Threxx

Look... GM and Ford both had their dark eras. In fact many of the models from their dark eras or 'partially shaded' eras are still in production today.

But both companies clearly have some stellar new models out now or about to come out. Models that the magazines and such can't deny are class-leading or at least highly competitive within their class. Models that have interiors that make people say "wow" and mean it in a good way.

But Chrysler? I still haven't seen a single hint that they have "gotten it" yet. Everything they put out even to date seems to range from sub par to par. It all seems so generic, half-assed, and uninspired. I think it was in Motor Trend that I read somebody write "If Chrysler fell off the face of the planet tomorrow, would any notice?"

OK sure, some people would notice, but talking about your average consumer... would most of them even realize Chrysler was missing? I doubt it.

Reading this 25 thousand mile Dodge Caravan durability test by Edmunds is what got me started on this rant.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...hotopanel..3.*

A 40 thousand dollar van and it's just one let down after another accompanied by a worst in class interior.
Remember when vans were the one thing Chrysler was kicking everyone else's *** at? If you owned a Caravan or Town & Country then you had a 'real' van... the rest were just pretenders.

Z28x

Jeep Wrangler, Dodge Ram, Dodge Caravan, and the RWD cars

As far as "cars" go, the 300C was the first great car from them in a while. They have nothing below that though.

Z28Wilson

Jeep has had some real stinkers (Compass comes to mind) but I think overall their lineup is decent. The new Ram is supposed to be quite good. And of course, the 300 and Charger have done well.

I think Chrysler's problems have been (and continue to be) their interiors. The Caravan review you posted didn't sound too good though. Believe me, I've been well versed in Chrysler minivans - my parents bought their first in '85 and owned one continuously up until the 2008 model debuted. They hated the design so much they leased a Jeep GC instead. Maybe that was a good thing.

Threxx

I've sat in the current Wrangler and while I understand it's sold as a "purpose built" low-frills vehicle, its overall quality is not something that's going to impress anyone.

Ram... I have to admit I haven't sat in a new one. Seriously though... what's changed? I've heard this about the Ram every time one has come out.

The Caravan... you obviously didn't read through my entire post.

I've driven the 300C and hated almost everything about it. Drives like a boat and the interior makes me want to drive off a cliff. Seems based on the reviews I've read that almost everything based on that same chassis suffers from a case of "the sames"... they all look too similar, drive too similar, etc.


What's worst about Chrysler is that they have nothing to fall back on. With GM they could often times say "yeah, it may not look or sound pretty, but the powertrain will keep on ticking until the rest of the car around it falls apart".

Chrysler has had tons of powertrain issues through the years as well so what can they fall back on? "Yeah the interior may be falling apart, and it sounds like a bucket of bolts but the engine and transmissions... whoops... there goes 1st gear and your head gasket."

Z28x

I was thinking along the lines of what are sellers and what I've seen good reviews for.

The new truck has a lot of new utility and an updated Hemi.

People like the Jeep Wrangler from what they are. And the 300 interior didn't impress me either, I had one for a week while my truck was getting body work done. A lot of people like the car through, and a new one comes out next year. Challenger is also getting a lot of people excited and sales are very good.

Hemi seems to be a great engine, and I havn't heard of any horror stories with the 5 speed auto that they use in the RWD vehicles.

Chrysler really is lacking big time on just about every product that doesn't have a Hemi though.

Z28Wilson

My beef with Wrangler is that it can be obnoxiously expensive. I remember looking at one at NAIAS and was floored by the near $40k sticker. Seemed insane for what you got.

A lot. The interior has taken a quantum leap from the old Ram. The Hemi has been improved, the storage boxes along the bedrails seem useful, and it's the first pickup I can remember having a coilover rear suspension - kills towing ratings but does give it a better ride.

Jason E

Ever see the bumper sticker "Its A Jeep Thing...You Wouldn't Understand?" Well, that applies in spades to the negative comments about the Wrangler. Its an icon. It sells like hotcakes, without big incentives. It makes Chrysler decent money, and has the best resale value this side of a Mini...seriously. Look it up.

The new 300 and Grand Cherokee will be home runs, IMO. The same MT that made the above derogatory statement about Chrysler vanishing also can be quoted as saying the computer generated photo of the 300 in the viability study does the car no justice. They've seen it in person, and I guess its drop-dead gorgeous.

The Ram is the best full size pickup out there, period. C&D thought so last month. The 200C concept is a gorgeous car in search of a platform...will it be a Nissan derived chassis? Fiat? Who knows just yet...but the style is certainly there.

As for the Caravan interior, indeed, at 40k its bad...the last new-release holdout from the Daimler days. But, people don't buy 40k Caravans...they buy 40k Town & Countrys, which are WAY nicer inside, even in more basic form. $40k gets you a T&C Limited with heated suede and leather seats, and a gorgeous-for-a-van interior.

Chrysler ain't dead yet...nor do I expect it to be.

ad356

i dont think chrysler has a good overall line of vehicles. the challenger, while a nice looking car is easily out done by the camaro and mustang. their small cars are joke. who wants a nitro or caliber, or sure the names sound cool but the products are terrible. GM offers the cobalt, malibu, and impalla. the malibu has recieved many accolades, the cobalt gets some of the best fuel economy in its class (37 mpg XFE, better than camry and civic). the media likes to badmouth the cobalt but i see a ton of them on the road. personally if i bought a new car, the cobal wouldnt bother me one bit. although, i of course would have my eyes on the new camaro. i have always been a sucker for the camaro, and 29 mpg at 300 hp is extremely impressive. i think the camaro is an all out win win for general motors, and i hope the "come-back kid" does well.

