Edmunds on Chrysler

vtdog · **Joined:** Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:27 am **Posts:** 640

Interesting and thoughtful article:

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Co ... eId=123298

truckbouy2 · **Posted:** Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:24 pm

It will be interesting to see if and how Chrysler survives.
The above article stated that Chrysler is relying on its CHINESE partner to develop a small car.
Fascinating...Once the world standard was set buy the U.S. auto industry now we are rapidly being left at the dance with no escort.
My my....relying on a COMMUNIST third world country to come up with a lifesaver to bail out the once mighty auto company...
Just as the Germans raped Poland so have they done the same to Chrysler....
If I sound PRO-American, I am....

KeighJeigh · **Posted:** Fri Feb 15, 2008 10:40 pm

Quote:

Just as the Germans raped Poland so have they done the same to Chrysler....
If I sound PRO-American, I am....

Pro American is good. I'm pro American. God bless America. Hail to the chief!
Chrysler has a tough road ahead of it, no doubt about it.
I wonder, what would YOU if you could magically be CEO for a year? Not an easy sandbox to play in right now. :shock:

But pruning their product line may be a good move IF they end up with diverse, unique cars targeting unique markets. If they have cars that are hard to differentiate (Firebird and Transam for GM are always good examples) then I think they will have trouble. They also have to be leading edge and not reactionary.

warp2diesel · **Posted:** Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:06 pm

We work harder and longer than other countries that do not have as much, that is why we have more toys.
They work less and have more vacations, but they envy our toys

If they want more toys, work more, work hard, and play hard.

Raping like MB did does not count as work.

Steve

KeighJeigh · **Posted:** Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:51 pm

warp2diesel wrote:

We work harder and longer than other countries that do not have as much, that is why we have more toys.
They work less and have more vacations, but they envy our toys

If they want more toys, work more, work hard, and play hard.
Raping like MB did does not count as work.
Steve

Maybe Chrysler could get out of it's funk by introducing a product line called "Toyz for da poor Boyz"! Tag lines: "We know you work for your money. We know they don't. You deserve to drive the best Toyz in town!
The new Chrysler Toyz: Because you deserve more than "they" do! You are a better human being."

I think we're on to something here!

warp2diesel · **Posted:** Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:01 am

When I was in the U.A.E. (yup ski slopes inside and stiling silver fenders on Audis) the contractor had 10 engineers to do what one site engineer does here in the US or in Canada. Gee wizz we must be more efficient, I guess.
They wine about not having toys unless your rich, but I am not rich and I have toys, I must work.

Steve

KeighJeigh · **Posted:** Sat Feb 16, 2008 1:45 am

warp2diesel wrote:

When I was in the U.A.E. (yup ski slopes inside and stiling silver fenders on Audis) the contractor had 10 engineers to do what one site engineer does here in the US or in Canada. Gee wizz we must be more efficient, I guess.
They wine about not having toys unless your rich, but I am not rich and I have toys, I must work.
Steve

I completely agree! If "they" are not rich and don't have toys, then they are lazy! Nope, ain't like WE we work hard! (Hey, what if Santa Claus brings me a new Jeep?)

I quite certain there is a connection between hiring practices in Dubai, DC being "raped" by MB, DC working with the Communist Chinese and loss of American engineering prowess. I'm just not intelligent enough to put it all together. I'll try harder.

retmil46 · **Posted:** Sat Feb 16, 2008 3:22 am

And just what in the h### did the above rants have to do with the original article or Chrysler's future?

And for the record, Daimler did take Chrysler to the cleaners big time.

Threeweight · **Joined:** Mon May 14, 2007 5:57 pm **Posts:** 679

retmil46 wrote:

And for the record, Daimler did take Chrysler to the cleaners big time.

After a merger that was approved by US government regulators, and the board/shareholders of Chrysler.

KeighJeigh · **Posted:** Sat Feb 16, 2008 6:06 am

retmil46 wrote:

And just what in the h### did the above rants have to do with the original article or Chrysler's future?

And for the record, Daimler did take Chrysler to the cleaners big time.

Well said!

bhysjulien · **Posted:** Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:31 am

Chrysler could do itself a huge favor by improving its products. Almost all of the buddies I have that like Mopar tell me the transmissions don't last. Chrysler engines, for the most part, have never been known to be fuel efficient. We could talk about the mickey mouse cost cutting that passes for engineering (KJ balljoints, EGR, Torque Converter made by Mattel, and that's just the KJ) but why rehash what we already know. We could talk about the decision to discontinue the KJ CRD (11,000 sold in 2 years) and then bring out the CRD Grand. How many of those have they sold? What about the Commander? A slightly bigger, boxier Grand. Pure genius to build something slightly bigger but tell everyone how much more you can fit in it. I've had 300 C's as rental vehicles and they are great cars. I would own one if I could afford it. How many 300 C commercials do you see in a day? If you don't push the product nobody will buy it. Chrysler has problems on several levels. I hope Jeep survives them.

sbohner · **Posted:** Sat Feb 16, 2008 10:52 am

Chrysler has had some tough decisions that led them to short-term gains and sometimes just survival. It is a good reflection of our nation's economic predicament. There is global competition and leaders of nationally-based companies must navigate the changing economic waters. Where competition is not fierce, US companies do okay. But in markets like the car industry where much of this pricey product is bought in the USA, the international competition is fierce and we should be prepared to retool to compete. It is telling to watch Korean firms like Hyundai beat the Japanese at their own game. The introduced high-quality cars at a low price (employing Lean Development) by retooling their development and production lines just as Japan's infrastructure was too new to update, but too old to compete. At the same time, Korea had a workforce hungry to work and the Japanese were satisfied in their success. Hence, Korea is doing to Japan, what Japan did to the USA, and what the USA did to Europe after WW2.

Brand loyalty for American products eroded away in the 1980's. American car manufacturers built products like the Granada, the Pacer, the K-Cars. They competed with Japan who made the Honda Accord and the Toyota Camry. With Union pressures and an aging production infrastructure Corporate Executives were compelled into the position they still hold today and American buyer loyalty was cast aside. Of course, this avenue leads to other eroding behaviors such as poor customer service (in the interest of reducing risks), cheap labor alternatives (overseas manufacture), and the like.

We make buying decisions to stretch our wallet. But much of what we buy are are luxuries and these are often bought on credit and from foreign producers (not to be confused with foreign companies). We listen to advertisers who suggest we "deserve" their products since that makes us smarter, better looking, better smelling, and sexy. The American public has allowed itself to be duped into this path that is leading to our economic predicament.

Focusing back on Chrysler -- a failure by Corporate Executives to do the right thing is exacerbating the situation. Chrysler is floundering because of its past indecision and poor decisions. Like a dinosaur, you can shoot it in the head, and it will walk another two miles. Chrysler is large -- they employ a lot of people and have a large responsibility. Decisions that would kill a small firm are survivable for something this large. However, the energy needed to revive a corporation of this size is enormous too. I fear that radical measures are needed.

What would happen if the firm would turn to honest and transparent practices (both externally with customers and internally with employees)? What if they treated their hardworking American employees as valuable assets that could innovate past the competition? What if Chrysler were to really stand behind their products? This would entail lots of risk according to the lawyers, but what about the rewards? It takes leadership with vision and meaningful tasks to succeed here.

If Chrysler can come out of this funk, then perhaps our nation can dig its way out of the situation it is in. Companies can learn how to compete in a global market. Working more than other nations is bit "Boxer the Horse" (from book called "Animal Farm"). Working with meaningful purpose towards a worthy goal like preserving America for our kids and their kids, now that would make us work smart enough to compete. Not fearing the use of technology to overcome the diseconomies of labor costs would also be reasonable at this point. But will Chrysler and other companies in America be risk entrepreneurial or remain risk averse? (Hint risk aversion leads to entropy, an important engineering phenomena).

vtdog · **Joined:** Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:27 am **Posts:** 640

Wow, when I first posted the article I never expected that the discussion would evolve (devolve?) into a discourse on macroeconomic theory and geopolitical issues. It is amazing how the stream of consciousness moves.

In any event, I believe that the author was making the point that Chrysler is at a critical juncture. At present, they are producing vehicles which few want to purchase. In addition, the vehicles that they do make are not known for either their fuel efficiency, or dynamic styling. The author makes the point that in order to survive as a company (outside of Jeep which will (should?) survive on its own) they have to produce vehicles which are both “stylish” and fuel efficient. The best looking vehicle which shows a poor EPA rating or the most fuel efficient vehicle which looks awful will not sell. Chrysler does have the talent, the only question is do they have the will and are they willing to make the investment in big dollars to make the company solvent again.

The other issues raised by forum members are all symptoms of the problem, but not solution

crd liberty · **Posted:** Sat Feb 16, 2008 3:31 pm

Suerly someone very smart at Chrysler would know
when they produced the CRD that it would not work in its present
state.

That hose was clear when I put it on.

EHM hose at 5,000 miles of being on there.amaign what all the power
plants look like inside that have not done this mod?
Nothing wrong with the powerplant just the alterations
that were made to it.

vtdog · **Joined:** Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:27 am **Posts:** 640

I am certainly not an expert on vapor depostion, but the coating on your clear hose could be due to a very small total amount of oil (less than 1 ml) which was "fogged" during the 5k mile combustion process and deposited in hose as it cooled. I have no direct experience in this area, but did do some vapor coating of items in my college/grad school days and it is my recollection that very very tiny amounts of material when vaporized produce large thin layer coatings over great surface area. Just and FYI so that things may not be as bad as they seem

PS I am NOT defending Jeep in their "improvised" engineering answer to EPA issues.

05infernoCRDL · **Posted:** Sat Feb 16, 2008 5:30 pm

vtdog wrote:

I am certainly not an expert on vapor depostion, but the coating on your clear hose could be due to a very small total amount of oil (less than 1 ml) which was "fogged" during the 5k mile combustion process and deposited in hose as it cooled. I have no direct experience in this area, but did do some vapor coating of items in my college/grad school days and it is my recollection that very very tiny amounts of material when vaporized produce large thin layer coatings over great surface area. Just and FYI so that things may not be as bad as they seem

PS I am NOT defending Jeep in their "improvised" engineering answer to EPA issues.

VT... there is alot of oil coming through that hose... pull off the inlet side of your intercooler... there is alot of oil that gets in there... i just pulled mine to install a "provent"

crd liberty · **Posted:** Sat Feb 16, 2008 5:48 pm

That oil is coming straight out of the CCV puck and going thru that hose
to the frame rail. Without that hose on there all that oil is going thru your
turbo, intercooler, both hoses, FCV and EGR valve.
Think I am wrong? Look at the hose from your CCV valve. Trace that
3/4 hose to where? Between the air box and the turbo is where
it feeds the whole system back into the flow of things.
Please, look at it and don't let this stuff into your systems.
Steve

Pablo · **Joined:** Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:06 pm **Posts:** 1201

They need a few short term home runs to keep the cash coming in. Why don't they put that 2.8 Panther in the Dakota and release the JK with it?

You would not be able to sell those fast enough and they would rake in some cash.

If VM can't make them fast enough, get a license for them and have Cummins make them. VM has sold the licenses to its motors before, so it should not be an issue.

This crap with Cherry... really come on. Cherry? WTF? Let me guess..lead paint on the interior. Airbags powered by fireworks left over from Chinese new year? I have seen the you-tube of that thing in a collision. It is a death-mobile.

They need to ditch these guys and go beg Mitsu for their forgiveness... or forge a partnership with the Koreans.

If they can't do that, they would be better off revitalizing the Neon and bringing it back. It sucked when it first came out because of bean counter issues (head gasket, etc). By the time it was on the chopping bock, it was a reliable vehicle that got decent mileage and was inexpensive. They replaced it with a bloated angular plastic POS-- the Caliber.

BTW, what happened to Chrysler styling? They went from the sexiest for the money to that fat ugly betty standing alone by the punch bowl. Every new vehicle that comes out looks like every other vehicle they make-- just smaller or bigger. The Jeeps look like clones now and the Dodge's too. Plus every vehicle is bathed in miles of cheap plastic. My 2001 Corolla has a better interior than a new Caliber.

So far the "New Chrysler" is not very impressive.

warp2diesel · **Posted:** Sun Feb 17, 2008 12:57 am

My brother who works as a fuel systems engineer for Ford told me that the word around Detroit is the Investment firm that bought Chrysler will make Chrysler LLC work and make money, Hell or High Water with an Iron Fist. I am glad I don't work for them.
My reasons for buying the Liberty CRD are:
1) Common rail Turbo Diesel with towing capacity.
2) 4X4
3) Good handling for an SUV.
4) Jeep reputation, independent of Chrysler's reputation.

Edmunds on Chrysler

Who is online