Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Problem is that Mercedes platforms are already outdated.
People keep parroting that statement about the Mercedes-derived LX/LC Chrysler vehicles with absolutely NO justification other than "its design roots go back to the 90s and the LX has been in production since 2005." Well, yeah? So flippin' what? Its not like there haven't been incremental (and not-so-incremental) improvements that whole time. I have driven the latest Camaro (Alpha platform, less than 5 years old) and the latest Mustang (similar). Other than the fact that they're both smaller and lighter and therefore inherently more nimble, there's not any glaring difference that can be attributed to the Challenger's "old" platform architecture. If anything, it is more remarkable for remaining in the same zip-code with them despite spotting them 600 pounds or so. Suspension tuning, selectable-rate dampers, drivetrain, interior, stability systems... ALL those are very improved in 2017 over what they were in 2005. Its not like engineers have discovered anything new in suspension design in the past 20 years anyway. Could the same size vehicle be re-rendered to save some weight compared to the basic chassis from 2005? Probably. But unless they make it SMALLER, its still going to weigh more than an Alpha-platform Camaro. I'll take the added size and better rough-road manners, since I'm not going to be racing it anyway, thank you.
Originally Posted By: edyvw
What FIAT can offer for the future?
Now that is a very good question. Right now the Chrysler component of FCA is definitely short on money to develop new offerings. A new Wrangler is in the works, but a Challenger/Charger replacement probably won't happen before 2020 and maybe even longer for a major update to the Grand Cherokee (although nobody's gritching about Benz needing to update THEIR vehicle built on exactly the same platform... double-standard in full play). When you only have the support from the parent company to develop ONE platform at a time, things get grim pretty quickly.
It is outdated not because it is developed in 1990's. Who cares about that. I have engine in my BMW that is except two turbos, same since 1998. Problem is that platform is too heavy. As for MB, please, it is not double standard at all. It is not only platform, it is engines, transmissions etc. FCA did good thing to go and buy ZF products in order to be competitive, but they need to do something about engines to stay competitive. That is if you compare it to MB or BMW. If you compare it to Honda & co, FCA is fine, more or less.
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Problem is that Mercedes platforms are already outdated.
People keep parroting that statement about the Mercedes-derived LX/LC Chrysler vehicles with absolutely NO justification other than "its design roots go back to the 90s and the LX has been in production since 2005." Well, yeah? So flippin' what? Its not like there haven't been incremental (and not-so-incremental) improvements that whole time. I have driven the latest Camaro (Alpha platform, less than 5 years old) and the latest Mustang (similar). Other than the fact that they're both smaller and lighter and therefore inherently more nimble, there's not any glaring difference that can be attributed to the Challenger's "old" platform architecture. If anything, it is more remarkable for remaining in the same zip-code with them despite spotting them 600 pounds or so. Suspension tuning, selectable-rate dampers, drivetrain, interior, stability systems... ALL those are very improved in 2017 over what they were in 2005. Its not like engineers have discovered anything new in suspension design in the past 20 years anyway. Could the same size vehicle be re-rendered to save some weight compared to the basic chassis from 2005? Probably. But unless they make it SMALLER, its still going to weigh more than an Alpha-platform Camaro. I'll take the added size and better rough-road manners, since I'm not going to be racing it anyway, thank you.
Originally Posted By: edyvw
What FIAT can offer for the future?
Now that is a very good question. Right now the Chrysler component of FCA is definitely short on money to develop new offerings. A new Wrangler is in the works, but a Challenger/Charger replacement probably won't happen before 2020 and maybe even longer for a major update to the Grand Cherokee (although nobody's gritching about Benz needing to update THEIR vehicle built on exactly the same platform... double-standard in full play). When you only have the support from the parent company to develop ONE platform at a time, things get grim pretty quickly.
It is outdated not because it is developed in 1990's. Who cares about that. I have engine in my BMW that is except two turbos, same since 1998. Problem is that platform is too heavy. As for MB, please, it is not double standard at all. It is not only platform, it is engines, transmissions etc. FCA did good thing to go and buy ZF products in order to be competitive, but they need to do something about engines to stay competitive. That is if you compare it to MB or BMW. If you compare it to Honda & co, FCA is fine, more or less.
Last edited: