By on February 11, 2021

Stellantis leadership is going to have some tough decisions to make in regard to Chrysler and Dodge. While both brands are a shadow of their former selves, Fiat Chrysler viewed their rightsizing as more of a distillation process. Despite lacking the full complement of vehicles necessary to occupy every segment, the two have the oversized American sedan segment almost entirely to themselves. In fact, their more-is-more ethos is becoming increasingly rare within the overall industry and (allegedly) at odds with the coming age. We’ve been told the only way to continue playing is through powertrain downsizing and electrification. The V8 is becoming taboo, reserved for the incognito browser.

What will your neighbors think when they learned you bought a Hemi? The jokes about the size of your member for needing such a big car with such a big motor will perpetually have you on edge and peering over a shoulder. You’ll be a fugitive inside your own mind, forever teetering on the brink. What if your alarmingly massive penis is actually as demure as your bother’s wife suggested when you brought the car to the last family dinner? Wouldn’t it be easier if we all just drove bland crossovers with modestly sized motors? Why do you have to be so different?

These are the kinds of harrowing questions we wouldn’t need to ask ourselves in the aftermath of a midnight screaming fit if Dodge and Chrysler stopped existing. Stellantis has that power … and it may even be considering that possibility right now. But is that really what’s best?

Obviously, your author’s take is a flailing-and-frothing no. Dodge and Chrysler are two of the only brands still producing vehicles from some of my favorite segments. If you want a comfortable, tire-shredding, V8 powered coupe with a backseat that’s actually useful, you literally have to buy a Dodge. If you want an honest-to-god minivan, Chrysler has you covered. Interested in big, burly sedans or a grotesquely overpowered SUV? Your chariot awaits.

But the Pacifica, Challenger, Charger, and 300 weren’t FCA’s biggest sellers — even though they happen to be the models that define their respective brands — and the associated nameplates may not be viewed as essential. Stellantis came into being because Groupe PSA wanted to use the merger to gain direct access to Ram and Jeep. This was made abundantly clear when Stellantis CEO Carlos Tavares explained the company’s future trajectory at the Auburn Hills Technology Center on Wednesday.

“We expect pickups and SUVs to be developed in the Auburn Hills,” Tavares said during a tour of the Michigan manufacturing complex. The Detroit Free Press noted that the focus on certain vehicle types came at the expense of others when it recounted the moment, however.

2021 Jeep Wrangler Rubicon. Image: Jeep

From Freep:

That’s the most important thing for the U.S. role in the newly created Stellantis. By engineering and building many of the company’s most profitable and best-selling vehicles, Auburn Hills, and thereby Detroit, is assured a significant voice in investment, management and corporate strategy for what just became the biggest car company in town.

Just as they did under FCA, DaimlerChrysler and when Chrysler was independent, sales of Jeeps and pickups will determine Auburn Hills’ fate, and the company’s role in Michigan and America’s economies.

That doesn’t make the 300, Pacifica, Charger and Challenger disposable, though.

It would be irresponsible not to play devil’s advocate against myself. As easy as it is to rationalize the comparative bargains offered through the purchase of a Chrysler 300 or Dodge Charger, they’re not going to be a great fit for everyone. Bland as it may be, the Honda Accord is a solid performer starting a few thousand lower. Its base engine may be 100 horsepower shy of a V6-equipped, vanilla Dodge but it’s an otherwise good vehicle, providing an excellent user experience for anyone in need of reliable transportation. But the Accord has loads of direct competition whereas formerly FCA products exist in a category that’s kind of their own and becomes truly unique once you start optioning them with their famously large powertrains — with V8 outputs ranging between 372 and 807 horsepower.

But that doesn’t make them sustainable products. Dodge and Chrysler are catering to a decidedly American niche that its new French owners might not appreciate. Meanwhile, regulatory issues will continue making large, powerful automobiles increasingly troublesome to manufacture. It’s kind of hard to envision either brand going unaltered in the years ahead.

