By on September 20, 2007

p0505_wp_a_3.jpgSince Cerberus removed Chrysler from German control, the crisis corporation’s modus operandi appears to remain unchanged. Other than some relatively minor dealer antagonism (since smoothed over), there’s been none of the slash-and-burn stylings formerly attributed to ex-Home Depot CEO Bob Nardelli and his new, private equity employers. Perhaps a companywide excrement – fan collision awaits the conclusion of United Auto Workers negotiations. Meanwhile, Chrysler better start getting its you-know-what together on the product front, ‘cause the cupboard is almost completely bare.  

In the last year or so, Chrysler has rolled out over a half-dozen new models. Only one can legitimately be called a “hit”: the Wrangler Unlimited. Yes but– much of the buzz surrounding the vehicle can be attributed to low supply. We’ll have to wait for the initial rush to end before we'll know if the Jeep model has "legs:'" sufficient staying power to match increased production and become a corporate cash cow. 

Elsewhere, the bloom is off the 300 and its derivatives. Sales are down 15 percent year-to-date. The good news: Chrysler has the relatively affordable, large-and-in-charge American sedan market to themselves for a while longer. And the “niche” is generating a cool quarter million sales per year. The bad news: the previous regime pushed 300 production well past consumer demand, and then dumped 44 percent of total production into fleet sales. Owners are heading for a major hit at trade in time– which will do neither 300 sales nor the brand any favors. 

At the same time, the company’s REAL profit centers are rotting on the vine and taking it on the chin. The Dodge Durango and Chrysler Aspen (a TTAC Ten Worst Automobiles Today (TWAT) winner) are both down by double digits. And again, Chrysler sent its “extra” units to bulk buyers. Some 33 percent of Durangos and 31.2 percent of Aspens sailed with the fleets.

Ye Olde Ram pickup is also in dire straits. The Ram was always going to have problems keeping up with the refreshed Chevrolet Silverado and “newer than thou” Ford F-150. With the slump in the building trades and Toyota jumping in and playing price war games with their Tundra, the Ram is on a hiding to nowhere.

Chrysler’s “new” introductions are also lost in [dealer lot] space. Though let down by poor reliability, the designs that fueled Chrysler’s pre-merger renaissance were daring and innovative (e.g. the cab-forward line and the Neon). They kept their competition awake nights and wrote the tickets for more than a few former Chrysler hands (one of whom has been chasing the magic at GM ever since). 

After the 300, Chrysler’s new models landed with a gigantic thud. Jeep Commander excepted, they weren’t “bad” designs; just incredibly bland. The much-anticipated Sebring hit the market and went straight to rentals. Even the nicest of the buff books could find little nice to say. The Caliber was an interesting idea that can only dream of the old Neon’s volumes. And the lack of a model priced beneath the Caliber is crippling.

The Pacifica has been cut and reprieved several times. At the moment, as Chrysler supposedly considers paring down its offerings, there isn't even an update on the drawing board. As Chrysler’s only entry in the hot large-CUV market, the Pacifica should be capturing some of the more profitable parts of the SUV refugee and people-hauler business. The Pacific wasn’t quite good enough when it was new. It’s less so now.     

Other than their new minivan, Chrysler has one– count it one– more new vehicle on the near horizon. The new retro-styled Challenger has been getting good ink, but it’s diving into a shrinking pool (Mustang sales are tanking) and competing directly with Chevy’s new Camaro.

At least Chrysler doesn’t share GM’s and Ford’s worries about trying to eke out a profit from imported Europe-designed models. Chrysler don’t have any. One of the main “reasons” behind the now-abandoned DCX merger: Chrysler had no overseas presence. Their European subsidiaries were dogs, and got sold off during Iacocca’s reign. Chrysler Europe isn’t a great drain, but it sure isn’t going to be the company's savior.     

Worse, Chrysler’s old “partner/contract designer” Mitsubishi has been twisting in the wind for the last decade. Historically, designing and selling parts/designs to other manufacturers has been Mitsubishi’s path to success (such as they’ve had). Surveying Mitsi's equally aged line of lackluster models indicates that a last-second hook-up with Chrysler won’t help either of them.

