Comments on: Analysts say Chrysler won’t survive with or without bailout funds http://www.egmcartech.com/2008/12/10/analysts-say-chrysler-wont-survive-with-or-without-bailout-funds/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=analysts-say-chrysler-wont-survive-with-or-without-bailout-funds Auto News, Car Reviews, Live Auto Show Coverage Mon, 13 Feb 2012 17:44:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Timothy http://www.egmcartech.com/2008/12/10/analysts-say-chrysler-wont-survive-with-or-without-bailout-funds/comment-page-1/#comment-620098 Timothy Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:38:51 +0000 http://www.egmcartech.com/?p=28919#comment-620098 If Chrysler offered vehicles with mass appeal they wouldn't be in such a dire state. In the mid 90's Chrysler was the innovator of the big three with their cab forward LH cars. The LH cars offered handsome looks, gobs of interior space, fuel efficient motors at a realistic price. Chrysler abandoned that intelligent design philosophy in favor of producing producing gas guzzling, overpowered "hemi's", rear wheel drive and 4000+ curb weights beginning with the 2005 Chrysler 300, Dodge Charger and Magnum. Ok, so these cars sold pretty well at first. Now, nobody wants them! The Magnum was cancelled due to paltry sales. Chrysler's problem lies on backward thinking. Rear wheel drive and big V8's. Possibly the most glaring error in Chrysler's current timeline is the 2009 Challenger. What the f**** were they thinking?!!! Clap out an overweight, overpowered vehicle with 40 year old styling that attains horrible economy. Is this a vehicle for the masses? Hello? This is 2008 not 1969! I believe Damlier is to blame to a degree for Chrysler's downfall. Chrysler had the right idea with it's LH cars in the mid 90's. They really should've adhered to that design philosophy instead of 60's thinking with V8's and rear wheel drive. Toyota and Honda have stayed true to their philosophy: build a quality, modern product that's fuel efficient and people will buy it. it require a "miracle" for Chrysler to stand proud like they did in the 90's. If Chrysler offered vehicles with mass appeal they wouldn't be in such a dire state. In the mid 90's Chrysler was the innovator of the big three with their cab forward LH cars. The LH cars offered handsome looks, gobs of interior space, fuel efficient motors at a realistic price. Chrysler abandoned that intelligent design philosophy in favor of producing producing gas guzzling, overpowered “hemi's”, rear wheel drive and 4000+ curb weights beginning with the 2005 Chrysler 300, Dodge Charger and Magnum. Ok, so these cars sold pretty well at first. Now, nobody wants them! The Magnum was cancelled due to paltry sales. Chrysler's problem lies on backward thinking. Rear wheel drive and big V8's. Possibly the most glaring error in Chrysler's current timeline is the 2009 Challenger. What the f**** were they thinking?!!! Clap out an overweight, overpowered vehicle with 40 year old styling that attains horrible economy. Is this a vehicle for the masses? Hello? This is 2008 not 1969! I believe Damlier is to blame to a degree for Chrysler's downfall. Chrysler had the right idea with it's LH cars in the mid 90's. They really should've adhered to that design philosophy instead of 60's thinking with V8's and rear wheel drive. Toyota and Honda have stayed true to their philosophy: build a quality, modern product that's fuel efficient and people will buy it. it require a “miracle” for Chrysler to stand proud like they did in the 90's.

]]> By: Timothy http://www.egmcartech.com/2008/12/10/analysts-say-chrysler-wont-survive-with-or-without-bailout-funds/comment-page-1/#comment-613300 Timothy Tue, 23 Dec 2008 08:38:51 +0000 http://www.egmcartech.com/?p=28919#comment-613300 If Chrysler offered vehicles with mass appeal they wouldn't be in such a dire state. In the mid 90's Chrysler was the innovator of the big three with their cab forward LH cars. The LH cars offered handsome looks, gobs of interior space, fuel efficient motors at a realistic price. Chrysler abandoned that intelligent design philosophy in favor of producing producing gas guzzling, overpowered "hemi's", rear wheel drive and 4000+ curb weights beginning with the 2005 Chrysler 300, Dodge Charger and Magnum. Ok, so these cars sold pretty well at first. Now, nobody wants them! The Magnum was cancelled due to paltry sales. Chrysler's problem lies on backward thinking. Rear wheel drive and big V8's. Possibly the most glaring error in Chrysler's current timeline is the 2009 Challenger. What the f**** were they thinking?!!! Clap out an overweight, overpowered vehicle with 40 year old styling that attains horrible economy. Is this a vehicle for the masses? Hello? This is 2008 not 1969! I believe Damlier is to blame to a degree for Chrysler's downfall. Chrysler had the right idea with it's LH cars in the mid 90's. They really should've adhered to that design philosophy instead of 60's thinking with V8's and rear wheel drive. Toyota and Honda have stayed true to their philosophy: build a quality, modern product that's fuel efficient and people will buy it. it require a "miracle" for Chrysler to stand proud like they did in the 90's. If Chrysler offered vehicles with mass appeal they wouldn't be in such a dire state. In the mid 90's Chrysler was the innovator of the big three with their cab forward LH cars. The LH cars offered handsome looks, gobs of interior space, fuel efficient motors at a realistic price. Chrysler abandoned that intelligent design philosophy in favor of producing producing gas guzzling, overpowered “hemi's”, rear wheel drive and 4000+ curb weights beginning with the 2005 Chrysler 300, Dodge Charger and Magnum. Ok, so these cars sold pretty well at first. Now, nobody wants them! The Magnum was cancelled due to paltry sales. Chrysler's problem lies on backward thinking. Rear wheel drive and big V8's. Possibly the most glaring error in Chrysler's current timeline is the 2009 Challenger. What the f**** were they thinking?!!! Clap out an overweight, overpowered vehicle with 40 year old styling that attains horrible economy. Is this a vehicle for the masses? Hello? This is 2008 not 1969! I believe Damlier is to blame to a degree for Chrysler's downfall. Chrysler had the right idea with it's LH cars in the mid 90's. They really should've adhered to that design philosophy instead of 60's thinking with V8's and rear wheel drive. Toyota and Honda have stayed true to their philosophy: build a quality, modern product that's fuel efficient and people will buy it. it require a “miracle” for Chrysler to stand proud like they did in the 90's.

]]> By: Bobmarley http://www.egmcartech.com/2008/12/10/analysts-say-chrysler-wont-survive-with-or-without-bailout-funds/comment-page-1/#comment-613302 Bobmarley Thu, 11 Dec 2008 11:33:27 +0000 http://www.egmcartech.com/?p=28919#comment-613302 Exactly zermatt,<br><br>If anyone is going to be paying for their bailout it should be the people that own them (Cerberus)! Not the government!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<br><br>Is this really that hard to understand? Exactly zermatt,

If anyone is going to be paying for their bailout it should be the people that own them (Cerberus)! Not the government!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is this really that hard to understand?

]]> By: zermatt http://www.egmcartech.com/2008/12/10/analysts-say-chrysler-wont-survive-with-or-without-bailout-funds/comment-page-1/#comment-613301 zermatt Wed, 10 Dec 2008 23:38:30 +0000 http://www.egmcartech.com/?p=28919#comment-613301 CSM is only saying what Cerberus already knows.<br><br>If Cerberus thought that Chysler was worth anything they would be spending their own money.<br><br>Cerberus knows that it is time to kill Chrysler with a stick. They just want the goverment to do it. CSM is only saying what Cerberus already knows.

If Cerberus thought that Chysler was worth anything they would be spending their own money.

Cerberus knows that it is time to kill Chrysler with a stick. They just want the goverment to do it.

]]>