Buyer Beware at Chrysler

My question is this.
If Chrysler doesn't have the volume to keep their designs up to date,
why did GM fall so far behind with their designs?

http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/apr2007/bw20070412_730763.htm?c
han=search

 

GM rested on their laurels thinking that their position as #1 would
never change, that it was theirs by divine right. GM failed/refused to
look at the real world and they are now paying the price-as are Ford &
Chrysler. The Detroit Tiny Three fading into history.

 

This company was doomed by bad management long ago. I still own & drive
Mopars from the '70's - Plymouth Furys(2), Dusters(2), Scamps(2) - Dodge
Darts (1) & Chrysler Cordobas (3) and New Yorkers (1). I also have a 87
Dodge 4x4 and two cars from the '90s - an Intreped & a Concord, both
disappointing junk.. I use to run Jeeps before Chrysler bought them too, the
new ones are cheap mass market junk compared to the old ones... little 4
bangers with chinsy thin doors.

I'm hoping someone -an American- buys Chrysler and pulls it back away from
all of this Global garbage. I use to proud to run Chryslers, Plymouths,
Dodges & Jeeps but now their nothing but a shell covering some foreign
manufactures junk. My real concerns are:
1. Will Jeep be included in the sale of Chrysler? and who gets Jeeps 4x4
technology? (Jeep Quadratrac from the 70s was tough to beat).
2. Who gets the Hemi Engine design? The Hemi engines being produced today
are not the same engine design from the 60 - 70 engines.. it's a cheap
redesign to capitalize on the legend of one of the greatest engines ever
built, the 426. (Chrysler built smaller Hemi's back in the 50s too -331,
354, 392) Todays Hemi's are going to be dropping pushrods down into the
engine after they get substantial wear on them and then Hemi will get a bad
name because the Germans ruined it.

I see the cheap, ugly little car that they are passing off as the Dodger
Charger today, and my only thoughts are: 'Man, what an insult to the Dukes
of Hazard!' The Dodge Charger is my all-time favorite car & the 426 Hemi
engine my all-time favorite Engine, but that new thing isn't a Dodge Charger
& that ain't a true Hemi under the hood... I would never even consider
buying one.. their ugly and look like they've been put in a trash compactor
to crunch a foot off each end. ( I am negotiating on a 66 Charger, no
engine, and a 70 Charger with a 440 right now).

Right there is a perfect example of the marketing failure of Chrysler...
they left the people who took them to the dance in the first place. Instead
they went for mass appeal with marketing gimmicks like renaming a German
peice of junk with the legendary name of an American Classic. Did these
people at Chysler also think I would run right out and buy a Mitsubishi just
because they stuck a DODGE name plate on it? Who's idea was it to put cheap,
defective mass market ball-joints on Dodge Durangos when people buying
Durangos expected something heavy-duty? Come On!!! I just can't wait to see
the made in China or Korea version of Chrysler... the German version sure
was an insult.

For lack of a better alternative, I'm going to be running cheaply made
Chevy Blazers until Chrysler produces something truely American that I would
once again be proud to own. It will probably be an eternal wait since it
seems that Chrysler has a historic tradition of Clueless management. I don't
really give a F*&% if Germans, Japs, Chinese, Enviros or writers for the Car
magazines like MY car or not, if I wanted one of their cars I would've
bought one and I'm tired of being insulted by them trying to sell me their
cars by puttting a Chrysler/Dodge name-tag on it. I want an American Car
built BY Americans FOR Americans. I want a tapered box front-end and sleek
quarter panels/roof lines leading to a box back-end. I want a big gas
guzzling V-8 with rear wheel drive and enough horsepower to melt the tires
off. That was what Chrysler/Dodge/Plymouth was all about... not mass-market
cars but cars for niche buyers, buyers who want traditional Ugly American
Cars. When they built a car like that I'll buy one (even a new slant-6 Dart
would do), they can take their current version of the Charger and Hemi
engine and shove it.

 

The new Dodge Charger is not ugly nor is it underpowered.
Who cares if it's not a true "Hemi". It has 350HP in R/T package and 425HP
in the SRT8.
It's a great car and something GM couldn't give us a 4 Door RWD V8 without
paying Cadillac prices.
Not too many people remember the cars from the 60's and the ones that do are
too busy buying Buick Lacrosse/Lucernes.

Keep driving your POS Chevy Blazer.

 

That is a great question. Beware any short answers to it. Only the people
who work at GM And Ford know what they did wrong. I won't try to answer
that. I can tell you this about scale. If you compare AMC, Chrysler, Ford,
and GM over the last 50 years (or whatever, you pick) the effects of scale
are dreadfully obvious in the area of style and quality, fit and finish.
Especially if you look at the cosmetic quality of the cars after they hit 5
or 10 years old (you pick) they would fall right in line with who sold the
most. Chrysler quality was horrendous in the 70's, and then the styling
and paint were horrendous in the 80's. For their part, at no time did AMC
have a car that could match the tactile quality of anything from GM. They
had no styling leader, ever. The bottom line is GM had more resources, and
they used them. They could spread the costs of styling, engineering, and
research over more cars. Once in a while, like the 55 Chryslers, they'd
actually hit a styling home run. But usually not.