Whatever the new regime has planned for Chrysler, it looks like DCX shot their wad before handing over the keys. The new minivan better be “number one with a bullet," 'cause it’s the only one Chrysler's got chambered. Meanwhile, the lack of bold decisions on the new/refreshed product front may indicate management indecisiveness, a secret plan to tie-up with foreign automakers or an equally covert op aimed at stripping and flipping the core business (loans). Or, perhaps, all three.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

38 Comments on “Chrysler Suicide Watch 24: Now What?...”


  • avatar
    glenn126

    Well written, and to the point(s).

    Let’s not forget Chrysler’s tie-up with Chery – at the cost of a previous Chery tie-up with Malcolm Bricklin’s Visionary Vehicle’s. We’ll get some ‘fresh meat’ to look at, at Chrysler, Dodge and maybe even Jeep dealers – but they’ll be (WARNING Will Robinson) made in CHINA.

  • avatar
    dwford

    I’ll agree that Chrysler’s latest designs suck – ugly, cheaply made, poorly thought out designs. They also have no reputation for quality. There are no compelling reasons for anyone to buy a Dodge or Chrysler, and only the Wrangler maintains the Jeep legacy.

    However, you missed a couple of things: Dodge has a new CUV coming – the Journey. And, however embarrassing for us, Chrysler is the only US auto manufacturer that exports US made/designed cars to Europe and Asia, and actually manufactures US designs overseas for sale there. Well, I guess you did mention Chrysler Europe.

    Sad to think of the damage Chrysler is doing to the reputation of US engineering by exporting their crap…

    To me, there is nothing worth saving. Nardelli needs to fund 2 or 3 totally new platforms to be sold worldwide.

  • avatar
    Albnyc

    Get the lipstick ready for this pig. Costs will be cut and this baby dismembered. There is no long-term for this ownership and management team.

  • avatar
    KatiePuckrik

    Chrysler is the only one out of the big 2.801 that I want to succeed, but if I were CEO I wouldn’t know what to do. Chrysler seems like a postal worker with a nervous tick(i.e you know he’s going to “go” sometime soon, you just don’t know when!).

    For instance, it’s only “hit” was an SUV, a market which is dying on its big jacksie. Quality and reliability are perrenial problems which I doubt Detroit will ever shake off and its product range just underwhelms me (though, I was in one of their people carriers when I was in the Netherlands and I was corkily impressed!).

    It’s economies of scale aren’t as big as Ford or GM so statistically speaking, if one of the big 2.801 is going to go, they’re the front runners. Its best bet for survival is a tie-up with another manufacturer. But again its timing is bad.

    Renault were eager to get back into the US market, but then they got Nissan and it’s only a matter of time before they do come back with Nissan’s help.

    Mitsubishi would have been the ideal partner (due to their past ties through DaimlerChrysler), but itself is in a restructre (and doing jolly well). If Chrysler can hold out for 2 years, maybe Mitsubishi can help?

    Toyota and Honda, forget it.

    Peugeot-Citroen could also be interested, they’ll want to come back to the US and if their Diesel hybrid works, it could be a good selling point for Chrysler to use in the United States. In return, Chrysler could offer, Peugeot-Citroen, extra capacity and they could tie-up on purchasing, to buy cheaper? Plenty of scope there.

    FIAT? Same principles as Peugeot-Citroen, but I don’t think FIAT could offer much to Chrysler.

    That just leaves the Germans. Oh dear….I think Chrysler would rather file Chapter 11, than go through that again!

    But this seems like a bit of a cop out. Chrysler can succeed if it produces cars, that people want. If they crack that problem, the rest will follow. Trouble is, will the 3 headed monster’s patience hold out that long…..?

  • avatar
    joekawasaki

    Stick a fork in em! Chrysler’s loyals are dying(retirement home bound at least)& the Challenger with as much as I’m excited to see it, & no matter how good sales are doesn’t have a chance in hell! Unless of course they fire everyone thats been in control management/design/bean counters & start from scratch! Reinvent themselves completly, or bury the whole thing with the client base!

  • avatar
    Matthew Danda

    This is just like the plot in the new Battlestar Galactica series: the enemy had been so quiet for so long that everyone thought that the war had just gone away.

    Not likely. Chrysler has a plan.

  • avatar

    The pending demise of Chrysler is greatly (OK.. somewhat) exaggerated. The new minivans, while not aesthetically stunning are loaded with innovations and thoughful conveniences. This is a first class people mover!

    The new Ram (replacing ye olde Ram) is a stunner! As a Ram owner I cannot wait to drive one!

    As for the dismantling of Chrysler the recent additions of industry heavyweights Jim Press and Phil Murtaugh should have muffled those misguided whispers. But, at the end of the day this is the Motor City and anything can happen…

  • avatar
    SherbornSean

    KatiePuckrik:
    You forgot someone: Ford.

  • avatar
    SherbornSean

    Andrew,
    Love the picture of the handbasket. Wonder where it’s heading.

  • avatar
    hltguy

    “And the lack of a model priced beneath the Caliber is crippling” states the editorial. That is true except most of the Chrysler products can be had with substantial discounts now, pricing them below the Caliber in many cases. Though that was not the intent when the vehicles were manufactured. After just purchasing a Ram 1500 for $10K off sticker (including $6K rebate) the editorial seems spot on in its assertion there is trouble. The Dodge dealers I shopped were so anxious to make a deal it was almost sad.They had lots full of vehicles and not many shoppers, and were discounting like crazy.
    What is the current inventory of Chrysler vehicles?
    I know my truck purchase may have some risk, if the company fails to stay in business, but at 40% off sticker price, that is a risk I can live with.

  • avatar
    Redbarchetta

    I think they are setting up Chrysler to seel to the Chinese in the very near future. From partnership to ownership then the 3 headed dog cashes out.

    It’s sad because I am with Katie in hoping Chrysler would be the one to survive.

  • avatar
    KatiePuckrik

    SherbornSean,

    There’s a reason I left out GM and Ford.

    If I took one pile of Horse manure and “merged” it with another pile of manure, what would you end up with? ;O)

    Seriously speaking, there was no point to consider them, because like Mitsubishi they’re going through a restructure themselves so wouldn’t be interested. Plus, Ford are trying to sell many of their brand, they don’t want to be saddled with another one.

  • avatar
    dssmith2005

    Five years from now, it will seem ironic that Cerberus’ purchase of Chrysler was seen as “bringing Chrysler back home to the US”. The current ownership will not keep Chrysler for long. The tie up with Chery of China could well develop into an ownership play whereby the “remains” of Chrysler – after Cerberus has stripped it – give Chery an entry into the US market, with the former chief of American Toyota (who now works for Chrysler) as the CEO of Chery/Chrysler. Chery might even do something clever and move the headquarters of their newly global company to the US. That, coupled with having an American in charge, would make it more palatable for Americans to buy a “chinese” car.

    For an example of how this could work, see the Lenovo/IBM deal where Lenovo, a chinese computer manufacturer, purchased IBM’s PC business, moved their headquarters to NYC, and put former IBM managers in charge.

    I predict this model will soon be used to allow Chery to purchase Chrysler from Cerberus.

  • avatar
    factotum

    The author writes: Chrysler had no overseas presence

    I must disagree. I was in London and on the European continent this year and saw more Chrysler vehicles than any other American marque. In London, there were several Voyager minivans; and in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, I saw lots of PT Cruisers and even 300’s. Even the British version of “The Apprentice” uses Voyagers to shuttle the contestants to and fro.

    Their presence may be small, but for accuracy’s sake, it exists.

  • avatar
    Geotpf

    dwford said:

    Chrysler is the only US auto manufacturer that exports US made/designed cars to Europe and Asia

    That’s not quite accurate. US made/designed cars are sold in Europe by both GM and Ford. The Corvette and various Cadillacs and Hummers are sold in Europe, and the Corvette is even sold in Japan. I also remember some hot-rod version of the Ford F-150 (Lightning?) being reviewed by Top Gear, and Clarkson himself owns a US-designed and built Ford GT.

    Now, the quantities of all of the above are minimal. I think Chrysler may be the only US make that sells mass market vehicles in Europe, but the number of niche offerings by both of the others makes a blanket statement quite inaccurate.

  • avatar
    rtz

    Viper: Too expensive. If you want to sell lots of Vipers; it has to be lower cost then the Corvette. Potentially even install a turbo V8 that has more power then the funky sounding V10.

    Coolest car ever made(turbo V8):

    http://www.supercars.net/cars/371.html

    I’m amazed at the PT Cruiser. Every single Sunday, a certain local dealer advertises on the front page of the classifieds `08 models for $9988. Unreal. At that price; I’d expect them to be everywhere. But their not.

    http://www.normannobody.com/

    Dodge/Chrysler sure doesn’t have much to choose from. A truck, minivan, and a small handful of cars.

    I think Chevy really has something with that Volt and it’s powertrain. Something new, something different. They really need to make a performance version of it too. Make the electric motor in it have insane hp/tq.

  • avatar
    hltguy

    rtz: Exactly correct, I constantly see new PT Cruisers in the car ads in southern California in the $10K range. I don’t know anything about the quality of the car, but they come with long warranties and probably would make a decent car for a small family on a limited budget. Like I said in an earlier post today, the huge discounting going I see in ads and in person on Chrysler vehicles is fairly shocking. It has to have an impact on the image of the company, and perception of the brand with the public. Perception was discussed a few days ago on this site, but selling a $10K new car, stickered at far higher? How can that not hurt one’s image attempting to be portrayed as quality.

  • avatar
    iNeon

    Chrysler has another CUV in the works– based on the aforementioned Dodge Journey. The name being thrown around is Alpine.

    The PT for 10k is the classic ‘bait-and-switch’ bit. Like our local Suzuki dealer that claims $99 a-month payments, or the Toyota dealer that promises a Carolla for $10,990, or… or… or…

    Why don’t any of youall curse the Germans for doing this? Chrysler’s product led the pack back when the ‘merger’ took place.

  • avatar
    esager

    It may not take much to improve certain elements of the former DCX portfolio. Case in point, drop a 2.0 VW-sourced TDI into the Jeep Patriot, gussy up the interior a bit (only a bit) and I would line up with serious intention to buy. It could really be on the forefront of the new (clean)Diesel revolution.

    Thanks

  • avatar
    jthorner

    It is going to be interesting to see how the union negotiations play out this year. My money is still on Chrysler moving as fast as possible to get out of the manufacturing end of things and be a design, distribution, marketing and support company. Almost the entire electronics industry is organized this way for a lot of good reasons.

    If I am right, the thing Chrysler will insist upon in it’s union deal is the flexibility to sell factories off to third parties.

    Magna is sitting on a pile of now strong Canadian dollars. Tick Tick Tick …..

  • avatar
    50merc

    Advertising an ’08 PT Cruiser for $9,988 looks like bait and switch to me. Edmunds says dealer cost would be at least $14,690 and even if the dealer gets the $2,000 rebate there’d be a big loss.

  • avatar
    d996

    I swear Chris Rock’s ode ” to the GED class of 1999-There is no sex in the champagne room” holds far more meaning than he intended, at least to me. Cerberus, like countless other corporate owners hold no greater intelligence than the people/markets they are ruling, hence there are no incredibly smart brain trysts in the boardroom. Writers and commentators on this site show more insight into the auto business than anything I have ever heard from Detroit. Every auto exec I have spoken to acts like a stepford wife. If you make any mildly negative comment to them, a blank look comes over their face as if they can’t comprehend what they just heard. I knew that Cerberus was going to be the new sheriff in town, just didn’t figure it was going to be Andy Griffith.

  • avatar
    Dynamic88

    “…Chrysler can succeed if it produces cars, that people want. …”

    This concept seems difficult to grasp for execs at the D3.

  • avatar
    Dave M.

    If I was looking for cheap, roomy, reliable transportation, the PT at around $11-12k (with a/c of course) would be a steal. I rented one; it was fun to toss around, manageable size-wise, pretty good on gas, holds tons of stuff, and certainly falls under the ‘disposable’ file after 3-4 years of hard use.

    There’s no way I’d pay anywhere msrp though…..

  • avatar

    I agree with the writer’s overall take on the latest batch of Chrysler product. Even the new minivans look like a 10-year old Windstar. I could never see the logic of how going back can move you forward.

    Chrysler’s overseas sales are up however, and it would have been nice to see a little more balance in this piece. For the year so far, Chrysler’s international sales are up 19 percent to 153,813 vehicles.

    On the B-class car – why can’t they just shop around for one like GM did with the Aero? From Hyundai, for example. Looks like it will be years before any Chinese content will be roadworthy here stateside.

    New Avenger/Sebring is an aesthetic abomination and should be catapulted immediately.

    New Liberty will tank. Most current buyers are women, and new squared off look will repel them IMHO.

    I like the Durango and the RAm still looks fresh after all these years. I see tons of them here in Ohio. Dodge truckers that I know will never consider anything else.

    Chrysler is doing its best when it is shaking things up on the design front. Where is the next cab-forward signature? I looked at Frankfurt show pics and there are all kinds of cool shapes and concepts out there.

