Jump to content
Create New...

Jazzhead

Members
  • Posts

    111
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Jazzhead's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

0

Reputation

  1. I love the SHO. It's the first car I've seen since 2005 that I'd even consider trading in my 300C for. A big sedan with big performance is one of those things that, once experienced, is hard to give up. (I have a Ford Focus for grocery getting.) I figure the new car I get in the next couple of years will be the last hurrah - the last time to get the car I really want instead of settling for the eco-compromise the government wants me to. I'll have the rest of my life to drive those things - but the era of classic size, comfort and performance has only another five years or so, tops. Right now, the SHO would get the nod, with the performance variant of the LaCrosse and whatever Chrysler presents to replace the current 300C worthy of consideration. My C still sparkles in showroom-mint condition, so I'll save up for least another year or two. But ultimately I won't miss out - I want one one last example of Detroit's classic best in my stable, to thrill me when I'm not puttering around in my Rascal.
  2. My own pipe dream to revive our industrial base is to bring back tariffs. But not tariffs like back in the thirties, based on politics and aimed at disfavored countries. Rather, tariffs that are objectively determined based solely on a country's wage/benefit levels as compared to our own. Autoworkers making twenty bucks an hour can't compete with foreign workers making two bucks an hour. So use a formula-driven tariff to raise the labor cost of imported manufactured goods to, say, 75% of American wage/benefit levels. That still leaves margin to keep U.S. manufacturers from growing fat and lazy. But we (meaning our hard-working middle class) shouldn't have to face unfair competition from low-wage countries. Until those countries raise their wage/benefit levels to within 75% of our own, tax the difference. And use the tariffs, perhaps, to shoulder the legacy costs of American companies for things like retiree medical benefits that are only a pipe dream for workers just starting out. The so-called "world economy" has yielded benefits for some, but it has devasted the middle class in this country that works with its hands. It's time to bring back an old idea with a new twist - apolitical tariffs.
  3. I agree with the decisions to dump Hummer and reduce Pontiac to a niche, but Saturn? Where has is ever been proven that the "step-up" branding that GM pioneered a half century ago doesn't work anymore? Why not sell the same basic vehicle in multiple "flavors" for different customers? It works in apparel, it works in housing, why not cars? Ironically, Saturn right now has the best vehicle portfolio in its history.
  4. Porblem with minivans is they aren't so mini anymore. Chrysler should put out a cheap, short-wheelbase version of the Caravan, just like they did before the current generation. No stow-n-go, just a small, space-efficient vehicle that can haul a driver and six kids to a baseball game, or a family of four and their gear on a road trip.
  5. The only "dealbreaker" for me is that the car must be American made. To ship $30,000 bucks overseas when our own people are hurting is the height of community irresponsibility, as far as my values are concerned. Other than that, it's all a matter of my current need for the vehicle. My current stable consists of a Jeep, a rear-wheel drive sedan and a FWD subcompact. That covers the gamut, and I have no problem whatsoever with replacing a gashog with another gashog. Gashogs bring both utility and safety to the table. So long as I have a subcompact for grocery getting and commuting, my view of high gas prices is similar to my view of alcoholic beverages now that the authorities take drunk driving seriously. I cannot drink in quantity, so I drink quality - microbrews, single malts. Same with cars and high gas prices. I can't drive as much, but when I do drive, I want the experience to be exhilerating.
  6. I've adjusting to high gas prices by driving less. Not by turning in the car of my choice and driving a crapmobile. When the drunk driving laws drove up the price of public drinking, there was an increase in the sale of microbrews and other premium hootch. People were forced to drink less, so they chose to drink better. Why wouldn't the same phenomena hold true for cars? Sure, I'll have my Ford Focus, but my "second car" is still gonna be some funmobile, whether a Jeep or a sophisticated rear-driver. Why can't GM make a marketing case for selling that kind of fun for popular prices?
