Compared to the competition it's
- cheaper
- much better looking in and out
- got the best infotainment system
- good real world gas mileage
There is a LONG LIST of midsizers I would get the 200C over. In fact the only one I would probably get over it would be an Accord Sport, because stickshift. Did this car really deserve to die? Why didn't anyone buy it?
1. Terrible name recognition / reputation
2. Poor interior space
3. Poor acceleration with 2.4-liter
4. Poor fuel economy with the 2.4-liter
5. Poor visibility
6. Poor handling except on the "S" version
On top of all the reasons that various people choose cars that don't suck in any important way.
Besides, it's not like "no one" buys it. Chrysler sold 178,000 of them last year. That's a lot by most metrics, just less than the leading competitors.
I'm sure some of it was that the previous model didn't garner much good will. Reputation is hard to shake in a single generation.
Bro sales have fallen off a cliff
Month to month they are selling less than half this year than they did last year. Hell in March volume was down by 2/3
http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01/chrysler-200-sales-figures.html (http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01/chrysler-200-sales-figures.html)
What the hell is going on. The POS 2014 model did better. Way better. It's just weird that there was so much interest in the new version, and now it seems like nobody wants anything to do with it. I wouldn't think fuel economy would do it- gas is dirt cheap right now. It's a real mystery
I hadn't realized it was so steep, but that does come after the stated FCA goal of eliminating the car; maybe Chrysler has stopped trying to sell it effectively, in addition to turning off potential buyers by publicly disavowing it?
Gas prices shouldn't be a factor, because the 200's mileage is worse than its competitors, yet other midsize sedans are still selling fine. Lower gas prices should actually be canceling out one of its flaws.
Of course, it is aging and key competitors have gotten updates recently (Sonata and Camry in '15, Accord, Optima, and Altima in '16), so that may be part of it as well.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 16, 2016, 08:26:40 AM
Bro sales have fallen off a cliff
Month to month they are selling less than half this year than they did last year. Hell in March volume was down by 2/3
http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01/chrysler-200-sales-figures.html (http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01/chrysler-200-sales-figures.html)
What the hell is going on. The POS 2014 model did better. Way better. It's just weird that there was so much interest in the new version, and now it seems like nobody wants anything to do with it. I wouldn't think fuel economy would do it- gas is dirt cheap right now. It's a real mystery
Fewer fleet sales this year? Also, they discontinued a major incentive program that was in place last year (a dealer cash incentive that resulted in a number of dealers selling the cars to themselves and then selling the otherwise new cars as used).
I don't think the average midsize mainstreamer customer is keeping up with Sergio's shenanigans. I'm feeling like something happened at the dealer level. Maybe FCA stopped putting 5 figure sums on the hoods to move them and this is more reflective of the true interest in these cars?
It's reputation preceded it. Fleets don't care about reputation.
Mainstreamer people do def watch the news, and Sergio's deriding of the 200 was all over the news.
Quote from: 2o6 on April 16, 2016, 11:28:09 AM
Mainstreamer people do def watch the news, and Sergio's deriding of the 200 was all over the news.
The leader of a big company publicly slammed one of his company's products? :confused:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on April 16, 2016, 11:37:58 AM
The leader of a big company publicly slammed one of his company's products? :confused:
http://www.autoblog.com/2016/01/25/marchionne-chrysler-200-design-dummies-report/ (http://www.autoblog.com/2016/01/25/marchionne-chrysler-200-design-dummies-report/)
Sales were starting to slow, but then they just fell like a rock after this sentiment. It was all over the news that Chrysler was chopping what few non SUV's it had on sale; especially since the 200's only been on sale for like 18 months.
Sergio sets his targets too high - remember how botched the US Fiat 500 launch was? Or how bungled the Dodge Dart release was?
Quote from: 2o6 on April 16, 2016, 11:41:37 AM
http://www.autoblog.com/2016/01/25/marchionne-chrysler-200-design-dummies-report/ (http://www.autoblog.com/2016/01/25/marchionne-chrysler-200-design-dummies-report/)
Sales were starting to slow, but then they just fell like a rock after this sentiment. It was all over the news that Chrysler was chopping what few non SUV's it had on sale; especially since the 200's only been on sale for like 18 months.
Sergio sets his targets too high - remember how botched the US Fiat 500 launch was? Or how bungled the Dodge Dart release was?