On a positive note for Mopar fans, Freep at least seemed to understand that FCA’s “lesser” brands held some innate spiritual value. Tavares has likewise hinted that Stellantis had an appetite for marques that weren’t exactly catering to mainstream tastes. He has even spoken kindly about Chrysler and noted the company is “very keen on supporting a Chrysler brand rebound.” Earlier rumors suggested Stellantis might attempt to take Chrysler upmarket, possibly as a way to funnel European luxury vehicles into North America. But there hasn’t been much talk about retaining Dodge’s focus on value, performance, and attitude — making us think it’s the brand we’re most likely to lose.

Is that hunky-dory or would you rather see the new automotive conglomerate take a different approach to the former FCA properties? What would you have done as CEO?

[Images: FCA/Stellantis]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

71 Comments on “QOTD: What Should Happen to Chrysler and Dodge?...”


  • avatar
    FreedMike

    What “should” happen isn’t really relevant at this point. What “will” happen is the real question. And I think what “will” happen is this: Chrysler is terminal (it’s too far gone), and Dodge may or may not recover. FCA criminally neglected Chrysler, and forced Dodge to make do with reworked old products. Don’t take that as a knock on Dodge – they did a great job with what they had, and made some great stuff the last few years. But the “Hellcat everything” approach was bound to run out of steam sooner or later – these are old, old products and hot-rodding them only goes so far.

    If I were Stellantis, here’s what I’d do with Dodge:
    1) Redo the Durango. Jeep is doing a revised Grand Cherokee, so it wouldn’t be too hard.
    2) Redo the Charger and Challenger on the Alfa Stelvio platform.
    3) Redo European Stellantis CUVs with Dodge “Hellcat attitude.” Offer higher performance than, say, a Jeep Cherokee. I think sporty CUVs are going to be an increasingly important product, and Dodge’s “bad boy” image works for this.

    But that assumes the brand has a future, and it may be too far gone already.

    • 0 avatar
      ect

      I don’t have a strong opinion on the future of the Chrysler brand. I’ll simply observe that Audi was considered terminal by many in 1994-5, for what looked like good reasons. The arrival of the A4 changed that, assisted of course by the models that followed it.

      Product matters. Stellantis has platforms that would support the development of a strong Chrysler lineup, if they choose to do that. I’ve no idea if they will or not, of course.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        Audi was almost Game Over here in North America, but it was doing fine in Europe, so they had the money to develop the A4 you refer to (and the A6, which was just as important), so there was ready-made product they could build on. Chrysler’s a corpse EVERYWHERE, and they have practically nothing in their current lineup and nothing in the pipeline. If they come back, it’s from the grave, Pet Sematary style.

        I’d love to see them continue, but I think that mountain’s too steep to climb. The handwriting’s on the wall.

        • 0 avatar
          WallMeerkat

          In Europe (or at least the part that recently left Europe), Audi until the mid 90s was seen as a bit left field, a German Saab. If you wanted a premium sedan you went BMW or Mercedes. If you wanted an aerodynamic front wheel drive car that was put together fairly well, you looked at Audi.

          The development of the A4, a real 3 series competitor, was helped that VW group shared the platform with the B5 Passat (which also moved VW upmarket).

          Another thing that helped in the UK was residuals. I don’t know the ins and outs, but they held their value (guaranteed value/buyback?). This meant that PCP finance (basically paying the depreciation) was low. I was on a salary sacrifice company car scheme in the 2000s and it was cheaper to lease an A4 than a Mondeo (equivalent Ford Contour/Fusion) or Vectra (equivalent Chevy Malibu/Buick Regal).

      • 0 avatar
        Pig_Iron

        @ect, Good point. :-)

  • avatar
    jack4x

    Dream scenario for Chrysler:

    The designers responsible for the interiors of the Ram Limited and Grand Wagoneer are turned loose on a state of the art full size RWD chassis that spawns a truly luxurious American sedan with standard V8 power, starting at $100,000.

    Dodge inherits the Voyager/Pacifica, builds the Charger and Challenger for as long as regulations allow, and takes over the lower price Jeeps, allowing that brand to go upmarket.

