Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Chrysler 200 Was A Worse Seller Than First Expected

      FCA's restated sales numbers reveal the 200 sold worse than we first thought

    As Fiat Chrysler Automobiles continues its cooperation with the federal investigation into its falsified sales, they have begun to issue restate monthly sales results. They reveal that the Chrysler 200, a midsize sedan the company was hoping to be a success was even less popular than we first though.

    Automotive News reports that in a three-month period from July to September 2015, FCA reported that it sold 21 percent more 200s (8,577) than the new numbers. To put this in perspective, the second-largest discrepancy in sales was the Dodge Charger with 2,258 over-reported sales. 

    "There was a lot of pressure on the 200 to offset the loss of sales from discontinuing the Dodge Avenger," said Dave Sullivan, an analyst with AutoPacific.

    "FCA was under pressure to deliver a midsize car that could compete with the Accord and Camry after they emerged from bankruptcy. They were vilified for not offering competitive cars after we saw gas spike to $4. The 200 was meant to show how FCA was committed to offering passenger cars that could compete."

    There was also a $1 billion investment FCA made into the Sterling Heights Assembly Plant to build the 200. There was a lot of pressure for this sedan to succeed and could explain some of the reason as to the inflated sale numbers.

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)
    Pic Credit: William Maley for Cheers & Gears


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    I would still argue getting out of the passenger car business is probably a good business model for them.  They have not been passionate about mainstream cars since the 1990's IMHO.

    Specialty vehicles like the Charger and Challenger are another matter.

    The real question is what do they do when the next round of fuel economy fleet standards hit, or when gas goes back up to $4 a gallon.

    Do not myself see them getting back into the traditional passenger car business again soon.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    11 minutes ago, Frisky Dingo said:

    That's what happens when you make bottom of the barrel products. They should probably stick to building literally anything else besides mainstream sedans.

    Given the competitive nature of the sedan market, yes. As a car maker, you have to come to grips with who you are.

    There is a reason that Mazda does not build Luxury cars, Porsche does not build economy cars, and Toyota does not build high end performance cars.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I KNEW IT! I knew there was something off about their stretch of incredible sales when the 200 suddenly plummeted in the segment. Either they were absolutely selling their soul to rental agencies or the numbers were off. 20% sales inflation is pretty reprehensible.

    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    They shouldn't have even attempted this in the first place. For two reasons-

    1)This segment is so deep with competent offerings, that unless you are building something that near-flawless objectively, there's no point. Even a car that is slightly behind the pack is going to get left in the dust from a sales standpoint.

    2)It's a declining segment anyway. Building the best of something that is going to become obsolete isn't the greatest business case. It'd be like trying to make the best VCR after DVD players had already gained a foothold in the market.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    10 minutes ago, cp-the-nerd said:

    I KNEW IT! I knew there was something off about their stretch of incredible sales when the 200 suddenly plummeted in the segment. Either they were absolutely selling their soul to rental agencies or the numbers were off. 20% sales inflation is pretty reprehensible.

    Damn straight.

    Offering money to dealers to fudge month end sale numbers is some shady business practice. Very unethical. Those are some big skeletons in FCA's closet. 

    2 minutes ago, Frisky Dingo said:

    They shouldn't have even attempted this in the first place. For two reasons-

    1)This segment is so deep with competent offerings, that unless you are building something that near-flawless objectively, there's no point. Even a car that is slightly behind the pack is going to get left in the dust from a sales standpoint.

    2)It's a declining segment anyway. Building the best of something that is going to become obsolete isn't the greatest business case. It'd be like trying to make the best VCR after DVD players had already gained a foothold in the market.

    Your last sentence sums up the execution of the 200 ( and Dart ) perfectly. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Agreed @Frisky Dingo. They entered the market of the two deepest rosters with the heaviest of heavy hitters in the Camry, Accord, and Malibu and just didn't execute it well. It would have ad to have been absolutely perfect but like you said the segment is shrinking anyway.

