I was reading about the fiasco (of M-B’s brief ownership of Chrysler). The author contends that M-B did improve some of the Chrysler designs, but also introduced a LOT of problems-by trying to integrate systems from the Mercededs cars (like brakes) that would up causing all kinds of integration problems (you had the same Chrysler cars with different brakes systems, for example.
Also, M-B was never able to realize any economies of scale-one would have thought that they would have saved money (for example, by using the same air conditioning compressors on all Chrysler and M-B models)-but this was not the case.
Finally, it seems that M-B engineers did not like the way that Chrysler designed cars-so the chassis designs were always incompatible (between Chrysler and M-B).
All in all, the author contended that the merger was a financial and business failure-for reasons that should have been anticipated.
Now FIAT is trying to integrate their designs into Chrysler-so I have a few questions:
-will the same thing happen?
-FIAT is known for stiff suspensions and small, high-revving engines (average size in Brazil is 1.1 liter displacement); this contrasts with Chrysler’s enormous V-8 “Hemi” engines-I don’t see a lot of commonality there
Will the same thing happen with FIAT? (Long expensive struggle, leading to huge losses and eventual abandonment of the merger)?
Did Daimler improve Chrysler cars? No. Was that the fault of Daimler or Chrysler? I don’t know.
It’s my understanding that Fiat won’t try to remake Jeep or Ram trucks in its own image, rather that the Fiat contribution will be in the form of access to smaller, more efficient vehicle platforms that Chrysler has pretty much always sucked at building.
That leaves a handful of larger Chrylser/Dodge passenger cars in the balance.
Some things that I read on Bloomberg, was that the head guy Sergio wants to segregate Chrysler into two divisions, Chrysler and Ram. For some reason the Ram brand is popular and sells well, so pretty much the dodge division will be folded into Ram. Kinda like putting the cart ahead of the horse. I think the idea is dumb and won’t fly, but thats just mainly everyone hearing Ram is going to think light to heavy truck, a Ram Charger, Ram Challenger, Ram 300 sounds odd to me.
We were told at work , that chrysler is planning on reskinning 11 vehicles and about three of them will be Fiat/Chrysler hybrids. Figure on chrysler supplying the body and suspension and Fiat will supply the engine and tranny tech for the cars.
Declan
The first car from Chrysler that represented a leap in quality was the Chrysler 300C. At least in terms of fit and finish. And they were built on the LX platform, which was essentially lifted from the Mercedes E-class. The all-wheel drive system came from Mercedes.
One thing to consider though is that Mercedes doesn’t have that great a rep for quality. Fit and finish, yes. But I think most car people think BMW’s are better built and engineered cars.
Chrysler’s cars aren’t bad, but they just aren’t competitive any more. The 300C was pretty cool in 2005, but a Ford Taurus is a better car in every single category. Ford is making the safest, most reliable, best-value vehicles in their respective classes. GM has made big strides in quality and reliability. But Chrysler just doesn’t quite make the grade, in my opinion.
I was not impressed with the smaller Chryslers I looked at. they had some neat innovations but the overall design seemed to be the result of an engineering cat-fight. The mechanics who work on them can probably critique the reliability of them.
Beyond this, what happened to M-B once the American auto industry (other than Ford) turned to manure? Perhaps M-B had a escape-hatch clause allowing for a smooth, clean getaway?
Well, M-B basically gave away Chrysler! They lost $36 billion on the deal-it was not one of Dr. Z’s finer hours.
Chrysler got taken over by an entity called “Cerberus”-which was run by an investment fund. That outfit was not capable of running Chrysler, so it then was passed off to FIAT (a firm not known for high-quality vehicles).
So it will be an interesting time for Chrysler-I wish them luck, but somehow FIAT seems even less of a suitable partner, than M-B (anybody remember the FIAT “Ritmo”?),
It was the last car marketed in the USA by FIAT-it was voted one of the worst cars ever made!
This is a common misconception. The LX platform was developed from the LH platform underpinning the Chrysler Concorde/Dodge Intrepid. The LH was designed from the get go to be either FWD or RWD, hence the longitudinally mounted engines and Chapman strut independent rear suspension. All the development for the LX, plus plans for a RWD full size car that became the 300, was already complete under Iaccoca and Bob Lutz. After the “merger of equals” management was under pressure to realize some synergies for the shareholders, so the LX platform was changed at the last minute to shoe horn in some E-class suspension bits plus the Mercedes 5 speed auto tranny. The platform itself is quite new, dating from 2004, compared to the W220 E-class which dates from the late '90s. The AWD is a Borg Warner drop-in system that is also used by Mercedes, Toyota, and others.
