daddyralph7 wrote: I guess your right,i should have know everyone was flocking to own one of there products i guess thats why they have always been third out of the big three.
Your grammatical errors make me wonder how old you are?
In any event, yes Chrysler has introduced many innovations to the automotive industry. Denying that fact is silly.
This topic has strayed far enough I guess. Time will tell us more about the details of the upcoming Nissan Titan/Ram.
surveyorjp wrote: Cerberus is working hard towards cleaning up the mess, and has more work to do. IMO, they should start by improving the interiors that Daimler forced upon Chrysler.
This is the truth. At the Houston auto show this year, I sat in a lot of sedans. Most of the GM cars have drastically improved their interiors - Buick Lacrosse is excellent, along with the new Chevy Malibu and Impala. The Sebring/Avenger interior comfort was, in my opinion, not good.
2004 Ford Freestar 4.2 liter
2003 Jayco Qwest 12A
preserve the Second Amendment
They also introduced...
Intergrated power steering.
Three-speed automatic with torque converter.
Alternators rather than generators.
ABS.
Unit-body construction (not the first, but the first mainstream).
The first American FWD compact car.
Don't forget electronic ignition in 1972, a year or two before the others.
When you say unibody construction.........say AMC or American Motors Corporation, not Chrysler Corporation.
AMC pioneered it back when Chrysler was doing body on frame just like Ford, GM, Packard, Studebaker.....etc...
Regards, Eightballsidepocket
2005 Dodge Ram 2500 SLT 4x2 Quad Cab, Cummins, 48RE Tranny, Lg Bed, Line-X Spray-on Bed Liner.
06 T25BS Komfort Trailblazer TT
"If you can't say it in person, it isn't worth saying while hiding behind an anonymous P.C.!"
daddyralph7 wrote: I guess your right,i should have know everyone was flocking to own one of there products i guess thats why they have always been third out of the big three.
Your grammatical errors make me wonder how old you are?
In any event, yes Chrysler has introduced many innovations to the automotive industry. Denying that fact is silly.
This topic has strayed far enough I guess. Time will tell us more about the details of the upcoming Nissan Titan/Ram.
Wow that hurts my feelings.Please dont use such big words they're hard to sound out.I will study harder for the next test.
They also introduced...
Intergrated power steering.
Three-speed automatic with torque converter.
Alternators rather than generators.
ABS.
Unit-body construction (not the first, but the first mainstream).
The first American FWD compact car.
Don't forget electronic ignition in 1972, a year or two before the others.
When you say unibody construction.........say AMC or American Motors Corporation, not Chrysler Corporation.
AMC pioneered it back when Chrysler was doing body on frame just like Ford, GM, Packard, Studebaker.....etc...
AMC didn't EXIST when Chrysler started building unit-body cars in 1960.
John
1984 Ford B-700 school bus conversion, Thomas body
A bunch of other vehicles
3 nutty cats (Maya, Vierna, Briza)
One lazy dog (Marmaduke)
One wife (Liz)
"A wasted youth is better by far than a wise and productive old age"
-Jim Steinman
They also introduced...
Intergrated power steering.
Three-speed automatic with torque converter.
Alternators rather than generators.
ABS.
Unit-body construction (not the first, but the first mainstream).
The first American FWD compact car.
Don't forget electronic ignition in 1972, a year or two before the others.
When you say unibody construction.........say AMC or American Motors Corporation, not Chrysler Corporation. Hudson actually pioneered unibody construction on a wide scale, and was absorbed by Nash company and renamed AMC. Hudson and AMC are synonymous with unibody constructed vehicles.
Now I understand that possibly the 1930's Chrysler Airflow might have utilized unibody construction, but no company except for AMC utilized it across their entire vehicle line, for both large and compact cars.
AMC pioneered it back when Chrysler was doing body on frame just like Ford, GM, Packard, Studebaker.....etc...
AMC didn't EXIST when Chrysler started building unit-body cars in 1960.
I hope that's "tongue and cheek" your statement that AMC didn't exist back in 1960.
Cause, my father's American Motors 1956 Rambler Cross Country Station Wagon was unibody, and AMC was building unibody cars years before that date.
In fact AMC touted their cars as the modern/ and only unibody cars, while the Big 3 continued to do frame on body construction. It wasn't until the big 3 felt the "ouch" of Rambler that they started building unibody vehicles in the compact segment to counter AMC's inroads.
That included Ford's, Falcon and Mercury Comet, Chrysler's, Plymouth Valiant, and Dodge Dart, GM's, Chevy Nova/II,and Corvair, and even Studebaker's Lark.
There was a 1960 unibody Chrysler Imperial, and I believe that the 1930's ahead-of-it's-time Chrysler Airflow was of a type of unibody construction. But AMC was the company that went into it on a large scale and was doing it back in the late 40's/50's. AMC came a reality when Nash and Hudson mergered, and Hudson was utilizing unibody construction too.
Chrysler started building unit body cars in 1960 (the Valiant, which had many innovations, including an alternator, and an available aluminum-block engine a year later), and had everything but the Imperials switched within a few years (IIRC, the first B-body was 1962). The last perimeter-frame Chryslers were the Imperials until, IIRC, 1964. That makes sense, since many limos & other service cars were based on the Imperial, and converters prefer full-frame vehicles (see: Lincoln Town Car).
Automotive history lessons are in many ways similar to those government history lessons we read of in 4th grade. the interpretations are based solely on the opinions of those who author them.
We can brag about or flog Chrysler corporation and it's old and new products all we want, but reality is clear. We are entering some very different times as it pertains to our beloved vehicles and the future successes of any of those companies will depend more than ever on leadership. Those who realize what the customer wants and needs, and those who can produce it and sell it at some level of profit. We're going to see more, not less world mergers, we'll see gas, diesel and electrical powerplants manufactured by one company and sold to others more and more. We'll see more and more components, electrical, safety, mechanical and maybe even paint colors shared by competitors.
Most of us bought our last vehicles based on looks, ride, performance or any of a number of reasons, but many of us will buy future vehicles based on energy usage. It will be anyone's guess who survives, who fails and who merges, but just like those 20 year olds in 1977 hearing stories of real performance 10 years earlier, kids in 10 years will be hearing yesterday worshippers boasting about "in our day we could buy 500 hp 10 cylinder tire smoking Dodge pickups". The only thing that is sure is the enjoyment available from reading each persons perspective of where American Automotive industry was, is and where it's going. Thanks to all of you for keeping posts like this alive, informative and entertaining.
Hannibal wrote: I got the impression that the V8 Cummins would be for the 1500 Ram/Titan. My crystal ball tells me the 6.7L Cummins will still be in the HD Rams.
Give that man a cigar!
The 1500’s get the V-8 that Cummins designed, more then likely a way for Chrysler to mend fences after the Damlire Cronies screwed them over on the V-6 diesel they designed for them then didn’t use.
The 6.7 will be for all of the HD trucks and Nissan is going to build 3 cars for Chrysler also.
Don
* This post was
edited 05/18/08 09:58am by Perrysburg Dodgeboy *
daddyralph7 wrote: Chrysler innovative?cutting edge?Ya right thats why they were bailed out by the goverment once already the only thing they have are there trucks and jeep vehicles.I'm sure it was MB's fault for there previous melt downs too.
I’m not sure where you’re getting your info from, but the “Government” never bailed Chrysler out of anything! The hourly workers did that thank you very much!
Not one Government penny was given to Chrysler for the “bail out” (as you call it) it was financed with the Employee Retirement fund and only “guaranteed or backed” by the Government. The Workers also took pay cuts and wage freezes for 4 years to make sure that the Company stayed viable. Chrysler also paid every penny back to the ERF with interest years ahead of time.
Don
Offline
