same gas engine here as in the EU it would compete with the Prius for mileage. It looks to me like Fiat has some catching up to do on gas engine design. If Chrysler is banking on Fiat I believe it is shaky ground.
I never said those cars got 37mpg combined. But they are close enough in actual real-life driving for me that I do not consider the Fiat to be any significant advantage.
If I have a choice between a $10K Versa getting 32mpg combined (or whatever) against an unknown Fiat at 37mpg and what price, I'd choose the Versa.
If Fiat/Chrysler wants to make a hit and differentiate itself, it better bring something to market that's very inexpensive and gets 25+% better mpg than anything in it's non-hybrid class. I'd say it needs to sell its ultra-high mpg diesel, or stay home with this model. Otherwise this small car is just another "me-too", and maybe with a higher price tag because of the high union labor.
that depending on your POV, the Fiats will have something besides fuel economy going for them: looks. The Japanese, bless their reliable efficient hearts, can't manage to produce anything with great styling, EVER. Ditto the Koreans, although the Genesis coupe is a step in the right direction.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I think one of the main things that will be a problem for Chrysler and it's been pointed out here before is that many of Chrysler's models are outdated and there are no replacements coming soon. Chrysler will be forced to discontinue some of these old models or the sales will be minimal. In the meantime Fiat has a few models that can appear within a few years.
In the meantime then Chrysler continues to bleed maybe $1B for each of the next 24 months? and then some Fiats are going to come along ... well the math just isn't good unless Chrysler can then sell say 2 million Fiats a year at MSRP.
I'm not keeping up on all the finances and who's paying the bills and exactly what they are, but someone will be paying a lot of money to keep Chrysler around, just so a few new models can be sold here in the U.S. Meanwhile you can figure in 2 years that most of the existing Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep models are history in the marketplace.
I don't see Jeep going anywhere...Jeep is too well loved. Wrangler sales will never die, no matter how old the thing is. Probably still some market for the Liberty and Grand Cherokee too. Compass and Patriot...well, they're not "real" Jeeps anyway. The trick is to not scare off the Jeep loyalists.
With enormous incentives Chrysler still can't move the metal of their showroom floors clutter with new/used 2009 models depreciating by the second. Fiat who was in the US with Yugo years ago left together embarrassed as the laughing stock of auto manufacturing. Sure Yugo was banned to Siberia and Fiat has emerged strong in Europe with still a spotty reliability record, but how will this help Chrysler. Folk our money is gone. We were never going to get paid back, because even if Chrysler repaid the government loan congress would find a way to steal it again. It was a bad investment that should have never been made. It will be two years before Fiat technology will make it here in the states. And that's like waiting two days for paramedics after a massive heart attack. RIP Chrysler!!!
With a Renault CLIO common rail diesel, friends of mine (seniors) get 58 mpg average mileage over the year. This car fits two adults, one pet and two grocery bags. After 100,000 miles with regular service the small engine gave all it had and needed to be rebuilt for 6,000 USD (4,500 Euros).
Where is the saving and who really wants to squeeze into a Fiat 500 or it's equivalent? You're in for a juvenile experience and may need assistance to pull out of your seat. You should also inquire about front tire life expectancy and cost of repair.
Last point is safety: how does it feel to drive next to a truck merging on the Interstate or being in front of a truck coming to a stop? These small vehicles are meant to stay in the city, and should have their lanes. There is too much blood shed on EU roads because of sub-compact cars that offer insufficient protection. Do you know the smell of battery acid and blood? I do.
Yep but Jeep Wrangler sales aren't enough to keep Chrysler afloat. And "some market" for other Jeeps is not great - considering people will get bored with the current designs in 1-2 years, the redesigns are nowhere in site, the incentives on Cherokees is very high, and the Jeeps do not get very good mpg, in an environment of dictated rising mpg.
What I'm saying is that Chrysler must have 20 main models right now with different trim levels of those. Having 1 or 2 new vehicles that may sell 100,000 each in a few years to replace these vehicles IS NOT a savior for a company the size of Chrysler.
In the current economic environment and what is likely for the next few years, with an auto market of 10-12 million in this country, and the competition there will be, there is no way Fiat will ever makeup the $'s being lost month after month. The taxpayers may make it up, and that is the only way Chrysler lives.
The fact is that when the auto market goes from 17M to 10M, we simply don't need as many auto brands as we have!