I've not been keeping up with auto news. But it's still quite idiotic to slam your own products publicly.
Isn't the Dart being canned? They should just sell the Alfa Romeo Giulietta in the US: more stylish and exotic.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on April 16, 2016, 11:45:56 AM
I've not been keeping up with auto news. But it's still quite idiotic to slam your own products publicly.
Isn't the Dart being canned? They should just sell the Alfa Romeo Giulietta in the US: more stylish and exotic.
Giuletta would be too expensive, and the Dart is basically the same car for all intents and purposes.
Pretty much
every non SUV from Chrysler is getting axed, aside from the Charger and 300, both of which are old cars on old platforms.
Autoblog is not mainstream news
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 16, 2016, 12:06:50 PM
Autoblog is not mainstream news
No, it was in local news outlets as well, not just car sites. But business and local news as well.
Why would anyone buy one over a Mid size Toyota or Honda?
Quote from: MrH on April 16, 2016, 03:02:41 PM
Why would anyone buy one over a Mid size Toyota or Honda?
Looks a lot better
Costs less for the same level of equipment
Domestic name brand
:huh:
Better question is why get something like an Altima or even a Fusion over a 200?
Because it'll be on the road 5 years from now?
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 16, 2016, 03:59:07 PM
Looks a lot better
Costs less for the same level of equipment
Domestic name brand
:huh:
Better question is why get something like an Altima or even a Fusion over a 200?
Altima:
More room, better mileage, better visibility, better reputation.
Fusion:
More room, better mileage, better acceleration, better handling.
You keep asking the same question and the answer doesn't change. The 200 has its good points, but it's just not an especially well-rounded car, and many of its competitors are. It's a niche player, just like the Dart, and Chrysler doesn't understand why its niche cars don't have the mainstream appeal of well-rounded and well-established competitors.
I rented a 200, it was pretty bad. The rear visibility was terrible, the AT slammed its shifts HARD at off idle speeds, the shift knob ergonomics were hilariously bad, and its suspension was spongy on the freeway. Just bleh.
Don't let your contrarian tendencies convince you that it's a good car. The competition is better.
1.) Sergio is a moron who is running Chrysler into the ground (again)
2.) Chrysler revoked a lot of dealership franchises during the recession for some stupid reason (sell more cars with fewer dealers...OK)
Because it was an also-ran competing in a declining market segment?
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on April 16, 2016, 09:31:12 PM
1.) Sergio is a moron who is running Chrysler into the ground (again)
2.) Chrysler revoked a lot of dealership franchises during the recession for some stupid reason (sell more cars with fewer dealers...OK)
Pretty sure all of the Big 3 did #2. I imagine the dealers they shuttered were propped up by the home office in the first place.
Lots of places have redundant dealerships. I can drive for 15 minutes from my house and hit 3 Chevy dealerships, and I'm sure that's the case for 50% of Americans.
I think the reason why Fiat Chrysler sells anything outside of fleet sales is because people "want" a certain vehicle which has little to do with economic value. People want a Jeep or 300 or Challenger. For your standard midsize transportation appliance, 200 offers little above the competition as others have mentioned. No one "wants" a 200. I think it looks very good but so does a Fusion as well as a buch of other midsizers. And Fiat Chrysler reliability sucks and resale value of the 200 probably sucks as well. And the warranty isn't a marketing factor which Hyundai was brilliant at.
My Dad only buys domestics (even though car parts are manufactured everywhere and Honda may be built in the US and Ford may be built in Mexico - but whatever). He liked the 200 a lot a year or so ago but I steered him towards a Chevy or Ford.
I don't know guys.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PppcLoxShxc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PppcLoxShxc)
http://www.kbb.com/car-news/all-the-latest/2015-midsize-sedan-comparison-2015-chrysler-200/2000012091/#survey (http://www.kbb.com/car-news/all-the-latest/2015-midsize-sedan-comparison-2015-chrysler-200/2000012091/#survey)
http://www.thecarconnection.com/compare/chrysler_200_2015_choices (http://www.thecarconnection.com/compare/chrysler_200_2015_choices)
I'm just not seeing where all the hate is. It seems like it's pretty well received. I remember them doing a decent amount of press for it too and this was before I had cable. Back seat is tight but that's not unique in this segment. I'm thinking this got buried entirely by brand
So you found two reviews that are somewhat positive, and that's your evidence against all the other reviews that are negative, plus other people here who have personal experience, plus all of the pure specs that leave the 200 trailing. You didn't start this thread to ask a question, you started it because you wanted people to agree with your answer: Yes, the only reason that a car that's worse than its competitors in measurable ways isn't selling well is the brand.