So scale is a very real disadvantage for Chrysler. They have overcome it
with huge strides, compared to where they were. If you looked at the paint
on a 1985 Chrysler product after 5 years, they were peeling and flaking and
just awful. By 1995, the paint was staying on, and only the mylar chrome
was peeling off. You won't see any of that right now on a 5-year-old 2002.
They used the same truck cab from 1973 for 25 model years, and it was ugly
in 1973 when it came out. They canceled the 3500 trucks in 1980. Now,
they've restyled twice since then, and they're introducing a 4500 and a
5500. All the while losing less money and suffering less than GM and Ford.
They have actually driven GM and Ford out of the minivan market, and made
them admit it. They've made some good choices. Management was apparently
better. Maybe some guys in engineering just had more brilliant ideas per
person. You can overcome the effects of scale some days. One thing I feel
sure of, if so many experts didn't agree the Chrysler minivans were the best
for the last 20 years or so, Chrysler would have gone broke. That has
really helped, that they had one product that was the leader, even back when
the paint all flaked off.

Today's product lineup from Chrysler is debateable. I think time will judge
it. Resale value is still bad, and that is a really clear indication of
Chrysler's product shortcomings of years past. I think it'll improve (the
products did), or at least Ford will drop down and get under it.

 

Haha hahha a hha aaah. Whew! There's somebody that's /hard/ to insult.

This wasn't the first time I've heard somebody say the modern Hemi isn't
"the same" as the Hemis built 40 years ago. Gosh, we know that. Everybody
knows it. Don't worry, there's not any sane person that thinks that's the
same motor. Calling that a "hemi" just empty marketing with lots and lots
of horsepower. We all get it. Trust me.

 

Come on. If it's got 4-doors, it ain't a Charger. That's all there is too
it. And you want to make a bet on how many people remember the 60's
Chargers? Ever heard of "The Dukes of Hazard"? Or, the 2 new movies, all
using the '69 Charger? One of the most popular TV cars of all time.
The Charger is a nice looking car, but IMHO, it's not a Charger. They should
have came up with another name, and built a 2-door to have the honor of
being called "Charger".

 

Strange you say that as my '95 Concord is still the best car I've ever
had. The A/C was junk, but Chrysler at their cost finally repaired it
just before their 7 year warranty extension.

Whoops the LH cars were built in Canada, but as with many vehicles using
parts from many countries.
The 300 is Canadian as well.

However BMW, Mercedes and Toyota produce some nice cars in the USA.

 

So, no disrespect intended, but educate me on this. Just how have they
changed them and cheapened the design?
I was there in the 60's &70's but spent a lot of that time working for
Uncle Sam in far off lands. My best friend in those days had a
Plymouth Superbird that to this day, I still consider as one of the
most awesome vehicles ever built.

 

I was a toddler when the Dukes were on TV.
The over 35-40 crowd will remember the show and the ones that remember the
69 Charger?
That was almost 40 years ago which means you would have been at least 18
years old to consider buying back then which makes you 58+ years old.
Get with the times.
What about the new Impala SS? It's not even RWD for F*&^ sake.
Just wait for the Dodge Challenger if you have to have a 2 door.

 

That is a sad commentary on automotive life.

 

Apparently you have had your head stuck in the ground the past several
years. I too was a toddler when the Dukes were on TV, but you can bet your
ass I know what a '69 Charger is. Even in the newest "Dukes of Hazard"
movie, they still used the same car, a 1969 Charger. And, check with your
"most popular car on TV" polls. Usually the General Lee wins every time. As
for the Dodge Challenger, the pictures I have seen of it are quite nice, but
I think the new Camaro will be crowned King.

 

I saw Iacocca on TV promoting his new book. He blames management at
Chrysler. He says his replacement did a poor job. He also believes
executive salaries in the industry are outrageous.

If you follow the financial news you hear that employee health care
expense drags down American manufacturing.

A recent news article says some conservatives are now in agreement with
labor unions in that globalization and free trade policies are bad for
America. Conservative Ralph Gomory at the Alfred Sloan Foundation says
the focus on profitability and footloose corporations harm the US
economy. The results include loss of industry, lower wages, lower
living standards and the ever growing national debt. A weakening
economy can't sustain super power status, space programs, the
infrastructure, research and social programs.

While losing market share to the Japanese, companies pay excessive
executive salaries and bonuses, pay for unreasonably high health care
and have little resources left for engineering, styling and quality control.

 

What's this got to do with global trade?

It has been said that a reason for Daimler Benz/DaimlerChrysler's eagerness
to list in New York is tto let the top management to have 'legitimate'
access to the outrageous American salaries.

DAS

For direct replies replace nospam with schmetterling
---
[...]
, [US}..companies pay excessive

[...]

 

Think a bit. In a global economy, the contries where managment gouges
the proceeds, government, health care and insurance do the same,
manufacturers can't compete. Product price goes up while quality
suffers. The Japaese and Chinese win.

 

Of course I have heard of the '69 Charger.
So what? Driving it and reading about it are too very different things.
You probably know nothing about the way it handles and it accelerates.
Plus, I never buy used so even if the '69 Charger was so great I won't be
buying a used one.

 

Many cars today will handle better, accelerate as fast, and have many more
modern and practical advances. That has nothing to do with the enjoyment of
driving a classic automobile, flying a classic airplane, or cruising in a
mahogany Cris Craft inboard speedboat, etc. You evidently don't know, and
don't care, and that is just fine. It makes more room for the rest of us
that do appreciate such things. They just don't make nostalgia like they
used to. Let's talk about this again in ten years.

 

That is a disadvantage USA manufacturing has compared to Canada.
Labor costs in the two countries are similar, but Canada has a Gov. run
lifetime basic universal health care system.

 

Is that why Mercedes & BMW built so many vehicles in the USA?

 

So my lovely '95 Concord passes as an old "near classic" that runs
almost as good as a new cheaply built car?
That's the best of both worlds.