A national newspaper is looking to speak to consumers who are avoiding Chryslers because of the way the dealership closures were handled and/or concerns about the product liability that could happen because of the bankruptcy process. Please send your daytime phone number and the vehicle you own to ctalati@edmunds.com by Wednesday, July 29, 2009.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
Dang, the smell of battery acid and blood? That's dramatic!
I will be first in line for a test drive of the 500, but I agree with the majority here that the Fiat plan can't save Chrysler from the great trash heap of automotive history.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Dang, the smell of battery acid and blood? That's dramatic!
Wasn't that what the colonel who played Wagner from the attack-helicopter squandron in Apocalypse Now, said? - "I love the smell of battery acid and blood in the morning!"
Son, you can join the combat now going on, or you can surf! Now what's it going to be? My Renault Dauphine was some 850cc in size, put out 1950's power, and could be overhauled with a $29.95 kit from JCWhitney. How do I know? Been there. Done that. After a couple years of exciting ownership, I traded up for a brand new 1969 R10. I loved them both, and reveled in their "dee-fair-onss". That 1100cc R10 could wax a 1300cc VeeDubyuh in a fair drag. And that is very important! :shades:
Times have changed! For 30$ you could get the head gasket and the copper seals/rings for the bottom of the cylinder sleeves. I'd be surprised if you got the full set of piston rings for that price (fire, compression and oil scraper)
The nice thing about that small engine was that I could carry it to the workbench by myself, without the gearbox and accessories of course. The newer engines are quite different and located in front of the vehicle, so now you loose on winter and steep slope traction and everything becomes much more expensive :sick:
Are you really sure you would enjoy such a small vehicle again with it's messy gear shifting pattern, total absence of torque and strange rear suspension?
I think we pay a lot for torque on the newer models, and our problems are related to the way we produce power to keep the environment clean. Perhaps an in-between solution, a 2 Liter engine similar to the VW 2.0 TDI could be adequate to move a mid size sedan providing good safety of it's occupants, like the new Audi4 :confuse:
I agree with your observations. I personally would love a new A4 Allroad TDI.
The more I think about Fiat trying to save Chrysler, the more ridiculous it gets. Who is going to pay to revamp the UAW factories to build these Fiat tech cars? Our over loaded tax payers is the answer. They will fail for the same reason they went bankrupt. The domestics cannot build low profit margin cars with their labor packages. The only reason Ford is doing well is most of their low profit vehicles are built in Mexico.
Hi gagrice, It takes 10 years to train an engineer, 20 more for this young person to become a top level specialist. We left time go by without paying much attention to "other countries". South America, Asia, India and other countries providing good education will now play the role we had in the recent years. C'est la vie. We are forced to be inventive to survive.
Could UAW or even PSA (Peugeot - Citroen) factories convert to build Fiat cars? Not immediately, that's simply human. The same rules apply in the EU: we are stuck with our habits and privileges.
I'm thinking that Dodge trucks are a big item for Chrysler when the load hits the road. In spite of all protestations against large gasoline burners, the Dodge pickups seem to sell quite nicely here in 4WD country along the front range of the Rocky Mountains.
Dodge has an opportunity to capitalize on a segment of the market that other manufacturers phased out or have chosen to ignore. The US market place has changed dramatically in the last 3-4 years consumers are moving towards a performance end market. But part of that performance driven market is not like Ford, Chrysler and GM are assuming. There is a segment out there that desires higher mileage, manual transmissions and diesel engines. Dodge should have learned something from the liberty diesel they publicly noted that they were surprised at how successful that two year program was but they didn’t grasp the concept entirely instead they abandoned what was being anticipated by consumers as a break through in the US market finally opening the door to smaller diesel powered vehicles in other platforms with the desired result of mileage and drivability instead of just brute power.
Dodge needs to move their product mix away from their competitors they need to differentiate themselves. But instead of just looking at styling to gain market share look back at the drive train and it’s performance. (Think blue ocean strategy) What aren’t the competitors doing . What market segments can you service ..
Take a look at the market place and tell me how many vehicles still offer a manual transmission or a optional smaller diesel engine?
US society has grasped the concept that diesels can achieve significantly more mileage and if a manufacturer would offer them with either a manual tranny or a automatic they could capitalize on an under supplied market place and a segment of society that still prefers to drive a manual transmission and or the segment that is desiring the smaller more efficient diesel engines for daily service.