:hesaid:
The new 200 is leaps and bounds better than the old car, but that wasn't hard to do. The 200 was lightyears ahead of the old Sebring, but that wasn't hard to do.
The 200 is mediocre; incentives made it attractive, but the car can't compete with the domestic or imported competition. The new Malibu beats the brakes off it.
I want to believe :cry: It is such a good looking car
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 20, 2016, 12:03:06 PM
I want to believe :cry: It is such a good looking car
(http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m144/cleigh8/Screenshot102-3.jpg)
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 20, 2016, 12:03:06 PM
I want to believe :cry: It is such a good looking car
There we go, now you're being honest with us about your meaning. ;) Yeah, it's a good looking car, they did a really nice job of improving the looks over the previous generation.
The number one problem is that the only piece of property that garners any reverence in the Chrysler universe is Jeep, Ram, 300, TC/Caravan, and Charger.
No one under the age of 40 has a real positive view of Dodge/Chrysler. It has to be cheaper because no one would spend the same money and get into an Altima, Camry, or Accord. The lower market was swept by Hyundai/Kia as they have put out decent midsizers over the last decade.
The bottom line is that Chrysler is a bad company. The only thing holding it together is Jeep who would likely benefit from different ownership.
Im wondering if Sergio is seriously considering selling Jeep off and living off that huge golden parachute
On the flipside I feel like dude's pride would force him to go down with the ship
Fiat's purchase of Chrysler was masterful though I wonder if those billions would have been better spent on Fiat itself. Though half of that purchase $$$ came from Chrysler itself :facepalm:
It is clear the Chrysler and Dodge brands are just a drain on the company finances. At this point, they both need to go.
Jeep is a strong brand globally and is very much the jewel in the crown for FCA. Fiat is also huge, particularly in Europe and South America and still has potential as a niche brand in North America. Ram is another cash cow that FCA needs to milk for all it's worth.
The launch of Alfa Romeo into the mainstream premium market is crucial since Alfa will be able to command prices which Dodge or Chrysler never could. Joining Alfa Romeo and Maserati together at the hip can be beneficial for both companies.
FCA is experiencing the same problem GM did a decade ago; too many brands chasing to few buyers. It is time to thin the heard.
Quote from: Madman on April 21, 2016, 12:40:40 PM
It is clear the Chrysler and Dodge brands are just a drain on the company finances. At this point, they both need to go.
Jeep is a strong brand globally and is very much the jewel in the crown for FCA. Fiat is also huge, particularly in Europe and South America and still has potential as a niche brand in North America. Ram is another cash cow that FCA needs to milk for all it's worth.
The launch of Alfa Romeo into the mainstream premium market is crucial since Alfa will be able to command prices which Dodge or Chrysler never could. Joining Alfa Romeo and Maserati together at the hip can be beneficial for both companies.
FCA is experiencing the same problem GM did a decade ago; too many brands chasing to few buyers. It is time to thin the heard.
The Fiat-Alfa Romeo-Maserati half the company is the one that is the drain on finances. North American Chrysler-Dodge-Ram-Jeep sales account for something ludicrous like 85% of the company's profits. If there is one brand FCA ought to have culled from the
herd it's Alfa Romeo. The Giulia—a car that hasn't even launched yet—is already a multi-billion-dollar loss for the company. It'll never be anywhere near popular enough to justify the money spent on it.
Getting rid of Chrysler and Dodge would be cutting off FCA's nose to spite its face. Sergio Marchionne has totally lost the plot and needs to go. His schizophrenic product planning will be the death of the company.
Actually, I take that back: Lancia needs to die first. They still make Ypsilons and sell them in Italy.
