• Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0

    FCA In Discussions With A Partner To Build 200 and Dart


    • Discussions are ongoing with FCA and possible partners to build the next Dart and 200

    It was in late January when Fiat Chrysler Automobiles' CEO Sergio Marchionne announced that the Chrysler 200 and Dodge Dart would "run their course”. A diplomatic way of saying we wouldn't see a second-generation of either model. But Marchionne mentioned that both models could continue on if a partner was found.

     

    Motor Trend has learned that FCA is currently with potential partners, although who isn't mentioned.

     

    “There are discussions going on now. I think we will find a solution. We continue to talk. It’s both a technical solution and an economic one. We need to find a solution that works economically,” Marchionne said to Motor Trend on the floor of the Geneva Motor Show.

     

    The key thing FCA is looking for in a partner to build their small cars is someone “who is better at it than we are and who has got capacity available.”

     

    This comes on the heels of FCA announcing an extension of the temporary shutdown at Sterling Heights Assembly Plant in Michigan - home of Chrysler 200 production. The plant was shut down on February 1st and workers were expected to return on March 14th. This was to help cut down on the massive supplies of 200s sitting on dealer lots. FCA has decided to extend it by three weeks to April 4th.

     

    A FCA spokeswoman tells Reuters the reason for the extension is to match supply with demand. At the start of this March, FCA had a 147 day supply of 200s. This is an improvement from February where there was a 217 day supply.

     

    Source: Motor Trend, Reuters

    0


    Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0


    User Feedback




    I heard that Ford and Hyundai were also target "leads" to be wooed.

     

    Hmmm...

     

    Somehow I do not see this really helping the company. I mean I guess you'd be buying basically a Mazda with a Chrysler badge, which means you are getting a Mazda, but I would think the other guys would hold back some in reserves unless they get some real big bucks...

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Mazda needs partners too.  Their salvation may rest on building cars for other brands. 

     

    Also, if the plans are put into effect now, there could and should be enough differentiation to make and resulting product not a Mazda with a Dodge badge.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Yeah that's true.

     

    A made in Japan sedan with an American badge!!! Awwww yeah, that's how much an American brand has declined under ...well Marchionne is Canadian... (so yeah, Canada is involved)....an Italian parent.

     

    What's interesting is the guy that Marchionne replaced is Bob Nardelli, and he's a questionable character too given...

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I have said Mazda would be a good fit for them since last Summer. When they killed the cars I thought that was a sign I may have been on to something.

    The real key is they should turn FCA management over to Mazda and let someone who knows what they are doing run the place.

    The sooner Sergio is gone the better.

    Mazda since they left Ford has really had issues with development cost. They are doing ok sales wise but have no where near the volume they need to make it alone. Add the trucks, jeep and other brands to what Mazda has and you have a viable company if you pare it with competent management.

    Edited by hyperv6
    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Imagine what Mazda could do here, and it would help keep them viable. 

     

    Still, it's Sergio, Tony, and Fiat, its like asking for a death wish. 

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Mazda needs partners too.  Their salvation may rest on building cars for other brands. 

     

    Also, if the plans are put into effect now, there could and should be enough differentiation to make and resulting product not a Mazda with a Dodge badge.

     

     

    One of those few times I could agree with the Mazda part....could be win win....both could use the production boost...

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Any car company is "better at it" than FCA. FCA is terrible with small and mid size cars. The 300/Charger work because the rear drive chassis is better than the fwd of the competition and they are the only rwd game in town.

    I don't think Mazda has any extra capacity. And I don't see them making a new factory to build something to compete with themselves.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I would expect the Mazda lines would be better Incorporated into the Dodge dealer system. Sell the Mazda badged FWD cars and leave the RWD Dodge and Chrysler. Dump the FCA based FWD all together.

    Take FCA and keep the best and dump the worst. That is the only way for them to pull it out. It may be painful for some names just as it was for killing Pontiac but it needs to be done.

    Keep Ram, Jeep, Fiat for micro cars, Most of Mazda, make a new RWD Chrysler/Dodge model, kill all Chrysler FWD models accept the minivans. Lancia and Alfa let them play to the markets they are good in and keep them niche models based on Mazda platforms tuned in Italy just as the new Miata based Fiat. Masurati Expand production but not go crazy with it. Compete with Porsche and Maybe Bentley but do not try to go after BMW or Audi. Alfa should be more niche and not worry about the Sergio 400,000 volume that Sergio thinks they can do. Alfa needs to find its place and to earn its place. Lets face it most Americans see it yet as an Italian car that rust and is expensive to fix with an odd grill.