Take a look in Argentina, and use a ford F series pickup for example. You can get it with a 4cylinder diesel an d a manual transmission, the mid level is a 4.2L 6 cylinder diesel and a 5 speed that gets ridiculous mileage and the turbo charged engine keeps the truck scooting down the road with brisk power or you can order the larger more powerful 7.3 diesel. But in the US you can only get the largest most powerful diesel engine otherwise you are restricted to a gasoline engine and an efficiency robbing automatic transmission.
Chrysler could easily integrate a small 4 cylinder turbo diesel engine and a small 6 cylinder turbo diesel engine into their lineup offering it in a manual transmission and a automatic transmission format. (offering of both is key since all other manufacturers have chosen to ignore this segment of the market Offer it in all chassis’s from all jeeps, to the Dakota, and the 1500 ram. And if they made them stand alone units the wiring woes of the integrated system could be minimized, these engines also could possibly be used for retrofits to older chassis’s. Use the same bell housing pattern and flywheel across the board reducing replacement and service part’s complexity. Go back to the days of interchangeability to reduce inventory carry costs. Simplicity is key and many of these manufactures moved away from simplicity years ago in an effort to protect their brand and create a necessary market for dealership service but in the process they have created a complex and costly replacement parts inventory that they have to maintain.
If I could replace our outside salesmen’s gasoline 4x4 pickups with a pickup with a 5 or 6 speed manual and a 6 cylinder or better yet 4 cylinder diesel that would double the current 15-16 mpg they are currently getting with something that could easily net 24-28 I would do it in a heartbeat. My guys aren’t out there to win races they are out there to get the job done but they need a pickup with a lumber rack and some weight capacity. Problem is today I can only order one of a handful of options, a chevy 2500 with a 6.0 gas engine and automatic , a Dodge 2500 with a 5.7L hemi and automatic or a Ford F250 with v10 or 5.4 and automatic. OR I buy one of the New diesels that gets similar mileage, puts down Way too much power for what is mostly a commute/utility truck. Power eats fuel and the premium cost of the engine is hard to justify when for the most part it’s not netting me much more in mileage but a smaller turbo charged engine would. At $3.00 a gallon + everyone is looking back to tricks of the past to squeeze a few more miles out of each gallon everyone except the manufacturers.
Hybrids are cool for something’s but in the utility truck and 4x4 market a step back to a time of automatic or manual hubs, optional manual transmissions and smaller turbo charged engines would help us still keep our heavier duty vehicles for utility purposes on the road while and increase mileage this is something most the manufacturers haven’t even considered instead they are dolling up the interior and changing the exterior and streamlining in GM’s case to the point of only having two options in their HD trucks gas guzzler and automatic or high powered Diesel guzzler and a automatic. Gee guess I won’t be buying anymore GM products.
If they want to keep producing exactly what their competitors are and all compete of r the same customers that’s one thing but if they want to try opening the door up a little to a segment of the market that for many years has been phased out they might find a customer base that could help them get back on their feet ahead of their competitors as this market continues its swing towards different needs and options
Just my opinion but I know these very same issues have been raised by many other consumers who are feeling that the market place is no longer servicing their desires, it’s a market place that is becoming less and less diverse.
I didn't read your post word-for-word, but I agree that there are market-segment opportunities out there such as you describe.
But what I didn't get from your post is "Why do you think Dodge or Chrysler will fill this gap?" I ask because the only reason they survive is baecause of taxpayer $. And a lot more taxpayer money would have to go into Chrysler and Dodge before they could offer these types of vehicles.
Why would we pay many billions of $ to let Chrysler do this, when these vehicles already exist other places in the world? Why not let Chrysler fail, and just let Fiat sell their Fiats here?
When we bailed out Chrysler in 1980, Iacocca came out with the minivan and they were good to go for another couple of decades. Maybe Marchionne can pull a similar rabbit out of the hat.
Doesn't look too good at the moment though, does it?
Comments
Maserati, Ferrari or Lamborghini. :shades:
Heck, I know people who weren't even born when Fiat finally left our shores, who still know the "Fix It Again Tomorrow/Tony/Twice/Thrice" jokes! So IMO, Fiat will have a bit of a quality perception to overcome.
and don't forget "fix it all the time"!
http://www.entretien-auto.com/fiabilite_cout_entretien.php
Obviously, they forgot "Subaru" known to have 0% return for repair. It wouldn't look good on their plot!
