Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Next Dodge Challenger and Charger To Solider On With Current Platform

      Giorgio-who?

    Let us wind the clock back to November 2016. We wrote a piece in the rumorpile  saying that the next-generation Dodge Challenger and Charger had been pushed back to 2021. It was unclear as to why the models were being pushed back, but there was the interesting tidbit that they would be using the new Giorgio platform - what underpins the Alfa Romeo Giulia and Stelvio. But there may be a chance that the next-generation models could use a heavily upgraded version of the current platform which can trace its roots back to the 1990s from Mercedes-Benz.

    "We may not necessarily have to go as far as the Giorgio architecture for Dodge as long as we are willing to commit to a significant upgrade to the current architecture to make it competitive. That's something that's already started," said FCA Sergio Marchionne during last Friday's five-year presentation.

    "Certainly by the time we finish with that architecture, you will not recognize its origins. We may maintain its bare-bones structure."

    Obvious question: Why not Giorgio?

    "The problem with Giorgio is from size and capability standpoint it reflects much more of a European performance requirement than it does the American heritage of Dodge," said Marchionne.

    We read this one of two ways. Either the current incarnation of Giorgio cannot fit a HEMI V8 or is unable to handle the power output of high-performance versions like the Hellcat.

    As for the Chrysler 300, Marchionne hinted that it might not make a return.

    Source: Motor Authority



    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    15 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

    Georgio is too small and light for the Challenger and Charger.  

    Exactly, Italians always build small lite platforms more focused on Fashion trend style than on performance. No way a Hellcat or Demon engine could work with the Georgio platform.

    For Dodge to work, they would have to make a new Hemi 4 banger and Hemi V6 with turbo's and even then be limited to how much power to produce.

    Again, further proof of incompetence by Sergio as he stole the profits from Chrysler to bring back from the grave stupid Alfa crap and prop up the garbage Fiat.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Georgio is fine for a compact sports sedan, but the Charger and Challenger need to be at least 4000lbs and have V8 versions.  Different market niches.

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    6 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

    Georgio is fine for a compact sports sedan, but the Charger and Challenger need to be at least 4000lbs and have V8 versions.  Different market niches.

    True a European focused platform. Still they should have rolled back in the profits into Dodge & Chrysler and built up those portfolios before wasting the billions on resurrecting Alfa which contributes NOTHING to FCA.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the current platform aside from needing better material fit and finish. 

    They are full size and should remain so... not squished down to Euro standards. 

    • Upvote 4

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    3 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

    Georgio is fine for a compact sports sedan, but the Charger and Challenger need to be at least 4000lbs and have V8 versions.  Different market niches.

    Why does it have to weigh over 4,000 lbs?  Just because it has a V8 doesn't mean it has to be extra heavy, anytime you can cut weight it is a good thing.

    As far as Sergio hinting the 300 may not return, I would give a 5% chance at a next generation Chrysler 300 happening and a 50/50 chance of a new Dodge Charger.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with the current platform aside from needing better material fit and finish. 

    They are full size and should remain so... not squished down to Euro standards. 

    In their current form though the 300/Charger only sell in the American market, they are useless as a global product.   That might not be a problem if the full size sedan market in America wasn't tanking fast.  The 30 is down 11% YTD and the Charger is down 5% YTD.  Which isn't terrible, but how many of those sales are rental cars.   The worst selling Jeep outsells every Dodge except the Caravan, and I imagine a solid 50-60% of those Caravan sales are fleet sales

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    43 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

    Why does it have to weigh over 4,000 lbs?  Just because it has a V8 doesn't mean it has to be extra heavy, anytime you can cut weight it is a good thing. 

    The heft is part of their appeal, IMO.    Like with Mercedes, the V8 E-Class models aren't lightweights...

    Edited by Cubical-aka-Moltar

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Weight is just like platforms; consumers have no idea if a car weighs 3700 lbs or 4200.
    With all the plastics, aluminum & thinned materials in modern cars, you'd think a -say- '18 Challenger should weight 3200 lbs.

    Weight has gotten out of control, but at least there have been some very recent efforts slimming vehicles down.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    4 minutes ago, balthazar said:

    Weight is just like platforms; consumers have no idea if a car weighs 3700 lbs or 4200.
    With all the plastics, aluminum & thinned materials in modern cars, you'd think a -say- '18 Challenger should weight 3200 lbs.

    Weight has gotten out of control, but at least there have been some very recent efforts slimming vehicles down.

    In an era of 5000-6000 lb SUVs and trucks, 4000 lb cars seem reasonable to me..

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 hour ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

    The heft is part of their appeal, IMO.    Like with Mercedes, the V8 E-Class models aren't lightweights...

    They aren't, but if Mercedes could make the E63 4,000 lbs vs 4,500 lbs that would be a big win.  The cost would be ridiculous, but less weight is good.   And yes, with 5,000 lb SUVs, a 4,000 lb car seems light.  And suspensions and brake systems are better and better and can compensate for it, but weight hurts performance and fuel economy, 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Why do they have to be heavy? Because they are full size consumer grade cars, not high end stuff like multi-material Cadillac CT6s

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

    In an era of 5000-6000 lb SUVs and trucks, 4000 lb cars seem reasonable to me..

    Only if those weights are reasonable. Are they? (I know they are commonplace but that wasn't my question)

    Edited by balthazar

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Ask yourself what happened in the industry. Over time, cars in general shrunk, had 1000-some lbs of cast iron & steel replaced with aluminum and plastic, got body panels switched over to aluminum or even carbon fiber, all rims are AL, what sheetmetal left is thinner & thinner, glass is thinner, even carpeting is thinner. All these advances... and cars are heavier than ever in the grand scheme of things.

    1980 Turbo Trans Am, iron block/heads V8, all-steel body (other than front fascia/rear bumper), 198-in overall length, curb weight: 3673. How does a smaller, 35-year newer Camaro range from 3700-4350 lbs with all its aluminum & plastic (& carbon fiber?) and still be called 'progress'?

    I mean, I don't expect the opposite; that a '15 Camaro should weigh 3000 or less, but at least offset all the wiring/sensors/ etc with the construction lightening... but no. Just imagine a '15 Camaro with an all-steel body & an Iron block/heads; it'd weigh 5000+.

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    4 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    In their current form though the 300/Charger only sell in the American market, they are useless as a global product.   That might not be a problem if the full size sedan market in America wasn't tanking fast.  The 30 is down 11% YTD and the Charger is down 5% YTD.  Which isn't terrible, but how many of those sales are rental cars.   The worst selling Jeep outsells every Dodge except the Caravan, and I imagine a solid 50-60% of those Caravan sales are fleet sales

    This is untrue. The 300 is used for police duty in Australia now that both Ford and GM have ceded that market. 

    The 300 was also sold as a Lancia in Europe, and with a properly stocked Chrysler brand, the entire brand should have been branded as Lancia or just kept as Chrysler and sold in Europe.  The Europeans had an unusual love for the Town and Country and the GM vans.  The new Pacifica would have done well there. 

    The 300 with a 2.0T should absolutely be sold in China. The Chinese just lowered their import tariff from 25% to 15% effective July 1. They could still be built in Brampton and shipped over.  Stick the Pacifica hybrid on the same boat and price it like the Enclave. 

    The failure of Chrysler and Dodge rests entirely on Sergio's nationalism and inability to effectively use the brands he got in the acquisition. He is an absolute failure of a CEO. 

    • Upvote 4

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    They aren't, but if Mercedes could make the E63 4,000 lbs vs 4,500 lbs that would be a big win.  The cost would be ridiculous, but less weight is good.   And yes, with 5,000 lb SUVs, a 4,000 lb car seems light.  And suspensions and brake systems are better and better and can compensate for it, but weight hurts performance and fuel economy, 

    A 6-cylinder 5-series is 4,019

    A 6-cylinder E-class is 4,043

    A 6-cylinder A6 is 4,135

    Tell me more about how the 300C Limited V8 being 4,029 is vastly uncompetitive. 

