Chrysler orders pre-production vipers to be crushed

[Stratuscaster]

To say that Chrysler is a marketing arm for Fiats with Mopar nameplates is simply not true. You may as well state that Chrysler was a marketing arm for Mitsubishis and Mercedes' with Mopar nameplates - and that wasn't true either.

Chrysler in the North America markets the Fiat 500 as the Fiat 500 and the Fiat 500L as the Fiat 500L - not as "Fiats with Mopar nameplates."

These are, IMHO, "stopgap" solutions being used to get new product done faster while the next-generation models are being developed. That all takes cash and that's not something FCA has a lot of at this moment in time.

The whole Daimler merger of equals takeover was a farce - Daimler took the rather large amount of cash reserves Chrysler had built up during their success in the late 90's for themselves and stuck it to Chrysler so bad that over half the Auburn Hills HQ was empty and quality took a dive. Today, they are out of room to put new hires.

[SteveG1988]

How much less would vehicles cost if they didn't have crap like the tire pressure monitoring system on them?

Since I've owned cars, each one has had more and more stuff added to it.

Center-mount brake light.

Driver's side air bag.

Passenger's side air bag.

A whole bunch of electronic stuff like TPMS, traction control, antilock brakes, etc.

I almost wish I could go back to that 79 Olds Cutlass that had none of that stuff on it. I did find someone to straight-pipe the catalytic converter on it, which is something else I'd happily do away with.

The federal government only requires safety equipment to be installed when it gets cost effective, also known as it saves more lives than not having it and it does not cost a lot to add, for example airbags and automatic seatbelts were both viable versions of a passive restraint. But once airbags came down in price they were the only allowed part

The TPMS does not add to the cost of many cars as well, since you can reuse the ABS sensors for that if the company wants to do it cheaply (Kia/Hyundai on their small cars) since those sensors also detect wheel speed, if one wheel is moving at a different rate than all the others on the vehicle it will setup an alarm but not tell ya the PSI.

The center mount brake light is something that at one time did save lives, but now it is barely helping. but it is so cheap to add that they do not want to get rid of it, since all it requires is a few wires off the brake light circuit a housing a lens and a bulb, since the cars are designed to have it in the first place now it does not add to the cost and it does have the potential to save lives, it just isn't as great as it once was due to the novelty wearing off.

[hbelkins]

The center mount brake light is now pretty well integrated into the car's design, but in those early 80's models in which it was first introduced, it was ugly as crap and looked like it had been added as an afterthought.

I felt just as safe in that 79 Cutlass that had none of those things as I do in my current vehicle, which has all those add-ons plus side curtain airbags as well.

[mass_citizen]

False. New cars have to be sold with these features, but they can be removed aftermarket and the car would still be street legal.

False. While it is legal to drive a car with malfunctioning safety features, it is illegal to intentionally remove or disable a federally mandated safety feature. This  even applies to such trivial features as tire pressure monitoring systems.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title49/html/USCODE-2011-title49-subtitleVI-partA-chap301-subchapII-sec30122.htm

Note that while the law mentions "vehicle repair business" I suppose you could technically say it does not apply if you DIY. However the point is you would be hard pressed to find an aftermarket shop willing to remove or disable airbags, traction control, TPMS, etc. as they would be in violation of federal law.

The feds can't enforce a law like that.

False. They can and do enforce this law as written.

As I said in my original post, the law restricts repair shops, not the DIY. Try asking a repair shop to disable one of these systems (at least on the up and up, I'm sure you can find a shady one for a fee). I would know because I tried asking a tire shop to disable my TPMS for my winter tires and was informed of this law.  The automotive skills to successfully disable many of these systems require knowledge of electrical systems and mechanics. It is prohibitive to do it on your own without the tools or knowledge.  In other words, the common driver is stuck with these systems unless they break on their own.

I believe this is common to many laws, rules, and regulations out there (look at our tax code). There are ways around them, and the government knows that, but many times its such a PITA or cost prohibitive that most have no choice but to comply. 