    I'm sure all of the other mid size sedan companies are glad to see somebody leave the segment to get a few sales back. The segment was just too damn deep. They need somebody else to leave the segment as well but I don't see that happening right away.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    @ccap41

    This segment is definitely going to start drying up. Only the fittest are going to survive. The current players are going to have to start really doing something compelling to keep sales numbers up. As it stands, even 4 grand price differences, and 5-7mpg better EPA ratings aren't doing the trick. I think the answer may be to start making them more stylish and fun to drive, ironically. The Fusion Sport, harsh of a review as I gave it, may be a big step in the right direction. 

    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    15 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

    Agreed @Frisky Dingo. They entered the market of the two deepest rosters with the heaviest of heavy hitters in the Camry, Accord, and Malibu and just didn't execute it well. It would have ad to have been absolutely perfect but like you said the segment is shrinking anyway.

    I'm sure all of the other mid size sedan companies are glad to see somebody leave the segment to get a few sales back. The segment was just too damn deep. They need somebody else to leave the segment as well but I don't see that happening right away.

    Maybe VW will leave the segment. ;) They can afford too.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    9 minutes ago, dfelt said:

    Maybe VW will leave the segment. ;) They can afford too.

    Highly doubtful.  They are one of the worlds largest and most profitable car companies and they desperately want the US market for economies of scale.

    Letting Toyota, GM or the like dominate the US market would mean that they would loose that advantage and thus put their prime markets such as South America, Africa, China and the like into Jeopardy.

    Plus they are already federalizing their drive trains and building their platforms to US safety and emissions standards for Audi, Porsche, and the like. So they have no real cost advantage for doing this.

    If anything, they need a small crossover. the Honda HRV actually outsold the Camry last month, and building a desirable version of something like that is very much in VW's DNA.  It's actually far more plausible for VW to build and sell something like that than the Atlas concept we were shown.

    Given that a lot of the VW market share is urban....and young and professional....

    But the smartest people do the dumbest things and people in Stuttgart and Wolfsburg will wonder with angst and hand wringing why the Golf is down when they are doing very little to promote it or build the brand.

    I am not sure even diesel gate was enough of an existential wake-up call for them.  Sitting here in Columbus eating popcorn and watching....

    I could actually see them bringing Skoda over from Europe or something to re launch themselves before I could see them abandoning the segment.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I took abuse by many for saying the 200 and Dart were doomed to failure. 

    Here is the problem. You can not just revamp a Fiat product with a nicer looking body and expect it to be right. Fiat and Sergio has raped Chrysler and doomed their car lines. They are taking the profits from their Jeep and Ram trucks and putting it into the other Fiat brands which is like flushing money down the toilet. They should have funded Chrysler to do their own cars and funded a new RWD platform that should have been out 3 years ago.

    As it is now they are still looking for a partner that I suspect at some point may be a Chinese automaker just because they will want the Jeep and Ram trucks. They will pick the bones and not much more will be left in the end.

    The fact is FCA can not abandon the small car segment. It will be needed in the future even if it is just for CUV models. A partner could offer this but there are so few takers. In the end I feel this whole deal is going to be a much bigger mess in the future. The new regulations will kill them before it is all said and done.

    Even VW now with the money trouble is not interested in Jeep and Ram.

    • Agree 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 hours ago, hyperv6 said:

    I took abuse by many for saying the 200 and Dart were doomed to failure. 

    Here is the problem. You can not just revamp a Fiat product with a nicer looking body and expect it to be right. Fiat and Sergio has raped Chrysler and doomed their car lines. They are taking the profits from their Jeep and Ram trucks and putting it into the other Fiat brands which is like flushing money down the toilet. They should have funded Chrysler to do their own cars and funded a new RWD platform that should have been out 3 years ago.

    As it is now they are still looking for a partner that I suspect at some point may be a Chinese automaker just because they will want the Jeep and Ram trucks. They will pick the bones and not much more will be left in the end.

    The fact is FCA can not abandon the small car segment. It will be needed in the future even if it is just for CUV models. A partner could offer this but there are so few takers. In the end I feel this whole deal is going to be a much bigger mess in the future. The new regulations will kill them before it is all said and done.

    Even VW now with the money trouble is not interested in Jeep and Ram.

    This, times one hundred.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    20 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    Highly doubtful They are one of the worlds largest and most profitable car companies and they desperately want the US market for economies of scale.(...)

    (,,,) If anything, they need a small crossover. the Honda HRV actually outsold the Camry last month, and building a desirable version of something like that is very much in VW's DNA.  It's actually far more plausible for VW to build and sell something like that than the Atlas concept we were shown.(...)

    (...) I could actually see them bringing Skoda over from Europe or something to re launch themselves before I could see them abandoning the segment. (...)

    I think you mean the CR-V. The smaller HR-V sells 4 times less. VW is one of the largest (actually the largest so far this year) but not one of the most profitable. Partly because of diesal-gate fees but mainly because of the cost of brands acquisitions needed to become the largest. I sure agree about the Atlas, their poor target marketing and soulless cheaper offering in US. Sounds like old GM...

    They do a better job with their Skoda's versions (VW itself spreads rumors about bringing them to US) and new platform. So there is hope, but time is running.

    15 hours ago, hyperv6 said:

    (,,,) You can not just revamp a Fiat product with a nicer looking body and expect it to be right. Fiat and Sergio has raped Chrysler and doomed their car lines. They are taking the profits from their Jeep and Ram trucks and putting it into the other Fiat brands which is like flushing money down the toilet

    (...) As it is now they are still looking for a partner that I suspect at some point may be a Chinese automaker just because they will want the Jeep and Ram trucks. They will pick the bones and not much more will be left in the end.

    Can't agree more ! When the boss of the company himself says some of their products aren't great, you have to wonder. Honesty is a good politic but so is being able to learn from mistakes and correct a situation.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It is sad because it is actually a very nice car.  I thoroughly enjoyed the rental we had as they had apparently even sorted out the transmission issues on that one.  I would still love to see them partner with Mazda as a version of the 6 with the latest pentastar PUG would be a gem IMHO.  

     

    As for crossovers and SUVs, this isn't only happening at FCA as everyone from Ford to Toyota, to Cadillac are pumping out and have plans for more CUVs while their cars don't see much in the way of upgrades.  We are at a point where CUVs are nearly as fuel efficient as their sedan counterparts.  Even if fuel prices go up, the jump towards CUVs and SUVS will not change as we are not talking about a 98 Blazer that can barely touch 20 MPG on the highway, but rather super fuel efficient CUVs such as the new CRV which i would be surprised to see rated in the mid 30s on the highwa with the new 1.5T.  You have to make what the public wants as much as those of us that love cars may hate it. 

    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 11/3/2016 at 4:20 PM, hyperv6 said:

    I took abuse by many for saying the 200 and Dart were doomed to failure. 

    Here is the problem. You can not just revamp a Fiat product with a nicer looking body and expect it to be right. Fiat and Sergio has raped Chrysler and doomed their car lines. They are taking the profits from their Jeep and Ram trucks and putting it into the other Fiat brands which is like flushing money down the toilet. They should have funded Chrysler to do their own cars and funded a new RWD platform that should have been out 3 years ago.

    As it is now they are still looking for a partner that I suspect at some point may be a Chinese automaker just because they will want the Jeep and Ram trucks. They will pick the bones and not much more will be left in the end.

    The fact is FCA can not abandon the small car segment. It will be needed in the future even if it is just for CUV models. A partner could offer this but there are so few takers. In the end I feel this whole deal is going to be a much bigger mess in the future. The new regulations will kill them before it is all said and done.

    Even VW now with the money trouble is not interested in Jeep and Ram.

     

    Yep...though I agreed with ya....

     

    Also not sure how Jeep's luck is going to hold out either, starting with these new smaller CUVs....

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    i actually don't think the 200 is so bad.  But here is part of why it hasn't lit up the sales charts, apart from it's competitiveness issues.

    1- it's a classic tweener.  it's a bit small to really be a true midsize.  

    2-chrysler's own 300 in the showroom selling at huge discounts.

    I actually looked at some used 200's before leasing the Malibu this year, but the more i read into the teething pains with the 9 speed automatic across Chrysler's product line, i didn't want anything to do with it.

    The v6 AWD 200 to me is a nice option.

    It doesn't even really matter how many of the 200 Chrysler sells.  They can fleet whatever they don't sell retail.  If they drop it they do run risk of what do they sell when gas hits 5 dollars.  The issue is to size it correctly and not put Fiat guts in it IMO.

    Next Chrysler 300 is to be spun off the minivan.  That's a good move for the 300 but honestly unless Chrysler comes out with its own Equinox and Edge they'll need something downmarket in the showroom from the 300.  Not everyone wants a Jeep.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I wonder if Chrysler itself will also go away at some point.

    ...and the whole fleet what does not sell is a huge part of the reason that Honda products hold this value so much better.

    TLX is down 20 percent, and last I checked they were not even offering zero percent to move metal.

    Honda seems smart with production.  GM send by far and away the best of the bunch but currently they have lots of money on the hood of the Camaro and a ton of unsold Camaros.

    Methinks my next ride may well be Asian at this point.

    Edited by A Horse With No Name
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    14 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    Jeep is providing a good design in the Renegade. This again goes to corporate culture though as they have major quality control issues they are unwilling to deal with.

      Yep, don't buy the turbo ones!

     

    Kinda sucks because my wife really likes these. Though, I could always grab a base model if we really wanted.....seems to avoid most of those issues.....

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    5 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    I wonder if Chrysler itself will also go away at some point.

    ...and the whole fleet what does not sell is a huge part of the reason that Honda products hold this value so much better.

    TLX is down 20 percent, and last I checked they were not even offering zero percent to move metal.

    Honda seems smart with production.  GM send by far and away the best of the bunch but currently they have lots of money on the hood of the Camaro and a ton of unsold Camaros.

    Methinks my next ride may well be Asian at this point.

    Already figuring that is what is going to happen anyways....they will be lucky to hold on to dodge at this point....

    While Honda is pretty smart with production, I still think at some points even they are going to run into some issues with glut...

    Glad to see GM making some money, but I find getting what I want is a struggle.

     

    Looks like Ford will give me what I want though....

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Cool if Ford will give you what you want. I am waiting to see if my son stays in school in the Pacific Northwest or comes back to Columbus. Fiesta ST on Focus ST I both love, but need a bigger back seat than if he is only home a couple of times a year.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    17 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    Cool if Ford will give you what you want. I am waiting to see if my son stays in school in the Pacific Northwest or comes back to Columbus. Fiesta ST on Focus ST I both love, but need a bigger back seat than if he is only home a couple of times a year.

    Check out the Buick Envision. I love that compact CUV. My sister is 6' tall and with her in the drivers seat, all 6'6" of me can sit behind here totally comfy with plenty of room between my knees and the back of the seat. 

    This CUV even in FWD only config is just awesome. So quiet and comfy. I cannot say enough good things about it.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    6 hours ago, dfelt said:

    Check out the Buick Envision. I love that compact CUV. My sister is 6' tall and with her in the drivers seat, all 6'6" of me can sit behind here totally comfy with plenty of room between my knees and the back of the seat. 

    This CUV even in FWD only config is just awesome. So quiet and comfy. I cannot say enough good things about it.

    I had not even thought of that, THANKS!

