Mercedes still may profit from Chrysler

Of course, but the magazine goobers don't know a good vehicle from their
own backside. Motor Trend, while not on your list, didn't even include a
Ram truck in their Truck of the Year evaluation article, and of course
gave TotY to the poseur Toyota Tundra. I'd like to see that thing last
one week with the kind of treatment we gave trucks when I was a kid
working summers hauling hay with old Fords, Dodges, and Chevies. And its
even worse by today's standards: the dumb thing doesn't even have a
diesel engine option, the "big" v8 eats its own camshafts, and its
absurd to introduce such an over-sized gas-pig at a time like this...
but just because its a Toyota, its a foregone conclusion that it will be
TotY. And the Ram is *still* the only one with a true truck Diesel
engine, has the lowest diesel emissions of any of them, but it doesn't
make the list because its a Chrysler product. What a joke. Just
remember, these are the same magazines that declared the Renault
Alliance CotY, and declared that the first Toyota and Nissan minivans
were going to drive Chrysler out of that market, too. And people
wonder why I ignore the mainstream automotive magazines...

Actually, I don't find the new minvan interiors any more flimsy than any
other modern mostly-plastic interior myself. And the new seating and
entertainment system layouts are just what the 2.5 kid generic American
family ordered to move to something with a lot better mileage than a
Tahoe or Expedition. You just have to get used to the mainstream
automotive press trashing Chrysler. They always have and always will,
except for rare moments of insight, like declaring the '69 Roadrunner CotY.

One word: EWWW!!!! But styling is a personal thing. I can't stand the
new Camaro, but the Challenger and Mustang both work for me as
re-iterpretations of the originals.

 

It's highly unlikely that with the sell-off that Chrysler would be
able to manufacture the various Mercedes-like parts without an
on-going license fee. What would stop Chrysler from making and
selling those Mercedes parts for the world-wide Mercedes parts
aftermarket then?

I bet that even back during the early days of the LX platform that
Chrysler was licensing the various Mercedes parts from Mercedes (that
it was making) and buying the parts that were being made in Germany.
This makes the merger look good on paper when one division is doing
business with another division.


--------------------
Dr. Z's Painful Cure for Chrysler
February 14, 2007
(well before Chrysler was sold to Cerbus)

There was one more interesting comment made by Zetsche. He strongly
indicated that Chrysler and Mercedes won't be jointly developing cars
or sharing plants. "We do not see shared platforms as a future level
of cooperation between Chrysler and Mercedes," he said.

Chrysler and Mercedes shared a platform for the unsuccessful Chrysler
Crossfire roadster and used Mercedes parts for the 300 sedan. They
could share platforms to make Mercedes and Jeep SUVs. But truly
sharing a platform seems unlikely.

Zetsche did say that the two companies will share more engineering and
parts. And LaSorda laid out a plan to drop the number of Chrysler
platforms from 12 to seven as part of a plan to save $4.5 billion over
the next few years. Says Stallkamp: "They do a lot of redundant
engineering."

http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/feb2007/bw20070215_993167_page_2.htm
----------------------


----------------------
Chrysler's secret comeback plan
Monday, February 5, 2007

"While Chrysler has used Mercedes parts before on models such as the
Crossfire roadster and 300C sedan, Project X takes the cooperative
approach to another level."

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070205/AUTO01/702050387
----------------------

Then there's this subscription-only article. I can only guess it's
contents based on the title:

---------------------
Chrysler Confident in Mercedes Purchasing Collaboration
By Tom Murphy
WardsAuto.com, Jun 28, 2007 10:14 AM
http://subscribers.wardsauto.com/ar...ardsauto.com/ar/chrysler_mercedes_purchasing/
----------------------

My working theory is that all V-8 powered 300 sedans have German-made
transmissions.

Look at the window sheet for this 300C SRT8:

http://www.unioncjd.com/detail-2008-chrysler-300-c_srt~8-2401524.html

Engine: MX
Transmission: DE

 

And I've posted window sheets showing some 300's have transmissions
made in Germany.

I'll give you that. Mercedes does not have a 6-speed transmission.

What do they say on the Chrysler 300 web-based message boards about
transmissions and where they're made for a given model or engine
option?

 

Oh give it a rest. When the leading auto enthusiast magazine and the
leading consumer magazine both pan Chrysler products, consider they're
right and you are blind.

Because it isn't new. They only include new vehicles.

Yada, yada, yada. Grow up. Your blind, chauvanistic cheerleading for
Chrysler is tiring and childish.

Learn the basic facts.

And you have a citation for that?

Aries/Reliant, Aspen/Volare, Chrysler minivans, ...

They've picked Chrysler products before.

Yes, the Mustang does, because it is a re-interpretation. What did
Chrysler interpret (as opposed to copy)?

 

They're NOT Mercedes parts. They do not fit a single Mercedes model.

Google "Kokomo" and "Chrysler" -- you're all wet.

 

Well, 1. And I posted that even the 300s made in Austria use
transmissions made in Kokomo.

 

Yet you continue to ignore the examples (like the one below) plainly
showing some 300's with transmissions made in Germany.

How do you explain the window sheet for the SRT8 showing that the
transmission is made in Germany?

 

They will. But, they probably won't survive as an independent car company.

These venture capital firms are all the same. They buy failing companies
at firesale prices. Then they slash labor and any product that has a high
labor, and keep the products that are profitable. Then they kill investment
in R&D so the company does not have any new products coming into
pipeline. Now the company is profitable, but as it has no future it will
not stay profitable over the long term.

The last step is then selling the company to a larger company that has
similar product line for a lot of money. My guess is they are dolling up
Chrysler for eventual sale to General Motors or Toyota.

