The saga of Chrysler’s Sebring/Avenger replacement has been the proverbial long and winding road. After losing its project chief and “contemplating” stuffing the whole development thing for an Altima rebadge, Chrysler’s “Project D” is finally starting to get some traction. Only it isn’t. Automotive News [sub] reports that Chrysler’s “something better than the world’s worst car for the mid-size segment” (as Farago put it) is going to look like the 200C concept. As and when, of course. But what about the actual car bits?
ChryCo was hoping to jump on the Epsilon II bandwagon, but with the Fiat/Opel deal DOA, that ain’t happening. And AN reports that “Chrysler executives are concerned that even a stretched version of [Fiat’s forthcoming 159] D-Evo platform might not be wide enough for North America.”
Chrysler’s cunning plan? The mythical “shortened LX platform” that reportedly underpinned the 200C concept. Or not.
“Sources say Chrysler is interested in the shortened LX platform and would not necessarily build the concept as shown. Also, the D-Evo suspension would likely be used on the LX platform. Although the concept car was rear-drive, executives have said they could possibly build a front-drive version.”
Huh? It’s hard to tell what’s more pathetic, Chrysler’s abject flailing or AN’s straight-up (with a twist) reporting on the debacle.
Prospective engines for the 200C? Keep dreaming. Project D(OA) isn’t even at square one. Again. Still.
If they can pull off the gorgeous 200c concept without butchering it, then maybe Chrysler still has something left in them.
If Chrysler Group builds RWD cars with 4-cylinder and V6 options and an optional manual gearbox behind either engine, they would have full access to my new car budget for the rest of my life!
HEAR THAT CHRYSLER???? “THE REST OF MY LIFE!!!!”
I don’t care what wheels drive it as long as it’s a huge improvement over the current models.
Prospective engines for the 200C? Keep dreaming. Project D(OA) isn’t even at square one. Again. Still
Thats a shame cause that is one good looking car, especially from Chrysler MoCo. As for engines, the 4.0L V6 should be able to squeeze under the bonnet and they already have that on the shelf.
“As for engines, the 4.0L V6 should be able to squeeze under the bonnet and they already have that on the shelf.”
Is that engine in any way competitive with those from Nissan, Toyota, Honda etc?
400bhp, direct injection, turbo supercharged, 32mpg? I mean, for Chrysler to get back in the game they need to make cars that are significantly better for significantly less money than the competition.
Isn’t that 4.0 V6 the same engine that powers the Dodge Nitro? If so, then that’s a poor choice.
The so-called “Phoenix aka Pentastar” 3.6 V6 is basically ready to go as far as I’ve been reading anyway. If Chrysler does decide to do a RWD mid-size sedan (whatever happened to the next gen LY chassis?) it would be a great and distinctive selling point for the company amid the competition’s FWD offerings (especially if they can keep the concept’s striking proportions and looks). All they’d have to do is find a way to keep in CAFE-compliant.
Now, if only GM would see the beauty in making the G8 the next Impala SS.
I don’t care what wheels drive it as long as it’s a huge improvement over the current models.
I think that’s the point.
This is a fan-the-fanboy-flames bit of PR. Chrysler has nothing on the table, but they need to keep people in mind of their potentially having something, anything, that’s hot enough. It’s an old game in Detroit: treading on what you might do, rather than what you’re actually doing, in hopes that people look at that 200C and say “Wowee!” rather than sign lease papers on a Camry, Fusion, Altima, Accord or Sonata, and thusly be lost to Chrysler forever.
Chrysler is a volume make. As such, it needs volume product that a) makes actual money and b) is more than competitive with the market leaders. The 200C is a good looking car and rear drive can be fun, but this is not a market where styling and fun are the deciding factors (reference: Camry). The car needs to be as good as, say, the Accord or Camry, but with the added benefit of being prettier. Being pretty and rear-wheel drive works for luxury cars; mainstream buyers don’t give a damn.
(whatever happened to the next gen LY chassis?)
That would be the Dodge Challenger.
Now, if only GM would see the beauty in making the G8 the next Impala SS.
Not going to happen. The G8/Impala would have to share showroom space with the roomier, smoother, more fuel-efficient Malibu and would get slaughtered as a result. The current Impala treads water by virtue of being dirt cheap; a Zeta Impala would lose that advantage, much as the G8 did vis a vis the Grand Prix.
I question the point of full-size sedans. Midsizers are more than roomy enough, and anyone looking for more is going to buy a minivan/crossover/trucklet anyway. The appeal of the big car is to a market that’s, both figuratively and literally, dying off.
“The car needs to be as good as, say, the Accord or Camry, but with the added benefit of being prettier.”
As good as an Accord or Camry – the option of being just as good has long passed. To get back on their feet they need to be better than the Accord or Camry in every measure. Styling, handling, power, ride comfort, MPG, NVH, durability, everything. All while being significantly cheaper.
Can they do it? I’m not holding my breath.
It’s a handsome car.
And, really, how hard is it to build or acquire a suitable platform? Is there really some kind of amazing ground-breaking rocket-science that has to go into each new platform?
Longitudinal FWD is not out of the question. The LX is already available with AWD, which proves that they can drive the front wheels.
Not going to happen. The G8/Impala would have to share showroom space with the roomier, smoother, more fuel-efficient Malibu and would get slaughtered as a result. The current Impala treads water by virtue of being dirt cheap; a Zeta Impala would lose that advantage, much as the G8 did vis a vis the Grand Prix.
That’s the problem I see at GM. When I see the Malibu/Impala duo (mid-size/full size) you can’t help but think of the Fusion/Taurus or Altima/Maxima and Camry/Avalon. If they can build larger premium cars than their mid-size brothers and charge a premium for it, I don’t see what’s to stop GM from moving the Impala upmarket away from the Malibu (yes, yes, there is Buick to think about, but let’s leave those cars for the Geritol crowd). As I see it, a Zeta-based Impala would be a distinct offering in the full/near full-size market to compete with the competition from other brands.
My .02c
They need to go back to the idea of platform sharing with the Altima. Nissan has excess capacity in Tenn. There’s probably room for a deal. That’s the only alternative that has the remotest (word?) chance of being ready on time.
Chrysler’s mendacity is glaring. The company puts together a plan asking for billions to retool factories for a certain platform, but they haven’t really decided that it is feasible to build car-x on that platform. They tell dealers their cooperation is needed in ordering thousands of cars, then they turn around and stab the dealers in the heart by cancelling their franchises at a moment’s notice. Who knows what representations were behind the fiasco that is/was/never-was the Tipton transmission plant. The 2011 Chrysler 300 and Jeep Grand Cherokee were featurned in the glossy brochure that substituted for a business plan. Last week, the Wall Street Journal published that progression on the Grand Cherokee is in limbo because the company can’t deliver ONE Pentastar/Phoenix engine for testing the prototype.
The PTOA needs to go through Chrysler’s R&D budget with a fine-toothed comb and personally inspect the progress on all of the current Chrysler programs.
Samuel L. Bronkowitz:
It takes engineering talent and money. Unclear how much Chrysler now has of either.
The Sebring needs to be on a FWD chassis to be competitive. Fuel economy, production cost, packaging efficiency and weight issues are all good reasons why ever vehicle in the Sebring’s category is FWD.
Also, I agree with psarhjinian that the market for large sedans has mostly been consumed by the ever growing and ever improving mid-sized sedans. Malibu beats Impala, Camry beats Avalon, Fusion beats Taurus. Honda is one of the few companies which has avoided this foolishness. Honda sells two sedans in the US: Civic and Accord. There is no need for something between the two or for something even bigger than the Accord.
@psarhjinian:
I don’t see how the Malibu is roomier than the G8. The Malibu has a bit more front head room, but the G8 has an advantage in all other dimensions- with major advantages in hip, shoulder, and trunk space. With fuel economy, although I would like to see GM squeeze some better mileage out of the V8, the 3.6L G8 and 3.6L Malibu get the same MPG combined stat.
I also agree with Supaman that if Ford can do an Taurus/Fusion combo and Nissan does a Maxima/Altmia, there is no reason why GM can’t do a Zeta/Malibu. If GM insists on selling a full-size Chevy, they might as well make it a good one.
If anything, I think the two biggest potential problems with a Zeta Chevy are: RWD only might scare away people in snowy regions and the G8 might be too sharp-driving a car for the usual full-size Chevrolet shopper.
—–
As far as a RWD Sebring replacement goes, I like the idea, but Chrysler doesn’t have anytime to screw around with new platforms. The Sebring and Avenger need to be banished off showrooms immediately- not 20 months from now.
A rebadged Altima is Chryslers best bet. They don’t have time or resources left. Plus its a decent car that is 100 percent improvement on the current Sebring.
I don’t see how the Malibu is roomier than the G8.
Sit in them. You eat your knees in the rear of the G8, and the whole car “feels” cramped. That the G8 is a longer, wider car just makes that more obvious.
Front-engine/front-drive is the way to go if you value space-per-pound of car, which is critical in a mass-market vehicle. There’s no way around this.
Sit in them. You eat your knees in the rear of the G8, and the whole car “feels” cramped. That the G8 is a longer, wider car just makes that more obvious.
I found the G8’s rear seat to be downright limo-like, and I definitely felt that the G8 was a more cavernous car than an Aura.
However, I should disclose that I’m so short that I don’t even eat my knees sitting in the 3rd-row of a Tahoe.
So, from a short-guy POV, the interior of a Zeta sedan feels bigger than the Epsilon’s.
“Prospective engines for the 200C? Keep dreaming.”
Time to wake up. The Pentastar is here. And if a 200C sees the light of day, that is the engine it will have.
According to http://www.allpar.com/mopar/phoenix-engines.html
This motor will feature:
“All accessories bolted directly onto the block to avoid vibration and noise;
Exhaust manifold apparently integrated into the head itself;
Oil to antifreeze oil cooler in the “V”
Canister-free oil filter element — prevents landfill, allows incineration; also eases DIY oil changes and prevents ham-fisted oil change places from “holing” or over-tightening the filter
Very lightweight block — saves on aluminum and reduces overall vehicle weight (improving balance, too);
High-pressure die-cast blocks save on labor, have thinner walls, and are 20 pounds lighter than GM’s V6 blocks, saving around $40 per engine on aluminum and contributing to much lower build costs than GM’s engines.
The advanced oil filter system eliminates oil spills and contains an incinerable filter element instead of the typical spin-on filters, which are disposed of in landfill sites; the filter is conveniently located on top of the engine. The use of long-life spark plugs, regular gasoline, and a high-energy coil-on-plug ignition system also helps to reduce cost of ownership. The engine also is fully flex fuel capable, offering consumers the choice of gasoline or E85 fuel without any degradation in performance or emissions. The Phoenix [now Pentastar] engine was designed to be used in a North-South and East-West configuration, depending on the vehicle.
According to Chrysler presentations, even the most powerful Phoenix, displacing 3.6 liters and producing (in preliminary tests) over 280 horsepower, is quieter than Toyota’s 3.3 liter V6 – and far quieter than the Toyota 3.5 liter V6. Gas mileage is said to be good, partly due to the use of high-pressure, die-cast blocks, which save on labor and allow for thinner walls and less use of aluminum. These blocks are 20 pounds lighter than General Motors‘ V6 blocks, saving around $40 per engine on aluminum alone; an independent firm estimated that these engines are at least $300 cheaper to build than GM’s current V6 line…”
However, I should disclose that I’m so short that I don’t even eat my knees sitting in the 3rd-row of a Tahoe.
That would do it, then. I have trouble in the front seats of a Tahoe.
1. Well, they can’t go on with the LX platform forever.. it’s going to be outdated in the next five years or so. Considering that they cannot use Daimler technology anymore, I have a bad feeling that Chrysler is going to follow Rover into the same deadly path.
2. I’m sure the production version is going to be watered down. Think about the Airflite concept. And the fact that 200C is pretty much a wannabe Insignia isn’t helping either.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but yeah. I’m not feelin’ it. Not that I can think of an alternative solution..
Survival depends on success in the compact segment. Chrysler could have done it before, now, I’m not sure.
All of the major players in that segment are FWD, so making the car FWD isn’t a big deal to me. Play the music your intended audience wants to hear. If they make the same mistakes in translating the 200C to production as they did with the Sebring, then that will simply prove that Chrysler doesn’t care, and is just going through the motions.
Something to keep in mind…
Sebring replacement != Avenger replacement.
They’re trying to repair the absolutely smashed reputation of the Chrysler brand and trying to bring it back upscale. The dealers are getting merged into all brands at 1 dealership so they don’t have to sell entry-level Chryslers and the brand can go back to its sort-of luxury roots. The next Avenger is your Camry/Accord competitor, the next Sebring (200, whatever) will probably be more of a 9-5, S80 or RL competitor.
“The advanced oil filter system eliminates oil spills and contains an incinerable filter element instead of the typical spin-on filters, which are disposed of in landfill sites; the filter is conveniently located on top of the engine. The use of long-life spark plugs, regular gasoline, and a high-energy coil-on-plug ignition system also helps to reduce cost of ownership.”
This is all pretty standard technology on lots of modern engines. GM’s Ecotec-4 uses cartridge filters as do many European designs. Iridium long-life spark plugs are the norm today. Ditto for coil-on-plug ignition.
Interestingly enough, Fiat has access to the GM “High Feature” V-6 engines thanks to its former joint venture with GM. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JTS_engine I have no idea what the contractual arrangements are post-divorce, but it isn’t beyond comprehension to imagine versions of the GM V-6 engine designs ending up in future Chrysler products. As GM kills divisions and products its volume is never going to get back where it was just a year or two ago. Hence there is probably engine capacity to be had. GM and Chrsyler also have common shareholders now :).
“… it isn’t beyond comprehension to imagine versions of the GM V-6 engine designs ending up in future Chrysler products.”
Why would you want to buy a GM V6 for your company if you can make the equivalent engine for $300 cheaper a copy? Not to mention you just built a new state of the art factory in MI to build them with.