Doesn't the 2.0 have the awd option? I keep seeing "eawd" as in an electric motor assist which doesn't sound great.
Dodge Hornets are dropping like flies.
- Thread starter macarose
- Start date
I dunno, the hybrid AWD Highlanders were ICE front and electric motor rear only. Seems to work, and means they just run heavy gauge cables to the rear rather than a d/s
Why did Dodge/Chrysler/FCA/Stellantis/Whatever-their-name-is-this-week think anyone would want these? Between this, their electric Charger, and their $100k Wagoneer that no one can afford, they have to be the most out-of-touch car company in the world.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
I mean, at least the Wagoneer was targeted at the Expedition/Tahoe/Yukon market, which are the same price
Not sure what the logic was with the Hornet after the lack of success they had with the Dart. And yes, the electric Charger was an abject failure, despite being a pretty neat car. Thankfully, that platform was designed to be able to be EV/gas/HEV, so they won't be reinventing the wheel when the gas versions start showing up on dealer lots.
harbor
Site Donor 2026
Remember that the Hornet was conceived during the Tavares regime.
The Charger has the potential to be cool with a 6.4 Hemi in it. But as an EV? Know your audience, Chrysler.I mean, at least the Wagoneer was targeted at the Expedition/Tahoe/Yukon market, which are the same price
Not sure what the logic was with the Hornet after the lack of success they had with the Dart. And yes, the electric Charger was an abject failure, despite being a pretty neat car. Thankfully, that platform was designed to be able to be EV/gas/HEV, so they won't be reinventing the wheel when the gas versions start showing up on dealer lots.
The Grand Wagoneer and Wagoneer was a flop because most people couldn’t tell the difference between the $60k and $100k model, and they majorly overestimated their position in the market as a luxury brand. And to make it worse it was introduced at a time when very few people could afford a new car, much less a giant, expensive SUV. Again, Stellantis misreading the market.
I don’t know what they were thinking with the Hornet. I remember the commercials with the kid version of the guy, trying to make this car seems muscular and aggressive. They weren’t fooling anyone, it’s anything but. Most people buying a small CUV aren’t looking for muscular. They want affordable, practical and reliable. Three big zeros on that one, Chrysler. Remember this car started at $30k, and could be optioned to nearly $50k. The Honda HR-V and Corolla Cross were both significantly cheaper and better in nearly every conceivable way.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Introducing the EV version first, of which uptake potential was almost guaranteed to be low, was stupid. I'm not sure a hybrid version will sell either (that was planned), though I do think a hurricane powered version has potential. But, at the time when the EV version was conceived, there were subsidies and incentives and EV mandates as well as ICE phase-out targets, so I think we have to keep that in mind.
Q1 2024 US sales:
Tahoe: 23,324
Expedition: 21,560
Yukon: 18,013
Wagoneer: 13,131
Suburban: 9,684
Escalade: 9,135
Sequoia: 5,958
Armada: 3,977
Grand Wagoneer: 3,550
Navigator: 3,127
Infiniti QX80: 2,473
Lexus LX: 1,697
So, Wagoneer (by itself) out-sold Suburban, Sequoia and Armada. Grand Wagoneer out-sold Navigator, QX80 and the Lexus LX. While Tahoe/Expedition/Yukon top sales, I'd hardly call the Wagoneer/Grand Wagoneer a flop given how it compares to the Asian offerings.
And, unlike the Expedition/Navigator and Tahoe/Escalade, the Wagoneer/Grand Wagoneer are effectively different trims of the same vehicle, making it arguably more cost effective to produce.
Yes, as I said, on the heels of the Dart, which was a down-market flop, the Hornet seems outright idiotic. My impression is that they are trying to expand the product offerings for Dodge, which is decidedly mid-market compared to Jeep, but this is not the time to be making these sort of moves.
Hornet was a rebadged Alfa Romeo. I don't know how well it sells in Europe, but it was never designed for here I imagine, someone just decided to throw it against the wall and see what stuck. It didn't. It likely didn't cost Stellantis much to try either way.
I agree with @OVERKILL that the Wagoneer was targeted at a specific group. I see quite a few around here?
As for the Electric Charger - honestly that is where electric belongs. Nothing makes low end Torque like an electric motor. If the $7500 rebate still existed its fate might have been different.
The sad reality of the legacy Chrysler brands is that they offer a ton of equity in the North America. But every time their overlords decide to dig their hands way deep in that fertile soil, they poison it.
In a parallel universe Chrysler never gets bought by Daimler and they start fighting hard with Ford for that #2 position in North America. That, and a healthy showing in Europe thanks to their minivans and smaller sporty cars.
That would have been fun to watch.
In a parallel universe Chrysler never gets bought by Daimler and they start fighting hard with Ford for that #2 position in North America. That, and a healthy showing in Europe thanks to their minivans and smaller sporty cars.
That would have been fun to watch.