[formulanone]

A tire shop wouldn't want to disable it, primarily because they couldn't easily modify the engine control module, body control module, or whichever specialized box controls the actual function of the tire pressure warning light. Removing the sensors is one thing; on most recent vehicles, it's just a three-ounce sensor mounted onto the metal valve stem. Plenty of shops can easily discard them (or unwittingly break them).

But the lack of response from those sensors is what will illuminate the tire light in the first place. A firm the specializes in reprogramming ECMs/BCMs/et al would probably be your best bet. The average tire repair shop isn't going to invest in the specific equipment involved in modifying the EEPROM. And if they make a mistake, or someone alters the set-up...the computer's an aluminum paperweight.

Most dealerships won't do it, for legal reasons. It also opens the door to all sorts of litigation from the marque itself, up to and including franchise loss.

[mass_citizen]

agree entirely. Should point out that my follow up request to my dealer also resulted in me being pointed to the federal law regarding modifying safety equipment.

[bugo]

Fiat has really stupid trim level names.  Who wants to drive a Dodge Caravan Crew?  A Fiat 500 Pop?  I also hate the fact that Fiat took the ram's head and crosshair grille from Dodge, not to mention the fact that neither the pickup nor the Viper are Dodges anymore.  Fiat doesn't understand the American market, and I predict this version of Chrysler will be the final one.  Fiat will phase out Chrysler and Dodge when and if their own marques catch on in the US.  Jeep will probably be the only Chrysler make to survive.

[PHLBOS]

Center-mount brake light.

While such became mandatory for the 1986 model year; GM did offer such on its Eldorados/Toronados/Rivieras (boat-tail models) during the early 70s.and were intergrated onto the rear deck (between the trunk and rear-window and were flanked on the left & right sides)

The center mount brake light is now pretty well integrated into the car's design, but in those early 80's models in which it was first introduced, it was ugly as crap and looked like it had been added as an afterthought.

See above, such was mandated for the 1986 models and later.  Any car made before the '86 model year that had such were aftermarket installations; the fore-mentioned early-70s GM models and the '85 FWD C-bodies (DeVille/Fleetwood/Electra/Ninety-Eight) being the only exceptions.

Driver's side air bag.

GM first offered such an options on their luxury-sized C-bodies during the mid-70s.  Ford's excuse for moving their horn controls from the steering wheel to the much-hated turn-signal stalk circa 1978-1984 was due to the center hub being reserved for an air-bag (that was ultimately never offered then).

antilock brakes

Are anti-lock brakes now standard for every vehicle across-the-board?  That's news to me.  My '07 Mustang (which you've seen) certainly didn't have it.  If true, that must've been a recent mandate.

I almost wish I could go back to that 79 Olds Cutlass that had none of that stuff on it. I did find someone to straight-pipe the catalytic converter on it, which is something else I'd happily do away with.

While not new nor a '79 model, but here's a '78 model (1st year of that particular style & platform) that has only 16k on it. if you're interested.

Dodge's current Avenger has ended production, and it's replacement will likely be a Chrysler-led RWD mid-size platform that will also serve Alfa Romeo.

During the recent Auto Show in Philly, while the new 2015 Chrysler 200 was on display; there was nothing shown nor hinted regarding a replacement for the Avenger in the Dodge section (one or two 2014 Avengers were on display on the show floor).

Rumor has it that Fiat is indeed phasing out the Dodge marque within the next few years.  Time will tell whether this is true or not.

Back to the actual topic at hand: as others have stated, pre-production vehicles and/or prototypes being destroyed is not a new thing.  Heck, Boeing destroyed its 717 prototype just a few years after production of that particular model (production ran from 1999-2006) started.

[formulanone]

antilock brakes

Are anti-lock brakes now standard for every vehicle across-the-board?  That's news to me.  My '07 Mustang (which you've seen) certainly didn't have it.  If true, that must've been a recent mandate.

I think ABS is not required; although traction/stability control is required as of September 2011.

My 2009 car has neither, and I like it that way (although I'm not against ABS). But I own a 128hp car that weighs 2500 pounds, it doesn't need traction control, and ABS comes in the form of proper downshifting. But I could see it being a helpful thing with heavy and/or more powerful machinery.

TPMS is also a requirement, I think 2009 was the cut-off.

Back to the actual topic at hand: as others have stated, pre-production vehicles and/or prototypes being destroyed is not a new thing.  Heck, Boeing destroyed its 717 prototype just a few years after production of that particular model (production ran from 1999-2006) started.

And in similar vein, it wasn't truly Boeing's design, anyhow.

I don't think it's FIAT/Ferrari out to sock it to Lamborghini (never mind there was probably zero engineering influence on it from the struggling brand which made mid-engined V12 vehicles), but it just sounds like good press.

[hbelkins]

My '79 Olds had a 260 V8, which meant all of the crappy gas mileage and none of the power of the 305. It knocked and pinged so badly that I had to burn premium gas, and that didn't help the situation all that much. It also had a transmission that failed either three or four times (I've forgotten exactly how many times).

[bugo]

That '79 Cutlass might sound nostalgic today, but remember those late '70s cars were choked with emissions equipment and had driveability issues and were hard to start on cold days.  If I'm going to buy an old car, it will be a pre-1970.

[bugo]

Center-mount brake light.

While such became mandatory for the 1986 model year; GM did offer such on its Eldorados/Toronados/Rivieras (boat-tail models) during the early 70s.and were intergrated onto the rear deck (between the trunk and rear-window and were flanked on the left & right sides)

The center mount brake light is now pretty well integrated into the car's design, but in those early 80's models in which it was first introduced, it was ugly as crap and looked like it had been added as an afterthought.

See above, such was mandated for the 1986 models and later.  Any car made before the '86 model year that had such were aftermarket installations; the fore-mentioned early-70s GM models and the '85 FWD C-bodies (DeVille/Fleetwood/Electra/Ninety-Eight) being the only exceptions.

It was indeed 1986.  As a kid obsessed with cars (I still am obsessed, just not for the vast majority of cars on the road today) in the mid '80s I remember seeing these in late 1985.  Back in those days, you would see '60s cars in regular daily driver service and even a few '50s cars.  There were also still cutouts on lots of roads.  I feel sorry for the kids on this board who never got to experience that era.

GM first offered such an options on their luxury-sized C-bodies during the mid-70s.  Ford's excuse for moving their horn controls from the steering wheel to the much-hated turn-signal stalk circa 1978-1984 was due to the center hub being reserved for an air-bag (that was ultimately never offered then).

The first car I drove, a 1980 Ford Fairmont station wagon (200 I-6) and my first car when I was 16, a 1980 Mercury Cougar XR7 (302 V8) both had the horn on the stalk.  The Cougar also had a small hollow space where the horn would normally go, probably big enough to house a small airbag.  I had never heard that was the reason the horn was moved to the stalk, but it makes sense.  You get used to the stalk after a few weeks.  Oddly enough, the Fairmont didn't have this wheel.  The Cougar was the best handling car I have ever driven.  Despite what Steve Gum says, cars with solid rear axles can be made to be handlers.  The good handling of that car saved my life many times.  I took curves way too fast but that old Cougar handled each one of them with grace.  Had I had a car with inferior handling, I would have ended up in a ditch.

Here's a view of the interior view of a Cougar with this style wheel.  Note the large rectangular shaped area where the horn button would normally be.



Here's the steering wheel with the cover off.  It would have been a tiny airbag.



Here's the front cover of the secret compartment. 

Rumor has it that Fiat is indeed phasing out the Dodge marque within the next few years.  Time will tell whether this is true or not.

This is an actual rumor?  I thought it was just a crazy conspiracy theory that I came up with.

[Brandon]

Rumor has it that Fiat is indeed phasing out the Dodge marque within the next few years.  Time will tell whether this is true or not.

This is an actual rumor?  I thought it was just a crazy conspiracy theory that I came up with.

As far as I know from Allpar, it's pure speculation, no real facts to it.  Allpar does say that the Avenger will have a RWD replacement.

[bugo]

Fiat or not, a small RWD sedan will be a welcome addition to the market.

[PHLBOS]

The first car I drove, a 1980 Ford Fairmont station wagon (200 I-6) and my first car when I was 16, a 1980 Mercury Cougar XR7 (302 V8) both had the horn on the stalk.  The Cougar also had a small hollow space where the horn would normally go, probably big enough to house a small airbag.  I had never heard that was the reason the horn was moved to the stalk, but it makes sense.  You get used to the stalk after a few weeks.  Oddly enough, the Fairmont didn't have this wheel.

That 4-spoke wheel (shown on your Cougar) was optional on the Fairmont/Futura/Zephyr/Z-7 for every model year except 1978 (its first year).  It was also optional on the '79-'83 Mustang/Capri.

It was standard on all full-size Panther-based Fords/Mercurys from 1979-1989 (horn was moved back to the steering wheel hub for 1985-1989) and Panther-based Lincolns (including the '80-'83 Mark VI) from 1980-1989 (horn was moved back to the steering wheel hub for 1985-1989).

The Fox-based '80-'83 T-Bird/(fore-mentioned) Cougar XR-7, '81-'82 Granada, '83 LTD/Marquis, '82-'83 Continental also had that 4-spoke wheel standard.

[Stratuscaster]

Dodge's current Avenger has ended production, and it's replacement will likely be a Chrysler-led RWD mid-size platform that will also serve Alfa Romeo.

During the recent Auto Show in Philly, while the new 2015 Chrysler 200 was on display; there was nothing shown nor hinted regarding a replacement for the Avenger in the Dodge section (one or two 2014 Avengers were on display on the show floor).

There is no immediate (ie; 2015 model year) replacement for the Avenger. What's out on the lots is what is left. If you want a mid-size sedan from Chrysler Group, it's the new 200 for now (or perhaps a Dart - technically, per the EPA, it's mid-sized, too.)

Rumor has it that Fiat is indeed phasing out the Dodge marque within the next few years.  Time will tell whether this is true or not.

Doubtful. Again, the numbers Dodge sells in North America is what will provide the economies of scale for the return of Alfa Romeo.

[Stratuscaster]

Fiat has really stupid trim level names.  Who wants to drive a Dodge Caravan Crew?  A Fiat 500 Pop?  I also hate the fact that Fiat took the ram's head and crosshair grille from Dodge, not to mention the fact that neither the pickup nor the Viper are Dodges anymore.  Fiat doesn't understand the American market, and I predict this version of Chrysler will be the final one.  Fiat will phase out Chrysler and Dodge when and if their own marques catch on in the US.  Jeep will probably be the only Chrysler make to survive.

"Crew" was actually intended to be the name of what became Journey. As a trim, Crew was used on both the Grand Caravan and the Durango.

Plenty of folks dislike the new SRT and Ram brands. Hasn't adversely affected sales - Viper sales are up, as are Ram pickup trucks. Sergio Marchionne likes to run the business his way - each brand essentially has it's own P&L to account for - no more hiding poor selling Dodge cars behind the strong selling Ram trucks.

Fiat is just a brand like Chrysler and Dodge, now all operating under FCA - Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. The Chrysler and Dodge brands aren't going away any time soon, IMO.

[Brandon]

Fiat is just a brand like Chrysler and Dodge, now all operating under FCA - Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. The Chrysler and Dodge brands aren't going away any time soon, IMO.

To be frank, the only FCA brand actually in danger of going away would be Lancia.  It's been pulled from the UK and Ireland in favor of Chrysler.  Dodge gets a lot of use in Mexico as well as the US and Canada.

[Stratuscaster]

To be frank, the only FCA brand actually in danger of going away would be Lancia.  It's been pulled from the UK and Ireland in favor of Chrysler.  Dodge gets a lot of use in Mexico as well as the US and Canada.

True. Lancia is now Italy-only, and even then it's likely down to one single model.