Ted

 

Most of the posters here are saying that their transmissions are made
in Germany:

http://www.300cforums.com/forums/sr...8-guys-poll-where-your-tranmission-built.html

http://www.300cforums.com/forums/ge...rts-content-lx-based-vehicles.html#post624030

I think it's beyond question that Mercedes transmissions are going
into some 300 models - mostly SRT's but until I see other wise maybe
also 300's with V8's and/or AWD.

Some claim to have "made in germany" tags on suspension parts, and
that cruise control comes straight from Merc parts bin.

And until I read otherwise I'm going to assume that Daimler is getting
a cut for anything being made that has some Daimler / Mercedes IP
(intellectual property) content even if it's being made in a North
American or Asian parts plant. That includes some "Mercedes-inspired"
transmissions made in Kokomo.

 

Oh-I didn't know that Canada and Mexico were considered domestic. That
makes sense. Ironically I was thinking of putting in a joke about how
Canadian parts should be considered domestic since the U.S. annexed
them. I thought it was bad when my father-in-law bought a 99 civic,
and was told by the dealer that at the time it had the highest
domestic parts content of any car sold in the U.S. I wonder if the
regulations have changed since then, or if a whole lot of the honda is
made here.

 

Maybe the fact that the ones Chrysler uses on the LX cars don't actually
fit on any Mercedes cars?

That's what I thought was going to happen, but *everything* I've been
able to gather from reputable sources indicates that what transferred
was only a basic design, not finished parts or even prototype parts.

 

Lloyd wrote:

When my direct experience on repeated occasions validates my opinion, I
don't believe I'm blind.

And your quasi-religious faith in what professional WRITERS (not
scientists or engineers) repeatedly churn out is abhorrent to me. Even
they are now being forced by sheer numbers of dissatisfied customers to
point out that Toyota screws up just as much as anyone else, but they do
so grudgingly.

Yes, Chrysler has made some engineering screw-ups (I give you the 2.7
liter v6...), but they're few and far between. Certainly fewer and
further between than the rag writers would have us believe.

 

This brings back usenet memories.... Parker still worships Consumer
reports and to a lesser extent the car mags... at the same time on other
subjects will bash people for not citing scientific journals. Of course
he won't pick up an engineering journal or even read the short verisons
in SAE's magazine.

 

Isn't the Tundra a largely US designed and built truck?

I've heard the quality of Toyotas and Hondas built in the
US is poorer than those built in Japan.

A sad story if true.

It took Detroit about 10 years to lose the confidence of
the American automobile buying public, and it will take
a while to get it back as well.

Another sad story that it took the Japanese to get Detroit
to once again build a quality automobile (which I think is
now more often the case than not).

The Japanese still build the best quality car though.


SMH

 

And what has that got to do with anything? It still says Toyota.

The Japanese managed to break into the US market by selling some of
the poorest designed cars sold in decades. Maybe you are to young to
remeber the early 70's Toyotas and Datsun, or the late 70's Hondas,
but I am not. I still vidly remember my Sisters 1980 Accord and my
1984 Toyota Cressida - rolling junk and they were "good" Japanese
cars. I can also remember the early Civics, Toyota 1200,
etc.....cheap, unreliable, slow, ugly, etc., etc., etc....

And your proof is? And how do you define quality?

Ed

 

Don't know or care where it was designed. Its built in the US- they
built a whole new plant near San Antonio just for that vehicle. That
doesn't change the fact that its the wrong vehicle for the times- its
the ultimate in a city truck poseur gas-hog. No real work truck option,
but its HUGE anyway. At least the Honda Ridgeline didn't pretend to be a
real working pickup truck.

 

Yes, initially their primary quality was they were cheap.
You could get yourself a Honda or Toyota for a lot less
than any American vehicle.

They really came into their own after the first oil crisis
in the early 70's. They were small cars with small engines
(underpowered to be sure), but did much better than the more
typical 12 mpg of an American car.

Then they started building cheap, small, *high quality*
cars. They developed reputations for this attribute, while
Detroit was squandering their [good] reputations.

What's the result for this past year? GMC down 6%, Ford
down 13% and Toyota up 12% (if my memory hasn't mangled
the numbers: Toyota up, GM/Ford down at least).

Consumer report surveys. JD Power initial quality surveys.
My own [very good] mechanics that admit they seem to see
fewer problems with the Japanese made vehicles than the
American ones.

You're welcome to trash CR. I do myself. But their surveys
of longer term car quality is based on people responses, not
something they make up.

People may be more inclined to voice unfavorable experiences
about their cars, but if so, I would not think the brand of
the car would matter. There are lots of Toyotas and Hondas
out there so I don't think this is a sampling bias.

American cars *do* have more problems, although many of the
reports on car quality I have read now put American and
Japanese cars very close in quality of build and reliability.
The European manufacturers are still quite far out from the
Japanese.

You have sources of information that dispute this? What are
the sources?


SMH

 

That may be true but most pickup trucks on the road today,
and for quite a few years in the past, have not been work
trucks.

The Tundra pretty much matches what the market for a half
ton pickup truck is now days.

"Gas hog"??? I wouldn't think 15-20 mpg would be considered
"gas hog" given that's pretty much what the Fords, Dodges
and Chevys get.


SMH

 

The very fact that CR sampling is self-reported introduces a bias. An
uncontrolled bias.

It's a sub-sample of all the buying public that is not random to begin
with. Then, from that sub-sample, another non-random sample.

It violates the very basis of statistical validation.

E.P.

 

I'm old enough to remember the Vega Pinto and so on.

How about drive it.