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    23 minutes ago, balthazar said:

    Ask yourself what happened in the industry. Over time, cars in general shrunk, had 1000-some lbs of cast iron & steel replaced with aluminum and plastic, got body panels switched over to aluminum or even carbon fiber, all rims are AL, what sheetmetal left is thinner & thinner, glass is thinner, even carpeting is thinner. All these advances... and cars are heavier than ever in the grand scheme of things.

    1980 Turbo Trans Am, iron block/heads V8, all-steel body (other than front fascia/rear bumper), 198-in overall length, curb weight: 3673. How does a smaller, 35-year newer Camaro range from 3700-4350 lbs with all its aluminum & plastic (& carbon fiber?) and still be called 'progress'?

    I mean, I don't expect the opposite; that a '15 Camaro should weigh 3000 or less, but at least offset all the wiring/sensors/ etc with the construction lightening... but no. Just imagine a '15 Camaro with an all-steel body & an Iron block/heads; it'd weigh 5000+.

    There are models of 3-series that weigh more than my big old body-on-frame boat of an '81 Toronado with a 307 cubic inch iron block under the aircraft carrier sized steel hood. 

    A 4-cylinder 330xi weighs more than a V6 '81 Toronado

    A 6-cylinder 340xi weighs more than a V8 '81 Toronado.

    And for all the tech and weight savings they put into the M5 carbon fiber and all.... it still weighs 500lbs more than my iron beast. 

    Now, I'm not comparing performance at all of course.... but these are generally considered among the lightest cars in their class and they they all tip the scales more than some "old tech" Oldsmobile. 

    • Upvote 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    For an extreme size vs weight example, I wonder how much the lightest 60s full size 4dr sedan weighed..like a 6cyl Biscayne. Under 4000lbs maybe? 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 hour ago, balthazar said:

    Only if those weights are reasonable. Are they? 

    I don't know about reasonable, it's  what they are.  Seems like over the last 40 years cars have been downsized (though small cars have gotten larger) while trucks have gotten larger and heavier.   

    Meeting crash standards and adding content has increased weight, even though a lot a lightening has gone on.  There are no stripped down cars for the most part today, and stripped trucks only exist for fleets. 

    It seems the average 4cyl compact is better equipped than a typical Detroit luxury car 40 years ago, and more powerful.  

    So cars today on average are more efficient, more powerful, safer, and better equipped than 40 years ago.  And heavier...interesting times we live in. 

    Edited by Cubical-aka-Moltar
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    52 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    This is untrue. The 300 is used for police duty in Australia now that both Ford and GM have ceded that market. 

    The 300 was also sold as a Lancia in Europe, and with a properly stocked Chrysler brand, the entire brand should have been branded as Lancia or just kept as Chrysler and sold in Europe.  The Europeans had an unusual love for the Town and Country and the GM vans.  The new Pacifica would have done well there. 

    The 300 with a 2.0T should absolutely be sold in China. The Chinese just lowered their import tariff from 25% to 15% effective July 1. They could still be built in Brampton and shipped over.  Stick the Pacifica hybrid on the same boat and price it like the Enclave. 

    The failure of Chrysler and Dodge rests entirely on Sergio's nationalism and inability to effectively use the brands he got in the acquisition. He is an absolute failure of a CEO. 

    The Australian police car market has to be in the 100s of cars per year, and the 300 was sold in Europe.  It isn't now.

    Dodge/Chrysler failed in the 80s, failed under Daimler, failed under Cerberus, and so why would Sergio be expected to make them prosperous?  I don't think Sergio is a great CEO but his job as CEO is to satisfy the shareholders, not to save Chrysler.  As long as he makes the Agnelli family money he is doing his job, and the way to make them the most money is probably to split up FCA into pieces to sell off. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    52 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    A 6-cylinder 5-series is 4,019

    A 6-cylinder E-class is 4,043

    A 6-cylinder A6 is 4,135

    Tell me more about how the 300C Limited V8 being 4,029 is vastly uncompetitive. 

    I never said it was overweight, but Cubical said the 300 has to be at least 4,000 lbs as if weight was good, and if they put it on a lighter platform it would be bad.  That is like saying a CT6 must add weight to be more "American."   People want to praise the Cadillac chassis for cutting weight with aluminum and structural adhesive and mixed materials, then crap on the  Giorgio platform which is the same thing.

    And the next-gen Jeep Grand Cherokee will be built on the Giorgio platform, and I bet it is lighter, faster, more fuel efficient, better braking and better handling than what they have now.  The GLE and Grand Cherokee are obese because they still have too much of that  2006-2010 era chassis in them.  And all the Mopar fans will say how great it is, not that the platform is from an Alfa Romeo Guilia.  

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    37 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

    I don't know about reasonable, it's  what they are.  Seems like over the last 40 years cars have been downsized (though small cars have gotten larger) while trucks have gotten larger and heavier.   

    Meeting crash standards and adding content has increased weight, even though a lot a lightening has gone on.  There are no stripped down cars for the most part today, and stripped trucks only exist for fleets. 

    It seems the average 4cyl compact is better equipped than a typical Detroit luxury car 40 years ago, and more powerful.  

    So cars today on average are more efficient, more powerful, safer, and better equipped than 40 years ago.  And heavier...interesting times we live in. 

    Agreed, cars from 50 years ago were death traps.  The amount of structural reinforcement in cars today in incredible.  Then you look at how much sound deadening material, speakers, power heated seats, Nav systems and computers, glass roofs, which requires more bracing, etc get added.  A 90s Cadillac had power, heated, leather seats, 8 speakers, and a sunroof and that made it a luxury car because the average Chevy had manual crank windows and a 4 speaker am/fm radio practically.   Now a Kia Forte or Focus has a heated steering wheel, self parking, radar cruise control, etc, they have equipment you got on year 2000 S-class now on compact cars, just with a plastic dash rather than wood and leather.  All that crap adds weight.

    • Like 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    3 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

    For an extreme size vs weight example, I wonder how much the lightest 60s full size 4dr sedan weighed..like a 6cyl Biscayne. Under 4000lbs maybe? 

    The shipping weight on my '64 Catalina 4-dr sedan, with a cast iron 389 V8 & a full perimeter frame, was 3770. That car was 80-in wide and 213" overall, with less than 15 lbs of plastics. The 'lightest' were likely the early '60s MoPars; a '63 Plymouth Savoy (Unibody, OL length: 205") with a Slant Six came in at 2980. A '62 Biscayne 6 2-dr came in at 3405. All the lower priced '60s cars came in WELL under 4000.

    The commonly available numbers from then are 'shipping weights'. I can tell you my B-59 gains exactly 120 lbs going to curb weight (4274 / 4394), so I figure 100 for lighter/cheaper models.  So a early '60s Ply-Dodge is likely 3100 curb weight.

    For a nearly all plastic/aluminum Camaro to be 4300 is rather amazing.

    Share this comment


    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.




  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      I’ve driven my fair share of Challengers on both extremes - from the standard V6 to the high-performance SRT and Hellcat models. But I never had any time behind the wheel of the R/T with its 5.7 V8. That changed in the summer when a bright orange Charger R/T Shaker was dropped off for a week. This allowed me to ask a question that has been sitting in my head for some time: Is the R/T the best bang for your buck in the Challenger family?
      The Shaker sets itself apart from other Challenger models with the use of a ‘Shaker’ scoop that prominently pops up from the hood. There is also a blackout treatment on several trim pieces and wheels that make it look even more imposing on the road. Along with the scoop, the Shaker package does add a new cold-air intake seated right in front of the driver’s side corner. This addition should boost the output of the 5.7L HEMI V8 (372 horsepower and 400 pound-feet of torque when paired with the eight-speed automatic. But FCA’s spec sheet doesn’t say anything about the Shaker Package adding more oomph or not. When you first start up the R/T Shaker, it makes presence known with a deep and loud exhaust note. I had to do a double-take the first time as I was wondering if I was given either an R/T Scat Pack or a Hellcat by mistake. While it may lack the high power numbers of the 6.4 and supercharged 6.2 V8s, the 5.7 is no slouch. 60 mph comes in at just over five seconds and power is seemingly available at any speed. My tester came with the optional Performance Handling Group that adds upgraded springs, sway bars, and a set of Bilstein shocks. This does improve the handling by a fair amount with less body roll. But it doesn’t feel nimble due to a curb weight of around 4,158 pounds. The steering has a quick response, but there is a noticeable lack of road feedback. If you want your muscle car to have some handling, consider the Camaro or Mustang. Nothing new to report on the Challenger’s interior. It still has the angled center stack, retro-inspired gauges, and easy to use UConnect infotainment system. The seats are where the Challenger loses some points as it feels like you’re sitting on top of cinderblocks. The Shaker package is surprisingly good value, adding $2,500 to the base price of the R/T which begins at $34,295. But you’ll need to be careful on the option sheet, or you’ll end up with something quite expensive. My tester came with an as-tested price of $46,555, which is $300 more than an R/T Scat Pack Widebody with the 6.4 HEMI V8.  The Dodge Challenger is getting up there in age and sadly cannot compete with the likes of the Camaro and Mustang in terms of handling. But Dodge is still able to offer a lot of performance in the form of the R/T. With a potent V8 engine, old school styling, and different packages like the Shaker to make your Challenger stand out, the R/T is possibly the best value and well-rounded model in the lineup. Disclaimer: Dodge Provided the Challenger, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      Year: 2019
      Make: Dodge
      Model: Challenger
      Trim: R/T
      Engine: 5.7 HEMI VVT V8 Engine
      Driveline: Eight-Speed Automatic, Rear-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 372 @ 5,200
      Torque @ RPM: 400 @ 4,400
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 16/25/19
      Curb Weight: 4,158 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Brampton, Ontario
      Base Price: $34,295
      As Tested Price: $46,555 (Includes $1,495.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      "Shaker" Package - $2,500.00
      TorqueFlite Eight-Speed Automatic Transmission - $1,595.00
      Performance Handling Group - $1,495.00
      Driver Convenience Group - $1,295.00
      Power Sunroof - $1,295.00
      UConnect 4C Nav with 8.4-inch Display - $1,095.00
      Alpine Sound Group with Subwoofer - $995.00
      Shakedown Graphics - $495.00

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      I’ve driven my fair share of Challengers on both extremes - from the standard V6 to the high-performance SRT and Hellcat models. But I never had any time behind the wheel of the R/T with its 5.7 V8. That changed in the summer when a bright orange Charger R/T Shaker was dropped off for a week. This allowed me to ask a question that has been sitting in my head for some time: Is the R/T the best bang for your buck in the Challenger family?
      The Shaker sets itself apart from other Challenger models with the use of a ‘Shaker’ scoop that prominently pops up from the hood. There is also a blackout treatment on several trim pieces and wheels that make it look even more imposing on the road. Along with the scoop, the Shaker package does add a new cold-air intake seated right in front of the driver’s side corner. This addition should boost the output of the 5.7L HEMI V8 (372 horsepower and 400 pound-feet of torque when paired with the eight-speed automatic. But FCA’s spec sheet doesn’t say anything about the Shaker Package adding more oomph or not. When you first start up the R/T Shaker, it makes presence known with a deep and loud exhaust note. I had to do a double-take the first time as I was wondering if I was given either an R/T Scat Pack or a Hellcat by mistake. While it may lack the high power numbers of the 6.4 and supercharged 6.2 V8s, the 5.7 is no slouch. 60 mph comes in at just over five seconds and power is seemingly available at any speed. My tester came with the optional Performance Handling Group that adds upgraded springs, sway bars, and a set of Bilstein shocks. This does improve the handling by a fair amount with less body roll. But it doesn’t feel nimble due to a curb weight of around 4,158 pounds. The steering has a quick response, but there is a noticeable lack of road feedback. If you want your muscle car to have some handling, consider the Camaro or Mustang. Nothing new to report on the Challenger’s interior. It still has the angled center stack, retro-inspired gauges, and easy to use UConnect infotainment system. The seats are where the Challenger loses some points as it feels like you’re sitting on top of cinderblocks. The Shaker package is surprisingly good value, adding $2,500 to the base price of the R/T which begins at $34,295. But you’ll need to be careful on the option sheet, or you’ll end up with something quite expensive. My tester came with an as-tested price of $46,555, which is $300 more than an R/T Scat Pack Widebody with the 6.4 HEMI V8.  The Dodge Challenger is getting up there in age and sadly cannot compete with the likes of the Camaro and Mustang in terms of handling. But Dodge is still able to offer a lot of performance in the form of the R/T. With a potent V8 engine, old school styling, and different packages like the Shaker to make your Challenger stand out, the R/T is possibly the best value and well-rounded model in the lineup. Disclaimer: Dodge Provided the Challenger, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      Year: 2019
      Make: Dodge
      Model: Challenger
      Trim: R/T
      Engine: 5.7 HEMI VVT V8 Engine
      Driveline: Eight-Speed Automatic, Rear-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 372 @ 5,200
      Torque @ RPM: 400 @ 4,400
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 16/25/19
      Curb Weight: 4,158 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Brampton, Ontario
      Base Price: $34,295
      As Tested Price: $46,555 (Includes $1,495.00 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      "Shaker" Package - $2,500.00
      TorqueFlite Eight-Speed Automatic Transmission - $1,595.00
      Performance Handling Group - $1,495.00
      Driver Convenience Group - $1,295.00
      Power Sunroof - $1,295.00
      UConnect 4C Nav with 8.4-inch Display - $1,095.00
      Alpine Sound Group with Subwoofer - $995.00
      Shakedown Graphics - $495.00
    • By Drew Dowdell
      FCA US LLC Sales Summary Q4 2019


       
       

      Model

      Q4 Sales

      Vol %

      CYTD Sales

      Vol %

      Curr Yr            Pr Yr           Change

      Curr Yr            Pr Yr        Change

      Compass Patriot Wrangler Gladiator Cherokee

      Grand Cherokee

      Renegade

      JEEP BRAND

      33,263               38,493                -14%

      6                      22                   -73%

      52,012               49,081                  6%

      16,663                   0                    New

      42,048               59,694                -30%

      57,929               58,255                 -1%

      19,615               21,488                 -9%

      221,536        227,033             -2%

      143,934             171,167            -16%

      27                    621               -96%

      228,032             240,032             -5%

      40,047                   0                 New

      191,397             239,437            -20%

      242,969             224,908              8%

      76,885               97,062             -21%

      923,291        973,227          -5%

      Ram P/U ProMaster Van ProMaster City

      RAM BRAND

      172,579             161,397                 7%

      15,108               15,009                  1%

      2,968                 4,301                 -31%

      190,655        180,707              6%

      633,694             536,980             18%

      56,409               46,600              21%

      12,920               13,788              -6%

      703,023        597,368         18%

      200

      300

      Town & Country

      Pacifica

      CHRYSLER BRAND

      3                      43                   -93%

      5,520                12,038                -54%

      1                      0

      27,481               26,727                  3%

      33,005           38,808             -15%

      48                   1,043             -95%

      29,213               46,593             -37%

      5                      6                -17%

      97,705              118,322            -17%

      126,971        165,964        -23%

      Dart Avenger Charger Challenger Viper Journey Caravan Durango

      DODGE  BRAND

      2                      10                   -80%

      0                      0                    100%

      25,829               20,918                 23%

      14,298               14,403                 -1%

      0                      4                   -100%

      12,290               16,863                -27%

      23,245               30,992                -25%

      14,977               16,406                 -9%

      90,641           99,596              -9%

      15                    389               -96%

      1                      4                -75%

      96,935               80,226              21%

      60,997               66,716              -9%

      5                      19               -74%

      74,686               94,096             -21%

      122,648             151,927            -19%

      67,599               65,947               3%

      422,886        459,324          -8%

      500

      500L

      500X Spider

      FIAT BRAND

      699                  1,653                 -58%

      166                   182                   -9%

      442                  1,002                 -56%

      430                   600                  -28%

      1,737             3,437              -49%

      3,267                5,370              -39%

      771                  1,413             -45%

      2,518                5,223              -52%

      2,644                3,515              -25%

      9,200            15,521         -41%

      Giulia Alfa 4C Stelvio

      ALFA ROMEO

      2,328                 2,586                 -10%

      17                     55                   -69%

      2,600                 2,999                 -13%

      4,945             5,640              -12%

      8,704                11,519             -24%

      144                   238               -39%

      9,444                12,043             -22%

      18,292           23,800         -23%

      FCA US LLC

      542,519        555,221             -2%

      2,203,663     2,235,204       -1%

  • Posts

    • I don't see Ford offering free gas, so I don't know why people expect Tesla to offer free electricity.
    • Quebec lost ground in EV infrastructure to British Columbia, California and Washington. Due to the PQ (Parti Quebecois) Government  that was elected as a minority government in 2012.   The PQ cut all subsidies and EV investments in infrastructure  and distanced themselves with the idea of a better economy with EVs. But in 2014...there was another election and the Liberals won and the government invested its energy (*pun intended) back  in informing the citizens that EVs might be good for the Quebec people.  But...not enough monies were invested for the infrastructure.  Subsidies for EV purchases only.   A new government was elected in 2018 (the CAQ...50% separatist values  (kinda like the PQ party, but less radical),  25 % liberal values and 25%conservative values... but these guys actually do listen to the voice of the people...the pur sang Quebec people...the true blue Frenchies...and maybe not the English voices LOL) but where the Liberals left off with EVs, the CAQ goes even further.  They actually inform the people of Quebec on how EVs benefit our economy. Monies are given to local businesses, homes, to establish an infrastructure.   The CAQ government is working with Hydro-Quebec to not raise its prices, to give discounts to those who actually charge their EVs at home...to also encourage people to not be wasteful of electricity and so forth.  Subsidies for the purchase of EVs has also been prolonged, and the rebates increased all for the purpose to get more EVs on Quebec roads.  For green purposes but for Quebec's economy also.  The people of Quebec are starting to see the benefits of EV ownership versus ICE on multiple levels....  We have discussed these benefits ad nauseam @ Cheersandgears...no need for me to revisit this. The Model 3 is everywhere in Montreal.  The Model S too.  The Model X not so much... But...the Kia Kona EV is also a very popular EV in Montreal.   Tons of hybrids. From the Fusion Hybrid to the Chevy Volt to the different Toyotas that have the Toyota Hybrid Drive.  The Nissan Leaf and the Chevy Bolt were once dominant in Montreal, but since the Model 3 has arrived and now wait times are no longer an issue for the Model 3, the Leaf and Bolt are not as popular. The Model 3 is just steamrolling along.  The Federal government is offering up to 5000 and the Quebec government is offering another 8000.   That figure was for EVs costing less than 75 000. But now, as of April 1st 2020,  that 8000 max is for EVs costing less than 60 000 MSRP.   A Model 3, with an MSRP of less than 60 000 (which was the standard price) could be potentially had for 47 000...   And now...I think the standard price for the Model 3 in Canada IS 47 000... Well...we know that Elon likes to overcharge for some stuff...OK...but with rebates like in Quebec and in Canada...the Quebec rebate pays for the AWD and the Canada rebate pays for the mundane shyte that Elon charges for but other OEMs gives us for free...(yeah...its not as if GM or Ford or Honda dont force you into higher trim packages for the mundane shyte you want but are stuck in upgrading trim packages just to get that mundae shyte but now are forced to have other mundane shyte you really dont care for...)  https://vehiculeselectriques.gouv.qc.ca/english/rabais/ve-neuf/programme-rabais-vehicule-neuf.asp      
    • I totally agree with you and the west coast is very much the same as your area of Canada with state, county, city govs in sync with residents on EV's / Hybrids. Most want full size truck/SUV BEVs. As such, I think once these come to market we will see a dramatic move to EV's at least here on the west coast. I still think the Governments drive to have a cleaner climate is what will drive the change from ICE to EV. China especially will drive this.
  • Social Stream

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. dukenj
      dukenj
      (58 years old)
    2. svz-07
      svz-07
      (40 years old)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...