Indie Auto reader George Denzinger submitted a follow-up letter to a previous one concerning the 100th anniversary of the Chrysler brand (go here).
First, thanks to Steve for posting my letter. I wanted to address a couple of things that people in the comments have noted my letter. Hondadriver (and others) noted that Stellantis has several vehicles that could be adapted to the U.S. market (if they pass FMVSS). I understand the turbulence of the market, the business with Carlos Tavares and the restructuring following that episode, but I do not feel a sense of urgency to conduct business in North America.
In addition, the announcement that Christine Feuell has left for personal reasons, leaves me in further doubt whether or not there’s plan for the Chrysler brand. Back in 2022, we saw the first images of the Airflow concept, which looked like a fairly attractive and reasonably close to production-ready vehicle. But the lack of progress on that vehicle signaled to me that there was no desire to make it happen, it almost felt like a vanity project instead of a roadmap to the future. Strike one.
A stunning concept car that didn’t go into production
The more recent Halcyon concept (see banner photo) was stunning. The car showcased several ideas that were wrapped in beautiful skin, and it wasn’t a SUV! It also went nowhere. Strike two.
What will be strike three for the Chrysler brand? Stellantis seems to replace leadership when attempting to cut costs in underperforming regions (North America has struggled with sales and profitability). It makes sense to reduce management layers and centralize decision making, also.
With the new CEO, Antonio Filosa immediately appointing Matt McAlear (who already has Dodge, RAM(!) and Alfa Romeo NA under his leadership, does this mean we will see a coherent strategy sometime soon for the Chrysler brand? There are indications of more integration with Dodge, which is logical. But if not, will Chrysler ride off into the sunset in the Pacifica?
— George Denzinger
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
PHOTOGRAPHY:
- 2023 Chrysler Airflow — By Kevauto via Wikipedia Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license. Photo edited to lighten dark tones.
- 2024 Chrysler Halcyon — By HJUdall via Wikipedia Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication. Photo edited to lighten dark tones.
Indie Auto invites your comments (see below) or letters to the editor (go here). Letters may be lightly edited for style.
I can’t see a future for Chrysler/Dodge. Even if they were able to create a blockbuster of 1964.5 Mustang status, they’ll need five years to restore the public’s trust in their quality and likelihood that they’ll be able to stay in business to support their cars.
Jeep will likely remain and they can take over all of the Ram trucks that they share bodies with now. That franchise is probably valuable enough for Stellantis to hang onto instead of selling. If Rivian gets stronger then maybe they’ll be able to buy Jeep down the road.
To be honest, I would not be surprised if GM buys Ford within the next decade. Neither looks to be in great shape. They get the F150 and Mustang that they can’t compete with, and whatever EV stuff Ford has. They can make it a boutique brand in the Pontiac/Oldsmobile space and finally kill GMC. May as well kill Buick too; no one would notice except the Chinese and they won’t miss it now that they’ve stolen all of the technology.
I have seen a lot more of those little Buick CUVs on the road recently. I am in Los Angeles area near Orange County. I had to look it up. I think it has a 1.2 liter engine and the price is right.
A few weeks ago I posted a suggestion to twin Chrysler and Opel, not unlike what GM did with Buick…
https://www.autoperspectives.net/post/two-great-tastes-that-taste-great-together
I can see a future for Chrysler and Dodge. I am not so sure about Lincoln – whose cars are so Ford- like who would bother ?
The positives ? The Pacifica/ Pinnacle model is excellent and quite reminicent of the art deco models of the 1940’s. It is attractive roomy practical. And it would be an excellent base for a future Imperial.
Dodge has a good performance image construct and the new Charger is faithful to the original – and a 2 door. A rarity
in todays bulky look for vehicles. An added 4 door would be a great compliment to the model – there already exists a market for it.
The new Wagoneer is establishing a place in the sun against huge and powerful competition – we all know who.
Ford meanwhile suffers from paralysed management still beholden to Bill Ford and his families money. He is the last and the least of the Ford’s. I beleive his golden boy Mulalley steered the company to ruin – as amatuers often do.
I’m having a hard time imagining a positive future for Chrysler and Dodge. Chrysler specifically, as there seems to be no announcements about future product. I would agree with you about Lincoln, however. There was a joke a few years ago about the “One Ford” program several years back, the joke being that there would only be one Ford available for sale…
However the positives you mentioned look rather bleak to me. While the Pacifica Pinnacle is a fantastic vehicle, what else is there for Chrysler? Also, I don’t feel that a FWD-biased platform is really a good choice to resurrect the Imperial nameplate. Look at the one from the early 1990’s, see how badly it aged. In addition, Dodge has become a one-trick pony, little to offer besides muscle cars. There was a time that the storied nameplate (at least in North America) had a full line of vehicles and trucks. With RAM(!) split off and the focus on “Hemi all the things”, has left Dodge in a precarious position regarding market share. Much like Harley Davidson, if you don’t have a plan going forward, you’re going to sell to an ever shrinking market.
Look at the last couple of Dodge launches. The Dart was a great idea, but the actual execution was awful. The Avenger undercut it in price and the initial sales mix of Darts was biased on the higher line models. Few entry level models to at least get people to look at the cars. A similar situation with the Hornet (or the answer to a question no one asked). On paper this should have been a good seller. Who could resist an Alfa-based SUV with (ostensibly) a domestic price? It appears, everyone… Dart déjà vu, anyone?
As an example, when we were shopping for a new car a couple of years ago, we went to look at Hornets. While they were advertised with a price of under $30K, on the three lots nearest me, I couldn’t find one under $40K. While they were very comprehensively equipped and apparently quite capable, but as a supposed entry level vehicle? It was far more than what I wanted to spend. Even an XLT-level AWD Maverick would have been a much better buy.
FWIW, if I were in the market for a very large and heavy performance car in the $60,000 range, the new Charger isn’t where I would start. There are better choices (IMO) for that kind of money. YMMV.
You couldn’t be more wrong about Mulally, he clearly saved the company. Read the book “American Icon”. As his successors Fields, Hackett, and Farley forgot his lessons, they sure could use him now. As for Boeing, Ortberg at least is proving to be promising in turning it around after Alan’s successors made the same, or worse, mistakes. . Mulally was an organizational genius, full stop.
All of these companies have over 100 years experience and one would think that they know how build and sell cars. But it’s Third Generation Syndrome. The 1st generation founds a company, the 2nd makes successful and the 3rd destroys it.