FCA's problem is.... how can I put this. FCA is what happens when enthusiats take the reins of a mainstream company. Instead of developing the boring, high volume mainstream platforms and engines they need, they put their $$$$ into HELLCAT, low volume low cost CF sports cars and Alfa Romeo vaporware. The Compact Wide platform is ancient and overweight. The only modern engines FCA has are the Pentastar V6s, which are about as high tech as a 20 year old Nissan VQ, and those 4 bangers they developed with Mitsubishi/Hyundai almost 10 yrs ago. A LOT of the rest of their engines are port injected cast iron block lumps from the stone age (FIRE, HEMI). For this Alfa deal they NEED state of the art engines. They need a 2.0T with all the bells and whistles. The neutered Hyundai 2.0T won't cut it. But I don't think they have the resources to develop something to rival the likes of BMW's N20 from scratch and on their own. That's what the hold up is.
Still though, I like the 200. OK, it's overweight. OK, it has a cramped backseat. OK, it's engines are mediocre. But it has a lot going for it that its competition doesn't. I don't think I would ever buy something from this segment, but if I had to and couldn't get a 6MT Accord Sport I would at least give the 200 V6 a look. But the whole company is in a state of crisis which sadly is business as usual.
Quote from: 93JC on April 21, 2016, 01:14:36 PM
The Fiat-Alfa Romeo-Maserati half the company is the one that is the drain on finances. North American Chrysler-Dodge-Ram-Jeep sales account for something ludicrous like 85% of the company's profits. If there is one brand FCA ought to have culled from the herd it's Alfa Romeo. The Giulia—a car that hasn't even launched yet—is already a multi-billion-dollar loss for the company. It'll never be anywhere near popular enough to justify the money spent on it.
Getting rid of Chrysler and Dodge would be cutting off FCA's nose to spite its face. Sergio Marchionne has totally lost the plot and needs to go. His schizophrenic product planning will be the death of the company.
Big +1
I showed all sorts of data to FCA about how awful their planning numbers were. Director level just told me that Sergio doesn't care. He just says what he wants, regardless of the limitations, and leaves the rest of the org to scramble to try to make it happen.
Sergio makes Piech look like Bob Lutz
Quote from: 93JC on April 21, 2016, 01:14:36 PM
The Fiat-Alfa Romeo-Maserati half the company is the one that is the drain on finances. If there is one brand FCA ought to have culled from the herd it's Alfa Romeo. The Giulia—a car that hasn't even launched yet—is already a multi-billion-dollar loss for the company. It'll never be anywhere near popular enough to justify the money spent on it.
Getting rid of Chrysler and Dodge would be cutting off FCA's nose to spite its face. Sergio Marchionne has totally lost the plot and needs to go. His schizophrenic product planning will be the death of the company.
Damn spellcheck!
Anyway, Chrysler only has three car models: 200, 300 and Pacifica. Dodge also has just three car models: Dart, Charger and Challenger. Once the slow selling Dart and 200 are culled, Chrysler and Dodge will have just two models each. Three of those four cars are derived from an ancient platform developed in the 1990s and, quite frankly, are past their sell-by date. The fourth model, the Pacifica, is the latest entry in the rapidly dying minivan market. Don't get me wrong, I like minivans. Hell, I even own a minivan! But, if I ran a car company, that last thing I would invest money and resources into is a new minivan. The buying public have already spoken. They want SUVs and crossovers even though, for most people, they make absolutely no sense. However, if you want to survive, you need to give people what they want.
So, it's obvious both Chrysler and Dodge desperately need new product, yesterday. Problem is the Chrysler and Dodge brands are so damaged in the minds of the consumer that the only way they can sell cars is by discounting the shit out of them and piling on the rebates. That, my friend, is a one-way ticket to nowhere! It's exactly how pre-bankruptcy GM went off the rails and needed Gub'mint help to get back on their feet.
So, lets say you're in charge of FCA. What do you do? Do you invest money in brands that can only sell cars at fire sale prices? Or do you invest money in brands that can potentially charge premium prices for their wares? Who's to say Alfa can't borrow a few pages from the Lexus playbook? Of course, they have to keep those cars away from the shitty dealers they have now. Nothing will torpedo Alfa faster than having a polyester jacket-wearing Dodge/Chrysler salesman trying to convert BMW and Mercedes customers into a new Alfa Romeo.
Years ago, I advocated making Dodge the all-truck brand and branding all the cars as Chryslers. Now that Ram has been split off from Dodge, I really see no way forward for Dodge. And, unless Chrysler can get their hands on some sellable product, I really don't see any way Chrysler can make it, either. Jeep and Ram are where the money is made. I think, if handled right, Alfa and Maserati could be money-makers, too. Let's hope FCA doesn't screw the pooch on that one!