    Loved the Verano I  test drove before we bought the Jetta. Envision may work well!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The 200 was a nice car but it was a average to below average car in the most competitive class. They styled it nice but it was on old FCA bones. The best reviews were a nice car and a better car than the Sebring but not a great car. This was a good solid single when they needed nothing less than a t

    The other issue was hit with many recalls as have other FCA models of this time period and it did not help change peoples minds. Too many just defaulted to the Honda or Toyota, Many also went to the Ford and even now Malibu. 

    As for Jeep they have been given more funding to do more. Also Jeep is seen as a international brand so they can sell globally much easier than any Dodge/Chrysler product.  Chrysler established the Jeep brand that was already known globally in the 80's and it has been accepted well. 

    Now if vehicles like the Renegade turn out to be a modern day version of the Chevy Tracker that sold good the first time only to give owners many issues like rust and warranty issues it could change their future. Jeep for the most has always had quality issues be it rust of the CJ5 or just bad engines and other bits. Many are willing to put up with it because of the type of vehicle. But the new ones can not afford that and will pay the price in repeat sales. 

    Chrysler is second to last in repeat sales. Many have given them one chance and moved on with their next purchase. Only Mitsubishi is worse. 

    I really suspect FCA will have to merge with someone soon or this whole thing will fail in the auto market slow down. They have too many models and they have many issues with controlling cost and improving quality. Many models and brand will die in this I am afraid. 

    Don't like being doom and gloom here as I have seen too many brands die and want no more American brands to be lost. But it is coming like it or not. 

     

    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    You and I are thinking quite a bit alike here.  Don't like seeing it myself, as IIRC we are both from Ohio and a lot of jobs will be lost in Toledo if the Jeep thi9ng goes away.

    But Chryco is, as I have said, not acting rationally on its own behalf.

    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think they 200 could have done better, but they frankly gave up on it.  There were no real ads for it.  i mean hell, if I was them I would have been putting out the fact that it is a TSP+ and the only domestic TSP+ as well.  I would have also been pushing the Limited Platinum package which gives you leathers, the uconnect 8.4, power seat and heated seats for the price of a basic limited or under 26g and you could add the V6 and still be under 28k (which also gave it paddle shifters and nicer door panels).  .  C&D tested this configuration and pretty well loved it.  I would have also put better tires on there from the factory because that was the major thing holding back the ride and handling and the ones they used were even noisy.    IMHO, Chrysler will be gone in a few years and the minivan and cars will move to Dodge.  The market simply does not support have as many car brands under an umbrella as it used to.  IMHO, kill Chrysler and Fiat.  Have 1.  JEEP:  SUVs with an upscale vibe and/or off-road capability  2.  Ram:  Trucks, commercial vans, commercial trucks.  3.  Dodge:  Mainstream car and performance.  CUVs with a more sporting flare than Jeep.  4.  Alfa:  use this to take on the likes of BMW, Mercedes, etc higher colume cars and CUVs, 5.  Maserati:  op tier luxury, highest prices with a target for low volume.  6:  Ferrari.  well, it is Ferrari.......  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    5 hours ago, Stew said:

    I think they 200 could have done better, but they frankly gave up on it.  There were no real ads for it.  i mean hell, if I was them I would have been putting out the fact that it is a TSP+ and the only domestic TSP+ as well.  I would have also been pushing the Limited Platinum package which gives you leathers, the uconnect 8.4, power seat and heated seats for the price of a basic limited or under 26g and you could add the V6 and still be under 28k (which also gave it paddle shifters and nicer door panels).  .  C&D tested this configuration and pretty well loved it.  I would have also put better tires on there from the factory because that was the major thing holding back the ride and handling and the ones they used were even noisy.    IMHO, Chrysler will be gone in a few years and the minivan and cars will move to Dodge.  The market simply does not support have as many car brands under an umbrella as it used to.  IMHO, kill Chrysler and Fiat.  Have 1.  JEEP:  SUVs with an upscale vibe and/or off-road capability  2.  Ram:  Trucks, commercial vans, commercial trucks.  3.  Dodge:  Mainstream car and performance.  CUVs with a more sporting flare than Jeep.  4.  Alfa:  use this to take on the likes of BMW, Mercedes, etc higher colume cars and CUVs, 5.  Maserati:  op tier luxury, highest prices with a target for low volume.  6:  Ferrari.  well, it is Ferrari.......  

    If FCA  " kiil Chrysler and Fiat ", all that is left is " Automobiles ".

    Automobiles Dodge Challenger, Automobiles Dodge Charger, Automobiles Ram, Automobiles Alfa Guilia...

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It can still be Fiat Chrysler Automobiles as that would still be the parent company.  Hell, what cars are badged General Motors?  or Fuji Heavy industries?  

     

     

    2 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

    If FCA  " kiil Chrysler and Fiat ", all that is left is " Automobiles ".

    Automobiles Dodge Challenger, Automobiles Dodge Charger, Automobiles Ram, Automobiles Alfa Guilia...

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    4 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

    If FCA  " kiil Chrysler and Fiat ", all that is left is " Automobiles ".

    Automobiles Dodge Challenger, Automobiles Dodge Charger, Automobiles Ram, Automobiles Alfa Guilia...

    Just what mainstream America seems to want to buy...a Hemi Charger....

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    11 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    You and I are thinking quite a bit alike here.  Don't like seeing it myself, as IIRC we are both from Ohio and a lot of jobs will be lost in Toledo if the Jeep thi9ng goes away.

    But Chryco is, as I have said, not acting rationally on its own behalf.

     

    The Jeep is like a cockroach you can damage it you can abuse it and you can poison it but it always falls back to the regular Jeep model and survives. 

    No matter what happens Jeep will survive with the basic model. Renegades may come and go just as Patriots and Compass but the Jeep itself will always remain and someone will want it. 

    The Jeep Wrangler  is the one and only true American global model that everyone considers one of their own. It is not seen as just an American model. WWII I think saw to this. 

    I think Toledo is safe as where would you move it where it would be a better deal?  Fiat got a hell of a deal from the state and they will remain there for a good while as long as the union does not get too pushy. 

    As for the Charger people buy it because it is cheap. I have two kinds of co workers who own Chargers, Those who are die hard Mopar fans. The others are someone looking for a heavy discounted RWD sedan. 

    My Inlaws bought a 300 new because with all the discounts it was cheaper than a loaded Malibu. But they are finding like I did on my T Bird that the quality issues are making owning it a Challenge. Recalls and false engine lights and electrical issues have dampened their spirit to the point they will not repeat buy again. They are far from alone. 

    Sergio has robbed Chrysler of the profits from Jeep and plowed them into Alfa and Lancia. This was a major error. Even with the new Alfa being interesting it was late to market and had many issues we have yet to see if they have been solved yet. There is no way they will challenge BMW and make back the money. There is talk of this platform going under the new RWD Dodge and Chrysler but with out the V8. That is a death sentence as it will be an expensive car and people expect a V8 option. 

    I think there is some real issues between Chrysler and Sergio now. The engineers and designers can't be happy. They are starved for funds and are forced to make due with such old models. The Hellcat as cool as it is was just an old program they resurrected to buy time for the new car. They are now adding AWD just so they can use the power they have now as the RWD alone can not handle it. Yet even the AWD will not be on the Hellcat. as it will only get bigger tires and wheels. 

    We already know why the name Ram is on the trucks vs. Dodge. It gives them their own identity so they can be sold off if the need arrives to anyone with no baggage of the Dodge name to deal with. 

    The Germans abused Chrysler and the Italians are now raping them of their cash. I just do not see a good outcome unless they get a new leader at FCA that cares. The cars would die fast and only the trucks and Jeep hold any interest to any buyers. No one wants Fiat and Alfa and Lancia are not high on any list of buyers in this slow market. Iconic names but damages badly.

    I think they sprung Ferrari not just for the money but also to make sure they did not die or get sold off from the Family.  

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 11/7/2016 at 8:14 PM, hyperv6 said:

    As for the Charger people buy it because it is cheap. I have two kinds of co workers who own Chargers, Those who are die hard Mopar fans. The others are someone looking for a heavy discounted RWD sedan. 

    My Inlaws bought a 300 new because with all the discounts it was cheaper than a loaded Malibu. But they are finding like I did on my T Bird that the quality issues are making owning it a Challenge. Recalls and false engine lights and electrical issues have dampened their spirit to the point they will not repeat buy again. They are far from alone.

    I find these statements pretty interesting.  I leased a 2012 Charger R/T and it was literally the first new car I never had to take back to the dealership for anything other than maintenance.  I have never been a Mopar guy and grew up in a GM family but I leased it because I really liked what it had to offer.  I had always really wanted a Pontiac G8 (and would still love to have a Chevy SS) so I guess you could say I'm a fan of that type of car.  The fact it was a good lease deal certainly didn't hurt.

    Because we had such a good experience with that, we replaced it with a 300S lease.  Also a really good deal.  That car wasn't flawless as it did throw a check engine light that turned out to be caused by the oil pump which had to be replaced.  The explanation IIRC was that a contaminant affected a valve in the pump and was causing the pressure to go too high.  Other than that, no other issues, though.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 11/11/2016 at 2:35 PM, 2QuickZ's said:

    I find these statements pretty interesting.  I leased a 2012 Charger R/T and it was literally the first new car I never had to take back to the dealership for anything other than maintenance.  I have never been a Mopar guy and grew up in a GM family but I leased it because I really liked what it had to offer.  I had always really wanted a Pontiac G8 (and would still love to have a Chevy SS) so I guess you could say I'm a fan of that type of car.  The fact it was a good lease deal certainly didn't hurt.

    Because we had such a good experience with that, we replaced it with a 300S lease.  Also a really good deal.  That car wasn't flawless as it did throw a check engine light that turned out to be caused by the oil pump which had to be replaced.  The explanation IIRC was that a contaminant affected a valve in the pump and was causing the pressure to go too high.  Other than that, no other issues, though.

    They too had a light due to oil but so far it was a sensor issue and not a pump. 

    There has been the recall on the shifter and some other issues. 

    They like the car but with so many issues in the first 5,000 miles it can be discouraging. It will be interesting to see how the rest of the time plays out. I had a T bird I liked but we had many issues with the brake, The Sway Bar started to come lose and come off the car, MASS Air flow sensor failure, The door hitting the trim and knocking the paint off, Etc. That was the first 30K miles. It was good till about 70K then the seats started to take a tilt inward with the floor sagging [we are not over weight]. The doors began to sag and hit the roof, Then the head gaskets were starting to take on water so we bailed. 

    Chrysler has some people with few issues or ones willing to deal with it but of all the Chrysler buyers up to last year it was reported only 25% were repeat buyers. That is not good. 

    I have driven their 300 and it is a nice car. The only thing that gave me pause was the shifter as I could see some older people including them putting it in the wrong gear very easily. I was not supervised when they recalled it. 

    My fear is future electrical issues like we have seen with others. I tend to think since FCA took over they may have cheaped out on the parts they buy or they are from a troubles electrical MFG like their own division that is up for sale. VW was going to buy them but now with the Diesel issues it is up in the air. 

    Well the car is here and we will just have to see how it fairs. Right now the RWD platform needed replaced about 4 years ago and I will be shocked if it ever happens. I would not be surprised if FCA is broken up and Dodge may fade away with Chrysler. Few companies have the time or the money to invest in a brand with only North American markets only. 

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • @Drew Dowdell Did they say why the Silver Collar would not work with the adapter at charging Ford EVs?   Do they not have all the pins that support the slower charging in the NACS adapter?
    • Yes Hummer did have issues and the Lyriq shipped and then held to address software issues. Those are the only two that seem to still be working with their current software as they are the only EVs that support Android Auto and Apple Carplay as GM used the default Qualcomm software with minimal customization. Course the stupid thing is that they are planning to with the updates for the trucks and Chevrolet SUVs move all EVs to their custom software with no Android Auto or Apple Carplay. Hopefully when they realize they made the mistake everyone thinks they did, they will enable it as it is software switched off/on.  Yup we are in total agreement on GM messing up the Hybrid thing. Ford initially back in 2020 when Qualcomm started to announce OEMs that were going to use their Qualcomm Snapdragon system with Android OS that they would go with a customize experience protecting the end user's data from the cell phone companies. Then in 2023 they started to say they would keep it for ICE and not for EVs at the start of the year and by the end of the year the Ford CEO stated that all ICE and EVs would support Android Auto and Apple Carplay as the customers have stated it is an important part of their auto experience. Much like how Wendy's said at the start of the week in their investors meeting that they would roll out Surge pricing for peak hours of buying their food the internet had an uproar with millions sending via social media their unhappiness with Wendy's about surge pricing. Wendy's has now announced that the customer has spoken, and they will NOT be implementing surge pricing. Ford listened to their upset customers, GM has not realized that their customers are not happy about the lack of Android Auto / Apple CarPlay and I think this will bite them big time.
    • That’s a side effect, but no. It’s harder to do both engine and vehicle platform at the same time than it is to have them alternate in cadence.    but that’s kinda true of all major projects with large separate components.
    • I actually assumed it was more about extracting more money out of a vehicle/platform. Brand new vehicles will spike sales, even with an old engine. Then in a year or two they add a new engine to spike sales again. Rinse and repeat. 
    • Ultium is a sound concept but GM's execution has been terrible. I would equate it to Alfa's rollout of the Giorgio platform that went horribly, but if you think about it, it has parallels. Have you not noticed that no manufacturer, not GM, not Toyota, not VW, ever rolls out a truly all-new car?   When a new platform comes out, they usually carry over powertrains or pluck a newer powertrain that has been running in some other vehicle for a few years. Then, once they're 2 years in, there is an engine'/transmission update.  You used to be able to set your watch to the "All new Camry with same engine" / 2 years later / "Camry gets all new engine" / 3 years later / "All new Camry with the same engine" cadence.   The reason for that is that it is incredibly difficult to set up a whole vehicle platform AND engine / transmission platform all at the same time. The latest "all-new" CR-V came out in 2022, but the engine platform dates back to 2014 when it debuted in a mid-cycle refresh of an overseas market Honda Fit. And that is why the Alfa Romeo Giorgio platform had so many issues at the beginning.  The Giorgio, which debuted under the Giulia and later the Stelvio, was the first truly "all-new" vehicle we've had in decades. It was a new platform, on a new production line, with a new engine. The only off-the-shelf component in that car was the ZF 8-speed automatic. These days, Giorgio seems to be doing just fine as the Jeep Grand Cherokee and Grand Cherokee L Now take that task and multiply it by 10.  Not only did GM build a new platform, they built a new powertrain, and a new battery pack, and then they had to build the plants to build that battery pack, which they'd never done before. They called in LG for help, but it is still a massive undertaking. The early Teslas were utter rubbish (some would argue they aren't much better today). Worse than anything GM is experiencing at the moment.  GM, for all its faults, at least had the wisdom to stop production so the issues could be addressed instead of pushing out sub-par beta-test products like Tesla did.  Keep in mind that the earliest Tesla Model-Ses are now 12 years old, one year OLDER than my Avalanche. I've been in a battery presentation for Ultium, and I do believe that GM is on the right track.  Their modular design makes it easy to future-proof the design for new chemistries as they become available.  They'll get there, they're further ahead on the curve than Tesla was 12 years ago simply because, unlike Tesla, they can make a door that shuts properly.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • 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