  7. I must be missing something, but I still see the value behind the original concept of separate "step-up" divisions. Take the same basic platform, and sell it in different guises to different demographics. It seems to me to be an efficient way to cover more of the market. Maybe it's obsolete today to have different dealerships for each brand, but GM's already taking care of this by combining Buicks, Pontiacs and GMCs at the same dealer in most areas. But I assume it's not tremendously expense to produce four versions of the same crossover, that appear as different flavors for different groups of buyers. What's obsolete about the concept of diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks? So long as combined sales are reaching their targets, what's wrong this business model? I assume that if they only sold one crossover, and sold it at Chevy dealers, then they'd have lower sales. But how much lower? Is the difference enough to justify the development/marketing costs of the different variants? Isn't the bottom line all about keeping plant capacity at its highest level? If all four variants are coming off the same line, then what's wrong with giving consumers more choice?
  8. I dunno. Of the GM crossovers, I still like the Saturn Outlook best, but I was hoping the Traverse would be a smaller vehicle, not larger. What I need is a five passenger vehicle, not a seven-passenger behemoth. The Edge looks like the best fit, although a Jeep Grand Cherokee CRD might fit the bill. The interior of the Traverse looks fine, though, and it should hit its target market quite well. GM is offering the market I represent the Saturn Vue, and it's okay, but that Edge is a best seller for a reason. It's simply an inspired looker, and the new Sport version will be very, very tempting.
  9. What else can I say but - I'm in love.
  10. It doesn't say the Demon will necessarily be built in China, only that the platform will be a B segment platform designed by Chery. I'm not aware that Chrysler right now has the capability world-wide to engineer a B segment platform, so going to an outside company for the engineering is not outrageous. But building it in China for the U.S. market would be. No way I'd consider one if it isn't built in N.A. We need to stand up for the middle class in this country and resist the importation of automobiles built by workers making a buck an hour. China lets its currency float against the dollar so it will always retain that unconscionable advantage in labor costs. Once we get used as consumers to cheap Chinese automobiles, it'll be just as it was with cheap Chinese shoes - they'll be everywhere and the jobs will be gone. As for FWD, that's not necessarily a problem with a little roadster. I love my Focus ZX3, it's the best handling car I've ever driven. RWD is for off-the-line power and torque; it feels great in my 300C. But for that fun-to-drive factor, the Focus proves it can indeed be engineered into a little FWD-er. I'd buy another one in a hot minute. The Mini is another example of a good-handling FWD car.
  11. The lack of a gas guzzler tax on the SRT-8 Magnum all by itself pays for several years of its "dismal" fuel economy. That one's indeed a future collectible.
  12. Count me as another fan of the original Aurora who sez go for it! There's nothing like driving a pristine example of a favorite old classic. My baby is a '93 Grand Cherokee Limited in Hunter Green that I found by accident for sale by a guy whose wife drove it from house to market only, never taking it offroad. The beast looks as good as it did when it left the showroom floor, inside and out. I get more complements on that old Jeep than I do for the new cars I'm making payments for.
  13. I'd buy it if it were built here. 'Til then, no.
  14. If they're dropping a thousand dealers then I assume that means that the remaining ones would sell both Chrysler cars and Dodge trucks under the same roof. Sort of like Pontiac/Buick GMC. Jeep could continue to stand alone in larger markets or could be sold in a one-stop Mopar store in others. It could make sense. It certainly isn't necessary to have both Dodge and Chrysler minivans. for example. If it were me and I could be sold on the economics of the consolidation idea, I think it would still be good to keep one or maybe two Dodge cars, maybe the Challenger and the Viper. The economics still escape me though. Isn't it easier to build at Brampton's capacity by making both Chargers and 300s?
  15. I assume most of these decisions relate to capacity at the affected factories. The Mexican factory that builds the PT Cruiser is, I believe, the home for the new Chrysler crossover. The Pacifica is built in a Canadian minivan plant, which will presumably increase production of the new minivans. The Magnum is built at the Brampton 300 plant, which will soon be used to build the Challenger. Meanwhile, the Commander hangs on because it utilizes excess capacity at the Detroit Grand Cherokee plant. Same goes for the Toledo-built Compass and the Delaware- built Aspen. Too bad about the Pacifica and Magnum, though. We've had a Pacifica since 2004, and it's been an excellent, practical and trouble-free vehicle for us. The Magnum is unique, and I still turn my head when I see one go by.
×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings