Oh, I dont think they'll pass on them, I just dont think they are a vehicle GM would target in needing or wanting in purchasing Chrysler....

I mean, Buick and Cadillac are both essentially the competition for Chrysler to an extent.....and Pontiac is basically Dodge's counterpart.....

 

It may be beneficial for Chrysler to quit building duplicate cars like the Sebring/Avenger, Durango/Aspen. and such. My dealership sells only Dodge and does better than most that sell Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep in my area.
I like the Caliber SXT that we just got a couple of weeks ago. It is a nice little car that with only 2 fill-ups so far is getting 24mpg in town. Only rated for 23/27. It is peppy with the 2.0 and CVT2. I'm sure the new little car built by Nissan will get even better mpg.

 

......

 

Guaranteed the 300C/Charger stays tho....

 

There was another thread I posted on it. Yes, both of them are staying.

They've already canceled quite a few twins.

 

That's right, they are planning on pulling the plug on the W-body. I frankly have trouble believing that Chevrolet will abandon the FWD large segment considering how well the dull Impala is selling compared to the actually interesting, less expensive, more fuel efficient Malibu. I think it was Motor Trend who was saying that GM would probably make a stretched Epsilon II platform and use that for the Impala.

The fact is "putting all your eggs in one basket" isn't a wise approach. There is demand for RWD cars, I will not deny that; however, not everybody is willing to switch back to RWD. People particularly where I come from who used to own LH cars have switched to W-body or Tauruses (or would that be pronounced Tauri) cars since they prefer FWD's driving techniques in the snow and do not want to pay for an AWD car. The purpose of having different divisions is to reach a wider audience and it would be a mistake for GM to abandon that.

The Zeta platform is a good platform, but the LX platform has its place as well. Since GM made the G, H, & K which were about the same size of vehicle during the same time period, I don't see why they wouldn't use them.

The problem is it doesn't always work out the way you'd think it would. From what I read, Dodge and Chrysler lost some sales that they never have been able to regain after the demise of Plymouth. On top of this, if they do cut one of them, the temptation is to cut Dodge since Dodge is more of an American based car. The problem with that is Dodge is as you pointed out, Dodge is selling better than Chrysler (though that isn't surprising). What they need to do instead is quit trying to make Chrysler do the job of Plymouth and Chrysler at the same time. They need to just make Chrysler a entry level luxury brand (and what I mean by this is, they come nicely enough loaded to compete against luxury nameplates while still costing significantly less). Another thing Dodge needs to do is accept that the truck market is gone and put more effort into making sure they have a compete car line before they make any more CUVs or SUVs.

Back to the topic, I'm not exactly crazy about this arrangement, but I don't see how the Nissan-Renault relationship could be all that much better, and I don't trust any of the Chinese car manufacturers either. This could be the safest route in my view.

 

I'm not a fan of any merger/acquisition. I'm perhaps too hardcore, but I'd prefer the company to shut down than to become just a number of models within a larger entity. Just can't stomach the hemi, the whole mopar heritage becoming GM's ...or worse, a foreign company.

 

These are sad times for the American Auto industry. G.M. had anounced a few months ago that if things didn't turn around for the company by the second quarter of '09 that they would be out of money and may have to file bankruptcy. Nobody knows for sure how much money Chrysler has but it's reported to be in better financial shape than G.M. or Ford. If this merger happens, it won't be a result of G.M. buying Chrysler; they don't have the money. It will be a trade; Chrysler for the remainder of GMAC. No money will change hands. If this is what it takes for G.M. and Chrysler to survive, I'm all for it, but I don't have to like it. I think it's a shame that more Americans don't buy American brands and support their own economy better. Too many Americans complain about the economy and the loss of jobs but drive around in a $35,000 foreign car? Does that make sense? Can you imagine how many good jobs there would be if just 1/2 of the foreign car owners would trade for an American brand? Ford, Chrysler, and G.M. are all in serious financial trouble. What if they all failed? Can you imagine the loss of jobs and the impact on the economy? What if they were allowed to fail and there was another World War? Who would build the War Machine? Do people think about that? Do they know that during the two World Wars, the American auto industry shut down production of civilian autos and built heavy trucks for the military, along with APCs, Tanks, planes, airplane engines, all types of weapons and ammo, etc.? Are we going to ask the Japanese or Germans to build our war machine for us? They may be the ones that we're fighting (again). Maybe I'm just a worry wart but I'm old enough to remember how important the American Auto industry has been to this country and I just feel sick about what's happening to it. My brother and his wife used to buy and drive foreign cars all the time. Then his wife lost her job of 27 years due to foreign competition. That's what it took for them to wake up to what's going on. They now own a Ford and a Chrysler and are perfectly happy with them. They learned the hard way that sending our jobs and profits overseas are going to come back and bite us all one day.

 

I linked to the story in August,but it's a fact that Chrysler, while hurting is the strongest American car company. Not in over-all sales, but in streamlining their operation and profit. AutoWeek is reporting that Chase Bank is pushing for a merger because they hold the notes on Chrysler and GM and want to prop up the dinosaur GM, but "Cerberus spokesman Tim Price recently told the Financial Times that Chrysler isn't for sale." Also, Chrysler just signed contracts with Nissan/Renault for joint ventures and Chery cars in China. While Chrysler is partnered with GM in electric/hybrid technology, GM doesn't have the cash that a merger would take. The Autoweek story says they (GM) are almost out of all operating capital and may declare bankruptcy. Not Chrysler, they are sitting on just under $12 billion in cash. Why would a smaller, leaner operation risk losing everything to merge with a corpse that Cerberus would probably not be able to collect from? Stranger things have happened in business, but it is more likely that Chrysler would be sold to Renault before GM.
Here's why: 1)Renault wants an inroad in the US. 2)Very little to no competition between the brands and products. 3)Technology and engineering that would make Renault a true world-class, all market giant. 4)Renault is profitable and up til now, strongly in the black.

 

Why would a corporation that had strong sales, even more money, a healthy operation by all standards want to hook themselves to the wolves at Daimler? Something to think about, it has happened before.

One of the things that I think is a little difficult to say for certain is that Chrysler is healthy, the truth of the matter is Chrysler has no cars for the current market, they are losing sales in their traditional strength areas to Honda and Toyota. Probably the reason why they have money right now is the fact that they have been relying on other manufacturers parts, technology, and platforms instead of doing the investing themselves. This might work in the short run, but eventually this strategy will work against them as they cannot sell anywhere close to the ones who put these segments as one of their top priority.

The other problem is in this strategy is Chrysler hasn't made any real serious investment in the V6 line that they currently have since 1999, this is part of the reason why they are last in power output and fuel economy. Although it is true that they are in the process of coming up with a new V6, the issue is Chrysler has in recent years let their I4s and V6s go forever without an update and as a result have lost these markets; meanwhile, they have created and updated the 5.7L Hemi within a five year time period, and they managed to find the funds to update the arguably less important 4.7L V8 last year that is only used to play second fiddle to the Hemi in most truck models except the Dakota. The fact is you have to spend money to make money.

Another factor is considering what a disappointment the "World Engine" has been, it makes one question if Chrysler will be putting in the same none-existing effort into these V6s. Now I know unlike the "World Engine," Chrysler is supposed to be designing this one themselves, but the fact is Chrysler let the old engines go too long without redesigns and they need to put better effort in if they want to get out of the problems they are in with having too many models that don't sell.

The other case is GM has been spending money like crazy in trying to make their line-up competitive. They probably could cut back on investment if needed. What they need to do is cut back on production on models that are not selling and cut back production and raise prices a bit to resolve models that are not turning a profit. Probably what GM needs to do is end the sales number war with trying to make Chevrolet the best selling brand. They need to focus on improving profit making by utilizing other brands.

Renault to me is hardly a safe direction to go. They tried this before with AMC and it did not turn out. French cars are not popular in the U.S. market, just look at the Premier/Monaco & Medallion as an example. Although this would not threaten Renault, it could threaten Nissan their partner.