    But as long as we’re dreaming, I might as well ask for the Viper to return.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      I don’t know if you can make any money on the lower priced Jeeps if you take the Jeep logo off though.

    • 0 avatar
      DungBeetle62

      I’ll agree completely on the need for a proper cost-be-damned Chrysler product. With a combination of liberal plucking from the parts bin where nobody cares and knowing full well bespoke bits will not be cheap where people do care, Chrysler needs to be prepared for tiny volumes on this after the early-adopters jump in and be willing to stick it out. Put out a show car with a V-12 Hemi. Go where Cadillac teased forever they wanted to. Only with some Big Splash move like this is there hope of then rejuvenating the more reasonably priced area of the lineup.

      Ford should’ve made that “suicide door” Continental the only model.

      Also, for years Jaguar avoided an SUV because they shared showroom space with Land Rover. “If you want an SUV, we have great ones over here.” On that note, Chrysler shouldn’t do a “me too” SUV for the sake of an SUV and just be willing to say “We’ll show you across the showroom to a nice Wagoneer/Grand Cherokee if you must have a truck-shaped thing.”

      The minivan goes to Dodge (assuming there’s still the desire to play in that niche) with a showcase, similarly-luxurious and costly version “available” as a Chrysler. Again, staying the course and if you sell 200 a year, so be it.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      I like your dreams.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      Dodge mini-vans have occupied the cheapskate end of the market. You could always find them with huge discounts. You combine that with the contracture of that market due to soccer mom’s trying to look cool and buying useless(to them) Jeep Wranglers, there’s no point in keeping them around.
      The HellCat everything market will fade away with the baby-boomers.

      • 0 avatar
        DungBeetle62

        At some point, Hellcat-everything will pass their current point of diminishing returns to a point of no return. How much more power will it take to raise the bar further and is there that much hiding in their V8? And then, how long can they keep flogging a design that old with little more than “Even MORE power” as their calling card?

        • 0 avatar
          Superdessucke

          I agree dung beetle. Only I think the government is going to regulate cars like that out of existence. I think there’s a lot more animosity between current administration and, for lack of a better term, those who voted against them than you think. And I bet you the people buying these tallywacker substitutes are not overwhelmingly Biden/Harris voters.

          I think the new administration will get a lot of pleasure in trying to figure out ways of getting rid of them, along with monster pickup trucks.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      Love the idea, but that was the idea behind the 2006 Imperial show car. They opted not to produce it, even though the brand was on a HUGE upswing due to the 300. That was 14 years ago, while the brand had life. It’s almost totally dead now. There just isn’t anything to build on.

      My guess is that the “luxury” lineup here in the states will be the top-tier Jeeps and Ram trucks (and a full size RAM SUV, the absence of which has mystified me for a LONG time now).

    • 0 avatar
      Pig_Iron

      Maybe that compact pickup with regular or extended cab and stick they keep teasing. ;-)

  • avatar
    Steve Biro

    With all of the DS’s and upper-level Peugots that already exist, there’s no reason they can’t be slightly restyled and sold as Chryslers. If they need to be more Americanized, then the platforms of those vehicles are ready. PSA has been designing its vehicles with the U.S. in mind for a while now.

    All this talk about Chrysler being too far gone is us talking to ourselves. Most Chrysler dealerships will continue to be around because most sell Jeeps as well. It’s worth trying with a couple of Chrysler models to see how it goes.

    Meanwhile… I totally agree about redoing the Charger and Challenger on the Alfa Giulia/Stelvio platform. Americans WILL buy cars (as opposed to CUVs and SUVs) if they are interesting enough or feature something customers really want. Tesla is a good example. The Charger and Challenger are another. Sedans in North America had gotten pretty boring before the SUV craze came along.

    • 0 avatar
      WallMeerkat

      DS9 with a Chrysler badge isn’t too far fetched. Even has Americana-style retro rear blinkers/indicators! (Originally a nod to the DS)

      Would be a certain irony/circular history given that Peugeot rebadged Chrysler Europe products in 70s

  • avatar
    jmo

    ” regulatory issues will continue making large, powerful automobiles troublesome to manufacture”

    Huh? The new Model S has 1100 bhp and does 0-60 in under 2 seconds.

  • avatar
    Art Vandelay

    Dodge at least has an identity. Also I think that the dealership structure where you have Dodge, Chrysler, Jeep and Ram under one roof kind of makes it a moot point. You could probably kill off Chrysler, but how much do you really save? You arent shutting down an entire dealership network. Still, I don’t see much future for Chrysler. Dodge on the other hand is identified with batcrap crazy performance. No reason that can’t transition to the EV era assuming that happens. I never understood why Ram was split off from them anyway. I’d say fold them back in to the Dodge brand if you just have to kill some brands.

    Not really like GM’s purge of brands though where you had an entire network of dealers competing aginst your own products at a different dealer down the street. I just don’t see that level of savings…the only FCA brands not under the same roof in the US are FIAT, Alfa and Maserati. FIAT and Alfa are dead brands walking in the US and are more likely to die in this purge than even Chrysler.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @Art Vandelay – I think that Ram was split off because the plan was to kill off Dodge. A few years back I had read that SRT was supposed to take over performance vehicles.

      • 0 avatar
        DungBeetle62

        Whispers also had them splitting Ram off for a possible sale – someone like Nissan (wanting to get a seat at the Big Table in the truck game, but the Titan wasn’t doing it) or VW.

        Not like they couldn’t reintroduce Dodge Trucks later on.

  • avatar
    tylanner

    Make “better” vehicles.

  • avatar
    Rick T.

    What will your neighbors think when they learned you bought a Hemi?
    —————-
    I moved and got better, less judgmental neighbors. Problem solved!

  • avatar
    Varezhka

    Before the PSA merger, I thought I knew where things were going.
    Jeep was the SUV brand, Ram the truck brand, Dodge the sedan brand, and Chrysler the minivan brand, all under a single dealership.

    Now, I’m not sure. I don’t see a reason why Pacifica can’t go to EMP2 platform, but it probably won’t work outside of US. May or may not have a business case for it. I doubt EMP2 FWD based Dodge Charger/Challenger twins will work, so it’s probably a no-go. Maybe Dodge will be killed off once they can no longer be federalized, and we’ll have a Peugeot 508 based Chrysler 300?

  • avatar
    Kendahl

    If anybody refers to your vehicle as a substitute for an undersized manhood, you can tell them you are buying an electric car — Tesla Model S (670 or 1,020 horsepower).

  • avatar
    Land Ark

    Funny, just 30 minutes ago I got an acceptance of my offer to lease a 2020 Charger R/T for $375/mo with $4500 down. I’m not going to do it, but it was nice that they eventually allowed me to negotiate via email rather than come in.
    Another store near me totally stopped communicating with me when I asked for lease terms for one of their leftover 2020 Hellcat Challengers after saying I wasn’t going to come in. They list about 20 in stock so it doesn’t seem like they can afford it, but I must be wrong.

    I find the cars they are currently selling, all 3, to be desirable if not for the long term. As in, I would happily lease any of them but I would not particularly want to buy one. I suspect that is a problem though.

  • avatar
    Scoutdude

    Both will be gone in 5-10 years. The can only milk the Charger/300/Challenger for so long. Once those are gone they are one model brands, and the Durango is redundant. So if they want to continue with a minivan just stick it under the Ram or Jeep brands and call it good.

  • avatar
    Lightspeed

    I’d love to see Charger and Challenger get one more generation where the cars are smaller, lighter and use a 4.0L V8. But, ain’t gonna happen.

  • avatar
    dwford

    Here’s what should happen:

    1. Kill Chrysler and Fiat (and Lancia too). There is no brand equity in these names anywhere in the world.
    2. DO NOT attempt to reintroduce and PSA brands into the US.
    3. Sell Maserati to Ferrari for $1 if they’ll take it
    4. Make Dodge and Alfa sister brands. They both have a sporty DNA to the brands, with different flavors. Should be easy to design products for both brands off shared platforms.
    5. Let Ram be Ram and Jeep be Jeep.

    Of course, this all falls apart in 15 years when everything is an EV and all you’re selling is styling on top of a generic sled platform. Then how many brands do you need?

    • 0 avatar
      WallMeerkat

      Nice comment, but to play devils advocate

      > 1. Kill Chrysler and Fiat (and Lancia too). There is no brand equity in these names anywhere in the world.

      Killing off Fiat in Italy would be unheard of. I could see the brand continue but just as the 500 range (which has a recent EV). Lancia is quietly dying with a single Italy-only model. I’m not sure about Chrysler, though the badge could be useful for selling PSA products in the US.

      > 2. DO NOT attempt to reintroduce and PSA brands into the US.

      They’re already dropped this idea. Would make more sense to rebadge them under a known badge eg. Chrysler, the DS9 would be an easy conversion to a Chrysler 300 replacement for example, and the 5008 SUV would sell well.

      > 3. Sell Maserati to Ferrari for $1 if they’ll take it

      Makes sense, they were closely linked a few years ago.

      > 4. Make Dodge and Alfa sister brands. They both have a sporty DNA to the brands, with different flavors. Should be easy to design products for both brands off shared platforms.

      Shared platforms makes sense and works brilliantly for VW group. Though (and this is a UK/Europe perspective) I’d think of Dodge as V8 muscle cars, whereas Alfas tend to be relatively smaller engined (I4/V6) but revvy and beautiful handling.

      > 5. Let Ram be Ram and Jeep be Jeep.

      Ram as their workhorse GMC, Jeep as lifestyle SUVs

  • avatar
    Bobby

    For Chrysler I’d bring back the Imperial name but use it on a blinged-out version of the upcoming Jeep Wagoneer. Price it competitively at maybe $5k-7k below the Escalade/Navigator (base MSRPs in the mid $70Ks). I assume the upcoming base Wagoneer will be similar to the Tahoe/Expedition/Sequoia in pricing (high $40Ks-low 50Ks).

    Continue with the Pacifica minivan but if the US market needs a value priced van, rebadge the current Voyager as the Dodge Caravan.

    Assuming the Charger/Challenger duo have a future either on a shared Alfa platform or they somehow keep facelifting/updating the admittibley ancient LD platform, really how much more would in cost in R/D to also offer a Chrysler 300 version?

    As for the Durango I don’t see it having a future now that the upcoming Grand Cherokee’s offering a model with 3rd row seats.
    Fold the Ram truck back into the Dodge brand and bring back the Dakota to compete with the Colorado/Ranger/Tacoma, etc.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    Dodge – as others have suggested above, keep selling the Charger/Challenger for as long as regulations allow. Each new regulation should be evaluated against the cost to implement vs profits from the platform. These two cars are your flagships for the Dodge brand along with the higher hp versions of the Durango.

    Fill out the rest of the lineup with Peugeot platform CUVs, sedans, and hatchbacks. Peugeot has already walked back it’s intentions from a few years back to reintroduce Peugeot to the United States as a brand but that doesn’t mean they don’t want to get some mileage out of Peugeot’s platforms.

    Chrysler – do the same to the 300 as you do to the Charger/Challenger. Either make the Hemi easier to get or add the eTorque system to all the V6 300s. Reintroduce the “designer editions” like the John Vartos edition – make them the flagships. Keep the minivans (but move the “Voyager” to the Dodge brand and make it a true value leader.) Chrysler has a big slice of the minivan pie and it should not be seceded to the Japanese by default. Fill in the rest of the lineup with European platforms.

    Give me a Peugeot 508 sedan/wagon (as my consulting fee) and I don’t give two $hits what badge you put on it here in the USA. Give it the driving dynamics of the new Acura TLX and similar power levels.

  • avatar
    MKizzy

    What should Stellantis do with Chrysler and Dodge? How about splitting the lineups by powertrain to keep the brands distinctive–one focused on the present and the second more forward thinking?

    Dodge as the more “affordable” and traditional brand could offer a full range of ICE, hybrid, and maybe PHEV models until forced by consumer choice or gov’t regulation to dump ICE all-together.

    Chrysler as a more upscale and tech-focused brand could offer a lineup focused on hybrid, PHEV,& BEV models only.

  • avatar

    As Chrysler goes, so goes America.

  • avatar
    ToolGuy

    Can we soften the language in the second paragraph? (Is this a pun? Hard to say.)

  • avatar
    Lichtronamo

    Chrysler needs to follow Buick and Lincoln into CUVs. Take the Peugeot 2008, 3008, and 5008 with the Pacifica/Voyager and the brand is viable again.

    Dodge is harder. The Grand Cherokee L seems to cut the Durango’s legs out from under it. Maybe if paired with a RWD Alfa, a new Charger and Challenger could happen. But it’s a limited market. Stellantis may need more R&D cash for catching up on EVs than RWD Alfa’s and Dodges.

  • avatar
    DragDog

    Dodge has built a wide moat around crude “F your feelings” performance vehicles. Ride it out for the remainder of the ICE era. With the combined Mopar dealers there’s no need to be a full line automaker. They did a great job milking that old E-class platform, give them the Maserati Quattroporte/Levante chassis (already 8 years old and amortized) and cost-engineer the suspension and interior.
    Charger -> Quattroporte-based muscle sedan
    Challenger -> Quattroporte-based muscle coupe
    Durango -> Levante-based SUV
    Neon -> 308 GTI-based hot hatch (just for grins)
    Keep a HEMI-branded V8 available by any means necessary, even if it means partnering with Ford/GM, or a small-displacement V8 cobbled out of two DOHC I4 engines.

    Chrysler is a blank slate. Reboot it as a 100% CUV, 100% electrified, “imported from Detroit,” Art Deco, comfy-cars-for-people-who-hate-cars, outlet for high-margin PSA crossovers.
    EV Cruiser -> e-2008-based BEV CUV
    100 -> 3008 hybrid-based CUV
    200 -> 5008-based CUV with Pacifica hybrid powertrain
    Pacifica hybrid -> unchanged
    300 -> Levante/Durango-based flagship CUV with eTorque Pentastar mild hybrid

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    Kill Chrysler off and add crossovers to Dodge. Kill the Charger and keep the Challenger as a competitor to Mustang and Camaro. Add the Pacifica to Dodge. Don’t offer any sedans. Increase the quality because the lack of quality besides aging products are what has hurt FCA. Kill Fiat, Maserati, Lancia, and Chrysler. Offer a true compact pickup and name it Fargo under the Ram name. Make the compact pickup the size of the new Ford Maverick but offer an extended cab in addition to the crew cab and price it just below the new Ford Maverick. Use an existing platform for the Fargo from the Fiat Strada or Peugeot. Eliminate the crossovers from Jeep but keep the Grand Cherokee and Renegade. Add a full range of crossovers to the Dodge brand but eliminate the Durango and let Jeep be the brand for off road and suvs. Since most dealers that carry Ram carry Jeep, Dodge, and Chrysler it doesn’t make sense to have competing models from different brands in the same showroom.

  • avatar
    Pig_Iron

    “at odds with the coming age”
    :-(

  • avatar
    thegamper

    Realistically, how difficult would it be to keep these brands around with a few rebadged versions of cars from other brands and maybe one or two unique vehicles based off of common platforms.

    Neither Chrysler or Dodge has a large lineup of vehicles, quite the opposite. The dealers are already tied to Jeep and Ram in most cases. Keeping the lights on with minimal investment, as they have been, perhaps trying a few new things to see if anything gains traction.

    Jeep and Ram cannot be the only brands that sell vehicles in the US from a huge catalogue of Stellantis products. Its going to come down to dollars and cents. What is the cost of propping up a failing brand such as Chrysler or Dodge vs. the cost of starting over with something like DS or Citroen in the US. Stellantis needs one brand to sell luxury vehicles and one to sell the rest of its standard wares that don’t fit in the Jeep or Ram lineups. Pick the two strongest brands or brands with the most name recognition/potential that arent Jeep and Ram. 4 brands survive in the US is my prediction.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    I don’t believe Citroen or DS should be sold in the US. Dodge is worth keeping just add some crossovers but Chrysler itself should be taken off life support. A luxury sedan will not work in today’s market especially with sedan sales cratering and the stiff competition in the luxury market. Stellantis needs to concentrate on quality and then and only then after years of sales growth in NA they could create a luxury brand but if they do they should not sell it in the same showrooms as their other brands and they need to offer Lexus like quality service. FCA has destroyed most of the remaining quality and good will of Dodge and Chrysler. One or both of the brands should go and if one is to be kept it would be Dodge.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    Chrysler is a dead brand walking and has been for years now.

    Dodge is a successful niche manufacturer of a dying segment dependent on a platform that is dated and a marketing formula that helped Chrysler plunge into bankruptcy in 2009 (which isn’t to suggest the current alphabet soup ownership has this issue)

    Alfa is already here so taking Chrysler upscale doesn’t make sense.

    Maybe Dodge-Ram remarries, Chrysler goes the way of Plymouth and Eagle and the remains of American Motors. Pacifica moves to another brand.

    The days of full-size RWD cars for the middle class are over. Thy name is pickup truck.

  • avatar
    wolfwagen

    Chrysler should be like Lincoln except they need to keep a sedan of some sort and toss the mini-van to Dodge.

    Dodge should be along the lines of Honda (in terms of offerings) using comparable European platforms with the addition of the Challenger/Charger (if they kill the Charger, kick it over to Chrysler and make it a premium vehicle)

    As someone else said let Ram be Ram (with the addition of 4door Ramcharger to compete with the Suburban and Expedition) and Jeep be Jeep

  • avatar
    Dartdude

    What Stellantis should do with FCA products in America is simple. First with Jeep make only true four wheel drive SUVs only. With Dodge make CUVs with turbo AWD models only. With Chrysler brand make luxury CUVs. They could do a Imperial brand with a sedan and coupe and convertible that is the ultimate luxury vehicles.

  • avatar
    Yankee

    What do you mean Chrysler isn’t selling well? The Chrysler Grand Cherokee and Chrysler Wrangler are selling like crazy. These vehicles prove that all they have to do is put a seven slot grill on the front and a sticker on the back of a substandard Chrysler or Fiat product and people will buy them in droves! Problem solved!

  • avatar
    detlump

    I don’t see why the Charger/300/Challenger can’t exist as EVs. Many Teslas are sedans and people are buying them.

    Chrysler could exist as a premium SUV – for example take the new Wagoneer and make one into an Imperial. The big money is in SUVs for now and the foreseeable future. Chrysler could exist as only a luxury but not off-road SUV as the Chrysler Imperial.

    Not much reason for Lancia or Fiat to exist, really.

    I would like to see some of the interesting PSA designs over here, though.

  • avatar
    teddyc73

    I refuse to chose a vehicle based on the leftist liberal lunatic idea of what we all should be driving. The fact that my V8 powered pick up daily driver disgusts most liberal loons fills me with glee. If they are going to equate my vehicle choice with parts of my anatomy then so be it. Being juvenile and judgmental is simply the way they are. I applaud FCA for offering these types of vehicles and I will continue to drive my HEMI V8 for years to come.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      The extremists don’t want you driving at all. Their attitude is: driving for me, not for thee.

      • 0 avatar
        RHD

        The problem with your points of view is that “leftist liberal lunatics” and “liberal loons” are figments of your imaginations.
        Turn off the Limbaugh propaganda show and take a look around you. If someone driving a Prius makes you feel paranoid, you really need to see a shrink.

    • 0 avatar
      N8iveVA

      As a gun owning, V8 driving liberal, thanks for showing how wrong stereotyping can be at times. Would you like me to spew out some stereotyping on right wing conservatives?

  • avatar
    cardave5150

    First of all, at this point, the number of models in a given FCA brand doesn’t really matter. Virtually all of their dealerships are Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep/Ram anyway. Having 1 or 2 vehicles in a particular brand doesn’t matter – the showroom is full. They’re going to need to keep the Jeep lineup basically as it is – Jeeps don’t need to be discounted to the extent that they would be if labeled as a Dodge or Chrysler at this point. Plus, the Jeep Brand Manager wouldn’t allow his empire to be raided.

    So, any additions to Dodge or Chrysler are going to need to be unique (not Jeep re-badges). They’ll need to raid the Peugeot bin for vehicles to re-purpose. Smaller vehicles (cars, wagons, crossovers) could go to Dodge (as they were traditionally more mainstream than Chrysler (forget Plymouth – it’s NOT coming back). Keep them sporty in feel and good value for the money. The Charger and Challenger should go onto the Giorgio platform. Offer the high-performance models as hybrids, so the performance still puts a silly grin on your face, but they ease the fanboys into electrification.

    Chrysler could get the 3-row Peugeot crossover, their largest sedan and wagon. Re-do the front/rear clips to give them a Chrysler identity, and outfit them with premium interiors. Then sell at a price that slightly undercuts the market.

    • 0 avatar
      StudeDude

      Agree with everything you say. Since Peugeot is not coming here under their own name, they come here under the Chrysler and Dodge nameplates. Maybe throw a little Opel DNA in there as well. The Giorgio platform can be used for other models. Lots of interesting stuff to work with here.

  • avatar

    FCA is now a French company. Most of Chrysler future product line will
    become rebadged Peugeots. When you sell out your company to a foreign manufacturer this is what usually happens. The French now have a larger auto industry than the US in terms of sales. As a result of this merger pathetic GM has just dropped to fifth place!!!

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    Yes FCA is now a French company but before that it was an Italian company, and German company. Jeep and Ram are the rainmakers with the rest of FCA being disposable. This might be the beginning of the end for Chrysler and possibly Dodge only time will tell. Maybe Fiat and Alfa Romeo still have a presence in Europe but they are dead brands in the US.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    Should have said Chrysler was owned by the Germans–Fiat has always been Italian.

  • avatar
    Michael S6

    Do we need Dodge,Chrysler,Ram, and Jeep brands to make similar version of same Suv and trucks ? Probably Dodge will be euthanized given reliance of full size V8 cars that are a lead anchor on corporate fuel economy. Unlikely that Stellantis has the technology to produce battery powered performance full size sedans anytime soon.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    The only way Dodge survives is to expanded their lineup to crossovers and suvs.

  • avatar
    rw33

    My opinion…
    For Dodge, move the Charger and Challenger to a new platform. It needs to be lighter and adaptable for batteries. The Alfa platform would be appropriate but not for huge V8s as has been said. Sadly the V8 is on the way out and I think they’re milking it as long as they can with the current platform. Next, a 2row crossover that directly goes against the Chevy Blazer and Ford’s “Mustang” electric cuv. I don’t know if it’s worth having a new Durango with the Grand Cherokee L. Lastly, bring back the Caravan (not grand). Euro platform, battery capable and foreign market friendly. Plenty of ways to make a minivan sporty for those who have to bite the bullet and get one.
    For Chrysler, stay the course with the Pacifica. Drop the Voyager but apply the name to a 3row crossover. The 300 either can be a new version on the platform for the new Charger. Or it comes back as Chrysler’s electric flagship with the same buzz it had in 2005. Finally, bring the Portal concept to reality.
    Those are my hopes but we’ll see what actually happens.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • FreedMike: 3.5% of the U.S. population equals 11.55 million. If 10% are in the market for a car at any given time,...
  • JMII: “if humans were truly rational many Ridgelines, Mavericks, and Santa Cruz would be sold.” For sure....
  • SCE to AUX: Nothing wrong with this. Actually, their product is just following the auto industry trend.
  • ToolGuy: • On the extra credit point, this results in a perfectly flat raised ‘floor’ for the interior...
  • FreedMike: For the record, if some guy with an elephant lapel pin handed me a bottle of water on a hot day, the only...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

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