we should stop manufacturing cars in China and start exporting them to China and elsewhere. We'll create jobs here and bring back wealth while exporting brand loyalty. Everybody gets to have their cake and eat it too.
They need to get back to calling the Liberty the Cherokee in the US. The only reason why you would not is that the Liberty is so much a different machine from the Old XJ.
Thank Goodness,get rid of the Compass and Patriot FINALLY! Those two vehicles seem like missing links and are nothing but clones of each other. I mean why would Jeep at the time, even consider building on a platform that was originally built for the Mitsubishi Lancer/Lancer Evolution?
But these were the mistakes of the old Chrysler. But with Sergio Marchionne calling the shots now, there's been alot of great stuff coming out of Chrysler and Dodge. The Fiat 500 is another story,lol!
@1LoudMerc The Compass and Patriot were NOT Chrysler's decisions. They were Daimler's. Daimler had Chrysler making vehicles they would never make, like the "not-Jeeps" and the Caliber.
Also Marchionne is basically running Chrysler's plan with his name on it. Replace Mitsubishi car with Lancia or ALFA Romeo, and its the same thing just different parts. That said, Chrysler does seem to have strong leadership for the first time in at least 20 years, for now...
@1LoudMerc Sharing parts/platforms with Mitsubishi wasn't a mistake. That relationship helped both Chrysler and Mitsubishi prosper and thrive.
"Merging" with Daimler-benz was THE mistake. Daimler, then Cerberus, starved and stripped Chrysler, while Mitsubishi flounders.
The "old Chrysler", to me, was under Daimler. They are still always from the "Real Chrysler" that was ahead of the curve on everything, just not the biggest.
@DocWolph Merging with Damiler wasn't a mistake cuz if that was the case, there wouldn't be cars like the Challenger,Charger, and 300 which have parts from the Mercedes W220 and W210. but come on, Mitsubishi? Most of the cars built with Mitsubishi parts are nothing more than rentals at the local Avis or Hertz,ha!
And mitsubishi floundering? What, with the Evo X? Maybe the Outlander? Mitsubishi barely sold 80,000 units in 2011,ha!
@1LoudMerc You can trace Daimler's blame in this to the ME-412, a much superior car to the MBs SLR. The LX cars came before the ME-412, thus Chrysler was never able or allowed to update them, and they weren't until FIAT came in.
Mitsu? All their cars are based on the same platform and not doing well. They have no plans for an EVO XI. 80K units? Mitsu would sell that many Galants a year alone. Yeah, they are doing great w/o Chrysler as a partner.
If you say so guy,ha,ha! Mitsubishi didn't even make the top ten with even one of their vehicle lines compared to other brands! Doing well? Put the sales numbers of the Galant against the sales of the Hyundai Sonata sales of 2010 and 2011 with a straight face,ha,ha,ha! All you have to do is look at autoblog, and seveal business sites to see that. But like I said,whatever you say guy, guess you just wanna be seen on top here,ha,ha,ha!
@1LoudMerc Mitsubishi used to be a great company, though not he biggest, w/ Chrysler as a partner. But when Chrysler and Mitsu split, Mitsu had to kill off one car and platform after another. Cutting the Diamante, Galant, Endeavor, Eclipse, Montero, 3000GT, etc, until there is only 3. Going from selling 100s of 1000s to barely doing 80K in a year. Considering Chrysler sells almost that many 300s (not including Chargers) a year alone, Mitsubishi is doing real "well".
@DocWolph also, Mitsubishi sold 53,986 vehicles in the U.S. last year, 44% below 97,257 in 2008, Ward's data shows. Volume in 2008 fell 24.6% from 2007, which was the last year the auto maker exceeded 100,000 units, with 128,993 deliveries, for an 8.8% gain on 2006.Also autoblog said that Mitsubishi has been faring very poorly during the industry's worst downturn in decades, and it's tough to say if the struggling Japanese automaker will ever leave the intensive care unit. Doing well?
