FCA to produce no *cars* in the US

[Win]

Originally Posted By: whip
Chrysler is screwed if gas prices go back up. You'd think they'd learn from the past.


U.S. energy producers have clearly established that they can flood the market with oil at a relatively modest per bbl price, so it's hard to see how the per bbl price can go above that threshold for long. The drill rigs will go back in service and the oil patches will thrive, unless politics keeps them shut down.

 

[stephen9666]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd

And this is really curious:

They want to subcontract production of those models to someone else?


This has been talked about for a while. They don't make enough money on the Dart and 200, so FCA will stop producing both later this year to focus on more profitable SUVs and trucks. I think the Dart ends production in September and the 200 in December. I might be misremembering but I'm too lazy to look up the dates right now. They were both announced recently.

It appears they're going to maybe try a re-badge for them.

Who knows what will happen, though. Unless FCA announces the new models soon there could be quite a time where they don't offer anything in the midsize or compact sedan segment. At this point it appears they don't care, since their sales are booming in other segments. But if gas were to spike in price they don't want to be caught with nothing in those segments.

Originally Posted By: KGMtech

I'm no fan of FCA, their leader spends too much time and breath talking about how he needs a partner to survive...I guess from his vantage point he's circling the drain?

There was discussion of this on an automotive podcast I listen to recently, I think it was Autoline After Hours. Anyway, one of the guests was saying that Sergio is a dealmaker. He loves working the deals when it comes to buying and merging, but he may not love actually running a company. That could be why he's always talking about it, but they're not necessarily "circling the drain."

 

[Win]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
...

I'm not sure why it's been through so many owners. It's no stranger to brand-trading, though. Remember the AMC/Jeep/Eagle dealers? I think they were tied-in with Chrysler to some degree at the time as well. They also had a joint venture with Mitsubishi called Diamond-Star Motors. ....


Before the Renault tie in, there was Simca, which ironically, was founded by Fiat. Chrysler was always a wheeler dealer. It's only lately that it has been the one wheeled and dealed, and it clearly has not been good for it.

 

[supton]

How is the market in Europe doing?

I mean, gas is not cheap over there, and there is some uncertainty. But, if things are good enough (I'm sure they have seen some small drop in gas prices too), then has their market for larger cars gone up? Full and mid size that is.

If small and mid size isn't doing so hot here, then it makes sense to drop 'em here. Euro market will keep buying them, and thus product development will continue. If gas prices surge upwards, they could always just start importing a known entity. With a move to small turbo motors I suspect getting a North American car with "lots" of hp is easier than when one ran with I4's in Europe and V6's in NA--they could just size the engine bay to take the largest possible, which won't be that much larger than the smallest motor offered. They might even be able to run the same motor on both sides of the pond, with just tuning differences--I noticed a number of 1.4's lately, and I recall there being a tax break over there above (1.6? 2.0?).

 

[HerrStig]

Originally Posted By: Vikas
That is OK, the died in wool fans of Chrysler products will still claim that Chrysler is more "American" than foreign brands which actually manufacture in America.
Their "muscle" cars have Mexican engines and Canadian bodies. Not knocking Canada, just pointing it out.

 

[HerrStig]

Originally Posted By: Win
Originally Posted By: whip
Chrysler is screwed if gas prices go back up. You'd think they'd learn from the past.


U.S. energy producers have clearly established that they can flood the market with oil at a relatively modest per bbl price, so it's hard to see how the per bbl price can go above that threshold for long. The drill rigs will go back in service and the oil patches will thrive, unless politics keeps them shut down.
Those fracked wells which were turned off when our "friends" the Saudis tried to drive the drillers under with cheap oil can be turned right back on if our "friends" think it's back to old OPEC cartel rules time and try for a 100 bucks a barrel again.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: edyvw

Well apparently Hyundai/KIA, BMW, MB, Honda, Toyota and Nissan do not have problem making cars in the U.S. and make profit.
It is not where they are made, it is f.... leadership.


One thing those don't have that Ford, GM, and Chrysler do have is Unions and union commitments. The US 3 have those legacy costs and outside of 1 Toyota factory (NUMMI) none of the others are unionized nor do they have pensions, etc to deal with for their labor force.

Really? BMW, MB etc. are very profitable. Unions here are piece of cake compare to those in Germany and they are still profitable.
When VW was deciding to open factory between Huntsville, AL and Chattanooga, TN reason why they choose TN is better education, and they even pushed for UAW to unionize their workers. The State of TN was the one who jumped and said NO!
So that [censored] about unions you can sell to someone else.

 

[Yah-Tah-Hey]

Originally Posted By: Reddy45
Can someone explain why this particular brand in general has undergone so many ownership/management changes? FCA is now what used to be Daimler Chrysler, which used to be Dodge/Plymouth/Chrysler correct?
They probably purchased a POS 66 Dodge Dart V8 like I did and never purchased another Chrysler product.The Italians are going, The Italians are going.

 

[Bgallagher]

nothing says MPGs like a Hemi V8

 

[ToadU]

Really who cares where somthing is built? It's a global economy that benefits everyone. I can tell you from having purchased a decent sized fleet of Dodge / Ram trucks for my wrecker fleet due to best bid prices they were universially junk and could not hold up to the abuse my company dishes out. (Had 16 at one time). That goes for the Cummins engine too. Junk. I have the data to prove it. That doesn't mean for someone else the chassis or Cummins might not be great but for how we use the trucks they cannot hold up. The Ford conventional chassis wreckers are so much more reliable than any other brand over 20 years of owning fleets of every manufactures. Dodge / Ram Junk. GMs very close to Ford but they shut down their med duty division. Hino Junk. Freightliner Junk Xs 10. International (and I really like international even custom ordered my motorhome with a Maxxforce engine) Junk Xs 10. Mitsubishi Junk. Isuzu Junk. Ford LCF (and I tried hard to like them) Junk. NIssan UD Junk. Who else am I leaving out. I have owned multiple chassis of each of these brands and am very organized and track everything.

 

[ToadU]

......to tie this back into the OP out of all of them the Dodge / Rams were the worst with Freighliner and they were both made by the same company.

 

[Nate1979]

Originally Posted By: ToadU
Really who cares where somthing is built? It's a global economy that benefits everyone. I can tell you from having purchased a decent sized fleet of Dodge / Ram trucks for my wrecker fleet due to best bid prices they were universially junk and could not hold up to the abuse my company dishes out. (Had 16 at one time). That goes for the Cummins engine too. Junk. I have the data to prove it. That doesn't mean for someone else the chassis or Cummins might not be great but for how we use the trucks they cannot hold up. The Ford conventional chassis wreckers are so much more reliable than any other brand over 20 years of owning fleets of every manufactures. Dodge / Ram Junk. GMs very close to Ford but they shut down their med duty division. Hino Junk. Freightliner Junk Xs 10. International (and I really like international even custom ordered my motorhome with a Maxxforce engine) Junk Xs 10. Mitsubishi Junk. Isuzu Junk. Ford LCF (and I tried hard to like them) Junk. NIssan UD Junk. Who else am I leaving out. I have owned multiple chassis of each of these brands and am very organized and track everything.


If you think the Cummins is junk did you ever own the Ford 6.doh?

 

[cptbarkey]

Originally Posted By: ToadU
Really who cares where somthing is built? It's a global economy that benefits everyone. I can tell you from having purchased a decent sized fleet of Dodge / Ram trucks for my wrecker fleet due to best bid prices they were universially junk and could not hold up to the abuse my company dishes out. (Had 16 at one time). That goes for the Cummins engine too. Junk. I have the data to prove it. That doesn't mean for someone else the chassis or Cummins might not be great but for how we use the trucks they cannot hold up. The Ford conventional chassis wreckers are so much more reliable than any other brand over 20 years of owning fleets of every manufactures. Dodge / Ram Junk. GMs very close to Ford but they shut down their med duty division. Hino Junk. Freightliner Junk Xs 10. International (and I really like international even custom ordered my motorhome with a Maxxforce engine) Junk Xs 10. Mitsubishi Junk. Isuzu Junk. Ford LCF (and I tried hard to like them) Junk. NIssan UD Junk. Who else am I leaving out. I have owned multiple chassis of each of these brands and am very organized and track everything.


So whats on your good boy list Santa?

 

[ToadU]

I said Cummins was junk for my application.

The Ford 6.0s over 20 of them. Had the 6.4 too. We didn't have any major issues with them. The 6.0 was no 7.3 but all of my wrecker Diesel engines are derated power wise so a lot of the problems found in the 250 / 350s were greatly reduced in the 450 / 550 / 650 chassis. Also when I had the 6.0s thr EPA regulation wasn't a draconian as today.

All diesels have many problems in my applications which is why I have switched to gas. I have (1) lone diesel in the fleet after after college football season it will be sold.

Take a Cummins 6.7 and try running it nearly 24/7 in town never getting over 40-45mph--never driven on the hwy ever--and idling it for hours and hours and hours at a time. See how many turbo problems, crankcase ventilation filters, emissions sensors / problems and DPF filter problems you have. Junk junk junk for my applications.

Even the owners manuals say not to idle modern diesels. I need an engine to idle.

Take a Cummins and put it on a rig or chassis that sees highway miles most of its life and little to zero idling and you have a [censored] fine engine.

 

[itguy08]

Originally Posted By: edyvw

Really? BMW, MB etc. are very profitable. Unions here are piece of cake compare to those in Germany and they are still profitable.
When VW was deciding to open factory between Huntsville, AL and Chattanooga, TN reason why they choose TN is better education, and they even pushed for UAW to unionize their workers. The State of TN was the one who jumped and said NO!
So that [censored] about unions you can sell to someone else.


Ford and GM are profitable as well. FCA is as well. But they have heavy union presence and that has a cost. They also have lots of commitments to their past workers (healthcare/pensions) that a lot of these other manufacturers don't have. Also the contracts they have with the unions. I'm sure Ford, GM, FCA would love to open a non-union shop somewhere in the USA but there is a reason they don't have any. I doubt it's simply "cheap labor".

I'd not use VW as an example of working well in the USA. Look up Westmoreland: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Westmoreland_Assembly

Chattanooga voted to go union. It will be interesting to watch as a quick Google search seems that there is turmoil with the vote as well as VW's recognizing of the UAW.

 

[cptbarkey]

Originally Posted By: ToadU
I said Cummins was junk for my application.

The Ford 6.0s over 20 of them. Had the 6.4 too. We didn't have any major issues with them. The 6.0 was no 7.3 but all of my wrecker Diesel engines are derated power wise so a lot of the problems found in the 250 / 350s were greatly reduced in the 450 / 550 / 650 chassis. Also when I had the 6.0s thr EPA regulation wasn't a draconian as today.

All diesels have many problems in my applications which is why I have switched to gas. I have (1) lone diesel in the fleet after after college football season it will be sold.

Take a Cummins 6.7 and try running it nearly 24/7 in town never getting over 40-45mph--never driven on the hwy ever--and idling it for hours and hours and hours at a time. See how many turbo problems, crankcase ventilation filters, emissions sensors / problems and DPF filter problems you have. Junk junk junk for my applications.

Even the owners manuals say not to idle modern diesels. I need an engine to idle.

Take a Cummins and put it on a rig or chassis that sees highway miles most of its life and little to zero idling and you have a [censored] fine engine.


got it, emissions delete for the 6.7 would have fixed most of that. a shame.

 

[4WD]

I'm fortunate enough to have a real nice pension waiting on me - and realize a portion of what I pay for a vehicle goes towards a union worker's pension. That is fine. I want at least one US company left when WWIII starts ...
(No, I don't hang out in an underground bunker with John Goodman)

 

[ToadU]

"""""got it, emissions delete for the 6.7 would have fixed most of that. a shame"""""

--Emissions deletes are illegal. The DOT would shut me down. The bad publicity would put me out of business.

--Emissions deletes are expensive and void the manufacturers warranty.

--Diesels still do not make sense for my application. In every single parameter that matters gas engines outperform--especially the Ford V10. There is not one single advantage of having a diesel in my wreckers. Not one.

 

[CKN]

Originally Posted By: ToadU
"""""got it, emissions delete for the 6.7 would have fixed most of that. a shame"""""

--Emissions deletes are illegal. The DOT would shut me down. The bad publicity would put me out of business.

--Emissions deletes are expensive and void the manufacturers warranty.

--Diesels still do not make sense for my application. In every single parameter that matters gas engines outperform--especially the Ford V10. There is not one single advantage of having a diesel in my wreckers. Not one.



It seems for some reasons known only to the "OIL GODS" on BITOG breaking the law when it comes to emissions is morally acceptable.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT!

 

[ToadU]

Lol. Well said my friend. It would really put me out of business. And even if it didn't, I'd still be stuck with a Diesel engine which is less than optimal to me. Now...if it were on farm equipment I think there is a legal way to do a delete if it's never on the road...not sure...