Chrysler orders pre-production vipers to be crushed

[SteveG1988]

http://blog.caranddriver.com/the-first-dodge-vipers-ever-built-are-being-crushed-w-video/

From what I read in the article it boils down to a sue happy culture, Chrysler donated the cars to education programs, and two made it out onto the public roads, since the vehicles are pre-production models they do not meet the emissions requirements for a 1992 vehicle, and presumably do not meet any safety standards of that model year. The two that got out were involved in accidents and in today's culture that means "Sue the crap out of the company that let these vehicles be accessable to the public" since to the people suing they are "unsafe death traps that should have never been let loose"

I cannot blame Fiat for wanting them destroyed, they do not want to be sued if any more of these vehicles are let loose on the public roads. Odds are they already have plenty pre-production vipers in storage so these may not be missed.

[formulanone]

I wonder if they could have been sold under "show and display" laws (i.e., museums, displays, off public roads, racetracks) which are permitted for imports, so as long as they aren't driven on public roads. Also, had it just been a few more years, the exemption of vehicles 25 years and older might have applied.

It looks like neither will occur, and for nearly pointless reasons. Vipers aren't daily driven, and there's far more 20+ year old vehicles that are much more unsafe due to poor upkeep, normal wear-and-tear, branded titles...so it all seems like more pointless bureaucracy. Although, it's been going on since the 1970s, due to EPA laws; many older pace cars, test models, and  prototypes were (and are) destroyed after one year because they do not fit EPA emission, fuel economy, due to increased performance requirements.

Of course, many (but not all) states do not prohibit modifying a vehicle; each is different, but only a bare minimum of safety (lights, seatbelts, signals, brakes, tires) are required for public road use on recent vehicles. Naturally, places without state vehicle inspections have more permissive laws.

[SteveG1988]

I wonder if they could have been sold under "show and display" laws (i.e., museums, displays, off public roads, racetracks) which are permitted for imports, so as long as they aren't driven on public roads. Also, had it just been a few more years, the exemption of vehicles 25 years and older might have applied.

It looks like neither will occur, and for nearly pointless reasons. Vipers aren't daily driven, and there's far more 20+ year old vehicles that are much more unsafe due to poor upkeep, normal wear-and-tear, branded titles...so it all seems like more pointless bureaucracy. Although, it's been going on since the 1970s, due to EPA laws; many older pace cars, test models, and  prototypes were (and are) destroyed after one year because they do not fit EPA emission, fuel economy, due to increased performance requirements.

Of course, many (but not all) states do not prohibit modifying a vehicle; each is different, but only a bare minimum of safety (lights, seatbelts, signals, brakes, tires) are required for public road use on recent vehicles. Naturally, places without state vehicle inspections have more permissive laws.

On a 2014 car you have to legally be equipped with ABS,Traction Control, Airbags, etc.

[Jardine]

I guess if they have to be destroyed they could drop them in the Corvette sink hole . . .


 

[corco]

I wonder if they could have been sold under "show and display" laws (i.e., museums, displays, off public roads, racetracks) which are permitted for imports, so as long as they aren't driven on public roads. Also, had it just been a few more years, the exemption of vehicles 25 years and older might have applied.

It looks like neither will occur, and for nearly pointless reasons. Vipers aren't daily driven, and there's far more 20+ year old vehicles that are much more unsafe due to poor upkeep, normal wear-and-tear, branded titles...so it all seems like more pointless bureaucracy. Although, it's been going on since the 1970s, due to EPA laws; many older pace cars, test models, and  prototypes were (and are) destroyed after one year because they do not fit EPA emission, fuel economy, due to increased performance requirements.

Of course, many (but not all) states do not prohibit modifying a vehicle; each is different, but only a bare minimum of safety (lights, seatbelts, signals, brakes, tires) are required for public road use on recent vehicles. Naturally, places without state vehicle inspections have more permissive laws.

On a 2014 car you have to legally be equipped with ABS,Traction Control, Airbags, etc.

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

[SteveG1988]

I wonder if they could have been sold under "show and display" laws (i.e., museums, displays, off public roads, racetracks) which are permitted for imports, so as long as they aren't driven on public roads. Also, had it just been a few more years, the exemption of vehicles 25 years and older might have applied.

It looks like neither will occur, and for nearly pointless reasons. Vipers aren't daily driven, and there's far more 20+ year old vehicles that are much more unsafe due to poor upkeep, normal wear-and-tear, branded titles...so it all seems like more pointless bureaucracy. Although, it's been going on since the 1970s, due to EPA laws; many older pace cars, test models, and  prototypes were (and are) destroyed after one year because they do not fit EPA emission, fuel economy, due to increased performance requirements.

Of course, many (but not all) states do not prohibit modifying a vehicle; each is different, but only a bare minimum of safety (lights, seatbelts, signals, brakes, tires) are required for public road use on recent vehicles. Naturally, places without state vehicle inspections have more permissive laws.

On a 2014 car you have to legally be equipped with ABS,Traction Control, Airbags, etc.

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

Okay, but it is illegal to MAKE a car with those features missing nowadays.

[jeffandnicole]

On a 2014 car you have to legally be equipped with ABS,Traction Control, Airbags, etc.

Okay, but it is illegal to MAKE a car with those features missing nowadays.

Just wondering, is there still an option to make cars with either airbags OR automatic seatbelts?  A few cars had auto seatbelts when the option was first mandatory, and most models contained airbags.  Today, I can't think of any model without airbags.  But...is the option still there?

[corco]

I wonder if they could have been sold under "show and display" laws (i.e., museums, displays, off public roads, racetracks) which are permitted for imports, so as long as they aren't driven on public roads. Also, had it just been a few more years, the exemption of vehicles 25 years and older might have applied.

It looks like neither will occur, and for nearly pointless reasons. Vipers aren't daily driven, and there's far more 20+ year old vehicles that are much more unsafe due to poor upkeep, normal wear-and-tear, branded titles...so it all seems like more pointless bureaucracy. Although, it's been going on since the 1970s, due to EPA laws; many older pace cars, test models, and  prototypes were (and are) destroyed after one year because they do not fit EPA emission, fuel economy, due to increased performance requirements.

Of course, many (but not all) states do not prohibit modifying a vehicle; each is different, but only a bare minimum of safety (lights, seatbelts, signals, brakes, tires) are required for public road use on recent vehicles. Naturally, places without state vehicle inspections have more permissive laws.

On a 2014 car you have to legally be equipped with ABS,Traction Control, Airbags, etc.

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

Okay, but it is illegal to MAKE a car with those features missing nowadays.

False, only illegal to sell a new car missing those features. You can still legally buy a kit car and assemble it yourself that doesn't have that stuff. Or you could build your own car without that stuff. The feds require airbags, not the states. They enforce it through the interstate commerce clause, which only applies for pre-assembled new cars.

[briantroutman]

Just wondering, is there still an option to make cars with either airbags OR automatic seatbelts?  A few cars had auto seatbelts when the option was first mandatory, and most models contained airbags.  Today, I can't think of any model without airbags.  But...is the option still there?

I don't think so. The original legislation passed in 1984 (and delayed until 1991) required "passive restraints" . The requirement was amended in 1998 to require "dual air bags"  specifically.

On a 2014 car you have to legally be equipped with ABS,Traction Control, Airbags, etc.

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

Okay, but it is illegal to MAKE a car with those features missing nowadays.

Perhaps this would vary by state, but states I've lived in that have annual inspections will fail a vehicle if any of the original federally required safety equipment is disabled.

[formulanone]

False, only illegal to sell a new car missing those features. You can still legally buy a kit car and assemble it yourself that doesn't have that stuff. Or you could build your own car without that stuff.

It's a state-by-state basis; I recall Florida and Nevada are quite liberal on kit cars, whereas some states are less so. Here's the EPA's take on them.

[bugo]

Fiat is destroying Chrysler's heritage.  Before long the Chrysler and Dodge marques will be history and Fiat will be selling their garbage here as Fiats and Alfas.

[SteveG1988]

Fiat is destroying Chrysler's heritage.  Before long the Chrysler and Dodge marques will be history and Fiat will be selling their garbage here as Fiats and Alfas.

What makes modern Fiat vehicles garbage? The Fiat 500 for example is built in a Chrysler factory in Mexico. And remember chrysler has churned out some garbage over the years. Early Neons and their headgasket issues, finnicky wiring systems on most of their early 00s cars, the maintence intensive 2.7L DOHC V6 which will sludge the oil unless you change it religiously, replace the internal water pump, and timing chain more frequently than the manual says to. Yes Fiat has a history of bad design decisions too, but you are letting their pre 2000s image cloud your opinion of them. That is like saying every Hyundai or Kia is garbage due to their early US market crap like the Excel or Festiva. Also Daimler-Benz dumped their crap onto Chrysler, the fact that the Crossfire, Charger, Challenger are all based off older Benz platforms, and also the fact that almost every other vehicle they have except for pickups are based off another company's platform.

Caliber,Compass, Patriot, Avenger, Journey, Sebring, 200 all based off the Mitsubishi Lancer

300,Charger,Challenger, Magnum. Based off the Mercedes-Benz W211 platform from 2002 with bits from older models thrown in.

The only US designed vehicles Chrysler builds are the minivans and pickups

[Stephane Dumas]

It wasn't the first time it happened, Chrysler had destroyed about 40 of the 50 turbine cars.

[bugo]

We never had any head gasket problems with my sister's '97 Plymouth Neon DOHC sedan.  That little bastard was governed at 120 MPH and was pulling strong up to that speed.  No telling how fast it would have gone if if hadn't had the speed limiter.

[vdeane]

At 120 mph, what's the point of having a speed limiter?

[hotdogPi]

At 120 mph, what's the point of having a speed limiter?

Maybe so the speedometer will never be inaccurate (if there wasn't, 120 and 160 would both show as 120)?

[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.

[JREwing78]

At 120 mph, what's the point of having a speed limiter?

Tires were likely speed-rated to 120 mph. My car has a speed limiter at 112 because of its tires.

[Stratuscaster]

Speed limiters are mostly used because of the choice of factory tires on the car.

Caliber,Compass, Patriot, Avenger, Journey, Sebring, 200 all based off the Mitsubishi Lancer

Technically not Lancer. They are based off the Mistu GS platform, which Mitsu intended to use for the next Galant and Endeavor and never did. Daimle rforced Chrysler to use it because it was farther along in development that Chrysler own designs were, and at the time Daimler was still intending to purchase at least a large stake in Mitsu. Current Lancer is also GS-based - there was at one time a plan in place for Chrysler to build the Lancer for Mitsu.

300,Charger,Challenger, Magnum. Based off the Mercedes-Benz W211 platform from 2002 with bits from older models thrown in.

Not based off the W211 platform, but yes - parts from the Daimler parts bin were used. Suspension was a modified Mercedes E-Class design rendered in lower-cost steel rather than aluminium. Mercedes licensed Chrysler to build the Mercedes 5-speed automatic used in Chrysler vehicles - and Chrysler had to pay Mercedes royalties for it.

The only US designed vehicles Chrysler builds are the minivans and pickups

And the Grand Cherokee/Durango (although they do share some bits with the Mercedes ML/GL.)

Dart, the new Chrysler 200, and the new Cherokee are all using Fiat's CUSW platform as a base - but the styling and engineering was done by Chrysler. Jeep's new Renegade is using the Fiat SCSS platform - modified many time over by both Fiat and GM since it's inception - but all the styling and engineering was done by Chrysler.

The new Maserati Ghibli uses a good bit of what's to come in the next-generation 300/Charger/Challenger.

The "Neon" head gasket issue was technically the "2.0L/2.4L DOHC head gasket issue" and was purely an issue caused by upper echelon cost-cutting.

Fiat is destroying Chrysler's heritage.  Before long the Chrysler and Dodge marques will be history and Fiat will be selling their garbage here as Fiats and Alfas.

Fiat provided the cash to Chrysler to improve their vehicles after years of penny-pinching and cheapening under Daimler and Cerberus. It's already been stated by Fiat that Alfa Romeo's return to the US market cannot happen without the mass-market production and sales capabilities of Chrysler & Dodge. 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. Fiat takes the lead on small platforms (up to compact) and Chrysler takes the lead on mid-size and large cars - because that's where their strengths lie.

That said - anything can change at any time.

Back to the topic - you'd be surprised at how many vehicles get crushed by the automakers. I recall seeing photos of a couple of Challenger test cars on a flatbed on their way to be destroyed.

[corco]

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.

Once again, false. It's illegal to sell a car by doing that, not for the person to do it themselves. The feds can't enforce a law like that. Read the text:

"A manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or motor vehicle repair business may not knowingly make inoperative any part of a device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment in compliance with an applicable motor vehicle safety standard prescribed under this chapter unless the manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or repair business reasonably believes the vehicle or equipment will not be used (except for testing or a similar purpose during maintenance or repair) when the device or element is inoperative."

That does not include the individual vehicle owner.

[vdeane]

At 120 mph, what's the point of having a speed limiter?

Maybe so the speedometer will never be inaccurate (if there wasn't, 120 and 160 would both show as 120)?

I know of nowhere other than the Autobahn where it's legal to drive that fast though.  Is it even an issue on US cars?

[cpzilliacus]

What makes modern Fiat vehicles garbage? The Fiat 500 for example is built in a Chrysler factory in Mexico. And remember chrysler has churned out some garbage over the years. Early Neons and their headgasket issues, finnicky wiring systems on most of their early 00s cars, the maintence intensive 2.7L DOHC V6 which will sludge the oil unless you change it religiously, replace the internal water pump, and timing chain more frequently than the manual says to.

Some members of the group are too young to remember the absolutely terrible 1970's Plymouth Volaré and Dodge Aspen, which almost Chrysler into bankruptcy - then.

[hbelkins]

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.

[Pete from Boston]

Traction control is a giant headache in snow.  In the vehicles I've used with it, the most annoying part has been that it comes back on when you start the car, and must be disabled every time.

[briantroutman]

Fiat is destroying Chrysler's heritage.

Some members of the group are too young to remember the absolutely terrible 1970's Plymouth Volaré and Dodge Aspen, which almost Chrysler into bankruptcy - then.

Read the book Riding the Roller Coaster by Charles K. Hyde. Basically, every 10-20 years for the company's entire history, Chrysler would be on the verge of bankruptcy. They'd have a big-selling car for a few years and make record profits, then the lineup would stagnate for a several years, sales would plummet, and the company would be in trouble again.

Iacocca (who I respect in many ways) didn't really save Chrysler; he helmed the company while they scored one more hit (OK, two, the Aries/Reliant and the minivan). By 1990, the company was in trouble again. Then again by 2000... Chrysler is like the alcoholic that can get sober for a day, bring home one good paycheck, then spend the next week passed out on a couch.

Now basically a marketing arm for Fiats with Mopar nameplates, Chrysler is dead for all intents and purposes, and I can't say their fate wasn't entirely deserved.