I am telling you... FCA is going to juice the hell out of Jeep and prompt a firesale once a) the next recession hits or b) gas spikes and torpedoes HELLCATs.
Quote from: Madman on April 21, 2016, 01:47:57 PM
Anyway, Chrysler only has three car models: 200, 300 and Pacifica. Dodge also has just three car models: Dart, Charger and Challenger. Once the slow selling Dart and 200 are culled, Chrysler and Dodge will have just two models each. Three of those four cars are derived from an ancient platform developed in the 1990s and, quite frankly, are past their sell-by date.
Okay, let's just get a few things straight: the "slow-selling" Chrysler 200 has more annual sales in the US, alone, than the
entire Alfa Romeo brand, worldwide.
Really, let's get this straight, dude: go look up FCA's 2015 reports. They sold 56,800 Alfa Romeos in Europe, and of those they sold 30,500 in Italy. Outside of Italy they have a very,
very meagre market share. Even in Italy they have a crappy market share, they sell more Lancia Ypsilons in Italy than they do Alfa Romeos.
They sold 177,889 Chrysler 200s in the US. They sold over 80,000 Darts.
QuoteSo, lets say you're in charge of FCA. What do you do? Do you invest money in brands that can only sell cars at fire sale prices? Or do you invest money in brands that can potentially charge premium prices for their wares? Who's to say Alfa can't borrow a few pages from the Lexus playbook?
If I'm on the FCA board I try to get Sergio removed ASAP.
If you mean if I had Sergio's job, I would have stuck by the Dart and 200 and we'd have already been working on the next generation cars for years. I would have scaled Lancia back to the one model in Italy long ago, and I wouldn't dedicate any money toward a replacement. I would
not be spending the $7B+ they've spent on the Giulia, because it's sucking resources away from lower margin but far, far, far and away higher-overall-profit vehicles.
I would have made the 200 a Dodge product. I would have had the company working on a Journey replacement years ago; the Journey is in a bread-and-butter market segment that they've let languish for far too long. I would not have split 'Ram' from Dodge. I would have created a mid-size Chrysler SUV (crossover), something akin to a Ford Explorer but 'nicer'.
You talk about Fiat being huge in Europe and Latin America but these markets are hurting badly! Do you know how much profit the company makes in these markets? They made €213 million in Europe and
lost €87 million in Latin America. Do you know how much they made in North America?
FOUR-AND-A-HALF-BILLION EUROS.Ninety-two percent of the company's profits are from the NAFTA region. So don't spew a bunch of BS about these cars being "a drain on the company's finances". Get real pal, they're making money!
Lol. That was refreshing
What a shame. But really, in general, Chrysler has always lagged GM and Ford, and in cars in particular. Sure, Chrysler had its moments - from the rebirth of the 300C/Charger/Challenger, to the "cab forward" stuff of the '90s, to the K-Car of the '80s, to the Fuselage cars of the '70s, to the B-body muscle cars and the Magnum and second gen Hemi motors of the '60s, even back to the '50s with the C-300 and intro of the first gen Hemi. Sadly, curiosities and short wins don't keep an automaker afloat - it's the Impalas and Torinos and Tauruses and Malibus and Caprices, etc., etc., year after year. Chrysler had some wins here too but not enough and not long for enough.
Yes, I am very aware the bulk of FCA's profits are made in North America. Jeep and Ram are the cash cows keeping the whole company afloat.
The crucial mistake Sergio made was announcing the Dart and 200 will not be replaced, effectively killing the cars in the eyes of the public. Nevermind that dealers still need to keep selling Darts and 200s for the next few years. it was a boneheaded move and a totally unnecessary one.
And yes, I am also aware Alfa Romeo sales are currently in the toilet, too. That's what happens when you only have three cars, one of which is a low-volume niche model and the other two are aging products nearing the end of their useful lives. It is indeed shameful how this once iconic brand has been neglected. But try not to think of Alfa as it is today. Instead, think of what it can be. There is tremendous equity in the Alfa Romeo name. Yes, rebuilding the brand will be a long, uphill slog, but the long-term payoff has the potential to be enormous. This isn't the first premium marque to make a comeback. Post-war BMW was nearly insolvent. VW spent decades transforming Audi into a credible player in the premium segment. Toyota created Lexus from thin air. If managed properly, Alfa has every chance to reestablish itself as a bona fide aspirational brand.
