Posted on 05/30/2018 2:53:18 PM PDT by tcrlaf
Swirling rumors suggest that one of America's oldest remaining automakers could be on the chopping block.
Sergio Marchionne will hold an investor's meeting in Italy on Friday, June 1, in Balocco, Italy, where the CEO will possibly kill one the corporation's most historic brands. FCA specialist Larry P. Vellequette of Automotive News reports that "a source told a European colleague" that Marchionne would declare the end of the Chrysler brand in the speech to investors.
In addition, Marchionne could detail plans to pull Fiat out of the United States and China, according to Automotive News. The brand would re-focus on building vehicles for Europe, Brazil, and emerging markets.
FCA's big strategic pivot would free up money to invest even more into Jeep, which is already the corporation's most profitable division. Among the new products reportedly on the way, there would be an even smaller SUV below the Renegade and the luxurious Grand Wagoneer for challenging the upper end of the segment.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
“The exceedingly expensive cam angle sensor went ar 55k. The dealer said it was a common problem, but there was no recall. Rather than spend over $1000 fixing it, I bought a Camry.”
sounds like a smart move to me ...
Chrysler made a fine 300-L in 1965.
How many quarts of oil do you put in per month?
A high school buddy had one of those.
It was from a kinder, simpler time...
Zero. No need to.
I recently bought a used, 3 year old Grand Cherokee. Overland, their top of the line. It is a fine vehicle with more useable upgrades than any car I have had, including my 1 year old Acadia. Not anything remotely resembling a Fiat.
I have nothing against JEEPS actually. I agree they are a niche market. For me, I wouldn’t do it as an everyday driver (not even the Cherokee). But as a hobby vehicle. I would consider it if I had that much disposable income. No doubt they are fun. Do they still have a water proof interior?
I would love a Raptor too. But I can’t quite rationalize the practicality of it as I still need an every day driver. lol
Yes, seats back then were great for the drive-in. Seems like most vehicles, pick-up trucks included, have a center console now. Bench seats went the way of rotary phones and vinyl records. Kids now don't know what they missed.
Fake news. If anything they will sell Chrysler to an other company. Jeep makes SERIOUS money. The Challengers and Chargers also sell very well.
Go check out the Nick's Garage channel on YouTube - it'll take your mind off your worries.
I just searched the Dodge Caliber... what a boring, non-descript vehicle. I’m simply not in the market for boring cars.
I fell in love with the PT the first time I saw it. I had to wait a few years until I graduated college, then I went out and got one as soon as I could afford it. My 2004 turbo 5-speed manual has just over 150,000 miles and is still in pretty good shape. I’ll keep it forever if I can.
Okay, you have the *one* exception to the drudgery and misery of the PT Cruisers - you got the turbo motor, which is radically different than the non-turbo cars; there were suspension and brake differences too. Most of the naturally aspirated cars have a stupid expensive timing belt change at around 100K that costs more than the car is worth. The brakes fall apart about the same time and need a complete system replacement and the line goes on and on.
My parents have an 05 non-turbo PT Cruiser. It’s a miserable POS even though it was obsessively maintained.
They’re talking about killing off the Chrysler brand, not the entire company currently under the Chrysler umbrella.
My parents have one. It’s miserable. It’s currently sitting because it needs a complete brake system overhaul, which is not cheap, but it also needs a timing belt change which will cost more than the vehicle is actually worth. The number of things that broke on the car in the 125K they’ve had it is ridiculous.
Bench seats suck if you want to go around a corner at more than 1mph. As much fun as they are with a potential date on the other side, most of the time you didn’t have that and you either slid across the empty seat or had someone of the same sex slamming into you if you went around a corner even vaguely spiritedly, or took a curvy road for driving enjoyment.
Front bench seats suck.
And then when you inevitably hit something, your snuggled-up girlfriend would hit the dash, or worse go through the windshield. No thanks; this song was written about it - I’ll link the original and not the better cover by Pearl Jam because you appear to be of the ‘older is better’ set.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYi0NjS1JWU
I mean, if you hate your girl, sure, that’s one thing to have...
“Engine light usually means nothing more than emissions (The Environment(TM)) these days. EGR valve, etc. You can afford to ignore it unless you must go through Enviro(TM) inspections.”
My dad thought the same thing.
He is now paying for a new $15K engine in his SUV because he thought he could keep driving when the light came on - after all, it was ‘only emissions,’ right? Too bad the engine was actually out of oil and had been trying to tell him, HEY, STOP, YOU’RE OUT OF OIL.
Check engine means CHECK THE ENGINE.
My first car had bench seats and they were OK until I met my wife. I was 6'2" tall with a 35" inseam and my wife was 5'2" tall. She tried to drive on a long trip but I had to sit in the back because she had that bench seat up so far I couldn't fit.
From then on I had to do all the driving until I bought my second car with bucket seats.
So your silly scenario means nothing to me.
That was a cool truck..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.