Jump to content
Create New...
  • 💬 Join the Conversation

    CnG Logo SQ 2023 RedBlue FavIcon300w.png
    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has been the go-to hub for automotive enthusiasts. Join today to access our vibrant forums, upload your vehicle to the Garage, and connect with fellow gearheads around the world.

     

  • Drew Dowdell
    Drew Dowdell

    Rumorpile: Dodge Grand Caravan and Avenger get short stay of execution

    By Drew Dowdell

    Managing Editor - CheersandGears.com

    July 26th, 2013

    You could be excused if the on again, off again, on again status of certain models from Chrysler and Dodge left you wondering what exactly is going on in that big office building in Auburn Hills, Michigan. Going back to at least the beginning of 2012, the fate of Chrysler's mid-size cars and mini-vans has been murky. Much of the uncertainty is over whether the vehicles will each see a direct replacement or a move to a different segment. However, a report out today from Automobile Magazine adds uncertainty to the current models as well.

    The rumors say that the current Dodge Avenger will now stay in production until the end of 2015 while the Dodge Caravan's termination has been pushed out till at least 2017, but both the Grand Caravan and Chrysler Town & Country could live on to the next generation.

    Previously we mentioned that the Dodge Grand Caravan could cease to be as we currently know it, transforming instead into a 7-seat Crossover while the Chrysler Town & Country carried on in the Mini-van segment. Now, the 7-seat crossover could end up at Chrysler with both the Town & Country and Caravan continuing in their current roles.

    The current Chrysler 200 Sedan will still have a short 2014 run before being replaced by a model that shares a platform with the Dodge Dart.

    Sales have been up for the Dodge Avenger, Chrysler 200, Chrysler Town & Country, and Dodge Grand Caravan so far this year, possibly buying Chrysler some time to make up its mind.

    Source: Automobile Magazine

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Party due to the fact they are giving them away here. You can lease either van for 200 bucks a month, a 200 for a little less than that, and can buy an avenger with a pentastar for less than 15k (or a base model for 12k)

    I'm a fan of the penta myself, and could have me switching from a Cruze...

    I've driven an Avenger with the V6, and does it ever move in that little car.....

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It kind of makes sense to me. Chrysler relies on fleet sales for a decent chunk of volume. Why fleet whore out your new, improved replacements when you are trying to increase transaction prices and residuals? Keep the old vehicles around for a year or two extra for fleet sales and sell some retail as well.

    GM did this at the tail end of a couple of generations of Malibu and are doing in now with the Impala. While it never really worked with the Malibu, I think that was because each successive generation of Malibu wasn't astronomically better than the previous. I bet it works for them with the Impala, though, as the new one is a HUGE step up. GM is also doing it with the Chevy Captiva to keep from having to fleet the Equinox and it seems to be working there.

    This makes sense whether or not the Avenger and Grand Caravan get replacements. It would help prevent the new 200 and T&C (and Avenger and Grand Caravan if not getting killed) from getting fleeted out which in turn should bring transaction prices and residual values up provided the new vehicles are at least competitive.

    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.




  • Support Real Automotive Journalism

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has delivered real content and honest opinions — not emotionless AI output or manufacturer-filtered fluff.

    If you value independent voices and authentic reviews, consider subscribing. Plans start at just $2.25/month, and paid members enjoy an ad-light experience.*

    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

    • Happy Birthday!!! Cheers!!!  
    • Yes. Ferrari was always a company selling towards the top tier rich.  I am not sure about Porsche's marketing after 1945, but I do know that Porsche wanted to go up market, really up market,  to sell to the rich in the late 1990s.    Rolex watches were always expensive.  But not always being a  chic jewellery accessory.  Rolex watches were expensive time pieces because they were highly precise time pieces meant for professions that required time pieces that were precise in time telling. Also, Rolexes were also engineered to be tough and not break in those job environments. Therefore the high price tags of them were because the high standard of engineering that went into them.  The value of the brand went up because of the people that bought them praised them. It was after the quartz movement of the 1960s and 1970s that Rolex needed to re-invent themselves as battery powered watches were MORE precise ate their lunch. So...like many other "swiss" automatic watch makers launched their new image as luxury time pieces. It was easy for Rolex to do as Rolex was coveted as a great engineered watch to begin with.   Like I said...its a boys club that they want to be known as and bought by (rich) people that have bought into that boys club mentality.  It aint for you or for @ccap41.   Even if you or @ccap41 had the money, its obvious that you guys have not fallen for this marketing gimmick.  Its barely for me either.  1. I cant afford Ferraris, Porsches or Rolexes. 2. I do not want to be in a Porsche Boys club.  I like Porsches and all, but Im not in their camp.  Not because of the boys club marketing schemes. Its just that I am not a rabid Porsche guy fanatic.  3. If I had 1% money, I am not sure Id be a Ferrari guy either.  After deep thought, I am more of a Ferrari guy than I am a Porsche guy.  But maybe not enough for me to fall for this kind of sales scheme either. 4.  Rolex...   I do like a Rolex.  But I am not one to boast about what kind of time piece Im wearing. So...nix me on that club as well. 5. It looks like I am aligned with you and @ccap41's take on this, but with me, I shrug it off.  I see why the companies want to go down this road. And I see why there are some people...rich people...that do not mind giving their monies away to these companies. And at the end of the day, its what makes them happy and superior to the rest of us as we do not have the time or money or will to buy into any of this. And kudos for them for buying into that lifestyle.    At the end of the day, whether we are talking about Ferrari or Porsche or Rolex, some of their product, past and present, have been REALLY REALLY EXCELLENT product. Whether we are talking about looks and style or engineering and technology, all 3 have styled and engineered awesomeness.  We could talk about their products that were failures, but wouldnt that signal some sort of sour grapes analogy on our part? Its a company's right to mold their brand image as they wish.   Whether we agree to it as individuals is irrelevant. What is relevant though is how collectively we ALL feel about it.  In Ferraris case its a huge success. Porsche and Rolex have to work on it just a tad more. But I feels its successful.  If there is a downfall for Porsche, I think it has more to do with their decisions to being a sports car maker ALONGSIDE being a (rich) family grocery getter/soccer mom SUV maker.  The failure of having two opposing identities is killing Porsche.  And it is a double edged sword.  On the one hand, if not for the SUVs, Porsche would have been gone by the early 2000s.  The inevitable was prolonged?  Rolex... Too many boutique time piece makers have propped up in the last 15 years that took their place in some areas of the really expensive realm.  Quartz time pieces keep on being a nuisance to them. This time around its the fashion watch trend. The name brand watch sellers like Michael Korrs and Hugo Boss and even Porsche that have taken some of Rolexes market share.  The advent of smart watches also hurts them.  So they decided to change it up in the sales realm.  Are there enough Rolex worshippers out there that will buy cheaper Rolexes or older models just to get that one highly anticipated limited edition time piece? Well...although watches are strictly fashion devices today, there are more than enough fashionable time pieces around for people to by-pass Rolex fandom.  Some have their own unique look to them and are sought after and some just emulate Rolex but watch brand snobs are too few today so Rolex has a steep hill to climb because most people that wear watches dont give a shyte what kind of watch you wear.  Unlike cars, car snobbery actually still exits...  Hence why Ferrari is still king of the douchiness and going on strong. Stronger than ever Id say.    
    • Happy (belated) Birthday @G. David Felt!
    • Oh yeah, I forgot to even mention the wireless charging! That is also a game changer. It eliminates yet another thing people are afraid to change, plugging in. Yes, i realize it is EXTREMELY easy to do, but the anti-EV people love to point out "I don't want to have to plug in every night". It's just another thing to check off the list. 
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

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