By on July 27, 2016

2015 Ram 1500 Laramie Crew Cab 4x4 EcoDiesel

Fiat Chrysler Automobiles knows what models bring home the bacon, so there won’t be many corporate tears shed over its decision to axe the Chrysler 200.

Yesterday, the automaker announced $1.48 billion in funding to retool its Sterling Heights, Michigan assembly plant, paving the way for the next generation of Ram trucks. To free up space for lucrative pickup production, FCA just sent the 200 on the long walk to the gallows.

Ram production will move to Sterling Heights from the Warren assembly plant to beef up Ram production. (A Warren announcement will come later, FCA says.) Next-generation models arrive for 2018, and FCA can’t have a problem product stemming the flow of vehicles from its surging truck brand.

So, the automaker will pull the plug on the 200 in December. With its sales in the gutter, the 200 is that guy on the life raft who doesn’t do anything useful, but drinks a lot of water. FCA plans to bash the similarly underperforming Dodge Dart with an oar in September, making room at its Belvidere, Illinois plant for Jeep Cherokee production.

FCA just sank more than $1 billion into its golden child, the staggeringly hot Jeep brand. Who can blame them? If it sells like happy promises at election time, an automaker would be stupid not to throw cash at it.

By Christmas, FCA won’t have a compact or midsize car in its stable — a first for the company, and something that would have been unthinkable just a couple of decades ago.

CEO Sergio Marchionne’s plan to outsource small car production to another automaker hit a brick wall when no one showed up to dance. With no partner announced, FCA’s non-truck/crossover/SUV lineup will consist of the aging LX platform full-sizers and the Fiat 500.

Just our two cents: TTAC writers agree that Sergio should court Mazda for the honor of building his castoffs. (Feast your eyes on our concept of a Mazda3-based Dart replacement.)

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

90 Comments on “Fiat Chrysler Spends $1.5 Billion on Next-Generation Ram; Hands Chrysler 200 December Death Notice...”


  • avatar
    ajla

    “FCA’s non-truck/crossover/SUV lineup will consist of the aging LX platform full-sizers and the Fiat 500.”

    Don’t forget about Maserati and Alfa Romeo!!!

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    This directly conflicts with what Danio told me about the 200, which was that it would live for “A couple more years.”

    So much for inside info!

    I had planned to rent a 200 because I wanted to see what’s what, but they foiled my plan by offering me a Challenger instead.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      I’d call that a favor, actually.

    • 0 avatar
      danio3834

      That was the plan, but now it’s not. I hope you can appreciate that things change.

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        Such a quick change of plans might indicate some flailing to me.

      • 0 avatar
        Scoutdude

        Well the fact is that contracts can be renegotiated. So Chrysler probably either just bought out the contract at a discount or offset it with an order for something else from the same supplier.

        It comes down to the lesser of two evils. Continue building cars that would be sold at a loss or make a payment to suppliers to get out of the contract. The supplier will likely take much less than the value of the contract because the straight payment will be pure profit while producing actual parts requires materials, labor and overhead. Plus they now have the potential capacity to make other parts they can sell to a solvent automaker.

    • 0 avatar
      wolfman3k5

      You didn’t miss much, as the 200 is a POS. Poor dynamics, low quality interior bits, shitty transmissions, drives and feels like a Chrysler sedan from the 90s.

      It looks like FCA can’t build a decent front wheel drive vehicle if their life depended on it…

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    I can’t believe they’re still building 200s. How many day supply do they have now?

    I still say we need to start a betting pool on when the last brand new 200 will be sold: 2017? 2018? 2019?

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      Probably a good buy here at the end of the year, as long as you’re alright with that transmission. Seeing them in person, they look well put together.

    • 0 avatar
      philadlj

      My roommate drove a 200 loaner while her Forester was being repaired. She…did not like it.

      Her response to the news of its impending demise: “YES. Good. It was a stupid [email protected]#*ing car.”