    Let Mazda do most of the platform development and the engineering and leave Jeep and Ram to Dodge.

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Don't do it Mazda. It will be the death of you. Why would one build a competitors vehicle that could eat into your own vehicle sales?

    Stay as far away from FCA as possible.

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Please let it be Mazda

    Please let it be Mazda

    Please let it be Mazda

    A company that specializes in big enthusiast cars partnering with a company that specializes in small enthusiast cars?

    Works for me.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Don't do it Mazda. It will be the death of you. Why would one build a competitors vehicle that could eat into your own vehicle sales?

    Stay as far away from FCA as possible.

     

    If the original Fusion wasn't based on the Mazda 6 it wouldn't have been nearly as successful.   Food for thought.........

    4

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Don't do it Mazda. It will be the death of you. Why would one build a competitors vehicle that could eat into your own vehicle sales?

    Stay as far away from FCA as possible.

     

    If the original Fusion wasn't based on the Mazda 6 it wouldn't have been nearly as successful.   Food for thought.........

     

     

    Ford then, like Fiat is now of Chrysler, pulled the strings. 

     

    On November 18, 2008, Ford announced that it would sell a 20% stake in Mazda, reducing its stake to 13.4% thus surrendering control of the company, which it held since 1996.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

    Don't do it Mazda. It will be the death of you. Why would one build a competitors vehicle that could eat into your own vehicle sales?

    Stay as far away from FCA as possible.

     

    If the original Fusion wasn't based on the Mazda 6 it wouldn't have been nearly as successful.   Food for thought.........

     

     

    Ford then, like Fiat is now of Chrysler, pulled the strings. 

     

    On November 18, 2008, Ford announced that it would sell a 20% stake in Mazda, reducing its stake to 13.4% thus surrendering control of the company, which it held since 1996.

     

    It was still a platform designed by and for Mazda and put into use by Mazda years before Ford started making the Fusion.  That is the point, like it or not.  Using other manufacturers platforms is nothing new. 

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I don't think Mazda wants any part of FCA.  Power Wheels builds better small cars than FCA does.  See, this is much more stylish and probably better handling than a Dart or Fiat 500.

    CDD15-power-wheels-porsche-911-gt3-red-d

    Edited by smk4565
    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I wonder if they are considering Taiwan's Luxgen.  I saw a pic of a Luxgen S5 with Michigan plates on the Facebook.  Looks a bit like a 200.

    Edited by Cubical-aka-Moltar
    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    As I have said in a couple other threads, I think Mazda would be an excellent partner with FCA and I don't think it would require a merger.  It could be a partnership similar to Hyundai-Kia and Nissan-Renault.  Mazda does small and midsize cars well but doesn't sell in volume for whatever reason (too small of a dealer network?)

     

     

    Any car company is "better at it" than FCA. FCA is terrible with small and mid size cars. The 300/Charger work because the rear drive chassis is better than the fwd of the competition and they are the only rwd game in town.

    I don't think Mazda has any extra capacity. And I don't see them making a new factory to build something to compete with themselves.

     

    Neither the Dart or 200 are horrible cars.  If it weren't for the available diesel powertrain I would have been in a Dart instead of Cruze.  I actually liked the Dart better overall but the diesel won me over.  Unfortunately the problems with the diesel lost me.

     

    Here is why I think the Dart failed:

    1) Horribly managed launch with only manual transmission cars available

    2) Pairing the DDCT trans with the 1.4T.  Should have been a torque converter auto right from the start.

    3) The horrid gas mileage that the 2.4L versions of the car get.

     

    To me, 2 and 3 kind of go hand in hand and are what really did the Dart in.  They basically panicked when everybody hated the DDCT paired with the 1.4T and since they didn't have a standard auto ready to mate up to it, they simply switched almost every trim over to the 2.4L.  I truly believe that if the car had launched with the 1.4T and a torque converter 6 speed auto, the Dart would not be in such dire straights.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    Don't do it Mazda. It will be the death of you. Why would one build a competitors vehicle that could eat into your own vehicle sales?

