The "Good" Chrysler Thread: Making Vanilla, Vanilla

  • Thread starter YSSMAN
  • 542 comments
  • 61,497 views
okay...this is getting totally annoying

I sympathize with Mopar guys (GM dingalings), AND chevy guys. you want jeep that damn bad that your willing to sacrifice what little bit of money you have left? and risk going under yourself?! for God's sake...that'd leave us with boring old FORDS!

you know what...I'm starting to think we should just get the bleep out of the car business entirely, now. there's no longer any money in it, everybody's bleeding cash, the third world keeps swiping bits and peices of what's left of our companies, jobs are dissolving...

and then the world has the gall to yarp that they're being overloaded with American culture? why are you complaining, you've cleaned us out for jobs and businesses trying to exact revenge for introducing you to hamburgers! </rant>
 
What on earth makes you think GM is only doing this for Jeep? It's been said by numerous analysis that GM is doing, or at least wants to do this, to build equity within their company. Also not to mention knock a huge competitor out of the market.

The US government should buy the and just call in the People's Automotive Group, I mean we are the United Soviet States of America anyways.
 
I'm glad Nissan is at least putting their foot in the door, as I think it'd at least be a better idea than GM raiding and stripping Chrysler of everything. I don't think I could forgive them for doing that.

Unfortunately its a decision to be made more by the people at Cerberus than the people at Chrysler, and ultimately, its hard to say what exactly will happen. Having GM buys in means that, for the most part, Cerberus gets their money back... And then its game over for the Chrysler boys (with the exception of the Vans and likely the Jeep brand). If Nissan buys into Chrysler, picking up the tab left from Daimler-Chrysler, it at least injects a bit of liquidity, and likely gives a small bit of hope that the eventual share of Chrysler under the Nissan umbrella increases with time (who wants to bet there is a sneaky 2005-style GM/FIAT deal brokered?).

Whats left of the people who own Chrysler, I'd think, would be in favor of the Nissan deal. For that matter, I think Nissan would by far have the most to gain by it. Not only would they be able to utilize their North American production facilities, but also their massive R&D force, and if they choose... A dealer network in-tact to possibly drag a few Renaults over just for the hell of it.

...And is it just me, or is it a little freaky that Chrysler could get back in the sack with the French company they destroyed 20 years ago?
 
Last edited:
...And is it just me, or is it a little freaky that Chrysler could get back in the sack with the French company they destroyed 20 years ago?

This time around, it's the French (and, to some extent, Japanese) that will be in charge, though, and, hopefully, that will mean better product. I'm particularly hoping for a decent Fit/Fiesta/Yaris-sized car to come out of it, with an SRT version reminicent of the Clio RS 185....
 
Its all a conspiracy man. Renault just wants the AMC name back. :lol:
Honestly, though, I'm surprised Renault wants into the company again.

Realistically speaking the AMC part likely ain't happening. We (technically) have a Renault here in the States in the form the Nissan Versa. I see the Renault-Nissan deal is more feasable than the GM merger.
 
Realistically speaking the AMC part likely ain't happening. We (technically) have a Renault here in the States in the form the Nissan Versa. I see the Renault-Nissan deal is more feasable than the GM merger.

it's basically a Clio, correct?

and, hang on, sorry for randomly jumping into the topic, but, AMC made the AMX(ultimate stuntcar, IMO), right?
 
it's basically a Clio, correct?

and, hang on, sorry for randomly jumping into the topic, but, AMC made the AMX(ultimate stuntcar, IMO), right?

unfortunatly, AMC was the "yugo" of US market cars. the AMX was, apparently, the only good spot in most of the run. AMC was formed from the Residue of Independants in the US, and promptly went down the tubes after the muscle car era. they only thing they had that was worthy for mermanence is Jeep. unfortunatly, jeep is what everybody fights over :P
 
That's a bit harsh, Sniffs.

AMC was quite a brilliant independent carmaker. Their ugly, quirky hatchback, the Gremlin, actually sold well, simply because it was the largest, most powerful subcompact. I mean, it was a hatchback that could be had with a 5.0L V8. I also think they offered it with the Porsche/Audi "Van Engine" that saw duty in the 924.