I also agree splitting Ram from Dodge was another mistake but, at least this one can be corrected fairly easily. Everyone still calls it the Dodge Ram anyway, so it's not hard to imagine FCA reuniting Ram with Dodge. You also mentioned Lancia which, I'm sad to say is a lost cause. There is simply no room for both Lancia and Alfa under the FCA umbrella. Rebulidng one premium brand is difficult enough. Rebuilding TWO premium brands is simply too much for any one company to handle, especially one with FCA's limited resources. Besides, decades of building pricey versions of Fiats have killed any allure Lancia once had.
Chrysler can possibly be salvaged but it will take a demonstrable willingness to stand behind the brand and the product. The 200 isn't a bad car, but it needed to be better and I think it can be made better. But, whatever happens, don't write off FCA just yet.
I wonder how many jobs could be saved if Sergio just fucked off and died?
Isn't it sad that the relatively tiny island nation of Japan has Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Subaru, Mazda, and Mitsubishi while we only have 3 (2.5?) automakers?
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on April 21, 2016, 10:24:37 PM
I wonder how many jobs could be saved if Sergio just fucked off and died?
Isn't it sad that the relatively tiny island nation of Japan has Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Subaru, Mazda, and Mitsubishi while we only have 3 (2.5?) automakers?
That Japanese drive + obsession is what is destroying the country. If things keep going as is, in 100 years Japan won't exist.
Plus those 3 domestic brands outsell all those Japanese brands as well as the Koreans, at least in the US. I don't know if we will see Mazda or Mitsubishi in the next 10 yrs either.
Quote from: Madman on April 21, 2016, 09:52:57 PM
But try not to think of Alfa as it is today. Instead, think of what it can be. There is tremendous equity in the Alfa Romeo name. Yes, rebuilding the brand will be a long, uphill slog, but the long-term payoff has the potential to be enormous. This isn't the first premium marque to make a comeback. Post-war BMW was nearly insolvent. VW spent decades transforming Audi into a credible player in the premium segment. Toyota created Lexus from thin air. If managed properly, Alfa has every chance to reestablish itself as a bona fide aspirational brand.
Heres the thing though. Timing is everything. Lets focus on the US market since we know it and it's pretty much the only one doing anything. When MB/BMW got a foothold here, there was literally no luxury alternative worth a damn. The domestic offerings were TERRIBLE. Audi caught MB and BMW kind of sleeping too. All those years with no AWD option? The A4 looked really good in and out as well. Lexus caught MB & BMW with their pants down as well. The LS400 was 1-2 generations ahead of whatever MB/BMW were selling at the time.
Compare that to Alfa's situation now.... we nitpick over shit like infotainment and turbos but the fact of the matter is the Germans have never had more competitive lineups. Seriously, what can Alfa do to curbstomp the 3 series? Because that's what it will take. And please don't feed me that "more dynamics!" bullshit. We saw how that went for the ATS. And that's just them. Then you have Lexus, Infiniti, Jaguar, Acura and Volvo. What's gonna make anyone looking at a 3/C/A4/IS/Q50 take a gamble on an Alfa? Styling? The top seller in the class is the boring ass 3. Tech? UConnect is good but that's not enough. Theres no case for it.
And you talk about building the brand.... how many billions of $$$$s will FCA suck up from the taxpayers of the US and Italy to prop this up? Why not just accept the loss and make the
responsible business decision?
Sergio has painted himself into a corner with this litany of terrible decisions. The billions he is spending on Alfa should be spent on a new Compact Wide platform in line with the competition (as far as weight goes) and some mainstream engines. Then Dodge/Fiat/Chrysler would have a fighting chance. As is FCA is FUCKED.
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on April 21, 2016, 10:24:37 PM
I wonder how many jobs could be saved if Sergio just fucked off and died?
Isn't it sad that the relatively tiny island nation of Japan has Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Subaru, Mazda, and Mitsubishi while we only have 3 (2.5?) automakers?
Probably because of the low sales of any import.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 22, 2016, 07:01:37 AM
Compare that to Alfa's situation now.... we nitpick over shit like infotainment and turbos but the fact of the matter is the Germans have never had more competitive lineups. Seriously, what can Alfa do to curbstomp the 3 series? Because that's what it will take. And please don't feed me that "more dynamics!" bullshit. We saw how that went for the ATS.
The ATS is also a badly flawed car with poor interior space, the horrid CUE, dull styling, and mediocre engines.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 22, 2016, 06:38:58 AM
That Japanese drive + obsession is what is destroying the country. If things keep going as is, in 100 years Japan won't exist.
Plus those 3 domestic brands outsell all those Japanese brands as well as the Koreans, at least in the US. I don't know if we will see Mazda or Mitsubishi in the next 10 yrs either.
Mitsubishi's automotive business can go die for all I care. The only significant cars they've produced are the DSM (which is dead) and the Evo (is that thing still on sale?).
They would not be missed. Mitsubishi still has a lot of other businesses outside of automotive. I like their PLCs.
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on April 22, 2016, 09:37:19 PM
Mitsubishi's automotive business can go die for all I care. The only significant cars they've produced are the DSM (which is dead) and the Evo (is that thing still on sale?).
They would not be missed. Mitsubishi still has a lot of other businesses outside of automotive. I like their PLCs.
You would not miss them, but all their bad credit subprime buyers would. They get poor people into new cars with warranties, which is worth something.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 23, 2016, 06:19:22 AM
You would not miss them, but all their bad credit subprime buyers would. They get poor people into new cars with warranties, which is worth something.
Kia holds a bug chunk of that demographic.
Their cars have improved massively in recent years and they'll still finance anyone who's breathing.
The Japanese market is effectively closed to outside competition. Also, Japanese nationalism means they buy Japanese no matter what.
Also, they've got odd size taxes that is basically not cost effective for manufacturers who aren't Japanese to try and compete with.
Many of world compact cars are too wide for Japanese regulations; they'd get put in a class where they'd be uncompetitive
Someone at my job got a new Malibu 2.0T. I still prefer the looks of the 200, but I have to admit, the new 'Bu is basically everything the 200 should have been. If they can fix the C/D pillar treatment that will pretty much be it.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 25, 2016, 02:28:31 PM
Someone at my job got a new Malibu 2.0T. I still prefer the looks of the 200, but I have to admit, the new 'Bu is basically everything the 200 should have been. If they can fix the C/D pillar treatment that will pretty much be it.
Maybe Chrysler can stretch the 200 by a few inches in between the B and C pillar like they do on those Chinese market special edition sedans?
That would fix the biggest complaint concerning the 200, although I'm guessing it's probably too expensive to do so.
Quote from: Madman on April 25, 2016, 05:55:00 PM
Maybe Chrysler can stretch the 200 by a few inches in between the B and C pillar like they do on those Chinese market special edition sedans?
That would fix the biggest complaint concerning the 200, although I'm guessing it's probably too expensive to do so.
It's already among the longer cars in its class, it's already a stretched version of a small car, and extra length wouldn't fix the headroom issue anyway.
Besides, interior space isn't necessarily the biggest complaint about the 200 -- just the most obvious. It was reported that some Daimler bigshot hit his head getting out of the backseat of the 2001-06 Sebring, and his big requirement was that the 2007 model have more headroom. This transformed the Sebring from a mediocre but somewhat stylish car with limited rear seat space into a mediocre ugly blobby thing with a roomier rear seat. Let's not encourage that path this time around.
I'm checking my RSS reader, and see TTAC puts out a review on this car. Skim read it, and they're actually saying it's not that bad. I think, you know, Jack Baruth has officially lost it.
I scroll down to the comments and see Sporty then remember this thread :lol: You and Jack Baruth are the only two that like this car.
A lot of the people hating on it haven't even driven it though. I haven't either but I'm at least giving it the benefit of the doubt.
I will again say that I don't hate it, but it's understandable why it's struggling. Here's the review I'd done of it: http://www.examiner.com/article/review-2015-chrysler-200-limited-6th-place (http://www.examiner.com/article/review-2015-chrysler-200-limited-6th-place)
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 26, 2016, 08:19:22 AM
A lot of the people hating on it haven't even driven it though. I haven't either but I'm at least giving it the benefit of the doubt.
I've driven one and didn't like it.
But of all companies, FCA is the last to get the benefit of the doubt with me.
I drove it and disliked it. :huh:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2016/05/despite-fcas-clear-effort-chrysler-200-still-isnt-selling/ (http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2016/05/despite-fcas-clear-effort-chrysler-200-still-isnt-selling/)
Also, I found a new favorite game. Read TTAC articles, and find the sporty comments on them.
My favorite one so far was the comment saying the GTI is a poor man's 911 :lol:
Are they so bad that it'd be a bad idea to buy one when you can get one for under $22k with a V6 and AWD?
I mean, based on sales I'd guess it's still a bad car even at that price. It's just surprising because it seems like a lot of car for the money.
A lot of bad car for the money is still a bad car :lol:
Quote from: MrH on May 04, 2016, 10:54:08 AM
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2016/05/despite-fcas-clear-effort-chrysler-200-still-isnt-selling/ (http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2016/05/despite-fcas-clear-effort-chrysler-200-still-isnt-selling/)
Also, I found a new favorite game. Read TTAC articles, and find the sporty comments on them.
My favorite one so far was the comment saying the GTI is a poor man's 911 :lol:
It's the jack of all trades. There are faster cars for the money (GT-R:stripper pony car) as well as more pure cars (Evora S:Miata), but if you could only have 1 car for the $$$ to be practical and fun to drive..... what else is there?
Quote from: MrH on May 04, 2016, 10:54:08 AM
Also, I found a new favorite game. Read TTAC articles, and find the sporty comments on them.
saw one of his other ones too :lol:
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 04, 2016, 12:53:29 PM
It's the jack of all trades. There are faster cars for the money (GT-R:stripper pony car) as well as more pure cars (Evora S:Miata), but if you could only have 1 car for the $$$ to be practical and fun to drive..... what else is there?
:huh:
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 04, 2016, 12:53:29 PM
It's the jack of all trades. There are faster cars for the money (GT-R:stripper pony car) as well as more pure cars (Evora S:Miata), but if you could only have 1 car for the $$$ to be practical and fun to drive..... what else is there?
:confused:
Quote from: MrH on May 05, 2016, 12:11:17 PM
:confused:
My point is, for the $$$ there are other cars that do certain things better, but no car that does so many things anywhere near as well. What is confusing about that?
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 05, 2016, 12:20:15 PM
My point is, for the $$$ there are other cars that do certain things better, but no car that does so many things anywhere near as well. What is confusing about that?
Why the GTI specifically? What about the other hot hatches? Focus ST? WRX?
Quote from: Cookie Monster on May 05, 2016, 12:21:38 PM
Why the GTI specifically? What about the other hot hatches? Focus ST? WRX?
The Focus interior is too compromised in space efficiency. The WRX interior is too cheap to justify the price.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 05, 2016, 12:20:15 PM
My point is, for the $$$ there are other cars that do certain things better, but no car that does so many things anywhere near as well. What is confusing about that?
Nothing.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 04, 2016, 12:53:29 PM
what else is there?
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on May 05, 2016, 12:09:18 PM
:huh:
Was answering the question- literally. ;)
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 05, 2016, 12:20:15 PM
My point is, for the $$$ there are other cars that do certain things better, but no car that does so many things anywhere near as well. What is confusing about that?
So the GTI is like the 911 in that they're both good?
Quote from: CJ on May 05, 2016, 12:23:45 PM
The Focus interior is too compromised in space efficiency. The WRX interior is too cheap to justify the price.
Focus interior is ugly as shit too, and the GTI is lighter, faster, quiter, more fuel efficient etc etc just a better all around car. GTI is as fast as my Z was and it gets about 50% better gas mileage lol.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 04, 2016, 12:53:29 PM
It's the jack of all trades. There are faster cars for the money (GT-R:stripper pony car) as well as more pure cars (Evora S:Miata), but if you could only have 1 car for the $$$ to be practical and fun to drive..... what else is there?
An old El Camino with suspension upgrades, of course. It's unbeatable. Well, except for when it drops a valve into the cylinder.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on May 05, 2016, 08:28:22 PM
An old El Camino with suspension upgrades, of course. It's unbeatable. Well, except for when it drops a valve into the cylinder.
pfft it's not like you don't know where the valve is. Just turn it upside down and shake it out. :cry: