CarSpyShots
Quick Member Login:
Forgot password?
Forum Statistics:
Forum Members:
Total Threads:
Total Posts:


There are users
currently browsing forums.
  FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #281  
Old 08-15-2017, 03:29 PM
Crash Crash is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,920
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by swizzle View Post

Geely products have also benefitted as well because Volvo isn't just engineering Volvos these days. Thus, it really IS about Chinese quality control when you think about it. Volvo is Chinese and it has had a profound effect on Geely's other products.

.
Some of their designs have become quite handsome as well. And I'm hearing improving things on their QC.
Reply With Quote
  #282  
Old 08-16-2017, 07:45 AM
disap.ed's Avatar
disap.ed disap.ed is offline
CSS Veteran
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,008
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by swizzle View Post
That's the marketing BS that Jaguar/Land Rover and Volvo have used and it was necessary to fling that BS due to racism toward the cultures from which Tata and Geely come. Neither company bought a hobby and willy nilly poured cash into it no questions asked. The Chinese are NOT that stupid. Furthermore, to assume that the Chinese were incapable of transforming Volvo and that Geely had nothing to bring to the table and had to be hands off so Volvo could do show the feckless Chinese how it's done is just more bigotry talking.

Geely products have also benefitted as well because Volvo isn't just engineering Volvos these days. Thus, it really IS about Chinese quality control when you think about it. Volvo is Chinese and it has had a profound effect on Geely's other products.
All I said is that you don't magically solve problems with QC, because the days where you "checked" the quality and scrapped all the bad parts are long gone, nowadays you have to develop both product and processes to "produce" the quality, anything else is not sustainable. This doesn't come over night and of course Geely (resp. Tata) have to give their companies the ressources to develop this level of quality and as you said the engineering is done in Europe and of course Volvo itself is also evolving with additional models. And I am not accusing asian companies of being dumb, but it is just a fact that they didn't have the know-how, how to build european grade / premium cars before they bought Volvo resp. JLR. It is a win-win really.
Reply With Quote
  #283  
Old 08-24-2017, 09:35 PM
Crash Crash is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,920
Default

Is this part of the 5-year plan? Sheesh. Must be tough to sell Dodge when you have these types of headlines.

https://www.autoblog.com/2017/08/24/...astrophic-oil/
Reply With Quote
  #284  
Old 08-24-2017, 09:45 PM
pjl35's Avatar
pjl35 pjl35 is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,208
Default

Besides Jeep, FCA just needs to die already.
__________________
"In three words, I can sum up everything I have learned about life; it goes on." -- Robert Frost
Reply With Quote
  #285  
Old 08-25-2017, 10:37 AM
Levi Levi is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 489
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pjl35 View Post
Besides Jeep, FCA just needs to die already.

I see nothing about Jeep. Only one real off-road car, which needs to be transported on a trailer, because it brakes down.
Reply With Quote
  #286  
Old 08-25-2017, 12:45 PM
Crash Crash is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,920
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pjl35 View Post
Besides Jeep, FCA just needs to die already.
I disagree. There is SO MUCH potential in Dodge, Chrysler and Ram. It's crazy how much is possible. Problem is they're starved for products....Dodge has had one new car since they were taken over, Chrysler 2 new ones. They were taken over, what 2008? It's beyond embarrassing. The FCA board of directors should be absolutely ashamed of themselves.
Reply With Quote
  #287  
Old 08-25-2017, 01:48 PM
swizzle's Avatar
swizzle swizzle is offline
Raconteur
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bakersfield
Posts: 24,011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pjl35 View Post
Besides Jeep, FCA just needs to die already.
Ram is also a big money maker for FCA. Jeep and Ram are what's worth selling off.
Reply With Quote
  #288  
Old 08-25-2017, 02:48 PM
pjl35's Avatar
pjl35 pjl35 is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crash View Post
I disagree. There is SO MUCH potential in Dodge, Chrysler and Ram. It's crazy how much is possible. Problem is they're starved for products....Dodge has had one new car since they were taken over, Chrysler 2 new ones. They were taken over, what 2008? It's beyond embarrassing. The FCA board of directors should be absolutely ashamed of themselves.
How many years have we been saying exactly what you just posted though? Sooner or later you have to cut your losses...that potential is rotting away each day there aren't new models.

Not only would they need new products, which seems highly unlikely at this point, they would also need a MASSIVE strategy to regain a stronghold in the market. It's one thing to have a good product, but another for people to even consider your brand when buying that new product.

Even if a new 200, Journey, etc. debuted tomorrow, no one would even have Chrysler or Dodge on their list of brands to shop because they've been in the shadows for so long.
__________________
"In three words, I can sum up everything I have learned about life; it goes on." -- Robert Frost
Reply With Quote
  #289  
Old 08-25-2017, 03:13 PM
Crash Crash is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,920
Default

Oh - I absolutely agree with that! It would not be easy.

When Sergio FIRST took over Dodge / Chrysler / Jeep - he KNEW that there were brand issues, and they needed to address them w/ quality, attractive and competitive products. But - they set unrealistic expectations and delivered average products at best. Had they delivered on the above - those brands would be in much different places right now. But they didn't. They tried to take an easy route, made poor investment choices and the brands are in Hospice care as a result.

However, people wrote off Chrysler in the 80's - then came the K-Car and Caravan.

People wrote off Chrysler in the 90's - then came Intrepid (which was a great product for its time); note I said great - not perfect.

People wrote off Chrysler in the early 2000's - then came the original 300.

I'll also note that people wrote off Hyundai / Kia as Japanese wannabe's; and look at them now. People wrote off Ford in 2006 as a 'truck only' company; look at them now (although they could be doing more - but that's coming) and people wrote off GM post bankruptcy; and GM has some AMAZING products.

There is zero reason for a company to not buy them, invest in products and benefit from the rewards. Chrysler needs a new 300 (the only product in that portfolio with a modicum of value), CUV, compact CUV. Dodge needs a new Journey, a compact Journey and new Charger / Challenger - those things alone would get these brands back on a shopping list.
Reply With Quote
  #290  
Old 08-25-2017, 11:30 PM
swizzle's Avatar
swizzle swizzle is offline
Raconteur
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bakersfield
Posts: 24,011
Default

VW would have been a logical choice. VW desperately needs Jeep and Ram for its product portfolio and Skoda could have replaced Chrysler or been rebadged as Chryslers.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:40 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Black Falcon Media Group Oy