    New old Challenger will do well (100K a year to start at last), even against Camaro, which doesn’t know what it wants to be…retro, mod, a transformer?

    Of course, there are those nagging issues such as quality and residual value. Without addressing these, looks wont matter much n the long term.

    Overall it is still early on what will happen. My hope is that Chrysler will succeed in tact and not be sold off in pieces.

  • avatar
    tankd0g

    Many of those American cars you see in Europe are not sold by franchised dealers but by importers. They are allowed to import just about any car they want in europe, regardless of age. Where as we are stuck with the stupid “15 year rule” in Canada and 25 in the US.

  • avatar
    tankd0g

    The PT Cruiser, like all of the retro designs (prowler, HHR, Thunderbird) ironically did not age well. The novelty wears off, and when all the had going for it was novelty, well it’s time to stop making them. All I ever see a PT Cruiser doing these days is taxi cab duty or filling airport rental car lots.

  • avatar
    hltguy

    50 Merc: It may sound like bait and switch and some dealers may pull that, but I know for a fact one can acquire a new PT Cruiser for around $10K. I personally have seen it. Here in California, the dealers are so hungry to move cars they are steeply disconting, also with the heavy rebates. The consumer has to make sure in the finance office not to add a bunch of items like rust proofing or whatever crap the dealer tries to add on. The US manufacturers have so much surplus it is ridiculous and the dealer lots are overflowing. A buyer willing to purchase a product of the 2.8 can do their research and get serious coin off the sticker price. Example:
    I could have obtained a Ford F-150, not the top of the line model but a new one with a/c, extended cab, automatic etc a couple of weeks ago for under $14K? How? The dealer was going to knock about $1,500.00 off the $20,300.00 msrp, plus there was the $3,500.00 rebate plus owning a business I would get another $300.00 off, plus I joined the American Quarter Horse Association (at $35.00 a year, though I do not have horses), that make me eligible for another $500.00 rebate from Ford, plus Ford gave me a certificate for $750.00 off (sent to me through the mail) because I owned previous Ford vehicle, that would make the price of the truck $13,750.00. I chose the Dodge Ram at $10K off sticker instead.
    In California the dealers advertising has to include the VIN on the cars on sale and how many are being offered at that price.
    The very low prices and and are being had.
    Like I said in another post, this sort of pricing does not help the image of the 2.8 or resale value
    but it does get one a new vehicle with lengthy manufacturer’s warranty at an affordable price.
    One last comment: I purchased a 2003 F-150 XL four years ago and after all discounts got it for $10,100.00. I sold it two weeks ago for $9,000.00 through placing an ad in the local newspaper.

  • avatar
    iNeon

    I sure do wish we had deals like that in Birmingham– I’m shopping for a neon replacement, and the best I can do in a PT is an $8,000 2001 model with 60k, or an ex-rental for $11,900.

    The dealers are selling new for $15,000– with a 5-speed.

  • avatar
    P.J. McCombs

    What absolutely floors me about Chrysler’s current lineup is that, with all the industry talk about the importance of interior quality and tactility over the past decade, they seem to have gone *out of their way* to concoct the cheapest, nastiest, plasticky-est cabins in the North American market.

    Recently, on a Dodge lot, I sat in a pre-owned 2001 Neon R/T, then a 2007 Caliber. In terms of materials quality, it’s a wash (the Neon actually had more soft-touch and grained surfaces, but some clunkier switchgear).

    I can see what they’re going for with their current hard, wipe-down, rectilinear cabin decor–presumably trying to create a tough, all-American atmosphere to counter the “soft and sissy” Japanese. This worked in the Magnum and 300. In every other product, it hasn’t. At all.

    Most indicative of Chrysler’s current head-up-the-arse syndrome is the fact that, in the past year, they’ve released three new compact cars (Caliber, Compass, Patriot), *none* of which is as well-packaged, pleasant to drive, or well-finished inside as the PT Cruiser–a vehicle that’s *seven years old*, for chrissake. This, when the entire industry is buzzing about the importance of competitive compacts.

    It hurts my head to imagine the funds, stress, and engineering hours that Chrysler put into developing a model line that’s no more appealing or competitive than the one it replaced.

  • avatar

    Heck, even their very names tell us outright that the Chinese are going to take it over: Cherysler.

  • avatar
    KatiePuckrik

    I do feel sorry fo Chrysler. They remind me so much of the UK’s much missed Rover car company. They were both owned by a German company who abused them and didn’t know what to do with them. Eventually, they were both sold off to a private equity company. Both didn’t really stand a chance, they didn’t have much free capital to design and make good cars and lived on life support. In the end, Rover got picked up by a Chinese company and it looks like History will repeat itself if the Chinese pick up the “stripped and flipped” Chrysler! If Chrysler go under, I will feel a little for them.

    Ford and GM I have NO sympathy for them. They always had their fate squarely in their hands and no-one else cocked up their future except themselves.

  • avatar

    Katie: Are you saying Rover went under because BMW “abused” them? So, uhm… How did they get to the point that BMW bought them, in the first place? Here’s a hint: Up to that point, they, too, “had their fate squarely in their hands and no-one else cocked up their future except themselves”.

    It would behoove you to display a teensy little bit less “Boohoo, it’s all them naughty Krauts’ fault!”, and the tiniest smidgen of recognition for their own responsibility for their own fate, lest you be percieved as perhaps ever so slightly blinkered by misguided nationalism.

  • avatar
    iNeon

    Conrad: Are you saying Chrysler didn’t have competitive product in every segment when the merger took place?

    Picture it, America, 1997– Chrysler has a roomy, lithe, 40MPG small car that won COTY and sold above list at it’s launch. Not only is this small car roomier than it’s competition, but it’s quicker AND has more profit built into it’s design than said competitors.

    The Mid-Size lineup consists of a trio of sedans getting 30MPG– Forgettable workhorses that can be found for $2,500 today with 175,000 miles on them.

    The LH cars were ending their very successful first-generation, were larger and more powerful, better-driving automobiles than their peers.

    Trucks were selling, we had a total of what– 4 SUVs? Cherokee, Durango, Grand Cherokee and Wrangler.

    There is a sharp line between pre and post-merge vehicles, and it isn’t terribly hard to see the German influence. Anyone that has owned a Mercedes-Benz will feel right at home in a modern Chrysler– they’re austere just like the German automobiles used to be. It’s a common thread between them, but no one seemed to realize that when you’re building American automobiles with a German aesthetic that you simply can not cheap out on materials.

    That is where this merger went haywire– the Germans decided it was OK, or passable, to build simple automobiles out of cheap materials, and we (Americans) won’t have such a plain car as a w210 anymore– especially if it’s built of cheap materials.

  • avatar
    Nemphre

    “the Germans decided it was OK, or passable, to build simple automobiles out of cheap materials”

    No, that’s been Chrysler’s m.o. for a long time. Even your much vaunted first gen Neon was a Consumer Reports Bad Bet. The rest of the lineup was chintzy and forgettable.

  • avatar
    iNeon

    160,000 miles and a decade old in 20 days.

    Mechanical issues:
    Head-gasket, Fuel pump and shifter bushings.

    Build quality issues:
    Sunroof rail, passenger’s door speaker, window regulator, radio.

  • avatar
    zenith

    The best price I can find on a PT is $13,950 with a lease option of $99 a month if you can come up with cash or trade of $3500.

    The lease deal is for a chintzy 10,500 miles/year.

    Has anyone else here noticed that the standard lease used to be 12-15K miles/year and that now 10,500 seems to be standard? Also, additional miles are a quarter a pop instead of 7-10 cents.

  • avatar
    iNeon

    Now what?

    I’m of the mind that Plymouth is needed.

    They could throw the old(time-tested, paid for) technology at decontented cars, sell them cheaply and earn future adopters of more costly, cutting-edge tech. It wouldn’t de-value the Chrysler or Dodge lines if 100k Plymouths a year were sold to fleets, would it?

    Dodge can be outsourced(to China, as much as I don’t want them to be), but I think Chrysler should be built in the US and sold at a premium price because of that. The differences need to be real and not just an added trim package and different bumper covers.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Superdessucke: Opposite direction of what needs to be done. Bring back the d’Elegance and Biarritz. This...
  • Superdessucke: Well, that’s eventually going to happen. China not taking dollars. But what does going to war...
  • dal20402: Obviously better for that but it didn’t come as a 335is :)
  • dal20402: If you ask the Taiwanese if they want to join the PRC, they will give you the loudest “NO”...
  • Lou_BC: LOL

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber