Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Honestly, I believe it is STUPID to tell someone to get or not get a car when you have never owned at least the make in question. Just my 2 cents.
Myself have never owned a Chrylser but you don't need to own one to know how poorly engineered and designed they are. The proof is in the stats, plenty of research and reporting is done on this every year. And after spending four and a half years behind the counter at an auto parts store you see first hand what rolling disaster areas the Chrysler lineup of the last 20 years has been.
Myself have never owned a Chrylser but you don't need to own one to know how poorly engineered and designed they are. The proof is in the stats, plenty of research and reporting is done on this every year. And after spending four and a half years behind the counter at an auto parts store you see first hand what rolling disaster areas the Chrysler lineup of the last 20 years has been.
Myself have never owned a Chrylser but you don't need to own one to know how poorly engineered and designed they are. The proof is in the stats, plenty of research and reporting is done on this every year. And after spending four and a half years behind the counter at an auto parts store you see first hand what rolling disaster areas the Chrysler lineup of the last 20 years has been.
What stats? Consumer Reports does not "research" anything. I'm assuming that that's who you're referring to since you sound like them. I am on my 4th Chrysler product (4 minivans) and they have all been great. They are nothing like what the "stats" (whatever that is) say they are. Your first 6 words says it all.
What stats? Consumer Reports does not "research" anything. I'm assuming that that's who you're referring to since you sound like them. I am on my 4th Chrysler product (4 minivans) and they have all been great. They are nothing like what the "stats" (whatever that is) say they are. Your first 6 words says it all.
Well-said dkf. Now, you are someone I would listen to if you had anything negative to say about Chrysler products because you actually own them! You are CREDIBLE, not some auto parts counter person who has a subscription to CR!
Well-said dkf. Now, you are someone I would listen to if you had anything negative to say about Chrysler products because you actually own them! You are CREDIBLE, not some auto parts counter person who has a subscription to CR!
Don't I feel stupid. It must be Chrysler's sterling reputation for quality and attractive vehicles that has put them in such a great market position. Surely any tales of fires, catastrophic steering failure, and engine meltdown at 60,000 miles must be spread by a propoganda organization bent on promoting EVERY other manufacturer. I mean since you, an individual, has owned Chrylers with no problems; than that is clearly indicitave of the quality of their entire fleet of vehicles. A person or an organization with exposure to more than just *YOUR* car, analyzing an entire fleet of vehicles would obviously not know anything more about it than you, becasue of course you've experienced *YOUR* car, which tells you all you need to know.
I mean they are ranked higher than Suzuki in the quality ratings...so that's a good thing.
That just means that the part that was halfway worthwhile is gone...
Thats a joke right? Its either that or a completely uninformed opinion. Daimler is the major reason that Chrysler had to file reorganization! They equally screwed suppliers, employees, pensioners during their ownership fiasco. Any profits that WERE made were wired directly back to Germany under the heading of management costs. They spent nothing on developing any new engineering or designs. In otherwords, they raped Chrysler for whatever they could sent the proceeds back to Germany and then dumped it when they had left nothing but a shell. Worthwhile? Yeah - right
Thats a joke right? Its either that or a completely uninformed opinion. Daimler is the major reason that Chrysler had to file reorganization! They equally screwed suppliers, employees, pensioners during their ownership fiasco. Any profits that WERE made were wired directly back to Germany under the heading of management costs. They spent nothing on developing any new engineering or designs. In otherwords, they raped Chrysler for whatever they could sent the proceeds back to Germany and then dumped it when they had left nothing but a shell. Worthwhile? Yeah - right
You're right, Daimler did not do anything to benefit Chrysler financially or technologically. I was just saying their product were better than the Chrysler. They really maintained the Chrylser status-quo, which was bad...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Consumer Reports does not "research" anything. I'm assuming that that's who you're referring to since you sound like them. I am on my 4th Chrysler product (4 minivans) and they have all been great. They are nothing like what the "stats" (whatever that is) say they are. Your first 6 words says it all.
Now, you are someone I would listen to if you had anything negative to say about Chrysler products because you actually own them! You are CREDIBLE, not some auto parts counter person who has a subscription to CR!