You seem to forget that Chrysler darn near failed in 79, then again in 2008 - literally no one else wanted them whole. Chrysler is so much better off with Stellantis. Stellantis might have the best balance sheet in the industry outside of Tesla. Ford and GM are utterly loaded with debt, which limits what they can do.
Is Stellantis milking the Jeep / Ram brands and not much else. Yep. Good business.
1979 may as well have been another planet in terms of the car business. Chrysler had been mismanaged for nearly the entire decade.
They also came pretty close to going under in 1991. I actually bought 400 shares of Chrysler stock at only around $10 a share, and it zoomed like a rocket.
They were so far ahead of their competition when it came to cab forward design, their R&D proceesses, and the efficiency of their operations. It was Daimler buying them out which resulted in their R&D budget getting choked and Daimler destrorying any real level of autonomy they had over their product line.
Cerbereus made it terminal... and then FIAT was actually a big help at first. But now? Billions have been plowed into FIAT, Alfa Romeo, and lipstick pigs like the Dodge Hornet which had no business existing in the North American market. Then you have the current terrible quality control. The starving out of their minivan models, and the turning of Jeep into a second-tier brand.
It's really painful to see because Chrysler has the knowledge base and infrastructure to be helpful without a partner.
GON
$175 Site Donor 2026
If the Hornet was extremely well designed, reliable, and easily serviceable--- I would have definitely consider buying one. The reviews on the Hornet suggested it would be a significantly higher risk purchase than the same money spent on a Toyota or Honda.
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2024
- Messages
- 1,592
If autonomy meant the Concorde and no autonomy meant the 300C and the Magnum - my money is on no autonomy.
I don't know of any company that has historically worked with Chrysler that didn't lose skin and feathers.
- Renault lost north of one billion in the 80s after developing the XJ for them. They literally finished the thing and Chrysler kicked them out.
- Daimler lost 30 billion and left them platforms which to this day are among the best Chryslers of the last 40 years, and lasted them decades.
- Cerberus lost 6 billion.
- Fiat/Stellantis - no loss to speak of - yet. But these spaghettis are so entangles we'll need years to figure out what profit was actually a loss.
American auto companies have a gravity of their own. They can make money from other companies, but good luck milking something out of them.
Let's see where autonomy took them...
The Dodge Ram - made them billions and finally put them in direct competition with the GM and Ford full-sized pickups.
The Chrysler Minivan - despite having over a dozen competitors they had over 50% of the market before Daimler took them over.
The LH Sedans - These were the best American mid-sized sedans of the 1990s. Nothing GM or Ford made came close.
The Dodge Neon - The last profitable American entry level vehicle. A car that was so successful that Toyota was caught by Automotive News trying to creative negative PR on what was among the most successful cars of the 1990s.
The Jeep Cherokee and Grand Cherokee - It's not just engineering that's required to make a good vehicle great. It takes brilliant marketing and relentless salesmanship. Renault never had strong marketing in North America. Chrysler was just plain phenomenal.
And I won't bore you with the Dodge Viper, the early successes of the Chrysler PT Cruiser, or the Dodge Dakota mid-sized truck which could have become truly great if Daimler hadn't stripped the $850 million budget to only $250 million.
Eventually Toyota, Nissan, GM, Ford, and Honda also entered that niche. Chrysler could have dominated it.
Chrysler's biggest mistake is not staying Chrysler.
Last edited:
If I was going to guess, and I am, it was there to compete with the Rav4, CRV, high end Rouge, high end Tucson/Sportage and just maybe the high end Buick little SUV. The development was already done by Fiat/Alfa for the most part. Just inner testing, rebadging and right off the bat $10,000 over charge. They were going to bring out a more performance orientated Hornet with more boost and better suspension, but I don't know if they ever got that fa, as soon as they saw nothing was selling.
I don't think it would have changed much.
I worked at a GM dealer as a kid in the mid 90's - not long before Mercedes bought them. We took lots of Chryslers on trade. They weren't very good IMHO, and I have no brand loyalty.
The RAM back then wasn't even close to the late 90's Silverado or F150 other than maybe appearance, and sales showed it. Peak market share for RAM pickup I think was actually 2019. There doing better now in market share than they were then.
Minivan yes, they still do well there, but that market is simply dying a slow death. Sedans are already about done - bringing back the challenger / charger was genius. Most companies have left those markets.
The GC did well during those years but that was primarily because they caught all the other companies flat footed - including the Japanese. Ford and GM lost there share once everyone else entered the market.
Chrysler went from 1 of 3 companies to 1 of 17 companies. I think they have done quite well since the 2008 acquisition, all things considered.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2022
- Messages
- 876
Charger as an EV....hmmm, need to plug in the Charger to the charger. Or need to charge the Charger. Sad, sad times.... Don't use a legendary name as a lame EV. Come up with something new. Said the same thing about the Mustang EV. C-mon corporate, know your audience, the uh-hem disconnect is blatantly obvious.