Does the future of Fiat-Chrysler include Dodge?
06-13-13, 05:17 PM
#1
Does the future of Fiat-Chrysler include Dodge?
Does the future of Fiat-Chrysler include Dodge?
Ward's Auto reports the future of Dodge is looking uncertain. Fiat has more or less laid out its game plan for the next few years, and while the Chrysler, Fiat and Jeep lines are set to receive plenty of love, Dodge isn't so lucky. Fiat has already hobbled Dodge significantly by splitting off the brand's trucks into a separate Ram line.
Ward's says that after the Avenger rides off into the sunset early next year, Fiat-Chrysler won't replace the model, leaving a gaping midsize hole in the Dodge lineup. The report also cites unnamed sources as saying that at least two other current Dodge products will move to the Chrysler line.
One of those could very well be the Grand Caravan. Chrysler has already made it clear that it plans to trim redundancy between its minivan offerings, but it has yet to clarify which other vehicle could sail under the Chrysler banner moving forward. Either way, such changes to the product line would theoretically leave Dodge with just four models.
http://www.autoblog.com/2013/06/13/d...include-dodge/
06-13-13, 11:09 PM
#2
They better not ax the Challenger and Charger. Both of those are pretty epic in terms of styling.
Personally I think it was a dumb idea to just call the trucks "Ram" The Ram logo looks bad IMO, and not just because somebody thought it looks like a woman's uterus(but that's part of the reason).
Personally I think it was a dumb idea to just call the trucks "Ram" The Ram logo looks bad IMO, and not just because somebody thought it looks like a woman's uterus(but that's part of the reason).
06-14-13, 10:29 AM
#3
Lexus Fanatic
It would be a bad marketing move, IMO, because, with Plymouth gone, Fiat/Chrysler needs a lower-priced domestic-nameplate to compete wth Ford and Chevy. Here in America, selling those lower-priced vehicles under the Chrysler name won't hack it.
In Europe, though, Chrysler does market more of a complete line of vehicles than Dodge, and that policy would make more sense. In fact, in some Euro-countries, I don't think Dodge sells at all.
In Europe, though, Chrysler does market more of a complete line of vehicles than Dodge, and that policy would make more sense. In fact, in some Euro-countries, I don't think Dodge sells at all.
06-14-13, 02:44 PM
#6
Lead Lap
I'm thinking that's because it's not actually car-based.
Anyways, here's allpar's rebuttal on the topic:
Anyways, here's allpar's rebuttal on the topic:
Originally Posted by Allpar
Recently, Ward’s posted an article which was picked up (and exaggerated) by various news-scavenger sites. Insiders told Ward’s that two cars being rebranded from Dodge to something else, and the Avenger being dropped. The conclusion some drew: Dodge is dying.
When Sergio Marchionne started talking about the Dodge Avenger, over a year ago, it prompted death-of-Dodge stories then; but then, we’ve been reading death-of-Dodge stories since Daimler took over.
First, let’s look at Dodge Avenger. A rear wheel drive mid-sized car is in the works; Chrysler/Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne publicly said more than once that it would not be economical to create one for Alfa Romeo alone, but making one for both Alfa and Dodge would work.
Not Chrysler. Dodge.
Does it make sense to make a Dodge version of the 200, which is essentially a bigger Dart with a V6? Chrysler’s division of sales among two or three brands makes it hard to make the top sales lists and increases costs and customer confusion. Having two midsize carmeans splitting the sales, unless they push the Chrysler brand upscale, which we’ve been told isn’t going to happen.
On the other hand, a rear wheel drive midsized Dodge Avenger (or Demon, or Daytona, or Magnum, or Shadow, or Lancer, or Rebel, or whatever) would make plenty of sense. It would give Alfa a credible car in the thick of its market, and give Dodge and SRT a more direct competitor for Camaro and Mustang, while improving Dodge’s image.
When Fiat took over, leaders said that Dodge would stay sporty, but would move from muscle to cornering. Dodge Dart sales invalidated that idea; Dart is a great handling car, but changing a brand in that radical yet subtle a way takes a lot of time and money. Instead, known fast-learner Sergio may be revising his plan from “change perceptions of Dodge” to the “change Dodge itself.”
Instead of being the everybrand and fighting with Chrysler to fit into Plymouth’s shoes, Dodge could expand on the work done by Charger and Challenger and Viper and, yes, Dodge Ram — even if the Viper stays within SRT and Ram stays off on its own. (I would argue that it’s time to bring SRT back down from full brand-hood, at least for Dodge.)
When Sergio Marchionne started talking about the Dodge Avenger, over a year ago, it prompted death-of-Dodge stories then; but then, we’ve been reading death-of-Dodge stories since Daimler took over.
First, let’s look at Dodge Avenger. A rear wheel drive mid-sized car is in the works; Chrysler/Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne publicly said more than once that it would not be economical to create one for Alfa Romeo alone, but making one for both Alfa and Dodge would work.
Not Chrysler. Dodge.
Does it make sense to make a Dodge version of the 200, which is essentially a bigger Dart with a V6? Chrysler’s division of sales among two or three brands makes it hard to make the top sales lists and increases costs and customer confusion. Having two midsize carmeans splitting the sales, unless they push the Chrysler brand upscale, which we’ve been told isn’t going to happen.