The Pacer was also quite forward-thinking, just let down by being perhaps too much so, the Eagle wagon was the Subaru Outback before the Outback was thought of, really sort of the genesis of the "Crossover" SUV. and AMC has names like Hudson and Nash in it's heritage. Hell, James Bond drove a Hornet while chasing a badguy's Matador. Said Matador became a jet airplane. And dont' forget Penske's run with Javelins and Matadors in Trans Am and NASCAR.

As for the Muscle era, you can't forget the handsome Rebel SST and outrageous Machine, the fastback Marlin, and the Hurst SC/Rambler.

The dark spots come from the Renault era, which is ironic that Renault would be Chrysler's savior.
 
unfortunatly, AMC was the "yugo" of US market cars. the AMX was, apparently, the only good spot in most of the run. AMC was formed from the Residue of Independants in the US, and promptly went down the tubes after the muscle car era. they only thing they had that was worthy for mermanence is Jeep.
Ouch. Really. AMC died because every lucky break and great idea that they managed to come up with was ruined by outside influences.
 
I'd agree that its a bit harsh on AMX as well. At one point they did make quite a few really good cars and trucks, but it was poor business decisions that drove them into the ground, not the bad products. One of my favorite cars was the AMC Eagle, the awkward mix of a sedan/wagon on a Jeep chassis, like Jim pointed out, truly a forerunner to the Forrester.

Nevertheless, the differences here between a partnership with AMC/Renault and Chrysler/Nissan-Renault is that there is far more to be gained on both ends than just buying up shares of a competitor. Chrysler will have some liquidity, Nissan-Renault gains production facilities, R&D departments, and a wealth of new platforms at which they can begin to develop new products.

...Lets just hope they stay far, far away from the transmissions...
 
I was thinking of the 70's, when things REALLY started to go down hill. you gotta admit, gremlin and Pacer are in the "fugly" catagory, and the 282 they used in the Eagles was a true POS.

Renault's original screwup, here, with AMC, was what killed them outright, and took the last remaining non-european luxury cars with them...france was the survivor of car wars, then got voted off the island by japan.

to continue the Survivor:Detroit metaphor

Japan picked up the immunity (at least, that's what it feels like), Korea is reaching for the tribe head position. but team america is starving, and GM is barely hanging on to the tribe headship with ford sabotaging away at it while disposing of un-needed products.
 
Our governor is pissed about it too. For the first time since she's been elected I think I actually agree with her, a merger between GM and Chrysler would end up destroying the economy around here and have thousands of jobs cut. Well done Jenny from the Block, well done.
 
Thats why I keep thinking that it won't go through. GM shareholders, GM fans, the Detroit City government, the Michigan State government, and likely the Federal government wouldn't approve of it in the long run.
 
BREAKING NEWS

Wagoner to Tokyo to meet with Toyota management, what is the world coming to?

Word is that they're meeting to discuss having Toyota buy up some assets, share some more development between them... But where do we go for a co-operative or a merger? Could they be spying on VW to make sure that their dominance reigns supreme?
 
I can't imagine what the hell this is about. No way it is a merger. The U.S. Government would never allow it, nor would most Toyota stock holders. I also doubt it is an asset buy up, as I believe Toyota is dumping some of their excess stuff as well.
Its probably something to do with more car sharing (NUMMI style) or something.
 
Perhaps, perhaps not. Either way, if Toyota is buying into a larger portion of GM, and if GM is buying into a larger portion of Toyota, perhaps this is a "truce" of sorts to guarantee survival? I think you're right on the NUMMI deal, I could see GM looking to make a short-term deal to sell redone Corollas as Pontiacs or Chevrolets before the Delta II stuff rolls out (they've placed a hold on all development costs until 2010), and I could see Toyota maybe looking to take notes on or borrow the E-Flex technology for the next Prius.

We'll see.
 
Toyota doesn't need anything from GM, right? This can't be about some fair trade. This is GM selling something to Toyota for price.

Or, this is a bluff. They are pressuring the Chrysler camp, or whoever their partner is this week to get the deal done quicker, and more in GM's favor.
 
I'm quite glad that the Treasury at least managed to see through GM asking for more money was so the Government could have the privilege to give GM more money.
 
Autoblog
...the Treasury was unwilling to give money away for a deal that could potentially result in thousands of lost jobs.

What says thousands of jobs aren't lost anyway though... ?
 
Back