U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-01-2009, 08:58 AM
 
Location: Rockland County New York
2,982 posts, read 5,623,254 times
Reputation: 1298

Advertisements

I recall back in January of 1994 while watching the Super bowl my wife and I saw a commercial for the New Neon. The cab forward design and powerful engine helped bring us into the show room to see one. My wife and I were both in college and needed new cars. We test drove the care and my wife loved it. My parents owned a Chrysler 1973 Furry 3 and had nothing but problems with it. For their experience I was not ready to purchase a Chrysler product. My wife leased the car in February of 1994 and during the entire lease the car had one problem after another. I opted for a 1994 Mitsubishi Mirage a few months later because I thought the Neon was a piece of junk. When the car had less than 26k miles it began to drip oil. The dealership told us it needed a head gasket. It was in the shop with several other Neons with the same problem.

We were happy when the car went back in 1997. You would think that Chrysler would produce a good entry level car for young people to get them hooked on their cars. They did the opposite. The made a crummy car and spent millions on adverting. We never did buy another Chrysler.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-01-2009, 10:51 AM
 
Location: Houston
529 posts, read 1,252,068 times
Reputation: 374
I was wondering why it took so long to fail.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2009, 02:27 PM
 
866 posts, read 4,081,226 times
Reputation: 282
I'm not here just to defend Chrysler, BUT, the Detroit 3 have improved their quality over the years and you can't deny that.

Do I think that Chrysler made the correct business decisions over the past 10,20,30 years...absolutely not. Especially the people that have been running the company lately. When Daimler-Benz bought Chrysler in 1998 although they were a healthy company, with profits coming in. When Daimler AG split from Chrysler in 2007 they left them high and dry. It was actually pretty sad what they had done to a well to do company just a decade before.

Cerberus (in my opinion) has not been running the company very well either. They didn't really know what they were getting themselves into when they took on Chrysler in 2007.

Chrysler, although, has not "failed" as some would say. This bankruptcy is just a new way that they can re-organize, hopefully with some better leadership. And the Fiat-Chrysler alliance will actually work. The only thing that concerns me now is that Chrysler will be 55% owned by the UAW. Kind of odd if you ask me...
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2009, 03:50 PM
 
Location: home state of Myrtle Beach!
6,722 posts, read 21,422,441 times
Reputation: 4169
You may be too young to remember that Chrysler has failed before and the government stepped in to save the company some 30 years ago. My Dad owned a 68 Dart that was a fairly reliable car, but the 83 and 85 Omni's we owned were nothing but crap and like OP had numerous problems and were in the shop a lot. We traded them in for a Honda; vowing never ever to give Chrysler any of our money again. Guess what; that Honda ran just like it was supposed to and rarely saw the shop floor after we bought it. I will never again buy a Chrysler product.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2009, 04:56 PM
 
Location: Rockland County New York
2,982 posts, read 5,623,254 times
Reputation: 1298
Quote:
Originally Posted by myrc60 View Post
You may be too young to remember that Chrysler has failed before and the government stepped in to save the company some 30 years ago. My Dad owned a 68 Dart that was a fairly reliable car, but the 83 and 85 Omni's we owned were nothing but crap and like OP had numerous problems and were in the shop a lot. We traded them in for a Honda; vowing never ever to give Chrysler any of our money again. Guess what; that Honda ran just like it was supposed to and rarely saw the shop floor after we bought it. I will never again buy a Chrysler product.
I remember it being 1980 when they failed. I was 14 years old and it was in the middle of the second enery crisis. Chrysler kept build huge cars like the Newports and New Yorker 5th ave. which got 12 miles a gallon and were not very well made. Seems they never learned their lesson.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2009, 05:25 PM
 
Location: home state of Myrtle Beach!
6,722 posts, read 21,422,441 times
Reputation: 4169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stac2007 View Post
I remember it being 1980 when they failed. I was 14 years old and it was in the middle of the second enery crisis. Chrysler kept build huge cars like the Newports and New Yorker 5th ave. which got 12 miles a gallon and were not very well made. Seems they never learned their lesson.
Yes, it was. I remember it well. Having just turned 20 I found a job working on the Dodge ad campaign. Boss sent a bunch of us out into the field to see if the dealer's wanted to sell cars. My research showed they didn't. I'll give someone a cookie if they know which ad agency it was.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2009, 06:24 PM
 
Location: Marietta, GA
7,886 posts, read 16,220,150 times
Reputation: 3692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dexterguy View Post
I'm not here just to defend Chrysler, BUT, the Detroit 3 have improved their quality over the years and you can't deny that.
My wife has a Ford and I have a Japanese import. I agree that Ford and GM have improved their quality over what it was 10 - 20 years ago. Chrysler on the other hand...nope.

I went to the recent auto show and checked out the Jeep, Dodge, and Chrysler models. Cheap plastic interiors on just about all of their vehicles....cheap plastic parts on the Jeep exteriors. Square fitting and junky parts that fit together unevenly.

My wife loves her Ford, and I had an Explorer for 10 years that I loved, but other than an occasional Ford, it's been Japanese designed vehicles for me.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2009, 09:15 PM
 
Location: Rockland County New York
2,982 posts, read 5,623,254 times
Reputation: 1298
My wife has a 2007 Chevy Malibu. It has a great engine and transmission but its interior is plastic and cheaply made. Not a very solid car at all.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2009, 09:58 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland area
554 posts, read 2,417,141 times
Reputation: 530
I'm not wondering at all.

GM & Ford have made HUGE steps in making their cars more competitve. Chrysler has tried, and while it has succeeded in some areas, it's failed in others. Chrysler has a reputation for making desirable cars but letting them fail, IMO.

For one, let's take a look at the PT Cruiser. When it came out, it seemed a lot of people wanted this retro wagon, and it sold well. Chrysler failed to make any significant updates to the model, and it went from a desirable car to a car people could no longer stand.

An area where Chrysler still succeeds is the large car. The 300/Charger twins were selling extremely well when gas was cheaper. On top of that, they had little to no competition. The current Taurus was nowhere are near as desirable as a Charger. Even the G8 failed to catch up to the sales of the Charger/300 twins, despite having better pricing and stronger engines.

Chrysler fails miserably when it comes to fuel economy as we all know. Their "fuel efficient" Magnum only achieves 30 mpg on the highway. That's a respectable number, but when compared to other companies (Chevy Cobalt, Ford Focus, Honda Civic, etc), it's really nothing special.

Compared to nearly all other automakers, Chrysler's interiors contain an exorbitant amount of plastic. Not only is it plastic, but it is hard plastic. If Chrysler would have upped the interiors of their cars, they probably would sell better and bring in more profits.

Interior quality is not the only place where Chrysler lags; they also lag on exterior execution. Maybe I'm the only one that notices this, but in Europe the Grand Cherokee's tail lights look much better than the American version. They have designated turning signals (as in the stop light and turning light aren't the same). Chrysler seems to merge the brake light and turning light on over 75% of it's lineup. I know this is probably being a little picky, but what's so hard about having one light designated for breaking, and the other for turning? Not only is it safer for drivers, but also it makes the car more attractive.

Chrysler vehicles lag behind in reliability, which gives Chrysler the undesirable reputation of having some of the worst reliability around. I've never owned a Chrysler vehicle so I can't comment on this statement, but I can comment that if they want their vehicles to appeal to a wide range of customers, they definitely have to up their reliability ratings.

Chrysler also failed due to their extreme reliability on SUV & Pickup sales. Jeep's entire line is SUVs. The Ram was Dodge's best selling automobile. Even the Chrysler brand had an SUV, which was basically a slightly more upscale Durango. They put so much of their resources into SUVs, they had little left over for their aging sedans.

Despite the flaws, there are glimmers of hope for Chrysler, including the Fiat merge. The 2011 Grand Cherokee looks also very competitive, but it seems to be a nice SUV at a time when companies are moving toward smaller, more fuel efficient cars and Crossover/SUVs. And at 16/23 for the V6, it's not very efficient. Sure, it's an improvement over the outgoing model, but not a very big one, especially considering how Chrysler kept touting the new Phoenix V6 engine.

As stated above, I'm not really wondering why Chrysler failed. What I do wonder, however, is if they can succeed after this bankruptcy.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2009, 08:22 AM
 
Location: Warwick, RI
4,611 posts, read 5,240,982 times
Reputation: 7352
In the last 20 years, I've owned a Dodge Daytona (bought used) and a Dodge Neon (bought new) and I will NEVER purchase a Chystler product ever, ever again. The Daytona was ok, but had transaxle problems over and over again. The Neon was great for the first 20K miles, but then the paint started peeling off, to which my dealer told me was not covered under any warranty at all. At about 30K, we started overheating and burning oil - the first of three head gaskets. The car was JUNK! I was never happier than the day we got rid of it. I replaced it with a Ford Taurus, and it's been a great car - so good that we now have two of them. I'm a Ford man now, and while I empathize with all Chrystler workers who face job losses, I won't miss their cars.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2022, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top