On the other hand, a rear wheel drive midsized Dodge Avenger (or Demon, or Daytona, or Magnum, or Shadow, or Lancer, or Rebel, or whatever) would make plenty of sense. It would give Alfa a credible car in the thick of its market, and give Dodge and SRT a more direct competitor for Camaro and Mustang, while improving Dodge’s image.
When Fiat took over, leaders said that Dodge would stay sporty, but would move from muscle to cornering. Dodge Dart sales invalidated that idea; Dart is a great handling car, but changing a brand in that radical yet subtle a way takes a lot of time and money. Instead, known fast-learner Sergio may be revising his plan from “change perceptions of Dodge” to the “change Dodge itself.”
Instead of being the everybrand and fighting with Chrysler to fit into Plymouth’s shoes, Dodge could expand on the work done by Charger and Challenger and Viper and, yes, Dodge Ram — even if the Viper stays within SRT and Ram stays off on its own. (I would argue that it’s time to bring SRT back down from full brand-hood, at least for Dodge.)
06-15-13, 12:06 PM
#7
Lexus Fanatic
IMO, it's hard to call the Durango a CUV. It is almost as large as traditional full-size SUVs like the Tahoe/Expedition, and, until recently, was also done on a truck-platform (it now shares the unibody Jeep Grand Cherokee platform). So, the presence of a V8 is not surprising.
Last edited by mmarshall; 06-15-13 at 12:10 PM.
Trending Topics
06-15-13, 03:05 PM
#8
IMO, it's hard to call the Durango a CUV. It is almost as large as traditional full-size SUVs like the Tahoe/Expedition, and, until recently, was also done on a truck-platform (it now shares the unibody Jeep Grand Cherokee platform). So, the presence of a V8 is not surprising.
06-15-13, 06:54 PM
#9
Lexus Fanatic
SUV, CUV, Ute, most these terms are used interchangeably. I don't really care if they are unibody or body on frame, just as long as they are capable. The Jeep GC is great at offering a permanent four wheel drive and a transfer case and a V8, all while maintaining a good civilized ride despite off road prowess
The term CUV (Cute-Utility-Vehicle) is generally interpreted, by most people in the car-buisness, to be a small-to medium sized, unibody, car-based vehicle with permanent AWD (or maybe FWD in a base model), designed for hard pavement or very mild off-roading, and a four-cylinder or small V6 at most.
06-15-13, 07:39 PM
#10
Certainly no arguments from me about the new JGC...it's far better than previous generations, in several ways. But, while you yourself may use the terms CUV/Ute/SUV interchangably (and I respect your view on that), many other people don't use them that way.....including much of the auto-press.
The term CUV (Cute-Utility-Vehicle) is generally interpreted, by most people in the car-buisness, to be a small-to medium sized, unibody, car-based vehicle with permanent AWD (or maybe FWD in a base model), designed for hard pavement or very mild off-roading, and a four-cylinder or small V6 at most.
The term CUV (Cute-Utility-Vehicle) is generally interpreted, by most people in the car-buisness, to be a small-to medium sized, unibody, car-based vehicle with permanent AWD (or maybe FWD in a base model), designed for hard pavement or very mild off-roading, and a four-cylinder or small V6 at most.
CUV=a high riding station wagon based on a compact or midsize sedan, transversley mounted engine, FWD with AWD optional. Not meant for offroading, the AWD is designed to get you up that slippery snow covered hill on a paved road.
Real SUV= Body on frame, based on a pickup truck, longitudally mounted engine, RWD standard, AWD/4WD with a low range transfer case optional. Or they can be on a dedicated unibody platform, still the engine sits north-south, AWD may still be an option like the Durango/Grand Cherokee. Or AWD may be standard and the only way you can buy it, ala Land Cruiser, Range Rover, Jeep Wrangler, etc. Usually these vehicles are designed with some off-roading pretense. Although a Suburban may have a low range in the transfer case, it still sucks because its too big and has too much wheelbase, as where something like a Jeep or Land Rover has the body designed with off-roading in mind, as both of those vehicles have great approach/departure angles, good ground clearence, etc
06-16-13, 12:26 AM
#11
Certainly no arguments from me about the new JGC...it's far better than previous generations, in several ways. But, while you yourself may use the terms CUV/Ute/SUV interchangably (and I respect your view on that), many other people don't use them that way.....including much of the auto-press.
The term CUV (Cute-Utility-Vehicle) is generally interpreted, by most people in the car-buisness, to be a small-to medium sized, unibody, car-based vehicle with permanent AWD (or maybe FWD in a base model), designed for hard pavement or very mild off-roading, and a four-cylinder or small V6 at most.
The term CUV (Cute-Utility-Vehicle) is generally interpreted, by most people in the car-buisness, to be a small-to medium sized, unibody, car-based vehicle with permanent AWD (or maybe FWD in a base model), designed for hard pavement or very mild off-roading, and a four-cylinder or small V6 at most.
I don't really care if they are unibody or body on frame, just as long as they are capable
06-16-13, 05:59 PM
#12
Lexus Fanatic
I really wouldnt miss the brand if it vanished to be honest.Never been a fan and most likely never will be. Their products arent even on my radar
06-16-13, 07:43 PM
#13
Moderator
I would have to agree. Plymouth and Eagle has already been cancelled. Might as well cancel Dodge as well. Keep Chrysler and Fiat. Similar to Ford and Lincoln in which Mercury had been dropped.
06-17-13, 06:45 PM
#15
Moderator
CUV's
NX
RX
SUV's
GX
LX