Archives

http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/../photos/data/2/AmericanFlag.jpg Budget cars like the K-Car have been the bread-and-butter of Chrysler...maybe it's not too late to go back to that
(http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/30/chrysler-wants-small-cars-sounds-familiar/?ref=automobiles)
http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/1979_Chrysler_bailout.jpgJohn Pearley Huffman – The New York Times - April 30, 2009

Cover Picture: Lee Iacocca during the 1979 bailout hearings. Chrysler is on it's 9th life. -- Ed.

Whatever the next step is for Chrysler (http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/tag/chrysler/), over the next few days the world will be inundated with retrospectives of the great products the company produced. You know, the original ‘55 Chrysler 300, the lightweight drag racers from the early ’60s and the muscle-era Super Bees, Road Runners, Charger Daytonas and Hemi ‘Cudas. But that was never what Chrysler was about. Chrysler has always been at its best when it made cars for buyers who appreciate a good plastic pocket protector.

The Chrysler Corporation (http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/news/business/companies/chrysler_llc/index.html?scp=1-spot&sq=chrysler&st=cse) was the smallest of the Big Three throughout virtually all of its existence, and it could never afford to match General Motors or Ford engineering-dollar-for-engineering-dollar and marketing-buck-for-marketing-buck. Chryslers, DeSotos, Dodges and Plymouths were, most of the time, the plain brown wrappers of the American auto industry, stripped-down transportation for the value conscious and fleet buyers. Forget the Imperials the company made; the heart of the market for Chrysler was always vehicles like the Plymouth Savoy, Dodge Dart (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/06/automobiles/collectibles/06EGO.html?scp=3&sq=dodge%20dart&st=cse) and Chrysler Windsor. They were ordinary cars that few people bothered to save and collect, but that did yeoman duty as family haulers, taxicabs and police cars.

Even when Virgil Exner (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D07E2D7173EF932A15753C1A9619C8B63&sec=&spon=&&scp=4&sq=Virgil%20Exner&st=cse) was the head of Chrysler design during the late 1950s, pumping finned flamboyance into the cars, Chrysler was selling a lot of basic, no-option sedans painted white that would spend their lives with municipal seals on their front doors.... http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/30/chrysler-wants-small-cars-sounds-familiar/?ref=automobiles

Ah yes, it sounds very familiar.
Chrysler offered their compact Valiant in 1960 along with Fords Falcon and GM's unconventional Corvair. The Valiant was sold on its low price, economical operation, room for six, and a generous trunk. It was crude but it did the job it was designed to do. Over the years, the same underpinnings sold in the millions in various forms and with engines from 2.8 liters (the original 170cid slant six) to the 5.6 liter 340cid V8 in the early '70s. They were miniature tanks that did pretty well in preserving low cost of ownership, and their only Achilles heel was usually rust.
After the first fuel crunch, they offered the Plymouth Feather Duster - a Duster stripped of sound insulation, power assists, and even ornamentation (only peel-n-stick decals on the outside). A few of the body parts were made of aluminum. The slant six and four speed MT was EPA rated at 24/36 - and this was a car that held six (slender) passengers and was the size of today's midsize sedans. ( http://www.valiant.org/duster.html has some info near the bottom.)

The K-cars rolled out in late 1980 in a virtual sequel to the Valiant of 20 years earlier. Considered crude by the press, it was a small and economical solution for moving six people. Yes, they had early teething pains. I think there still may be a $10,000 reward out there for the first mechanic who can get an '81 Aries to idle smoothly and not stall when you touch the accelerator. But within three years, the early bugs were gone and the platform spawned the first minivan. Available in base trim with vinyl seats, it was the best solution for an affordable and economical living room. The platform was so appropriate for the times that it continued on for 15 years, when the last remnants were replaced by the LH cars, the Neons, the cloud cars (Cirrus/Stratus), and the rebadged Mitsubishis.

Just as the article states, even their mid and full size cars sold in largest numbers in their most basic forms. Each time Chrysler wavered from their basic transportation strategy, sales faltered. The same fate struck AMC by the early '70s, when the Rambler Classic and American gave way to bulky Matadors, Javelins and Ambassadors, some of which had designer trim packages and padded vinyl tops, while the Rambler-based Hornet staggered on for 14 years (last seen as the '84 Eagle) without more than a few bucks in development money.

In this decade, without any 2009 Valiant/Dart/Aspen/Horizon on any showroom floor, that target market is shopping next door at the other dealers. Hyundai/Kia, Scion, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, etc.

Hey NewCo... Bring back the Valiant:
- With or without a tire-shaped circle pressed into the trunklid, and odd taillights that reminded us of the eyes on the Burl Ives snowman on that Rudolph claymation cartoon.
- With an engine that can run for generations without much more than annual oil changes and monthly ballast resistor changes.
- With 30+ combined MPG.
- With a dealer network that doesn't play fast-n-loose with sales or service obligations.
...And we may just come back.

Chrysler has a few bright spots in a sea of failures. I think the old 60s and 70s era Valiants and Darts with straight 6's were great little cars...reliable and simple. Their weakness was that they handled like a sled, having to be coaxed and herded down the road.

The other bright spot was their mini vans...bringing the ability to take 7 or 8 people on a trip and still get over 20 mpg. For large families who couldn't afford 12 mpg in a full size van, they were great.

Chrysler also produced some reliable engines over the years...in addition to the slant 6 225, the 318 V8 was mostly pretty solid. In later years, the straight 6 Cummins got some incredibly good mpg in the trucks. The problem is that the rest of the truck would fall apart.

To survive, they now need long term innovation...basic affordable transportation with simplicity and function, with excellent FE. And some reliability would be refreshing too.

Ah yes, it sounds very familiar.

Just as the article states, even their mid and full size cars sold in largest numbers in their most basic forms. Each time Chrysler wavered from their basic transportation strategy, sales faltered. The same fate struck AMC by the early '70s, when the Rambler Classic and American gave way to bulky Matadors, Javelins and Ambassadors, some of which had designer trim packages and padded vinyl tops, while the Rambler-based Hornet staggered on for 14 years (last seen as the '84 Eagle) without more than a few bucks in development money.

In this decade, without any 2009 Valiant/Dart/Aspen/Horizon on any showroom floor, that target market is shopping next door at the other dealers. Hyundai/Kia, Scion, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, etc.


I fear part of the problem is that unlike the 60's/70's/80's, when there was a more continuous succession of management, the fact that Chrysler has changed hands so many times in the 90's/2000's means a discontinuity of the management which could bring out such mass-appeal vehicles. The last "company man" near the top was Tom Lasorda, who is no more.