1st: Toyota 4.8%
2nd: Mazda 5.8%
3rd: Honda 6.2%
Suzuki 8.2%
Hyndai 8.2%
BMW 9.3%
Volvo 9.4%
Nissan 9.6%
Saab 10%
Skoda 10.1%
Ford 11.1%
Audi 11.1%
Mercedes 11.4%
Citroen 11.4%
Mitsubishi 11.4%
Alfa Romeo 11.7%
Kia 11.8%
Peugeot 12.2%
Jeep 12.4%
Renault 13.1%
Opel 13.2%
Volkswagen 13.3%
Daewoo 13.7%
Chrysler 14.3%
Seat 14.3%
Lancia 14.6%
Fiat 15%
Rover 16.1%
Land Rover 19.7%
Fiat is known to have frequent problems repairable at low cost. This is true when you live over here and you are 5 miles from away from the garage :shades:
One of these lists can be weighed in favor of whoever the list makes wants to.Then which model has the most problems? They are hardly all the same.A four wheel drive SUV will not have the same issues as a small 4 door sedan.A vehicle with a 4 cylinder engine might have different issues than a V6 or a V8...An automatic has different issues than a manual transmission equipped sports car.In other words,it really gives very little useful information.
In the EU, most issues on mid-cost models concern cheap materials and assembly, the higher end issues concern technology. The whole spectrum of vehicles has mechanically reliable safety elements, the higher end also includes reliable engines and transmissions.
Those who buy the first 3 makes have a high probability of never going for repair, those who fall between 5 and 10% expect an issue, the rest have an explanation to why they bought their specific vehicle. Most people are in the 3rd case and don't complain: there is no class action here nor any equivalent to the lemon law. You simply have to pay. There is a simple saying: if you receive an incentive/rebate when you buy a vehicle, you pay it back with high interest. The first 3 makes don't buy their customers, whatever model you choose.
Engine and transmission rebuilding is no longer profitable here, SUVs are integrated in the mass with sedans and sport cars because of speed limitations. Those who practice off-road activities pay more attention to their vehicles because this is a passion and thus do preventive maintenance.
I hope this gives you a clearer view about the way the comparison was made. Parcel postage service is increasing; this should give you a clue
So Fiat has nowhere to go but up.
1.2 (Pur02 version) is around 38 MPG US combined (es. BMW 335i is 20 MPG),
1.3 TDiesel is 43,5 MPG combined.
In 2010 there will be the new engine "SGE" 900cc with Multiair and an evolution of the Multijet diesel engine (with a Start/Stop system(the Pur02 actual version)... around 54 MPG)
The 500 prototypes with the new gasoline engine (Turbo with 70hp) are around 53,7 MPG US Combined (3,4 l for 100km in the "optimistic" European omologation trip)!
http://www.autobild.de%2Fartikel%2Ferste-fahrt-mit-fiat-multiair_923741.html
http://www.fptmultiair.com
with an italian brand (Ferrari and Maserati is another target)
- Fiat 500 ("Small" platform)
- Alfa Romeo Mito ("B-Evo")
- Alfa Romeo "940 project" ("C-Evo")
There will be a little suv, Jeep "Panda" ("Small"), clone of the Fiat Panda 4x4 Cross.
In 2012:
- Alfa Romeo "944 project" ("D-Evo"), station wagon version from 2013
- Alfa Romeo "new Brera" ("D-Evo")
- Alfa Romeo new Spider ("D-Evo")
- Fiat new Punto ("B-Evo")
These cars are confirmed in the project plan of the group and will be made
in north america, in the Chrysler factories. These 4 platforms are the base
of the new versions of actual Dodge, Chrysler and Jeep cars and the new small-size cars with american brand.
Alfa Romeo probably will construct 3 more cars: a little suv (size of BMW X1 on
"C-Evo" platform), a big sedan (like Mercedes E-class, on "LX" platform (300C))
and a Big SUV ("2011 Jeep Gran Cherokee Platform").
The marketplace will guide the company, ok, Fiat has many other small cars in european market that could be good for US marketplace, and has another brand "Lancia" with other models.
About whatI would get from 3 vehicles that I owned in the 80's - an Escort, a Sentra, and a CRX. It's not that great when you realize that that sort of mileage was possible was from engine and transmission technology of 30 years ago.
I agree with gagrice - if Chrysler/Fiat comes here with small relatively expensive cars, that get 37mpg or so, they won't be a big hit. In order to really succeed they are going to need to offer something exceptional. If I wanted to buy a premium small car, I'd get a Mini; if I wanted low price and high mpg I'd get a Ford Fiesta, Hyundai, Nissan Versa or Honda Fit.
If I have a choice between a $10K Versa getting 32mpg combined (or whatever) against an unknown Fiat at 37mpg and what price, I'd choose the Versa.
If Fiat/Chrysler wants to make a hit and differentiate itself, it better bring something to market that's very inexpensive and gets 25+% better mpg than anything in it's non-hybrid class. I'd say it needs to sell its ultra-high mpg diesel, or stay home with this model. Otherwise this small car is just another "me-too", and maybe with a higher price tag because of the high union labor.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The Yaris and Fit are butt ugly.
In the meantime then Chrysler continues to bleed maybe $1B for each of the next 24 months? and then some Fiats are going to come along ... well the math just isn't good unless Chrysler can then sell say 2 million Fiats a year at MSRP.
I'm not keeping up on all the finances and who's paying the bills and exactly what they are, but someone will be paying a lot of money to keep Chrysler around, just so a few new models can be sold here in the U.S. Meanwhile you can figure in 2 years that most of the existing Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep models are history in the marketplace.
Where is the saving and who really wants to squeeze into a Fiat 500 or it's equivalent? You're in for a juvenile experience and may need assistance to pull out of your seat. You should also inquire about front tire life expectancy and cost of repair.
Last point is safety: how does it feel to drive next to a truck merging on the Interstate or being in front of a truck coming to a stop? These small vehicles are meant to stay in the city, and should have their lanes. There is too much blood shed on EU roads because of sub-compact cars that offer insufficient protection. Do you know the smell of battery acid and blood? I do.
What I'm saying is that Chrysler must have 20 main models right now with different trim levels of those. Having 1 or 2 new vehicles that may sell 100,000 each in a few years to replace these vehicles IS NOT a savior for a company the size of Chrysler.
In the current economic environment and what is likely for the next few years, with an auto market of 10-12 million in this country, and the competition there will be, there is no way Fiat will ever makeup the $'s being lost month after month. The taxpayers may make it up, and that is the only way Chrysler lives.
The fact is that when the auto market goes from 17M to 10M, we simply don't need as many auto brands as we have!
Thanks,
Chintan
Corporate Communications
Edmunds.com
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
I will be first in line for a test drive of the 500, but I agree with the majority here that the Fiat plan can't save Chrysler from the great trash heap of automotive history.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Wasn't that what the colonel who played Wagner from the attack-helicopter squandron in Apocalypse Now, said? - "I love the smell of battery acid and blood in the morning!"
My Renault Dauphine was some 850cc in size, put out 1950's power, and could be overhauled with a $29.95 kit from JCWhitney. How do I know? Been there. Done that. After a couple years of exciting ownership, I traded up for a brand new 1969 R10. I loved them both, and reveled in their "dee-fair-onss". That 1100cc R10 could wax a 1300cc VeeDubyuh in a fair drag. And that is very important! :shades:
Just to refresh your memories:
http://www.forum-auto.com/automobiles-mythiques-exception/section5/sujet380974.h- - - tm
Times have changed!
For 30$ you could get the head gasket and the copper seals/rings for the bottom of the cylinder sleeves. I'd be surprised if you got the full set of piston rings for that price (fire, compression and oil scraper)
The nice thing about that small engine was that I could carry it to the workbench by myself, without the gearbox and accessories of course. The newer engines are quite different and located in front of the vehicle, so now you loose on winter and steep slope traction and everything becomes much more expensive :sick:
Are you really sure you would enjoy such a small vehicle again with it's messy gear shifting pattern, total absence of torque and strange rear suspension?
I think we pay a lot for torque on the newer models, and our problems are related to the way we produce power to keep the environment clean. Perhaps an in-between solution, a 2 Liter engine similar to the VW 2.0 TDI could be adequate to move a mid size sedan providing good safety of it's occupants, like the new Audi4 :confuse:
The more I think about Fiat trying to save Chrysler, the more ridiculous it gets. Who is going to pay to revamp the UAW factories to build these Fiat tech cars? Our over loaded tax payers is the answer. They will fail for the same reason they went bankrupt. The domestics cannot build low profit margin cars with their labor packages. The only reason Ford is doing well is most of their low profit vehicles are built in Mexico.
It takes 10 years to train an engineer, 20 more for this young person to become a top level specialist.
We left time go by without paying much attention to "other countries". South America, Asia, India and other countries providing good education will now play the role we had in the recent years. C'est la vie. We are forced to be inventive to survive.
Could UAW or even PSA (Peugeot - Citroen) factories convert to build Fiat cars? Not immediately, that's simply human. The same rules apply in the EU: we are stuck with our habits and privileges.
Dodge needs to move their product mix away from their competitors they need to differentiate themselves. But instead of just looking at styling to gain market share look back at the drive train and it’s performance. (Think blue ocean strategy) What aren’t the competitors doing . What market segments can you service ..
Take a look at the market place and tell me how many vehicles still offer a manual transmission or a optional smaller diesel engine?
US society has grasped the concept that diesels can achieve significantly more mileage and if a manufacturer would offer them with either a manual tranny or a automatic they could capitalize on an under supplied market place and a segment of society that still prefers to drive a manual transmission and or the segment that is desiring the smaller more efficient diesel engines for daily service.
Take a look in Argentina, and use a ford F series pickup for example. You can get it with a 4cylinder diesel an d a manual transmission, the mid level is a 4.2L 6 cylinder diesel and a 5 speed that gets ridiculous mileage and the turbo charged engine keeps the truck scooting down the road with brisk power or you can order the larger more powerful 7.3 diesel. But in the US you can only get the largest most powerful diesel engine otherwise you are restricted to a gasoline engine and an efficiency robbing automatic transmission.
Chrysler could easily integrate a small 4 cylinder turbo diesel engine and a small 6 cylinder turbo diesel engine into their lineup offering it in a manual transmission and a automatic transmission format. (offering of both is key since all other manufacturers have chosen to ignore this segment of the market Offer it in all chassis’s from all jeeps, to the Dakota, and the 1500 ram. And if they made them stand alone units the wiring woes of the integrated system could be minimized, these engines also could possibly be used for retrofits to older chassis’s. Use the same bell housing pattern and flywheel across the board reducing replacement and service part’s complexity. Go back to the days of interchangeability to reduce inventory carry costs. Simplicity is key and many of these manufactures moved away from simplicity years ago in an effort to protect their brand and create a necessary market for dealership service but in the process they have created a complex and costly replacement parts inventory that they have to maintain.
If I could replace our outside salesmen’s gasoline 4x4 pickups with a pickup with a 5 or 6 speed manual and a 6 cylinder or better yet 4 cylinder diesel that would double the current 15-16 mpg they are currently getting with something that could easily net 24-28 I would do it in a heartbeat. My guys aren’t out there to win races they are out there to get the job done but they need a pickup with a lumber rack and some weight capacity. Problem is today I can only order one of a handful of options, a chevy 2500 with a 6.0 gas engine and automatic , a Dodge 2500 with a 5.7L hemi and automatic or a Ford F250 with v10 or 5.4 and automatic. OR I buy one of the New diesels that gets similar mileage, puts down Way too much power for what is mostly a commute/utility truck. Power eats fuel and the premium cost of the engine is hard to justify when for the most part it’s not netting me much more in mileage but a smaller turbo charged engine would. At $3.00 a gallon + everyone is looking back to tricks of the past to squeeze a few more miles out of each gallon everyone except the manufacturers.
Hybrids are cool for something’s but in the utility truck and 4x4 market a step back to a time of automatic or manual hubs, optional manual transmissions and smaller turbo charged engines would help us still keep our heavier duty vehicles for utility purposes on the road while and increase mileage this is something most the manufacturers haven’t even considered instead they are dolling up the interior and changing the exterior and streamlining in GM’s case to the point of only having two options in their HD trucks gas guzzler and automatic or high powered Diesel guzzler and a automatic. Gee guess I won’t be buying anymore GM products.
If they want to keep producing exactly what their competitors are and all compete of r the same customers that’s one thing but if they want to try opening the door up a little to a segment of the market that for many years has been phased out they might find a customer base that could help them get back on their feet ahead of their competitors as this market continues its swing towards different needs and options
Just my opinion but I know these very same issues have been raised by many other consumers who are feeling that the market place is no longer servicing their desires, it’s a market place that is becoming less and less diverse.
But what I didn't get from your post is "Why do you think Dodge or Chrysler will fill this gap?" I ask because the only reason they survive is baecause of taxpayer $. And a lot more taxpayer money would have to go into Chrysler and Dodge before they could offer these types of vehicles.
Why would we pay many billions of $ to let Chrysler do this, when these vehicles already exist other places in the world? Why not let Chrysler fail, and just let Fiat sell their Fiats here?
Doesn't look too good at the moment though, does it?