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      I’m betting that it is 2018 or maybe even 2019. The last of them won’t hit the dealers until very late 2016 at the earliest and we have seen discontinued vehicles take up to 2 model years until they stop showing up on Tim’s sales charts. Given this is FCA though and their unique sales accounting practices means that they may say they are all gone by the end of 2017 but with a ton of inventory still sitting on lots. Yes they just announced that they are changing their ways, which really is code for we are going to do a better job of covering our tracks.

      • 0 avatar
        PrincipalDan

        IIRC there were brand new unsold Crossfires sitting on dealer lots in 2009, for a vehicle that ceased production in 2007.

        After production ends in December I vote that TTAC post a monthly update on the number of unsold 200s sitting on dealer lots. Enquiring minds want to KNOW!

    • 0 avatar
      sgeffe

      Weird..I thought the 200 was essentially a stretched Dart with a crummy transmission, so why couldn’t they both have been built at Belvedere or SNAP?

  • avatar
    indi500fan

    Gas here has hit the $1.5X / gal range.
    Not sure how long it lasts but certainly sells some pickups.

  • avatar
    philadlj

    Does anyone recall how much development of the 200 cost? All I know is it cost ~$1 billion just to renovate the assembly plant to build it.

    In any case, what a disaster. Even the Citation stuck around for more than two years (though that probably wasn’t a great idea)…

    • 0 avatar
      Adam Tonge

      I read a source that but the Dart’s development costs at about $1 billion and another that said that the Dart’s development cost FCA about half as much as the 200. So….lots of wasted money.

      • 0 avatar
        bumpy ii

        In the case of the Dart, FCA had to develop a 40mpg car as part of the deal with the government anyway.

        • 0 avatar
          Adam Tonge

          They didn’t have to spend over $1 billion doing so. I’m sure the 1.4T/DCT fits in the Lancer.

          • 0 avatar
            sportyaccordy

            1.4 is an ancient POS in the context of fuel economy regs though. Iron block, port injection, roots back to the 80s. Combined with the overweight Compact Wide platform the Dart never stood a chance of hitting those targets….

          • 0 avatar
            heavy handle

            sportyaccordy,

            The Dart Aero did hit the 40MPG target, both in auto and manual.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      They probably would have been better off keeping the old 200 (with convertible!) and Avenger around and just competing with Nissan on price.

      • 0 avatar
        Adam Tonge

        I agree. They probably could have moved around the same amount of units. What’s amazing to me is how quickly the floor fell out. In 2015, Chrysler sold the most 200s/Sebrings EVER. 177K units!!! Seven months into 2016, they have already decided to kill it.

    • 0 avatar
      heavy handle

      philadlj,

      Look up “sunk cost fallacy.” It doesn’t really matter how much they spent on these cars. If they aren’t making money, they need to be cancelled.

      The same plants can be used to make profitable cars/crossovers/pickups/whatever.

  • avatar
    michal1980

    can fiat meet cafe without any small cars?

    • 0 avatar
      RHD

      Very unlikely… so they could rebadge Suzukis as FCA products… maybe import TKD kits, and finish the assembly here, so there are at least a few American jobs involved. The quality and MPGs would be superior to the Dart and 200, and the investment in model development would be practically nothing. First-year bugs would already be ironed out.
      Suzuki would have more model choices to pick from than Mazda, unless Mazda wants relabeled current models being sold across the street at the Chrysler Fiat dealer.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      Getting rid of these small cars should improve their CAFE status. Despite the name of Corperate Average fuel economy the system no longer is a straight sales weighted average of the individual car’s MPG results. It is now based on the footprint and each individual car has its own target based on its footprint. The one area where the Corp Average does come into play is that they can trade credits from one car that exceeds its target to offset a vehicle that doesn’t meet its target. The Dart being overweight for its class means it is probably iffy on whether it generates any credits or even meets its target. The fact that the 200 seems to be so V6 heavy along with not being a light car either means it too is more likely to be a problem than a benefit when it comes to CAFE. The other thing is that as it is Chrysler has to buy CAFE credits to meet the standard. So less cars sold means that they may actually end up with the need to purchase fewer credits. Even if they don’t gain on the credit side of things not loosing money on selling the Dart and 200 leaves more money to spend on credits if they need it.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    So what happens when the price of gas pendulum swings the other way.