The best thing to have come out of it was probably the Mercedes 5 speed auto. You’re right that Mercedes has made a lot of junk in the past, but automatic transmissions are their bread and butter and Merc auto trannies are the best in the business. It is telling that until very recently, Mercedes was still using a version of that 5 speed transmission in their range topping SL/CL/S65 AMG and Mclaren SLR, as the 7 speed units used in their cheaper models were considered too weak for the torque requirements. These same units are used in Chrysler’s SRT-8 vehicles.
Every single bad car Chrysler currently offers that are uncompetitive - the Caliber, Sebring, Avenger, Jeep Compass, and a bunch of other turds I don’t care to remember, were designed during Mercedes’ management. Their most competetive products - LX cars, minivans, good Jeeps, Ram trucks, Viper, were the ones that Mercedes had the least to do with. Chrysler went from the healthiest, financially sound American car company with the most promising and innovative products to where they are today. Chrysler was sacrificed to save Mercedes from bankruptcy. This is well known amongst automotive enthusiasts.
I am curious about the claim that Chrsler saved M-B from bankruptcy. For one thing, Daimler Benz is a huge firm, that earns most of its profits from heavy truck sales.
I don’t have a cite, but I think the sales are like 4:1 (trucks to cars).
I think M-B saw the acquisition as a way to vastly expand their sales in the USA, at low cost.
They did not understand American labor laws, or franchise laws, or procurement.
As another poster mentioned, M-B has been riding on reputaion for a long time. Their cars are extremely overpriced, and not at all efficiently designed, IMO.
I’ve been expecting them to drop Dodge ever since they spun off Ram as its own brand. I figure, Fiat probably thinks that they only need one brand of cars in the US, and that’s going to be Chrysler. Ram will be the brand for pickups, and Jeep will be SUVs.
I also think that within about 5 years, most Chryslers will just be rebadged Fiats. About half will be built in Europe and just imported here, a few will be built in the US to Fiat designs, and a couple will be larger American-designed cars.
I’ve also read that Fiat is planning on folding the Lancia brand (which they also own) into Chrysler in order to get rid of it.
Are there enough people who have BAD memories of FIAT, to affect Chrysler?
I never owned a FIAT, but knew two guys who did. They were always bumming rides (because their cars were in the shop).
Of course, FIAT have probably improved their offerings-they are one of the larger car fiems in the world.
I’d be more worried about people who have BAD memories of Chrysler, and how that affects the sale of Fiat cars in the US. Personally I adore the Fiat 500, but I’d never buy it if it’s built by Chrysler. Not after all the bad experience I’ve had with my old Dodge Caravan.
Well, bankruptcy is probably stretching it, in as much as the German government would really allow Mercedes to go bankrupt (they won’t). The early 2000s were definitely a bad time for MB. Here’s a PDF.
Everything Chrysler has made in the last ~10 years or so have been fairly reliable, even the newer models. There’s only been a few serious problems, mostly stemming from either the A604 4 speed automatic transmission (incorrect service schedule distributed to dealers) or the 2.7l DOHC V6 engine (design defect that caused oil sludge and timing chain failures) back in the late 90s. Chrysler’s problem is that they were so starved for R&D funds by Daimler that their current lineup simply isn’t competitive at the same price point as other makes. Interior quality is usually quite bad, drive trains, while reliable, are usually older and less fuel efficient. Their entry into the relatively large midsize sedan market, the Sebring, is all of those things, and is ugly as fuck. Great if you’re looking for a no-frills used car at rock bottom prices, but not so much for the new car buyer.
FIAT has competitive small car drive trains and for all their other past faults, have never lacked style, both things Chrysler needs, so I am optimistic about their future.
I thought that they hadn’t made Lancias in ages due to that lawsuit in the early '90s - didn’t Jeremy on Top Gear tell me that the last Lancia had been made in like 1996 or 1998 or something? I guess they could try to bring it back in the States, but putting a brand definitely not known for quality (Lancia) into a manufacturer also not known for great cars (Chrysler) seems like a losing proposition, really.
Huh - wikipedia’s telling me that they’re still putting out lots of cars. Weird. Maybe Top Gear was referring to Lancias put out by Italy instead of those manufactured by Fiat. Who knows.