Thu
Nov 05 2009

Chrysler - have we seen it all before?

Hilton Holloway
Now Fiat’s plans for Chrysler have revealed, it’s worth pondering just how remarkably similar Chrysler’s history is to Rover’s. 

The American carmaker built its reputation on advanced engineering at an affordable price (as did Rover in the 1960s) but suffered a near-death experience in 1979 before being bailed out by the US government. 
  
It prospered for a while through the compact K-car, MPVs and, in 1990s, innovative styling strong sales at its Jeep SUV division.

Like Rover, Chrysler was also swallowed up – and then spat out – by a German carmaker (Daimler rather than BMW). 
  
But while Rover cars – shorn of its Land Rover division - struggled on as an independent before succumbing, the Chrysler Group gets a chance to live another day as part of the Fiat Group. 

What’s most worrying about the Chrysler revival plan is the move towards what’s called the ‘premium mainstream’. This Bermuda Triangle of a niche has been long searched for by mass carmakers. 

If only they could convince enough punters to pay extra for a ritzy car that’s based on quality mainstream engineering, they could build a very handy business. 

That’s what Rover bosses tried do in the 1980s and 1990s using Honda technology wrapped in the ‘above all it’s a Rover’ skin. BMW tried it with the all-new but retro 75.  

Renault also tried to shift upmarket a decade ago with the Vel Satis and bustle-back Megane. Ford is trying it in the US with Lincoln and Fiat has been trying with Fiat-based Lancias for a couple of decades. 

Truth is, ‘premium mainstream’ has never busted out of being a very small market. Lancia still sells around 120,000 cars and Rover died on its feet after the 75 failed to set the European market on fire. Most buyers either want a well-priced mass-market car or something from a blue chip premium brand. 

I think there are two problems for the new, ritzy, Chrysler. First, very few brands – aside from bargain basement stuff - prosper without some sporting intent (its incredible that Lancia is ignoring its unrivalled sporting heritage). 

Secondly, the appeal of chrome slivers is dying as the car buying population increasingly votes for something with a youthful twist. Even old men don’t buy old men’s cars, as jaguar will tell you. 

What’s really ironic about the new Chrysler being tied up with Lancia is that Chrysler and Rover came within an ace of being bundled together in the late 1990s. 

My understanding is that BMW wanted rid of Rover cars and tried to convince Chrysler to take the brand over, along with the new 75 and Oxford plant. Chrysler was also looking for a European production site for the Voyager.

The two brands looked like a good fit. BMW and Chrysler even did a deal that saw a Chrysler engine fitted to the new Mini. 

When BMW executives awoke in May 1998 to find Chrysler had jumped into bed with Daimler – and realized there was no Plan B for Rover. A glitzy retro car which then stuttered onto the market…

Sign-in or register to add your comments

About Hilton Holloway

Has two product design degrees and used to design mountain bikes. Realised that cars were a lot more interesting in 1990, and has been writing about them ever since.

Comments

Uncle Mellow November 5, 2009 11:30 PM

"That’s what Rover bosses tried do in the 1980s and 1990s using Honda technology wrapped in the ‘above all it’s a Rover’ skin."

Unfortunately these cars lacked Hondas' build quality.

"Most buyers either want a well-priced mass-market car or something from a blue chip premium brand. "

 One could argue that there aren't any "blue chip" brands left anymore , now that both Rolls and Bentley have been swallowed-up by mass-market German manufacturers.

noluddite November 6, 2009 6:27 AM

Hilton, I think you're right on the money. The only modern manufacturer that has pulled off this tactic is Audi, who started as unashamedly VW (although the engineering transfer was initially Audi to VW) and they made their reputation through motorsport with the Quattro. Lancia did the same with the Stratos and the Integrale, and then squandered it. Regarding chrome slivers, did you mention Citroen?

optimal_909 November 6, 2009 8:18 AM

I think the only 'premium mainstream' brand which might do the trick is Volvo, and perhaps Alfa Romeo.

This latest madness from Morchionnie proves that he ignores the fact that you can not build a brand from one day to another - Rome was not built one day either.

He shuffles the cards like crazy, here is a new brand, there we move with another...

This is going to end in tears.

realdriver November 6, 2009 8:21 AM

The first and most important thing these 2 brands need to address is perceived interior quality. This is why the VW group is doing so well. When you're sitting in your car in a traffic jam, it's all that counts. And I'm sorry to say that the perception of Lancia and Chrysler is that they're junk...

No amount of swoopy curves and marketing is going to help them get out of that problem.

Second problem is consistency of the product. The message they're trying to convey has to be in sync with what's on offer. Again, the germans do this best.

TegTypeR November 6, 2009 8:27 AM

The whole column merely fuels the fire that both brands (Lancia and Chrysler) should have been put to rest instead of revived to try and live another day.

richardhead November 6, 2009 8:29 AM

Don't worry about Chrysler and Fiat's involvement in it Hilton. Barry Sotero(AKA Barack Obama), has a popularity problem. His rating figure is sinking faster than any other president's. Mid-term elections are due in 12 months. There is no way he will let Chrysler go down again before the elections. Then there's the large Italian-American vote to think of. What better way to curry favour than bail out Chrysler, with extended cash for clunkers and direct funding, and aide Fiat in the process. Two birds for one stone: Obama's patriotism to the US's Chrysler reconfirmed and the goodwill created with the Eyeties by helping thee company from the olde country.

optimal_909 November 6, 2009 9:27 AM

@richardhead: not quite a representative sample, but seeing the comments on autonews.com I have got the feeling, that a lot of people in the US are not happy with the continous bailout.

Some even dislike the "arrogant" GM and would be happy to let them go under. I think the same applies to Chrysler...

richardhead November 6, 2009 10:08 AM

@optimal, I agree. I was being slightly tongue in cheek, but only very slightly. Obama is in desperate need of support. He's gone from hero to zero in unprecedented quick time. I agree that bailout-itis is killing America, the US taxpayer, by unrepayable govt. debt. However, a desperate man and party will buy votes wherever they can. Besides, when you've bailed out Wall St. and the FIRE(Finance, Insurance(AIG) and Real Estate) part of the US economy with estimated 23 trillion dollars, off the backs of working US taxpayers, since 2007, a few more billion dollars is chickenfeed in the scheme of things. America's going to hell; it's all academic in the end. Sorry to be such a 'gloom-and-doomer'.

HyundaiSmoke November 6, 2009 10:57 AM

Chrome doesnt fly well in Europe, but us Young people demand chrome in the US.  Its great that most brands are now creating a separte line up one for Europe, and One for the US.

No Chrome in the US Market=Cheap, Bland, Conservative.

In Europe its the flip flop opposite.

Hyundai will just Take their place as the makers of mass market low-cost near Luxury vehicles in the US if Chrysler truly does end -up competing with Benz.

Chrysler is leaving a big ass hole in the US market for Hyundai to just walk right on in with their Genesises, Sonatas, Next Gen Upmarket Small cars, etc....  Buick and Acura will also benefit greatly on Chrysler's exit out of Tier 3 Luxury as well.

HyundaiSmoke November 6, 2009 11:10 AM

Yall can say whatever you want but these are the facts.

What goes on here:

Largest trade in for Hyundai Genesis=300C

Largest trade in for Sonata=Sebring

Largest trade in for Accent/Elantra=Pt Criuser.

Chrysler cant compete in fit and finish, fuel eocnomy, or reliability.  They were better as a upper tier luxury maker, in the past.  

The Pt Cruiser is a Horrible and overpriced small car:  

1. Plastics hard as a brick.

2. Handling around corners is as un-poised as the throw of a brick thrower.

3. It breaks down frequently.

4. Its very susceptible to rust in snowy winter climates like here in Ohio.  (everything thats not painted rusts and seizes-up on that car, especially the wheel bolts)

5. It gets *** MPG.

6.  The Seats are uncomfortable.

My Brother Owns one, but once he gets a few Grand saved up he will be looking at Hyundai.

richardhead November 6, 2009 4:06 PM

I've just grasped why Fiat are sending Chrysler up market. News today that more than one in ten Yanks is on skid row. Unofficially, in reality, that's one in five(20%) unemployed after all the stat fiddling. That's depression level. Fiat obviously saw that no working stiff would be able to afford squat so sensibly sent the Chrysler upwards to compete with Jag-wahs, Bimmers and Mercs for the bonused up billionaire banksters of bailed out Wall St.

Notiron November 6, 2009 5:28 PM

The American car industry in the shitter. Who'd have thought it? Oh yes, I remember, they've never made one decent car in their entire existence (and Vauxhall / Opel). We should just stick with Land Rover, Morgan and anything German (including Rolls and Bentley).

fhp11 November 7, 2009 2:57 AM

@ Notiron - What an arrogant comment - you must drive a German car....... They have made plenty of crap cars but plenty of decent cars too past and present.

HyundaiSmoke November 8, 2009 7:47 AM

Chrysler must go upmarket, becuase their prices make it unable to function as a lower tier Luxury make anymore.

Lower Tier:

Why should I get this Sebring that costs $4500 more than the Sonata that's even nicer, and more reliable?

or

Upper Tier:

Why should I get a 300c for $41,000, when I can get a base E class for that price?

Chrysler cant Compete with Hyundai on Price, and they cant compete with Benz in terms of fit and finish.  

Therefore, either Chrysler will have to sell almost every car at a loss to compete with: Hyundai, Subaru, Mazda, Mercury, and Buick.  Or they will have to improve the fit and finish, and sell cars at higher prices to make tons more profit.

HyundaiSmoke November 8, 2009 7:50 AM

Lower Tier American Luxury is getting boring, and I think with the right product Hyundai has a chance to spice that up.

Upper Tier American Luxury is getting boring, and I think with the right product Chrysler can spice that up.

All about Autocar

Newsfeeds

Subscribe to our news with our RSS feeds

Advertise

To advertise with Autocar contact us

Buy our magazines

Discover our titles at themagazineshop.com

Autocar latest issue - cover 8.2.12

NEW ISSUE OUT NOW

FAST, EASY & SECURE
SUBSCRIBE NOW>>