    It always swings the other way.

    • 0 avatar
      SD 328I

      Not much I would suspect. Remember that when gas prices were still at relatively high $3.50 to $4.00 a gallon nationally a few years ago, truck sales were already surging along with high resale on used full size trucks.

      People are expecting prices to go back up and aren’t as knee jerk as they were before they climbed up to record highs back in the late 2000s.

      Also, modern full size are capable of much better mpg than even a few years ago, you have Rams that are rated at 29 mpg, better than many cars.

      • 0 avatar
        stuki

        “Also, modern full size are capable of much better mpg than even a few years ago, you have Rams that are rated at 29 mpg, better than many cars.”

        This. Also, for a fixed annual mileage, the actual fuel outlay difference between a truck getting 18mpg and a car 36, is 33% less than when trucks got 12 and cars 24.

        Nothing a regionally triumphant ISIS burning the entire Middle Eastern oil industry to the ground can’t fix with $20/gallon pump prices and rationing, but aside from those kind of scenarios, “being stuck with a gas guzzling truck” doesn’t seem like that big a risk anymore.

        Being stuck with monthly payment guzzling truck loan, is probably a bigger risk, for most people. Those realistic 18+mpg trucks, with requisite Mercedes inspired comfort, luxury and safety features, aren’t really all that cheap anymore.

    • 0 avatar
      seanx37

      I think you know the answer. FCA have to be praying for a Clinton win.

  • avatar
    davefromcalgary

    I stopped by an FCA dealer last night, not the one with the nice used Laramie I covet.

    The guy was… very arrogant. Basically told me he could cut me 20k off a new 2016 Laramie diesel, said he would “write me a personal cheque for the savings”, bragged about the millionaire dealer group owner, “but you need to buy this week, I can only do it to meet month end sales quotas.”

    He also told me that the price for an identical truck inflates about 7k from model year to model year, and that the 65k 2016 truck I want will pretty much guaranteed be 70+k next year for the same truck.

    I also got the very classic, “You’re an engineer, so you’re pretty smart, surely you want to save money and have a brand new truck.”

    The only good thing about it was, I figure that by dealing with such a character, I can likely flog the Verano… yaaaaay…

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      I don’t need to say it do I?

      • 0 avatar
        davefromcalgary

        Not sure what you’re talking about 28. Please enlighten me!

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          Give me a “G”, give me an “M”…

        • 0 avatar
          davefromcalgary

          Seriously though 28, the guy was very enthusiastic about taking the Verano in, where as GM has not shown any of that inclination. Therefore, despite the fact that I’m an incurable Sierra fan, they are in a far second place due to The Buick Problem (TM).

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            youtube.com/watch?v=Eal4fep7pK4

          • 0 avatar
            davefromcalgary

            So, not an FCA fan?

            Don’t worry, I’ll likely just keep the Verano, buy a 2015 Sierra for cash when it goes back… Pretty gunshy on another, different, bigger car note right now.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            @dave:

            If a Ram is what you really desire then go for it.

            However, take it from me, do not accept an FCA product as the generic, discount equivalent to what you actually want. Becuase that only leads to major remorse when the door handle falls off and the alternator fails for the second time in 9 months.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            @davefromcalgary

            I think one must understand there is a difference between “Chrysler car” and “Chrysler truck” just as there is a difference between “GM car” and “GM truck”. My issue with FCA is no matter whose name on the building, its still Chrysler and with that comes certain things you’ll have to live with. I’ve never been a “truck man” so between the three majors plus Toyota I’m not sure what to recommend – I suppose it depends on application. Personally I would roll a Tundra and be done with it.

          • 0 avatar
            davefromcalgary

            28 and ajla, I sincerely respect both of you and your commentary on the RAM truck matter.

            So, I don’t actually consider in terms of looks, options (when all is working), capability, the RAM to be a second choice to the Sierra. I like what they have to offer (on paper) equally. So from that standpoint, I wouldnt be settling.