Tokuzumi

The interior has been constantly panned for being a sea of plastic. But a plastic interior is not a measure of quality. If it holds together, and the dash doesn't crack like all chrysler products built during the 90's, it is a quality interior. It may not be pretty, however. But the Hemi is a wonderful engine, and should last forever. And the 5 speed transmission I believe is a MB sourced slush box.

I have read a fair amount on the Charger/300C forums, and people love these cars. The main thing people complain about the LH cars is a certain year doesn't have a certain function in the driver information center (DIC for short....insert joke here), such as 0-60 time, or a light when the displacement on demand kicks in.

Threxx

You are talking about the difference in perceived quality and durability.

Perceived quality is where these interiors fall flat on their face.

Actually, durability may be an issue too... just because a dashboard isn't cracking doesn't make it durable. If it loosens up and sounds like a bucket of bolts every time you drive over a bump in the road, it has failed to hold together, may not be something you can see, but you can definitely hear it, which is just as important.

z28 justin

Jeep, Jeep, and Jeep. As long as Jeep stays alive with it's Wrangler, Liberty, and Grand Cherokee they'll make some money. People who buy Wranglers certainly don't do it for the interiors. As far as reliablilty, I've not heard many bad things about the 5-speed autos. Some complaints about the early hemis with some electrical bugs but nothing in the newer setups. The 3.7L and 4.7L truck engines are fairly bulletproof. Anything under the size of a Charger, I'm not so sure on but I haven't researched them either.

guionM

You must have an extremely short memory, because when Chrysler's 300 came out, it not only won raves from car mags, it's the only car I can remember in my roughly 40 years of being around that a single car made TIME BUSINESSWEEK and NEWSWEEK, plus had famous entertainers leaving messages with the CEO to try and get one early. It also provoked GM North America to incorperate itself into Holden Australia's Zeta program, that was in it's final development stages.

It wasn't till gas prices started hitting $5 per gallon that the public's enfactuation with the 300 cooled..... and oddly, the other LX (the Charger) to take over lead in RETAIL sales.

So, if you can't think of any Chrysler that made the country stand on it's ear, you don't have back any farther than 2004 (or the toy car section of your local 7-11 or Truck Stop) to see Chryslers that made an impact.



As for quality, Chrysler's LX cars are certainly very solid and well made. I was in a Dodge Challenger just yesterday, and it's interior quality is far and away better than the now departed 2009 Mustang and not far off from the 2010's interior. I haven't sat in a final production Camaro yet, so I can't compare it with a Challenger.

Chrysler's Hemi is indestructable. It's DOD system has been noted as one of the most seemless. Chrysler has a long reputation of making the oily parts last decades. If there has been any weakpoint, it's been with the Mercedes designed automatic. It's not bad, but it is the only issue that has generated attention as far as reliability with the LX.



Chrysler has been the number one seller of minivans for longer than most members here have been alive. They not only repelled and destroyed both GM and Ford's attempts to get into the minivan market, they are still ahead of the competition... the competition that's left.

Even Volkswagen's Routan minivan is really a Chrysler minivan... made right there on the Chrysler assembly line with Caravans and Town and Countrys.


But...

Chrysler's not perfect.

Chrysler's mid size cars (Avenger & Sebring) are representative of how Chrysler's percieved, and it isn't pretty. Jeeps have gotten a pass because how seam line up isn't as important mechanical indestructability and longevity, which is something Chrysler has traditionally been good at.

Chrysler's Ram trucks have finally caught up with Ford's F-series and GMT900s is both quality and fuel economy, but Ford just pulled ahead again.

Finally,
The Chrysler LXs that gathered all the attention are now 5 and 6 years old!

The Mustang and FiveHundred both came out that year. The Mustang has been restyled, and the 2nd restyling of the Five Hundred (now a Taurus) is about to hit the streets. The current Impala came out the year after the 300 and the same year as the Charger... and we're calling that car old.

There are accurate pictures of the new 300 in the May edition of a couple of car mags, and the 200C concept is a barely disguised example of the new Chrysler Sebring replacement. Both look like showstoppers, and as long as Chrysler makes it past May 1st, should have the same impact the original LXs did as long as Chrysler doesn't cut corners or fails to keep an eye on suppliers quality.

Like GM, Chrysler knows how to make good vehicles. However, when your business plan actually involves selling way over half of your passenger cars to fleet and rental buyers, like them, you tend to save the good stuff for your high retail vehicles like Rams, minivans, and top level 300Cs.

With Chrysler's "Rental" business model in shambles, and the only hope is to compete with a full line of cars on the retail level, the question is can Chrysler muster the resources it's going to need to spread quality across it's entire model line, and not just a select few.

That can only be answered with a Fiat hookup and a few billion co-signed by the government.

Tokuzumi

And you mentioned it in your post.....perceived quality. I don't need to say anything else.

Threxx

Perceived... as in tactile... touch, sound, smell.

It's exactly what GM failed at and is now starting to succeed at. It's exactly what Chrysler still hasn't even started to make any progress on that I can tell.

It may not be important to you, but it is very much a real and significant measure of quality to your average car buyer.

There's this downright ignorant notion around this forum in particular (not everyone, but many) that perceived quality is not a real quality metric. It's is. Perceived quality simply refers specifically to quality that can be perceived by consumers. Not all quality or lack of can be perceived by consumers.

Z284ever

I've had three Dodges, all bought new.

'84 GLH
'98 Caravan
'04 Durango

The Caravan was by far, the best, most useable and most reliable vehicle I've ever owned.
I never needed to go to the dealer for anything. In the 110K+ miles we owned it, we only needed to replace consumables (tires/brakes/etc.). It drove great, handled well, was incredibly useable and never let us down.

Certainly one of the great American vehicles of the 20th century.