    Stay as far away from FCA as possible.

     

    If the original Fusion wasn't based on the Mazda 6 it wouldn't have been nearly as successful.   Food for thought.........

     

    Exactly. Why do some Ford fans forget that Ford made their living just like that for twenty years with Mazda? Sales from both did not suffer as a result of them "selling against each other" so why would this? Answer? It doesn't.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

    Guest
    You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
    Add a comment...

    ×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

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

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor




  • Popular Stories

  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      A day after the EPA announced an investigation into possible emission violations with Fiat Chrysler Automobiles' 3.0L EcoDiesel V6, the Department of Justice has now opened its own investigation.
      Bloomberg has learned from sources that the U.S. Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation into FCA's possible violations of the Clean Air Act. As we reported yesterday, the EPA said FCA did not disclose eight different software programs used on the 3.0L EcoDiesel V6. In lab tests, the engine used in the Jeep Grand Cherokee and Ram 1500 exceeded more emissions when driven at high speeds or for extended periods.
      We should note this isn't the only investigation being done by the DOJ into FCA. Last year, the DOJ started investigating the company over possible fraud for inflating sales numbers.
      FCA did not respond when asked by Bloomberg for a comment. A DOJ spokesman declined to comment.
      Source: Bloomberg

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      A day after the EPA announced an investigation into possible emission violations with Fiat Chrysler Automobiles' 3.0L EcoDiesel V6, the Department of Justice has now opened its own investigation.
      Bloomberg has learned from sources that the U.S. Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation into FCA's possible violations of the Clean Air Act. As we reported yesterday, the EPA said FCA did not disclose eight different software programs used on the 3.0L EcoDiesel V6. In lab tests, the engine used in the Jeep Grand Cherokee and Ram 1500 exceeded more emissions when driven at high speeds or for extended periods.
      We should note this isn't the only investigation being done by the DOJ into FCA. Last year, the DOJ started investigating the company over possible fraud for inflating sales numbers.
      FCA did not respond when asked by Bloomberg for a comment. A DOJ spokesman declined to comment.
      Source: Bloomberg
    • By William Maley
      Fiat Chrysler Automobiles finds itself in hot water, this time with the EPA. During a conference call this morning, the agency accused FCA of violating diesel emission standards on 104,000 Jeep Grand Cherokee and Ram 1500 models equipped with the 3.0L EcoDiesel from 2014 to 2016. They are also accused of failing to disclose eight different software programs. The EPA alleges the software used on these models allowed them to produce excess pollution. At the moment, the EPA isn't calling the software a defeat device as FCA haven't explained the purpose of this software.
      “Failing to disclose software that affects emissions in a vehicle’s engine is a serious violation of the law, which can result in harmful pollution in the air we breathe. We continue to investigate the nature and impact of these devices,” said Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance in a statement. 
      In lab tests done by the EPA, the 3.0L EcoDiesel meet emission standards. But at high speeds or driving for extended periods, the effectiveness of the emission's system was reduced by the software.
      This possibly explains why the 2017 Grand Cherokee and Ram 1500 EcoDiesel haven't been given the ok by the EPA as we reported last year.
      The EPA says there is no immediate action for owners to take as the vehicles are safe and legal to drive while the investigation continues. FCA could be fined as much $44,539 per vehicle if they are found to be violating the Clean Air Act (about $4.6 billion).
      In a statement obtained by Bloomberg, FCA said it “intends to work with the incoming administration to present its case and resolve this matter fairly and equitably and to assure the EPA and FCA US customers that the company's diesel-powered vehicles meet all applicable regulatory requirements."
      FCA's stock price dropped 16 percent to $9.30 after the news broke. Soon after, trading on the stock was halted.
      We'll be watching this and update this story as more information comes in.
      Source: Reuters, Bloomberg , USA Today , EPA, FCA
      Press Releases are on Page 2


      EPA Notifies Fiat Chrysler of Clean Air Act Violations
      FCA allegedly installed and failed to disclose software that increases air pollution from vehicles WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today issued a notice of violation to Fiat Chrysler Automobiles N.V. and FCA US LLC (collectively FCA) for alleged violations of the Clean Air Act for installing and failing to disclose engine management software in light-duty model year 2014, 2015 and 2016 Jeep Grand Cherokees and Dodge Ram 1500 trucks with 3.0 liter diesel engines sold in the United States. The undisclosed software results in increased emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from the vehicles. The allegations cover roughly 104,000 vehicles. EPA is working in coordination with the California Air Resources Board (CARB), which has also issued a notice of violation to FCA. EPA and CARB have both initiated investigations based on FCA’s alleged actions.
      “Failing to disclose software that affects emissions in a vehicle’s engine is a serious violation of the law, which can result in harmful pollution in the air we breathe,” said Cynthia Giles, Assistant Administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “We continue to investigate the nature and impact of these devices. All automakers must play by the same rules, and we will continue to hold companies accountable that gain an unfair and illegal competitive advantage.”

      “Once again, a major automaker made the business decision to skirt the rules and got caught,” said CARB Chair Mary D. Nichols. “CARB and U.S. EPA made a commitment to enhanced testing as the Volkswagen case developed, and this is a result of that collaboration.”

      The Clean Air Act requires vehicle manufacturers to demonstrate to EPA through a certification process that their products meet applicable federal emission standards to control air pollution. As part of the certification process, automakers are required to disclose and explain any software, known as auxiliary emission control devices, that can alter how a vehicle emits air pollution. FCA did not disclose the existence of certain auxiliary emission control devices to EPA in its applications for certificates of conformity for model year 2014, 2015 and 2016 Jeep Grand Cherokees and Dodge Ram 1500 trucks, despite being aware that such a disclosure was mandatory. By failing to disclose this software and then selling vehicles that contained it, FCA violated important provisions of the Clean Air Act. 
      FCA may be liable for civil penalties and injunctive relief for the violations alleged in the NOV. EPA is also investigating whether the auxiliary emission control devices constitute “defeat devices,” which are illegal.

      In September 2015, EPA instituted an expanded testing program to screen for defeat devices on light duty vehicles. This testing revealed that the FCA vehicle models in question produce increased NOx emissions under conditions that would be encountered in normal operation and use. As part of the investigation, EPA has found at least eight undisclosed pieces of software that can alter how a vehicle emits air pollution.
      FCA US Response to EPA

      January 12, 2017 , Auburn Hills, Mich. - FCA US is disappointed that the EPA has chosen to issue a notice of violation with respect to the emissions control technology employed in the company’s 2014-16 model year light duty 3.0-liter diesel engines.
      FCA US intends to work with the incoming administration to present its case and resolve this matter fairly and equitably and to assure the EPA and FCA US customers that the company’s diesel-powered vehicles meet all applicable regulatory requirements.
      FCA US diesel engines are equipped with state-of-the-art emission control systems hardware, including selective catalytic reduction (SCR).  Every auto manufacturer must employ various strategies to control tailpipe emissions in order to balance EPA’s regulatory requirements for low nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions and requirements for engine durability and performance, safety and fuel efficiency. FCA US believes that its emission control systems meet the applicable requirements.
      FCA US has spent months providing voluminous information in response to requests from EPA  and other governmental authorities and has sought to explain its emissions control technology to EPA representatives.  FCA US has proposed a number of actions to address EPA’s concerns, including developing extensive software changes to our emissions control strategies that could be implemented in these vehicles immediately to further improve emissions performance.
      FCA US looks forward to the opportunity to meet with the EPA’s enforcement division and representatives of the new administration to demonstrate that FCA US’s emissions control strategies are properly justified and thus are not “defeat devices” under applicable regulations and to resolve this matter expeditiously.

      View full article
  • Recent Status Updates

    • Drew Dowdell

      It might not be VW's scandal that kills diesel, it might be Mazda. What if you could get diesel like fuel economy from a gasoline engine and none of the diesel emissions issues? Mazda just might have the solution. HCCI is a type of gas engine that can run in certain situations with the spark plugs off, making for very efficient operation.
      · 0 replies
    • regfootball

      THERE IS BIG INCENTIVES ON CHEVY CRUZE RIGHT NOW
      · 0 replies
    • FordCosworth

      Who thinks lending more money to a country that will NEVER be able to repay its existing loans is solid idea? Oh , right the EU of course ...
      · 0 replies
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online