@DocWolph lets see if Mitsubishi can actually get off of life support for a company that's "doing well" ha,ha,ha! Lets see if they can even have a car that can even be considered for being in the top 10!
But anyway, it's a great idea of Jeep, getting rid of the useless Patriot and Compass. And keeping their true core vehicles!
@1LoudMerc Reading your last couple of responses, I'm not sure if you are just trying to jerk me around, playing and don't care, or something I'd rather not go into.
But the bottom line is, as you pointed out, the Compass and Patriot are on the outs.
@DocWolph Cerberus actually didn't do too bad. Keep in mind that a car's development is a long process, and if you'll note, Chrysler's new models that started taking over in 2011 line up to starting development during Cerberus' reign. The Grand Cherokee/Durango, the LX cars, the 200, the minivans; all of them are retuned and revised versions of what Chrysler already had. The Dart is Fiat's first major contribution. Whether it was Fiat or Cerberus who pushed the new interiors, I don't know.
@JETZcorp Cerberus, a Private equity group, stripped Chrysler of all its value, hence the crap interiors under Cerberus, trying to "maximize its value" only to be unable to sell the company. Cerberus ruined Chrysler. Only after FIAT took over, was Chrysler infused w/ the money and resources they needed. Updating of the LX cars then happened first. The DART is their 1st new joint car. Chrysler's been on a roll ever since. FIAT fixed Chrysler.
@DocWolph Chrysler interiors were garbage under Cerberus, but think back for a second. Daimler was the one who originally ruined Chrysler interiors, but if you bought a 2004 Dakota, made a good six years after the merger, it still had an interior very similar to the original Chrysler design of the '90s. Only for the '05 model did that one get messed up. Like I said, cars run in cycles, so Cerberus in 2009 was selling cars that were designed years before, likely finalized in '07 or earlier.
@JETZcorp Daimler had no intention of breaking Chrysler but refused to let Chrysler update existing product (outdated and/or bad interiors, for example) or decide just what they were going to build (see Nitro, Compass/Patriot, Caliber). Cerberus stripped out Chrysler's value, forgetting that it is a manufacturing company that runs on better product not cheap crap. Thus the huge turn around w/ FIAT, letting Chrysler run their original plan.
@DocWolph What changed during the time Cerberus was in control? Did they even introduce any new products or update anything? Because it looks to me like they were still selling all of the cheap Daimler-era bullshit. I don't mean to deny that Fiat has done an excellent job, because they really have. But there's no way they got ahold of Chrysler and then re-developed 80% of their product line in six months. A lot of what we've seen was "on its way" when Fiat hit the scene. Not all, but some.
@JETZcorp I answered those questions already in previous comments. You are not comprehending them. Take some time to research what actually happened, not what you think happened.
Daimler starved Chrysler. Cerberus stripped Chrysler of all meaningful value. FIAT took over and simply ran Chrysler's update plans they never got to put into action, plus actually advertising their wares, thus the huge turn around. It is literally that straight forward simple.
Here's a thought on how to jumpstart the economy:
we should stop manufacturing cars in China and start exporting them to China and elsewhere. We'll create jobs here and bring back wealth while exporting brand loyalty. Everybody gets to have their cake and eat it too.
classicforreal 1 month ago
no Doctor
Martincooksley 1 month ago
can't wait to see the new jeep liberty!!!
goford90 1 month ago
Bill Shatner school of speakin??
BubbaSmurft 1 month ago
They need to get back to calling the Liberty the Cherokee in the US. The only reason why you would not is that the Liberty is so much a different machine from the Old XJ.
DocWolph 1 month ago
@DocWolph I agree with you. The Cherokee is a much better name.
Miradart 1 month ago
Thank Goodness,get rid of the Compass and Patriot FINALLY! Those two vehicles seem like missing links and are nothing but clones of each other. I mean why would Jeep at the time, even consider building on a platform that was originally built for the Mitsubishi Lancer/Lancer Evolution?
But these were the mistakes of the old Chrysler. But with Sergio Marchionne calling the shots now, there's been alot of great stuff coming out of Chrysler and Dodge. The Fiat 500 is another story,lol!
1LoudMerc 1 month ago
@1LoudMerc The Compass and Patriot were NOT Chrysler's decisions. They were Daimler's. Daimler had Chrysler making vehicles they would never make, like the "not-Jeeps" and the Caliber.
Also Marchionne is basically running Chrysler's plan with his name on it. Replace Mitsubishi car with Lancia or ALFA Romeo, and its the same thing just different parts. That said, Chrysler does seem to have strong leadership for the first time in at least 20 years, for now...
DocWolph 1 month ago
@DocWolph that's why I said it was the "old Chrysler"
And it may be the same thing when it comes to sharing parts, but at this point, it's better than using parts from Mitsubishi!
1LoudMerc 1 month ago
@1LoudMerc Sharing parts/platforms with Mitsubishi wasn't a mistake. That relationship helped both Chrysler and Mitsubishi prosper and thrive.
"Merging" with Daimler-benz was THE mistake. Daimler, then Cerberus, starved and stripped Chrysler, while Mitsubishi flounders.
The "old Chrysler", to me, was under Daimler. They are still always from the "Real Chrysler" that was ahead of the curve on everything, just not the biggest.
DocWolph 1 month ago
@DocWolph Merging with Damiler wasn't a mistake cuz if that was the case, there wouldn't be cars like the Challenger,Charger, and 300 which have parts from the Mercedes W220 and W210. but come on, Mitsubishi? Most of the cars built with Mitsubishi parts are nothing more than rentals at the local Avis or Hertz,ha!
And mitsubishi floundering? What, with the Evo X? Maybe the Outlander? Mitsubishi barely sold 80,000 units in 2011,ha!
1LoudMerc 1 month ago
@1LoudMerc You can trace Daimler's blame in this to the ME-412, a much superior car to the MBs SLR. The LX cars came before the ME-412, thus Chrysler was never able or allowed to update them, and they weren't until FIAT came in.
Mitsu? All their cars are based on the same platform and not doing well. They have no plans for an EVO XI. 80K units? Mitsu would sell that many Galants a year alone. Yeah, they are doing great w/o Chrysler as a partner.
DocWolph 1 month ago
@DocWolph great,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha!
If you say so guy,ha,ha! Mitsubishi didn't even make the top ten with even one of their vehicle lines compared to other brands! Doing well? Put the sales numbers of the Galant against the sales of the Hyundai Sonata sales of 2010 and 2011 with a straight face,ha,ha,ha! All you have to do is look at autoblog, and seveal business sites to see that. But like I said,whatever you say guy, guess you just wanna be seen on top here,ha,ha,ha!
1LoudMerc 1 month ago
@1LoudMerc Mitsubishi used to be a great company, though not he biggest, w/ Chrysler as a partner. But when Chrysler and Mitsu split, Mitsu had to kill off one car and platform after another. Cutting the Diamante, Galant, Endeavor, Eclipse, Montero, 3000GT, etc, until there is only 3. Going from selling 100s of 1000s to barely doing 80K in a year. Considering Chrysler sells almost that many 300s (not including Chargers) a year alone, Mitsubishi is doing real "well".
DocWolph 1 month ago
Comment removed
1LoudMerc 1 month ago
@DocWolph also, Mitsubishi sold 53,986 vehicles in the U.S. last year, 44% below 97,257 in 2008, Ward's data shows. Volume in 2008 fell 24.6% from 2007, which was the last year the auto maker exceeded 100,000 units, with 128,993 deliveries, for an 8.8% gain on 2006.Also autoblog said that Mitsubishi has been faring very poorly during the industry's worst downturn in decades, and it's tough to say if the struggling Japanese automaker will ever leave the intensive care unit. Doing well?
1LoudMerc 1 month ago
@DocWolph lets see if Mitsubishi can actually get off of life support for a company that's "doing well" ha,ha,ha! Lets see if they can even have a car that can even be considered for being in the top 10!
But anyway, it's a great idea of Jeep, getting rid of the useless Patriot and Compass. And keeping their true core vehicles!
1LoudMerc 1 month ago
@1LoudMerc Reading your last couple of responses, I'm not sure if you are just trying to jerk me around, playing and don't care, or something I'd rather not go into.
But the bottom line is, as you pointed out, the Compass and Patriot are on the outs.
Okay. I guess we're done.
DocWolph 1 month ago
@DocWolph Cerberus actually didn't do too bad. Keep in mind that a car's development is a long process, and if you'll note, Chrysler's new models that started taking over in 2011 line up to starting development during Cerberus' reign. The Grand Cherokee/Durango, the LX cars, the 200, the minivans; all of them are retuned and revised versions of what Chrysler already had. The Dart is Fiat's first major contribution. Whether it was Fiat or Cerberus who pushed the new interiors, I don't know.
JETZcorp 1 month ago
@JETZcorp Cerberus, a Private equity group, stripped Chrysler of all its value, hence the crap interiors under Cerberus, trying to "maximize its value" only to be unable to sell the company. Cerberus ruined Chrysler. Only after FIAT took over, was Chrysler infused w/ the money and resources they needed. Updating of the LX cars then happened first. The DART is their 1st new joint car. Chrysler's been on a roll ever since. FIAT fixed Chrysler.
DocWolph 1 month ago
@DocWolph Chrysler interiors were garbage under Cerberus, but think back for a second. Daimler was the one who originally ruined Chrysler interiors, but if you bought a 2004 Dakota, made a good six years after the merger, it still had an interior very similar to the original Chrysler design of the '90s. Only for the '05 model did that one get messed up. Like I said, cars run in cycles, so Cerberus in 2009 was selling cars that were designed years before, likely finalized in '07 or earlier.
JETZcorp 1 month ago
@JETZcorp Daimler had no intention of breaking Chrysler but refused to let Chrysler update existing product (outdated and/or bad interiors, for example) or decide just what they were going to build (see Nitro, Compass/Patriot, Caliber). Cerberus stripped out Chrysler's value, forgetting that it is a manufacturing company that runs on better product not cheap crap. Thus the huge turn around w/ FIAT, letting Chrysler run their original plan.
DocWolph 1 month ago
@DocWolph What changed during the time Cerberus was in control? Did they even introduce any new products or update anything? Because it looks to me like they were still selling all of the cheap Daimler-era bullshit. I don't mean to deny that Fiat has done an excellent job, because they really have. But there's no way they got ahold of Chrysler and then re-developed 80% of their product line in six months. A lot of what we've seen was "on its way" when Fiat hit the scene. Not all, but some.
JETZcorp 1 month ago
@JETZcorp I answered those questions already in previous comments. You are not comprehending them. Take some time to research what actually happened, not what you think happened.
Daimler starved Chrysler. Cerberus stripped Chrysler of all meaningful value. FIAT took over and simply ran Chrysler's update plans they never got to put into action, plus actually advertising their wares, thus the huge turn around. It is literally that straight forward simple.
DocWolph 1 month ago
@JETZcorp AGREED!
1LoudMerc 3 weeks ago
you know a car sucks when the ceo of the company that makes it says it sucks, but I still see loads of them around here in Flagstaff
1doesntlikeapplepie 1 month ago
Exactly, just save the money and turn the phone off or to airplane mode.
AHAUGHT 1 month ago
I sure hope Marchionne is not just a bunch of talk, regarding the next liberty!
MrChevybaja 1 month ago