            However, I acknowledge the quality issues FCA suffers. Thats why the RAM has always been a distant second choice, I really do think GM makes solid trucks.

            In the end though… I think its probably moot. My most likely path is, drive Verano till it goes back, then buy a used truck for cash.

            28, from our interactions and your comments in general, I get the feeling you are a ton more pragmatic than me. I agree the Tundra is probably the best choice for trouble free motoring due to Toyota’s reputation for engineering quality, I just don’t want one. I don’t think I’ll ever buy a vehicle that doesn’t contain at least some aesthetic or passion appeal to me. For better or worse.

            Given that it likely is moot, I’ll try and move on from the topic now.

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            Dave, try out a Tundra with the TRD exhaust and/or test drive a “Pro” model. I’m very much an old school Japanese SUV kind of guy (my heart lies in Tahara), but after seeing the “Dirt Everyday” guy on youtube take a Tundra TRD Pro on a cross country trek, exhaust burbling the whole way as the truck chewed through some breathtaking terrain, I was smitten. The latest Tacoma has been neutered in the motor department IMO, that is not a truck motor.

            GM trucks have sweet interiors (haven’t actually sat in one) but the low hanging bumpers kill it for me (even with the air dam removed, they still look like tadpoles IMO). I am a fan of the Ecotec 4.3, the last of burly torque rich V6s IMO. Rams look good, but holy hell the long tradition of crap suspension parts can only be made worse by the air suspension, not to mention stupid electrical issues. Also I question the use of coil springs in the back of a half ton truck (crap payload). I dig the Power Wagon, I prefer it to the Raptor in terms of overall utility/versatility rather than being super-niche. Solid axles front and rear with lockers will always get my attention.

            Overall, to me the Tundra is the most “wholesome” in terms of getting the basic truck things right: a beastly, reliable V8, solid transmission, solid suspension and 4wd hardware. Uncompromised clearance. It lags in terms of interior, ride (relatively speaking), and fuel economy. TFL Truck took a closer look at that million mile ’07 Tundra, it really was pretty amazing how well the truck held up not only mechanically, but even that cheap interior looked almost new.

            I’m also one of those crazy people that likes the first gen Titan, for many of the same reasons I like the Tundra (uncompromised truckiness, namely offroad)

          • 0 avatar
            davefromcalgary

            Haha gtem, like I said yesterday I respect a lot about what Toyota does with the Tundra but its hideous (imo) and I don’t like it, and I wont spend that much coin on a vehicle that doesn’t excite me, for better or worse.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Thanks Dave. I agree on the aesthetics, as I have aged I came to realize what is the most pretty can also be the most costly whereas the most homely can deliver the greatest ROI, be it women or automobiles.

          • 0 avatar
            bumpy ii

            I’m mildly amused at how trucks and SUVs constantly cycle through various iterations of coil springs, torsion bars, leaf springs, and airbags in pursuit of the ideal suspension.

          • 0 avatar
            rpn453

            “I think one must understand there is a difference between “Chrysler car” and “Chrysler truck” . . .”

            For the trucks, they reverse the direction of the half-assed AWD system!

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            I hear ya, I know I too couldn’t bring myself to buy something that I thought was truly ugly. Although I tend to lean towards being pragmatic enough to tolerate something that is merely unexciting, as long as there are benefits on the engineering side of things. Definitely not trying to give you a hard time or anything. For what it’s worth, I think the refreshed front ends on the Silverados (namely the headlights and DRL LED strip placement) are awesome and the closest we’ve come to the GMT400 trucks looks wise. I drive by Fort Wayne assembly almost once a month and I get to see their off-site shop off of Aboite Road where they put the finishing touches on the special edition trucks (blackout or some such?). Driving a GM truck just feels right in Central/Northern Indiana!

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            gtemnykh – The Toyota “Pro” option is not available in Canada.

          • 0 avatar
            davefromcalgary

            **WARNING! WARNING! RAMPANT PERSONAL OPINION INCOMING!**

            Ach no! Lol gtem, somehow I still disagree with you. The Silverado facelift (2016+ models) is even worse than the wanna-be-a-Tonka caricature shape of the 2014-2015 Silverado.

            I see what you’re saying, and whenever I see a clean GMT400 (very rare) I want one, but the Silverado is a mess to this guy’s eye. A 96+ 2WD with the stamped steel rims and some form of anti spin rear would be a very cool PLC for me.

            Get up close to one of the new ones though and it all falls apart. The weird cutlines and trim shapes make it look like bad aftermarket plastic trying to shape reflector headlamp assemblies. I cant decide if the chrome or body color are worse. In my ever so humble opinion, the 2016 Silverado is good from far (with headlights off) but far from good looking.

            Lol, I find it amusing how different our tastes are. Thats part of the problem, I truly think RAM is the best looking truck on the road, which is why have been raving like a lunatic lately. Also, I really like the options available, I really think a PROPERLY ENGINEERED AND BUILT half ton truck with: small diesel or big OHV V8, many speed transmission, auto 4×4 and coil spring air supplemented suspension with a cushy interior would be incredibly to my liking, provided it didn’t fall apart! I want a comfortable truck that rides well, can do some mild off-roading for camping on crown lands, and yank around a 22′ trailer with ease. In terms of looks, the 2014 Sierra comes second, the current facelifted Sierra a grudging third (I’d buy one, but its not as good as its immediate predecessor) F-150 is incredibly neutral to me, and Silverado (currently), Titan and Tundra offend me.

            I wonder, can we toast the 2016 Tacoma? что твоя лошадь думает?
            (Duolingo fricken cracks me up! Teaching me such relevant and useful sentences!)

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            Dave do you think said coil spring rear end would cope well with a heavy trailer (not sure if you’re thinking goose-neck or what)? Or are we assuming there’s some helper airbags/springs?

            What does my horse think? LOL

            New Taco is growing on me, but the “tacked on” look of the nose makes me a bit queasy. I can see where it was the old 05-15 clip, and they just extended it. The loss of the 4.0L was a mistake, and a decision driven by CAFE standards I’m sure. Re-gearing can only do so much to offset the loss of low end torque.

            You had mentioned the 1st gen Tundra above, both it and the 1g Sequoia are coming into their element in the offroad community as they get cheaper and more attention. The iron block 4.7L 2UZ is a rock-solid workhorse of a motor, if not the most powerful thing by modern standards. It’s “just right” sized for many folks that want to tow a bit more than midsizers can handle, but a modern half ton is just too huge and over the top. They can even eke out some fairly palatable MPG. I’m still thinking there’s a 1g Sequoia in my future, I just wish they built them a bit more to 4Runner/GX standards in terms of fit/finish both inside and out and general ‘overbuilt-ness’. That or a GMT800 Suburban, I’ve ridden in a couple recently and it strikes me like a very practical vehicle for my upcoming needs and existing hobbies.

          • 0 avatar
            davefromcalgary

            I just feel if an OEM offers a factory airbag system on a tow package equipped vehicle, the load leveling feature had damn well better be up to the abuse of that trucks max ratings.

            Sadly I know this is a (crack) pipe dream, at least from FCA.

            Part of the reason I’m looking for that incredibly difficult mix of ride and payload is that while modern trucks ride very well and they don’t crush your kidneys anymore, my excellent (Russian speaking) S.O. finds taller vehicles to have too much lateral sway than she feels comfortable with, especially on longer rides, which is why I am trying to find the best damped halfton that will suit our needs. The fact that the bagged RAM has a freeway setting where it hunkers down at speed makes me hope that lateral motions would be reduced. We had a rental Terrain and she didn’t like that either, in terms of ride, so anything taller than a sedan makes her feel off on longer rides. If ALL trucks are still bad for this, we will likely have a capable car for non-camping road trips, but I’d prefer to be able to have a do it all truck. This is why I am kind of locked into a 2014+ GMC or a RAM with air ride. I like older trucks but the new ones certainly ride the best they ever have.

            Also, I couldnt agree with you more gtem on the ECOTEC 3 4.3L V6. I think its a great base motor for a truck, and GM should be offering it in the Canyonorado, and also the Lambdas. Grunt down low please!

          • 0 avatar
            rpn453

            Have you driven a new Ram yet, Dave? I prefer a well-damped ride, and the current 1/2-ton Ram is the best I’ve experienced in a truck. It’s the sportiest aspect of the driving experience, considering the slow and numb steering (which does firm up nicely on the highway), the intrusive nannies, the gimmeaminutetothinkaboutthat transmission, and the primitive on-demand AWD masquerading as 4WD. It’s frustrating that everything bad about the truck is the way it is because somebody wanted to make it that way.

            As you can tell, I dislike driving the thing in the city – especially in the winter where I appreciate real 4WD and reasonable (beneficial) slip angles, and like the steering to tell me how much traction is available at the front wheels. But from a passenger’s perspective, it’s an excellent ride. Body motions are well-controlled but not harsh, and the interior is comfortable, spacious, and attractive. Disconnect the silly roof speakers and the Alpine stereo is tolerable as long as you don’t want your music loud.

            The basic rear suspension is too soft for towing and heavy loads. My buddy installed some helper bump stops that get involved early and keep things under control, but they do harshen the ride when unladen. He does have an aftermarket helper air bag system he plans on installing. He never seriously considered the factory air suspension as it is a closed system that leaves you on the bump stops when a leak inevitably develops. That, and the added cost and complexity.

            It’s a good-looking truck. He didn’t even consider the Toyota or GM models because of how they look, and the Ford and Nissan both seemed archaic in comparison at the time (2014).

            He’s determined that a normal transfer case from the older trucks should be a direct replacement, but he’s hoping someone will soon offer a programmer that will simply allow him to lock the on-demand transfer case.

          • 0 avatar
            davefromcalgary

            Thanks for the feedback rpn. At this point, I’ve been praying to the spreadsheet gods to just figure out really whats my best bet. No sense in test driving and stirring up emotions.

            I had heard the coil sprung RAM rides really well. I think at this point I’m going to try and borrow my brothers Sierra more and do some clinical trials!

          • 0 avatar
            rpn453

            I enjoy having an excuse to test drive any vehicle!

            I’ll add that it has been essentially trouble-free. I think he’s had a couple electronic glitches that went away with a restart.

            Once he gets the transfer case sorted – it’s just programming, so somebody should come up with a fix eventually – there will be few complaints remaining that don’t apply to any modern vehicle. The steering doesn’t bother him as much as it bothers me, since he’s used to driving all his old trucks at the farm with slow and loose steering, and I find that the transmission works fine in the city and most other situations. It does a bit of hunting at lower freeway speeds due to the tall gearing, but the delay in response only shows up in highway passing, when you floor it and it takes over a second to kick down.

            I think it’s fundamentally – mechanically – a good truck. They just made some programming decisions that don’t suit my tastes. I wouldn’t complain so much about it if he didn’t feel like he got tricked by their false 4LOCK 4WD setting. It’s great that there’s an on-demand AWD setting (4AUTO). It’s a useful function for mixed conditions, and for drivers who don’t want to put too much thought into their driving. However, it’s an insult to their customers not only that they don’t think the customers are bright enough to know when to use an actual 4WD setting, but especially that they think it’s acceptable to trick their customers into thinking the truck actually has a true locked 4WD setting. Most conservative-driving owners probably never even notice, as the stock tires don’t have enough winter traction to shock load the drivetrain when they engage. But when you have Duratracs with over 200 studs per tire, you get a very unpleasant clunk on the delayed engagement of the front axle, and it gets a little worse every time it happens, as the clutches wear and increase the gap that the solenoid must overcome. For an aggressive driver, this occurs every single time you accelerate from rest in winter conditions, and can even get you stuck in deep snow when the back wheels dig themselves a hole before the fronts can contribute anything.

