Comments on: Chrysler kills re-badged counterpart to Dodge Journey

By: jackjimturkey

jackjimturkey — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 17:05:45 +0000

gbb: the Microbus has personality. can’t say that about many crossovers.

Johnnyc: When a canadian speaks of an “awful winter,” that carries some weight!

mazdaman: I rented a breeze once, and the thing was so dysfunctional I was glad to turn it in and get back in my Civic.

Chrysler needs to dump sebring sedan and Stratus, and later come up with a completely new commuter coffin

By: mazdaman

mazdaman — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 14:46:01 +0000

johnnycanuck:
I definitely agree with you about Chrysler’s situation before Daimler sank their teeth into them and sucked the very life out of them. Chrysler was far more innovative and produced far more attractive vehicles before the takeover by Daimler (except for the current generation 300, Charger, and Magnum). I did think that they played it a little safe with the 2001-2006 Sebring/Stratus until I saw the 2007 Sebring. The 2007 Sebring made the previous generation Sebring/Stratus look like understated beauty queens. The biggest complaint I had about the previous generation Sebring/Stratus and first generation Cirrus/Stratus/Breeze is that Chrysler did not do enough to differentiate them. They fixed the problem by making the current generation Sebring and Avenger look completely different from each other; that’s about all they got right with these two cars (although I think the Avenger’s exterior styling is superior to the Sebring’s design, but that’s not saying much).

I’m am anxiously waiting to see what Chrysler LLC’s products are like under the guidance of Cerberus. I hope to see desirable, class leading, brand appropriate vehicles at each division and no repeats of past mistakes. I know it will be a while before we see this, but it will be worth the wait if they do it right.

By: johnnycanuck

johnnycanuck — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 05:48:46 +0000

For what it matters, I purchased one of the last ’06 Sebring Touring sedans available in Western Canada the minute I set eyes on the ’07. In fact, I went out of my way to get the ’06. It was December and it took 4 weeks to get the car from Edmonton to Vancouver because of the awful winter we had last year. The previous generation Sebring was the last of Chrysler’s cab-forward philosophy and as I recall one automotive journalist remark upon seeing the ’07 Sebring ” does anybody remember when Chryslers were lower and longer?” By the way, one year later, I grow increasingly fond of my ’06 everytime I see an ’07 Sebring sedan ( or Avenger for that matter } go by.

Chrysler has lost it’s way. My “toy” is a mint, totally stock ’95 Neon DOHC coupe. I can still run rings around any new normally aspirated “pocket rocket” anyone can put out 12 years later. There is nothing in the current Mopar lineup that I would want to buy and have to live with on a daily basis. Hemis are nice but with oil approching $100 a barrel….

A word to the new owners of Chrysler: please remember that only a decade or so ago you were the most profitable car company on the planet offering some of the most satisfying vehicles the “common man” could afford and enjoy.

And once you’ve got that sorted out, go get those German cocksuckers that burned your ass and build something that will shove it right up theirs.

By: global_lightning

global_lightning — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 02:34:50 +0000

Journey? Tony Soprano’s next car (after the ‘Lade)
DON’T STOP, BELIEEEEVIN..

By: benny02gt

benny02gt — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 00:41:17 +0000

Mazdaman,
I hope under the new CEO leadership we’ll start seeing some great new models coming from Chrysler. He claimed himself in knowing what the consumer wants. We’ll see about that as time goes on. The PT Cruiser and the Magnum were nice cars. I think they were cut due to the poor sales.

By: gbb

gbb — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 00:09:36 +0000

jackjimturkey…….a ’67 VW Micro Bus is sweeter than any crossover I have seen so far.

My personal taste leans toward my 300 SRT8. I’m happy with the fact that few people like them. I only care that I like mine. I dont want it to ever become “Camryish”.

By: mazdaman

mazdaman — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 23:51:55 +0000

benny02gt:
Thanks for the update. Out of the four vehicles listed, I would miss the Sebring sedan much less than the other three. The PT Cruiser could still have a future if Chrysler would redesign a slightly more upscale, larger version on a FWD midsize platform (the “PT” designation would need to go). The Magnum’s demise is sad, but I guess it needs to go if sales are not there. The Pacifica worries me because the Chrysler brand will be out of the hot crossover segment when it’s gone. People will not gravitate towards the Aspen or Town & Country for a people mover, they will move on to another company’s product.

By: benny02gt

benny02gt — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 22:32:00 +0000

to Mazdaman,

Here is the info I got from wards:

The Chrysler Pacifica cross/utility vehicle will be among the first to go, Ward’s learns. Other media reports suggest the Dodge Magnum and Chrysler PT Cruiser CUVs are in peril, along with the Chrysler Sebring midsize sedan.

to Tom F__k,
I don’t live on this site if I’m missed last week’s news…What struck a cord is this new CEO is not wasting any time…

By: jackjimturkey

jackjimturkey — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 22:16:19 +0000

gbb: what would you have me drive?

By: TomF

TomF — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 17:53:35 +0000

Bewnny02gt wrote:

“I read an article from WardAuto.com on several other Chyrsler/Dodge vehicles that may be killed off.

Here is the list:
Chrysler Pacifica
Dodge Magnum
Chrysler PT Cruiser
Chrysler Sebring….”

Ah, Benny, they announced they were killing the Pacifica, Magnum and PT convertible last week already.

By: mazdaman

mazdaman — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 16:47:10 +0000

I respect Bob Nardelli and what he is trying to accomplish. Chrysler was in a real mess when Cerberus took over the reigns from Daimler. The question I have to ask is why in the world did anyone at Chrysler or Daimler put a stop to the madness long before now? I mean it shouldn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that people really don’t want vehicles with ugly, awkward exterior designs, interiors made from cheap, Rubbermaid quality materials, outdated powertrain technology, or questionable reliability and quality. Anyone in charge of a car company should know and understand this. I don’t view Nardelli as a genius for knowing this, it’s just plain old fashioned common sense. For some reason, it seems that common sense was rare at Chrysler when Daimler was calling the shots.

By: SS4LIFE

SS4LIFE — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 15:18:03 +0000

Yeah Chrysler is doing a major overhaul on their lineup it seems, and with their current plant capacity and models that aren’t selling as well as they used to I see why they may have to be making the model cuts, well that and to make way for the newer models. I didn’t hear that they were killing off the Chrysler Sebring? Didn’t they just re-design it? Benny02gt you sure that wasn’t the Chrysler Crossfire on the list and not the Sebring? I thought it was the crossfire, anyways yeah Culley you make a good point. “Because Chevy’s dealer network is probably larger than GMC, Saturn, Buick combined. It will be the cheapest and will drive volume.” I’m sure there will be as many of these driving on the road as it’s sisters. I was just trying to make the point that they don’t suffer the same fate as the Lambda minivans that Chevy, Pontiac, Saturn, and Buick had.

By: benny02gt

benny02gt — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 14:10:05 +0000

I read an article from WardAuto.com on several other Chyrsler/Dodge vehicles that may be killed off.

Here is the list:
Chrysler Pacifica
Dodge Magnum
Chrysler PT Cruiser
Chrysler Sebring

The decision maker behind this is from the new CEO of Chrysler Bob Nardelli. He quoted in the article he has “a feel for what consumers like.” He is the former CEO of HomeDepot. I think he is off to a good start…

By: Culley

Culley — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 13:10:17 +0000

“GM so far has had success with their Lambda based vehicles and I like the Acadia and the Outlook. But I agree that coming out with a Chevy version might be too much. You think they wold have learned with Buick, Pontiac, Chevy’s last minivans.”

Why are they coming out with a Chevy version??

Because Chevy’s dealer network is probably larger than GMC, Saturn, Buick combined. It will be the cheapest and will drive volume.

By: Mach

Mach — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 04:41:09 +0000

Good move Chrysler.
And that’s not even sarcasm!

By: CarStar

CarStar — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 03:28:57 +0000

Chryco is better off not having too much product overlap. Yet Chrysler division should have a luxury
SUV to stay competitive with Buick and others in the
segment. Perhaps they could contract with Mitsubishi for a version of the Endeavor- this would be different
than any Jeep or Dodge. Better yet, why doesn’t Mitsubishi leave America and just let Chrysler market
their cars as before? The Lancer would fill a gap in
the Dodge lineup and the Outlander could replace the
Nitro- leaving Jeep with its own Liberty again. The Galant could replace the next generation Sebring/ Avenger twins. Still another possibility-a re-styled and revised Jeep Commander could join the Chrysler lineup and Jeep could keep its ever popular Grand Cherokee at the top of the ladder…then again, Chrysler could merge with Renault-Nissan and sell some version of the next generation Nissan Pathfinder (not the ugly Murano)…the possibilities are endless…

By: SS4LIFE

SS4LIFE — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 01:22:47 +0000

I think the CUV is a great alternative to the minivan, and for those who have families and need a people mover, compared to their minivan counterpart and with the exception of the Chrysler Town and Country/Dodge Caravan as far as the domestics go the minivan is dead. But what would you rather be seen driving in a Dodge Journey or a Buick Enclave or a Honda Odysee? If I was in the market for a CUV I’d buy an Enclave for sure just as Jackjimturkey says he will be buying, but just like everything CUV’s aren’t for everyone especially myself, but I’d own a CUV before I’d resort to buy a minivan. The CUV is the alternative to that.

By: cookie4me

cookie4me — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 01:14:19 +0000

JJT, I realize the current uplander isn’t on a Lambda platform but they were developing one and killed it off earlier this year or late last year. It was suppose to be built at the Spring Hill, TN plant and is why that plant is sitting idle while they develop and tool it for the Chevy Crossover. I reckon GM only had enough mojo to go around at the same time.

By: gbb

gbb — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 00:29:58 +0000

Crossovers all suck, dont care who makes them. Useless crapmobiles made for morons that blow with the marketing wind. Cant wait till this stupid craze is over.

By: jackjimturkey

jackjimturkey — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 00:19:59 +0000

The designs are terrible to great, the engineering is terrible to great. Not sure they have any vehicles at the upper end of both

By: tripleonefive

tripleonefive — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 23:14:51 +0000

the styling is “wack”? OOOOK. Its just a K car lol
The designs are great but the engineering in the vehile is questionable. The interiors are hell and Chrysler will have to step them up. The leather in the 300 doesnt even feel like leather its more like vinyl. Even the leatherette in most BMW’s is better than the so called “leather” in certain Chrysler products

By: CA36GTP

CA36GTP — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 22:33:27 +0000

JJT: I wouldn’t even call Chrysler faux-luxury. It’s just plain crap.

By: jackjimturkey

jackjimturkey — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 22:21:09 +0000

1115: they already make some “good” vehicles — few and far between. the problem is, nobody wants to buy them, because the styling is wack, the prices aren’t realistic, or they’ve become too common.

By: tripleonefive

tripleonefive — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 21:17:12 +0000

I don’t know if this is a good idea. Chrysler definitely needs a crossover but maybe its better to come up with one from scratch. I commend them for not doing a GM and re badging the same vehicle over 4 times but they need to separate Dodge from Chrysler so this is a positive.
Cerebrus will bring Chrysler to where it needs to be I say 5 years and Chrysler wil be cleaned up. After that they can make some good designs and another 5 years thyey can prove that they are making good vehicles

By: jackjimturkey

jackjimturkey — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 21:10:32 +0000

Good.
Now kill the journey.

R-Head “Excremento,” should have crap-wheel drive.

94SS, SS4Life: So right. I’d have made 2 lambdas. The enclave (which I’m about to own) and the Outlook.

Hey, I saw a Cadillac Cimarron today.

planetdrive: how has Chrysler lost the minivan battle? I drove 5 week before last, and the GC was the best.

Cookie: the Uplander is an A-Body, not a Lambda

toto72: The aspen was stillborn. It would’ve been a loser anyway, but when it got named “Aspen,” (http://carblueprints.narod.ru/images/dodge/dodge-aspen-wagon-1977.gif) it became completely doomed.
I test-drove a Pacifica, but it didn’t really work for me.

Gary: Please, no new Cordoba!

GA36GTP: Chrysler has to go down to compete with Honda’s faux-luxury division. Chrysler has become more faux-luxury than luxury. So has Lincoln.

mazdaman: how about bringing back the Prowler as a Chrysler?

Zo6ified: I agree with you.

By: Z06ified

Z06ified — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 20:40:38 +0000

They should just kill the Journey while they’re at it. That thing has a hideous interior, ugly outside, and a poor powertrain. It really has nothing going for it other than reasonable price, and it’s going to get slaughtered by the competition.

They should have spent the resources to update and redo the Pacifica, which has a defined place in the market, and has a good reputation and name for itself, and was well received by customers from the beginning.

By: mazdaman

mazdaman — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 20:04:39 +0000

I don’t believe that resurrecting Plymouth would be a solution to Chrysler LLC’s problems. Right now, the company has three ailing, out of focus brands. It doesn’t need to revive an additional one when the current ones are in such bad condition. Chrysler LLC needs to work on repositioning/redefining/separating their current brands, creating attractive, well built exterior/interior designs consisting of upgraded materials, and engineering competitive powertrains and alternative fuel technologies. This is enough to keep Chrysler LLC busy without bringing Plymouth back from the dead.

By: mazdaman

mazdaman — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 19:56:13 +0000

If I view this news from a positive angle, at least Chrysler will not be selling another badge engineered Dodge clone. The thought of seeing a Dodge Journey with a Chysler grille and headlights, grooved hood, and upside down taillights makes me want to hurl.

On a negative note, the Chrysler brand now does not have a product in the crossover segment (currently the hottest segment in the market). They are left to do battle in the people mover market with a pair of pitiful badge engineered Dodge clones that operate in shrinking segments (Town & Country – minivan, Aspen -traditional SUV). Although the last thing the Chrysler brand needed was a rebadged Dodge Journey, they also didn’t need to completely abandon the crossover segment entirely.

I hope Chrysler LLC is working as diligently at creating/engineering/designing desirable, class leading products as they are at amputating rotten ones.

By: TomF

TomF — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 19:06:48 +0000

“Reasons for the cancellation of JZ49 are not clear”? Like hell; they’re clear as a bell. Somebody with a brain at Cerberus compared this vehicle to the Lambdas, the new Highlander, the new Murano and the Mazdas and said: we’re going to get killed backing this piece of junk in this segment.

The Journey is an also-ran even before it’s launched. AND it cannibalizes the Jeep/Nitro/etc. business. Not to mention Chryco’s own minis.

It’s disgraceful that this company does not have ONE convincing crossover/wagon, but about a dozen halfhearted, ill-conceived SUVs.

By: CA36GTP

CA36GTP — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 18:38:19 +0000

Plymouth should come back as a competitor to the new Pontiac that’s *supposed* to be coming of age with the G8. A Plymouth performance division would be HOT.

Dodge would be kind of a Chevy with many entry-level cars, plus the halo Viper (like Corvette with Chevy). Just don’t bloat the line-up as much.

Jeep is obviously a truck brand (but NO grocery getters, leave those to Dodge)

Chrysler should try to take itself upscale to compete with Cadillac, German manufacturers, and faux-luxury brands like Acura.

By: GARY

GARY — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 18:34:50 +0000

Bring back the Cordoba, Newport and New Yorker!! Bring back Plymouth and bring back the Plymouth Cricket!!…..yes there was a Plymouth Cricket in the early 70′s.

By: CA36GTP

CA36GTP — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 18:34:14 +0000

Chrysler’s namesake brand suffers from the same flawed logic as GM with Chevy: that their preferred brand has to have one of EVERYTHING. Chevrolet’s line-up is immensely bloated, albeit slightly better after the discontinuing of the Monte Carlo. Chrysler is not so bad, but a little bit of trimming could go a long way.

By: LamborghiniZ

LamborghiniZ — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 18:26:15 +0000

Look even the domestic fans should be able to see how cheap the Journey is. Look at the interior shots. Look at the vehicle itself. It’s like the Dodge Avenger of CUV’s. Blech.

By: purdue

purdue — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 18:17:58 +0000

but yet the new minis are garnering great word of mouth. One journalist also said it was the best car period for $30k.

By: cookie4me

cookie4me — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 18:17:44 +0000

Planet, I think they do and that is one of the reasons why this program was killed. They should delay the Dodge version as well since it is a hideous bland attempt at a crossover. You need to wait at least 3 years to see revamped product from a Cerebus owned Chrysler. Unfortunately but predictably most of Chrysler’s launches have been failures for bland or quirky styling (journey and sebring), poor fit and finish (caliber), and dull interiors (magnum, etc.).

The only reason GM is making a Lambda crossover for Chevrolet is because they killed off Chevrolet’s Lambda based minivan. You can’t leave Chevrolet hanging w/out a people mover. I wish they had actually stuck with the minivan version because that would differentiate it from the rest of the Lambdas.

By: toto72

toto72 — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 18:16:14 +0000

I think killing the Pacifica was not the best move in the first place. Chrysler should have focused on re-designing it and making it more competitive and more attractive to potential customers… I’m not a big fan of CUVs but Chrysler needs one more than a luxury SUV like the Aspen.

By: SS4LIFE

SS4LIFE — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 18:16:01 +0000

yeah, Chrysler doesn’t need another cross over, however since they are killing off the Pacifica (which I always liked) this will leave a gap open in their line up. GM so far has had success with their Lambda based vehicles and I like the Acadia and the Outlook. But I agree that coming out with a Chevy version might be too much. You think they wold have learned with Buick, Pontiac, Chevy’s last minivans.

By: planet_drive

planet_drive — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 18:09:08 +0000

I don’t understand why they no longer build the short wheel base version of the Caravan anymore. The previous generation caravan was much better looking and more sporty than this bland box. Chrysler has lost the minivan battle and it doesn’t look like the new owners of Chrysler have any desire to build beautiful cars anymore.

By: 94SS

94SS — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 17:56:08 +0000

I wish GM would also thin out many of the identical platforms across the different divisions. I like the new Lambdas but feel they are making too many versions…especially with the Chevy coming as well.

By: RicardoHead

RicardoHead — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 17:49:28 +0000

NO NO NO NO NO ! ! ! ! !

Just come out with a third version of the exact same thing and call it the Eagle Excremento!

By: Scarface03

Scarface03 — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 17:47:18 +0000

Good move, Chrysler. It seems that most of the Big 3 slapped different badges on ever car and truck out of some knee-jerk reflex. We don’t know what Chrysler’s plan is yet, but it sounds like they have one.

By: R1GHT30U5

R1GHT30U5 — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 17:33:33 +0000

“Reasons for the cancellation of JZ49 are not clear”
Looks pretty damn clear to me. Just what the NA market needs… another crappy Xover.

By: ///m

///m — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 17:28:08 +0000

Very good move, they dont need a Chrysler version of everything