            Whatever you end up with, I hope it works out better than the Buick.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      davefromcalgary – Your experience mirrors most of my experiences at my local FCA dealer. The sales staff would brag up how wonderful the Principal was and how much money they donated to charity or talk about his Lambo’s and other exotic cars.
      I was looking at the Ecodiesel last year and they claimed they sold so well that none were in stock. They pushed real hard to sell me a Pentastar V6 1500. I took one for a test drive and they thought they had me hooked. It had a rough 2nd to 1st down shift and an annoying rattle somewhere in the back. I walked away and they next day they phoned and said they had 6 Ecodiesels miraculously show up in their inventory. (They have a few storage lots). I told them i was no longer interested.

  • avatar
    JimC2

    They’ve been making the 200 this whole time??

  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    Any news on the 2018 Ram?
    A turbo Pentastar is a persistent rumour and quite a while back it had been said that the Ecodiesel was not a long term power plant since it won’t meet upcoming emissions regulations. Ram is also romoured to be releasing a “heavy half” i.e. something that can compete with the Ford’s HD payload package.

  • avatar
    Scoutdude

    I can’t belive that they are going to keep making it until Dec, do they have that many parts that they need to use up? As I said when they did the shut down they should have called that good and not restarted the line. Technically they could keep making them as 2016’s until Dec instead of switching to 2017 but either way they will be a very hard sell now that they are discontinued.

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      Surprisingly, there is less than a 3-month supply of 200s on hand nationwide.

      • 0 avatar
        Scoutdude

        Interesting, is that based on dealer stock and there are abandoned mall and office park lots hiding another 3 months worth of inventory in their sales bank? I thought back in April or so when The Sweater announced that it was a piece of crap that they had ~9 months of inventory on hand. Maybe that was the other car he called a piece of crap, the Dart, that had the 9 months of inventory.

      • 0 avatar
        seanx37

        Well, they have drastically cut back on production this year. With months of plant closings so far.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    Small cars? We don’t need no stinkin’ small cars!

  • avatar
    Land Ark

    I test drove a 200S AWD on Sunday (fyi – since chances are you don’t know all the nuances of the 200 trim levels – the 200 only gets AWD with the V6) and I swear the guy at the dealer really wanted to try to talk me out of it.
    I figured with 295hp it would be a suitable or sufficient replacement for my Legacy GT wagon. And while it was optioned really superbly, it definitely lacked performance. If you had told me after driving it (with ear plugs in) that it was a 200hp 4 cylinder I wouldn’t have argued.

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    FCA will build lots more pickups in the US, since all 1/2 ton production is leaving Mexico. Now it’s just a matter of getting 3/4 tons and up, built in the US too.

  • avatar
    VoGo

    Dodge = dead brand walking.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @VoGo – agreed.

      • 0 avatar
        heavy handle

        I don’t. As I’ve stated before, the Charger and Challenger are what saved Dodge. They sell to real customers for real money, unlike all the “0 down 96 month financing” crud that were cancelled.

        There will be a few lean years for the Dodge brand (not the dealers, they are doing fine), but we should see the new RWD mid-size soon, and a Pacifica-based crossover.

  • avatar
    George Taramas

    Now its a good time to bring the new fiat tipo to the us. Call it the new chrysler 100, price it well and you have a winner against the nissan versa and many other competitors.

    • 0 avatar
      heavy handle

      The Tipo would make a great Fiat in the US. It’s been getting great reviews in Europe, but it’s still a bit too small and too cheap for the Chrysler badge.

      • 0 avatar
        George Taramas

        Like you said. It gets great reviews because its a very good and beautiful car. In many european countries its the second best selling fiat, behind the 500,outselling the 500x, 500L and the aging punto. The point is that fca needs a car like tipo in the u.s.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Scoutdude: I have not seen #2 yet. Looks interesting but it doesn’t really address the total problem. What...
  • APaGttH: Almost $30K for a Corolla if you tick all the boxes…and no more grunt under the hood. $26K to enter...
  • Michael S6: 29 k is GTI money
  • EBFlex: Why does anyone reply to EBFlex? He’s obnoxious, aggressively ignorant, and has never added an ounce of...
  • ToolGuy: Oh hey Peter. “GM is awesome, and Cadillac represents GM at its finest.” Agree or disagree?

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber