The Forward Look Network
The Forward Look Network
Search | Statistics | User Listing Forums | Chat | eBay | Calendars | Albums | Skins | Language
You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )

"Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"
Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [50 messages per page]
View previous thread :: View next thread
   Forward Look NON-Technical Discussions -> 1955-1961 Forward Look MoPar General DiscussionMessage format
 
forwardlookparts
Posted 2008-10-18 1:31 PM (#148685)
Subject: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 2721
2000500100100
Location: Minneapolis
"Keep the minivan and Jeep, sh!tcan the rest".

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081018/ap_on_bi_ge/gm_chrysler_merger_...

THE END IS NEAR.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
5859
Posted 2008-10-18 5:05 PM (#148693 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"


Expert

Posts: 2933
200050010010010010025
Location: Lemoore CA
The end started with the killing of Desoto,Chrysler has been in financial trouble off and on since then, and then Plymouth. If nothing else it sends a subliminal message to the buying public that your company isn't good enough to keep a "certain" brand going. They probably should have just scaled back the Desoto operation and rebadged Dodges and Chryslers like they did with Plymouth and Dodge at the end of Plymouths life, but instead of killing the marques, they should have kept the names around. Another mistake was completely killing the AMC line and keeping just the jeep. When Studebaker merged with Packard, and then got rid of the Packard nameplate 2 years later, they didn't last much more than 6 years. I guess the most successful execution of this tactic was probably the formation of Amc killing hudson and Nash, I guess they lasted almost 20 years until Chrysler consumed them . Gm killed Oldsmobile, when buick or pontiac goes next, it will signal the winding down of operations for them too, same with Ford and Mercury.

Edited by 5859 2008-10-18 5:12 PM
Top of the page Bottom of the page
firedome
Posted 2008-10-18 6:02 PM (#148696 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 3095
20001000252525
Location: NY & VT
It's all so sad... the end of US domestic auto production seems inevitable, they'll all be made in China and just badged with US make names...
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Billy-Jack Ebare
Posted 2008-10-18 8:41 PM (#148701 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Extreme Veteran

Posts: 499
100100100100252525
Location: A proud Canadian
Doug, you know I can't say for sure how many times I have heard Chrysler folks complain about the take over by Daimler-Benz, and now this Cerberus Capital firm of Chrysler Corp... The fact is, back in the late 20's when Durrant was attempting to form a unified company, Chrysler was on the forefront of that historic business merger (as was Ford). It is said by many that it was a late time decision by WPC himself that saved the company from becoming part of General Motors. Perhaps, these merger talks aren't too far removed from that of Chrysler Corps Historical roots, as at the time of the talks of the late 20's Chrysler was a fairly new company... Who knows what the outcome of these talks will be??? But, for the purpose of history, it isn't the first time Chrysler has faced General Motors at the discussion table... Perhaps the old saying that "history repeats itself" is true...
Top of the page Bottom of the page
safetymike77
Posted 2008-10-18 9:12 PM (#148703 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 4520
20002000500
Location: Ripon, WI
Well, Chrysler would have had a better chance if they didn't do such stupid things, like nix the neon right when it was building speed... A bunch of idiots at the wheel right now, and they are just looking for the best cash cow to set the board for life.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
59CRL
Posted 2008-10-18 9:31 PM (#148706 - in reply to #148696)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 2679
2000500100252525
firedome - 2008-10-18 6:02 PM

It's all so sad... the end of US domestic auto production seems inevitable, they'll all be made in China and just badged with US make names...


Like EVERYTHING in Walmart..... LOL!!

Made in china cars..... last 1 week then break, go buy another one..... no warranty of course.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
forwardlookparts
Posted 2008-10-18 9:58 PM (#148710 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 2721
2000500100100
Location: Minneapolis
Well, the neon wasnt the money-maker it was supposed to be and they (Daimler) didnt want to spend money for a redesign when the current "cycle" expired.

B-J, I am not real sure what youre talking about. Billy Durant is the one that formed GM and its hierarchy model a 100 years ago. He was ousted in 1921 and set out to start his own version of GM by starting Durant Motors. Ford or Chrysler were NEVER part of any talks to with anyone merge back then. In the late twenties, Chrysler was Detroit's golden boy (a very business-savvy and engineering-minded latecomer to the industry) who needed no one due to his success. Ford was number one the world over and certainly needed not bother with any part of a merger.

Cerberus was a red flag to begin with. They have a history of buying just to resell and turn a buck, they dont care about the company. I am sure they will lose money on this stinker (Chrysler).

GM needs to dump Buick and Pontiac and maybe make Saturn a sub-model of Chev.

Ford, GM and MoPar will need to band together to survive. Oh, and they will need to start building cars that people will buy again.

"All things must pass" -George Harrison
Top of the page Bottom of the page
dukeboy
Posted 2008-10-18 10:07 PM (#148711 - in reply to #148710)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert 5K+

Posts: 6204
50001000100100
Location: Big pimpin'
I find it hard to believe that in 20 years, there will be a website dedicated to the Toyota Corolla..."Egglook.com, where all enthusiasts can come and share the "Family" of Toyota owners"...


I also can't see anybody stopping someone in 20 years and asking to take a picture with their Toyota either....

Edited by dukeboy 2008-10-18 10:09 PM
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Doctor DeSoto
Posted 2008-10-18 11:18 PM (#148716 - in reply to #148703)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



50005000500050002000500
Location: Parts Unknown
What worries me about any of this is that guys into Forward Look cars somehow think today's Chrysler Corp. is in any way related to our cars. Give it up. Mopar is not the Mopar or the 50's or even 60's. It is jelly beans and bars of soap, Tupperware, and nothing remotely as exciting as even the dullest Forward Look car. Mopar hung themselves with a short rope long ago with the rest of the industry. Any remorse over this loss was to be had in 1970.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
forwardlookparts
Posted 2008-10-19 12:36 AM (#148720 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 2721
2000500100100
Location: Minneapolis
I agree with all that except the year, that is very subjective. MoPar has been dead for years. So has GM. And who cares about F0RD.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Doctor DeSoto
Posted 2008-10-19 1:06 AM (#148724 - in reply to #148720)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



50005000500050002000500
Location: Parts Unknown
Agreed.

But somwhere between 1961 and today, whatever vestiges of respectable integrity evaporated away with bumper rub strips, decals instead of chromed emblems, styling that looked like luggage or soap.

Mourning the loss of Chrysler today is like crying when you flush. Yeah it WAS a nice steak some time ago, but now ???

Top of the page Bottom of the page
imfinlay
Posted 2008-10-19 12:53 PM (#148752 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"


Extreme Veteran

Posts: 488
100100100100252525
Location: London, England
This is a very interesting discussion to me, a Plymouth and Pontiac owner in the UK.

Over here, Chrysler sell Jeep and Chryslers. These UK-market (i.e. right hand drive) cars tend to fall into two categories....

Jeep - no real entry level models, all sell on being well equipped and slightly lower priced than equivalent BMW and Land Rover models. They're not seen as being genuine off road vehicles, or even terribly durable, but rather cheap school-run cars for those who don't want an X3 or X5. They depreciate like rocks sink and the plasticy interiors and cheap leather look pretty horrid in a couple of years.

Chrysler - the minivan (I think these are Dodges in the US?) is larger than most Euro equivalents, has a terrible reputation for crash protection but kind of works. I think it's too big for the interior space available. The 300 looks fantastic, handles like a pudding and has a cheap looking interior with too many buttons.

As a real American car lover, the only one I'd even consider would be the 300 station wagon in black. However, a used Merc or BMW 5 series would be much more likely.

I suspect if the American car industry can't work out what the rest of the world wants then it has a rough future. At least Ford Europe has a clue, the new Mondeo is really very good, so is the Focus.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Billy-Jack Ebare
Posted 2008-10-19 1:29 PM (#148754 - in reply to #148710)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Extreme Veteran

Posts: 499
100100100100252525
Location: A proud Canadian
Doug, I agree, and I stand corrected that my years/facts were off. But, I did a bit of research on this subject and came up with this quote from the Hemming's Motor News website.

"In either late 1907 or early 1908, Benjamin Briscoe, an early investor in Buick, phoned Durant with the concept of a large merger of automobile manufacturers. Briscoe had the Maxwell-Briscoe Motor Company to offer; Durant had Buick. And though Briscoe seemed to lead the early talks, Durant soon took a position common in his career, one behind the curtain but still calling the shots.

Briscoe seemed to want more high-prestige companies to join the proposed fold: Packard, Peerless, Pierce-Arrow, Stoddard-Dayton and Thomas. But Durant favored high-volume manufacturers, such as Buick, Ford, Maxwell (later bought by Walter P. Chrysler) (which produced 3,785 cars in 1907) and the REO Motor Car Company (3,967 cars in 1907). Those talks lasted through summer of 1908 before Henry Ford and Ransom Olds backed out, leaving just Briscoe and Durant at the altar, but Durant, sensing trouble even with Maxwell-Briscoe, started a liaison with the Olds Motor Works, which built just 1,200 cars in 1907".

At the time of these talks, WP Chrysler was still in the railway business. It wasn't until 1911 where he took the job of works manager for Buick, by then a part of General Motors. The point of my original post was to signify that GM has been down the merger path early in their history... I even have a picture somewhere in my collection of W.P. Chrysler, Henry Ford and Billy Durant standing together after a corporate meeting in or around the early 20's late teens. I am not much of a Chrysler/GM historian, but when I first read this story sometime ago, I was under the impression that Chrysler had some part in the Maxwell Car Co. back when these merger talks took place.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
50scars
Posted 2008-10-19 6:50 PM (#148765 - in reply to #148754)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"


Elite Veteran

Posts: 663
5001002525
Location: Oakley, Ill
Walter P had develped a reputation for corporate turn arounds. He did wonders for I believe it was Willys-Overland, then was called in to do something with Maxwell in the early 20's. It ended up becoming Chrysler Corp. At one time, Chrysler Corp sales were #2 behind GM, while Ford was floundering right after WW II. Chrysler has a history of making serious blunders, then reserecting itself. The Airflow disaster, followed by the years of dull but extremely dependable cars, when Chrysler became #2. The Hemi in 51, then the first Forward looks in 55, which happened to be extremely good looking but still dependable. The disasterous quality of the 57s, followed by much improved 58s, and continual improvement until they were able to offer the 5 year/50,000 mile warrantee. The failure to have an economy car during the first fuel crisis in 1973-4, even though the Valiant and Duster with the slant 6 actually delivered mileage near what a Pinto or Vega delivered in real life, and unlike Vega, would actually outlast the payment book, but they had to try to sell a British Import as their 4 cylinder economy at that time. Chrysler's full sized offerings delivered gas mileage comparable to the competition one size below them, but nobody was listening. Chrylser stock ended up at $2, AGAIN. It recovered in the late 70s, then crashed again in about 1980, when Lee Ioccocca was called in to save the day. Chrysler stock went below $2 again, when he succeeded in getting the government to guarrantee loans, in exchange for a hefty chunk of stock. Chrysler actually paid off the government and the feds actually made a big profit, and Lee bought American Motors, picking up Jeep, and killing the rest of their line to get rid of competition. Funny thing--Chrysler is the only owner of Jeep to ever figure out how to market the brand successfully. Lee provided the leadership to develope and market the K-car. True, the K-car was a cheap piece of crap, but it worked well, and was actually pretty dependable. The innovation of the mini-van came off the K-car platform, as did the reserection of the factory made convertibles, and the K-cars ragtops were quite affordable. They did some goofy looking things with it--the fake woodies, but it did save Chrysler.
If GM does take over Chrysler, I hope they have the brains to find the guys who had the balls to propose things like the hemi, the Prowler, the 300, the Magnum, the Charger, the Viper, and keep the mini-van crew. Lord knows GM has legions of also ran engineers and product planners who could be dumped to hire these guys.


Top of the page Bottom of the page
forwardlookparts
Posted 2008-10-19 8:34 PM (#148778 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 2721
2000500100100
Location: Minneapolis
The K-car may have been a piece of crap, but it was rather a sweet-smelling turd when compared to GM's X-car. Remember that one? The line of cars that signaled the beginning of the end of GM's dominance?

Let's not forget that Iacocca's ego/narrow-sightedness happened to be the cause of Chrysler's woes in the early nineties. Dumping rear wheel drive, building too many models (or ALL their models) based on one platform (the K), the under-powered and leaky 2.2 engine, etc. all led to another need to be saved.

Due to the market, economy, gas prices, etc., ideas like "the hemi... the 300, the Magnum, the Charger, the Viper" are things the market DOESNT need and are part of why Detroit is in the pickle its in.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
50scars
Posted 2008-10-19 10:08 PM (#148784 - in reply to #148778)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"


Elite Veteran

Posts: 663
5001002525
Location: Oakley, Ill
Like I said, the K-car was dependable. Yes the "silent shaft engine" was not the slant 6 dependable. I recall a magazine article suggesting that the "silent shaft" was what Chrysler had been slipping to their customers for a long time. the K-car's main problem was that it was originally built to be cheap, and that made it hard to dress up and sell as a New Yorker, or Imperial. Wasn't the LHS rear wheel drive? I never had one, but that was about the only sedan of that era I'd have considered spending my own money on. What the Charger, the Magnum, the Hemi, the Viper and Prowler represent is not the immediate panic market, but different thinking. Name something from GM that represents "different" thinking. Actually, they get fuel mileage that is at the top end of their market segments. Absolutely true, Ioccoca had EGO to burn--probably enough to be a US Senator. One would have to have all the ego and all the gaul in the world to step into that job when he did. He didn't design the K-car, or anything else, he just created the atmosphere that let creative people design it, and he sold it. He did the same thing with Mustang at Ford. Mustang was another slick body off a cheap platform, like the original mini-van. That is a segment that Chrysler invented and has always dominated. It is a usable stationwagon, just like we had in the 50s and 60s. Chevy's Astro van was actually a much better vehicle for someone who wanted a small van, but they were higher than the butt high seats of the Chrysler Mini, and were more truck like, mainly because in the 8 passenger guise, they were a 1 ton truck. The Astro was rated to pull a 5,000 lb trailer, and 1,500 lbs in the body. A 2,000 lb trailer on the back of a Caravan made steering dicy if there was much of a side wind, and you just didn't want to get in much of a hurry, because the Caravan didn't have enough engine for it. The Astro had 50% more engine than Chrysler did. GM had a hard time selling Astro's in big numbers. Ioccoca pulled off a couple other marketing triumphs at Ford, like the promotion where you could get a "56 Ford for $56 a month. There was a good bit of fine print there, but if you met the conditions, you could get a brand new 56 Ford for $56 a month. I kind of doubt that they actually sold any of the cars that were that bare bones, but the idea did bring people into the showrooms. Back then even heaters were optional.
I think Chrysler's problems in the 90s were created by his successors. Ioccaco left in the late 80s, didn't he?
Top of the page Bottom of the page
forwardlookparts
Posted 2008-10-20 1:11 AM (#148797 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 2721
2000500100100
Location: Minneapolis
The silent shaft engine was the 2.6 Mitsu motor. Aside from have simply HORRIBLE carbs, they were a bit better than the Chrysler-built 2.2s. They didnt need head jobs or all new oil seals after 30k.

I know Iacocca tried like hell to get the ball rolling in the mid-seventies on a minivan at F0RD, but by that time, him and Henry "The Tyrant" F0RD II werent getting along and it was soon afterward he was canned.

The LHS/New Yorkers came out in '94, a year after the other LH cars (Intrepid, Concorde and Vision). All were FWD. They did have some early growing pains, but these are the "Cab Forward" cars that helped saved Chrysler again. Lido really screwed-up by using the K platform too long and by dumping huge amounts of money and resources into the Eagle Division. Smart guy and he does deserve a lot of credit. Hindsight is 20/20, but even I knew back then that making Eagle a division was a disasterous mistake. Especially with the slop leftover from AMC-- the Renault designed Medallion and Premier? Yuck. Then they give Eagle an LH car when they should have given Plymouth one, a NEW Fury.

Oh well, I could go on and on, no point though. Chrysler did it to themself, as did all of Detroit.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Doctor DeSoto
Posted 2008-10-20 1:45 AM (#148800 - in reply to #148784)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



50005000500050002000500
Location: Parts Unknown
OK, ..... talk all you want about K-cars and anything else you like post-70 Chrysler .... you are always left with the same set of "numbers" .....

When compared to most FL cars, there simply is no comparison .... they are lacking in every department, ESPECIALLY styling.

My DeSoto got an average of 17.44 mpg on the last long trip I took. 361, 4bbl, 906 heads and an "RV" rated cam. I used the wrong pushrods upon reinstall and burned up FOUR sets of mufflers due to open valves. Yet I STILL got over 17 miles to the gallon shoving that three ton hunk of junk over 3500 miles of the American west. When I got it back home I also discovered I had a largely sludged-in torque converter with stuck stator vanes.

I am done with the argument that car mfr's sold their souls to deliver safer cars that got better gas economy when the roads are choked with dipweeds driving minivans and SUVs that get equal or worse mpg than the heap of 50 year old technology I'm driving (and we were all told were "evil" and gas guzzling smog machines). I'll take my car over just about anything made for a head-on collision and we'll see who provides the "crumple zones".

After 40 years (since the original US Gov't mandates) were set in place to turn American cars into pure sh-t, the average car on the road gets little to no better economy (certainly a negligible number for 40 years worth of design time potential) and we are going to sign off that all this was somehow an improvement because we have airbags and three-point seatbelts ? You gotta be kidding me !

About the only thing that really has improved is the sound systems, and in the bigger scheme of things, who really cares about that ? As I see it, the auto industry had the chance to sell the public less and less car for more and more money. Plain and simple. They designed themselves right into a corner and with no pizzazz besides crap like movie players and refrigerated cup holders, they have absolutely nothing of substance to offer the buyer. Not that anyone cares anymore. No cars have any real substance anymore. The thing to wonder about is how did the public get sold on this little walk down Stupid Lane to where all the chrome and "fun" is gone and all the buyer gets for their cubic pricetag is a load of plastic body parts and a seat that keeps your axx warm ?

Sorry gang, .... with a 57 or 60 NY'er as the arbitrary benchmark, there isn't a car built after 1971 that offered as much cumulative substance for the common-man dealer price. Be it styling, performance, interior, options, ease of maintenance, the FL years were the pinnacle of most car for your dollar that Mother Mopar ever offered. Just my "objective" and somewhat time-proven opinion. Let the whole mess go down the drain. They have "earned" it.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
firedome
Posted 2008-10-20 9:48 AM (#148837 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 3095
20001000252525
Location: NY & VT
Actually to correct a couple points, it was BUICK that WPC left Alco (locomotives) I think it was, to go work for. And the original K car engine was the 2.2 "Trans 4", not the "silent shaft".

I certainly agree with Brent on the styling and quality of post -70 cars vs the FLs and '60s cars, but the actual safety of the newest cars vs '50s/60s cannot be disputed, one cannot repeal the laws of physics and math. New cars are far superior in controlled energy absorbsion and mitigation of force distributon into the human body, in every respect, a fact that would be easily proved in an actual collision. However the loss of such a car would be nothing to cry about, after you had survived.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
grunau
Posted 2008-10-20 10:04 AM (#148839 - in reply to #148800)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"


Extreme Veteran

Posts: 442
10010010010025
Location: North of the 49th

Well said Doctor Desoto!!! My '60 Desoto is a dream to drive and gets 24 mpg on the highway with a bit less in and around town! My daily driver is post '70 but its a '75 Gran Fury (400 4bbl) and I love the way the car handles ....I heaved the lean burn and cleaned up the engine with a '69 manifold and an early AVS ...drives very well and delivers well over 20 mpg on average... still has some styling and is as dependable as the sun!!! My wife wanted a Mini van and that front wheel drive heap has been nothing but a money pit ...three transmissions(the infamous A-604) along with a ton of other crap...its fugly as are all the cars on the road today and it has no character....its sitting now behind the shop with a major engine miss and a check light "on" ....I hate it so much I don't want to even look at it any more let alone work on it!
The auto industry has made no progress in fact we've retrogressed !!!! I went with a friend of mine who works for a new car dealer on a dealer to dealer "trade" of course we travelled in "new stuff" I've never been so uncomfortable and the cars did nothing to impress me ...the seats were like upholstered cement blocks with interiors that had the look and feel of high impact polystyrene plastic ...but we had satellite radio....BFD!!! The price on these crates ...fourty grand average for a POS that looked like any of these heaps is a crime and the serviceablity is almost nil with all the scanners and high priced test equipment required to deal with the ABS (for people who can't drive) and traction control(also for people who can't drive) along with the engine/chassis computer chit its just sick.... the component placement is idiotic and appears to have been designed my engineers who couldn't find their own butt in the dark with their own hands ....I can't agree with you more let 'er slide....
Top of the page Bottom of the page
forwardlookparts
Posted 2008-10-20 2:00 PM (#148870 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 2721
2000500100100
Location: Minneapolis
Doc, I am not getting into a pissing match of the cars of the '60s v. cars of the present. If you want to romanticize the cars of yesteryear, thats fine. But, the blatantly dangerous shortcomings of these cars go along with the territory. I will be reasoning with the unreasonable. Sure, our cars look cool, they are fun to drive, but I dont live in mine.

I love old cars. I just bought a '29 Plymouth and to me, THAT is a real car, not a FL. But I still love my '61. But here are the facts:

-Cars are safer now. I would rather have my head or chest meeting an airbag than a steel dashboard or a steering column. I dont care that they arent made from "real steel". They are safer, period. "Little" things make them safer like disc brakes and master cylinders with TWO reservoirs (our caveman brakes are a joke), superior wiper systems, three-point safety belts, radial tires, modern suspension/steering, etc, etc, etc.

-Cars are more dependable. Electronic ignition rules. Believe it or not, engines that routinely go more than 200k miles rule too! Other than a slant six, getting more than 100k on an unrebuilt block was not too common, you know that.

-Cars really do get better mileage now, imagine that! I get 44 mpg around town in my little boxcar. Would I rather drive a "real" car? Yeah, but with gasoline at $3 a gallon and my New Yorker getting 11 mpg, money talks and bullsh!t walks. I am not independently wealthy.

-Cars are more affordable. You can get a six digit auto, but you can still buy one for well under $20k. In 1960, average income was about $5k, buy a new car for half that. Back then, only dad worked, now both parents do. Numbers are all over the board, but one report shows that 77% of two income families made better than $91k in 2007. Do the math. You get a more dependable and safe product and it costs less.

Like I said, I am sure this is falling on deaf ears. The stylings of new cars sucks, no argument here. But I wont live in the past ALL of the time. I like watching "The Honeymooners" on my old DuMont, but I also like watching "The Office" on my flat screen.

Naturally, this is all my opinion. Backed by some well-known facts.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
1960fury
Posted 2008-10-20 4:48 PM (#148896 - in reply to #148870)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert 5K+

Posts: 6650
500010005001002525
Location: northern germany
forwardlookparts - 2008-10-20 2:00 PM



-Cars are more dependable. Electronic ignition rules. Believe it or not, engines that routinely go more than 200k miles rule too! Other than a slant six, getting more than 100k on an unrebuilt block was not too common, you know that.



not realy
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Doctor DeSoto
Posted 2008-10-20 8:56 PM (#148922 - in reply to #148896)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



50005000500050002000500
Location: Parts Unknown
I am not convinced that the reason most old cars (engines) were at risk of dying after 100K was a shortcoming in design. It has been my experience that cars of our era were not taken care of very well by a public that was groomed to look at them at passing fashion. I have owned a number of finned cars with really high mileage that were kid-gloved from day one. The best example that comes to mind was a 58 Buick wagon that was a one owner cream puff. It came with a service record that resembled an encyclopedia and in its 498,000 mile history, showed four ball joint changes and lube services at 1000 mile intervals. How many cars like our for that kind of loving ? The engine had never been rebuilt, but in fairness to the argument, tossed a pair of rods shortly after I bought it. Upon cracking the engine open to see what was wrong, the wax build up from paraffin oils had entirely engulfed all the moving parts and would not allow the valve covers to be removed without a big pry bar !

A head gasket failure was the culprit.

I submit that while modern electronic controlled cars *might* give a long service life, if treated equally with a good old B-block, might not really show nay difference. I do know this, ... I have driven old rusty iron most of my life. I can count the times I have broken down on my two hands in three decades of driving, and can count the number of times I have not been able to fix the problem right there on the spot on one (with fingers to spare).

And why is that 61 NY'er getting only 11 mpg ? Something is wrong. I got close to 20 with crossrams on mine.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Sisu
Posted 2008-10-20 9:18 PM (#148925 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Inactive by Request

Posts: 1292
1000100100252525
Location: Lovely place

Maybe now is the time to buy all the new spare parts for the modern cars you can. In 30-40 years time one can sell them for a big profit, lets say "Plastic SRT8-emblem NOS, $550,-" or "Original Rubber Antenna, $600,-". Yes, it makes sense...

What comes to the reliability I think our cars are very reliable but they need more care than the modern cars. I actually think people should change their spending habits - try to keep old cars running, maybe update them with some sort of an emission system - I believe its much better for the earth to keep the old cars than support the industry that builds the new, boring stuff. The human kind is currently spending more than the earth can support.

One big fault with current living style is the hurry - we are always in a hurry! This is especially easy to notice when you are driving an older car, some people drive like crazy! Somehow they believe the modern electronics, air bag and seat belts will save their life whatever they do. See what happened to the top Austrian politician last week? Too fast with his big luxury car and now he's 6 feet under... He was drunken and stupid (his speed was over twice the speeding limit), deserved to die rather than kill someone else.

Consumption - my Sierra doesn't drink too much, 18 mpg is normal. Its always good to combine in the calculations the depreciation of the vehicle. With an older car you hardly have any, or its the opposite.



Edited by Sisu 2008-10-20 9:21 PM
Top of the page Bottom of the page
wbower3
Posted 2008-10-20 10:37 PM (#148936 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"


Walter passed away on Jul 29, 2014. We will miss you, Walt!

Posts: 5358
50001001001002525
Location: Heaven Above (Formerly Oklahoma City,OK)
To throw in another 25 cents worth, current cars got no "soul". Maybe the tinwork fits better, but it has no substance. They are "throw-away caars. And the bean-counters keep trying to make them cheaper.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Doctor DeSoto
Posted 2008-10-20 11:07 PM (#148939 - in reply to #148925)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



50005000500050002000500
Location: Parts Unknown
Good points, Sisu.

I will readily admit I was an "old man" driver from day one because of these cars. I am easy on the acceleration and try to brake softly and well in advance of a need - something I learned in Driver's Ed that I think was lost on all the other students. If anyone is going to squeeze mileage out of one of these, it will be me because I rarely push them hard.

Out of this logic to go easy on them and make them last as long as possible comes that "What's the hurry?" point of view that is virtually non-existent today. I drive like an old fuddy-duddy most of the time. Funny story - when my brother and I brought the DeSoto from Seattle to Spokane a few years back, circumstances dictated it be done in the middle of winter. I wasn't too happy about this .... the car was in bare metal, .. but it had to be moved. I got it on the car trailer and pulled it with my 58 International 1 ton 4x4 (good for about 45 mph). There are three mountain passes between Seattle and Spokane .... Tiger, Snoqualmie, and Ryegrass. Tiger is steep, but is rarely snowy. We hit it at about 0700 hrs to encounter a (presumed) lesser amount of traffic. It is two lanes up hill on each side and a single lane going down. The old truck was unable to get up out of first and we dogged it up the long drag going about 10 mph. The Seattle area is notorious for "stunt driver" and race car commuters, and my thinking that the pass might be relatively free of traffic was wrong, ... and we had dozens of hotrods honking and showing us the middle finger as they zipped by in a heavy, wet, and still falling snow. We crested the summit and it went down to a single lane and those that could not get past us were, let's say, ... "exuberant" as they realized I was going to maintain that same 10 mph going down - giving no thought to how such a load is most likely to get away from you on the downgrade.

Anyway, about two dozen cars ripped past us in the oncoming lanes on the straight stretch just east of the summit with horns a-going and fingers flying .... what could we do ? When we made the sweeping curve at the end of the tangent, there were the same dozen or more cars all spun out and crashed into each other. And along comes that old plodding truck with the big finned car on a trailer !

We got a good laugh out of that one !

I guess, as it relates to this concept of old vs. new - if everyone took top care of their cars and drove them like they were made of crystal, they would deliver much better than average performance in both economy and longevity. It is an unfair comparison to lineup a new Honda with the collective memories of how 57 New Yorkers performed and held up when the social attitudes that sat behind the wheel were so totally different. There is a big performance factor in that attitude to be considered that is largely overlooked.

Expectations. I do not expect my DeSoto to corner like my Honda. I also do not expect it to go four-wheeling like the International ! But for my typical get-out-on-the-road driving, the DeSoto delivers 100 times the experience any post-70 car ever will. It is just what I want and expect. In this same logic, I bear no grief in thinking Chrysler may go the way of the Packard. As far as my driving desires and expectations go, they left the building long before Elvis did.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
5859
Posted 2008-10-21 12:28 AM (#148948 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"


Expert

Posts: 2933
200050010010010010025
Location: Lemoore CA
Brent, I noticed on another thread that you pulled home a Desoto from Big M, curiosity has gotten the better of me, what is it? Is it a whole car, or just part of that poor smashed 59? Sorry to hijack the thread.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
forwardlookparts
Posted 2008-10-21 12:57 AM (#148949 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 2721
2000500100100
Location: Minneapolis
It was already hijacked, LOL!
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Doctor DeSoto
Posted 2008-10-21 2:40 AM (#148952 - in reply to #148948)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



50005000500050002000500
Location: Parts Unknown
Ten point bonus for good observation skills !

It was the rear clip from the smashed 59. Will form the basis of a new trunk pan, right wheel lip, and lower quarter skin.

Then it is on to the fun stuff !
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Powerflite
Posted 2008-10-21 2:25 PM (#149008 - in reply to #148952)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert 5K+

Posts: 6986
50001000500100100100100252525
Location: So. California
Have you seen the movie: "Who killed the Electric Car?" It is absolutely pathetic that GM had a great car that people wanted to buy now, even fought to buy it, and they wouldn't let us. They forced everyone to give them up so they could crush them all and pretend that the technology never existed. Chrysler and GM both fought the electric car tooth and nail. We then PAID them billions of dollars to develop the hybrid technology. They did, and did NOTHING with it. Toyota, on the other hand, didn't want to be left behind and developed it too and actually SOLD them. Now, 8 years later, GM announces the Volt that might save their behinds IF they can get it out in time before they go bankrupt. Meanwhile, people are standing in lines waiting to buy the Prius and Toyota can't make enough of them.

Why are they going out of business? STUPIDITY, short sightedness, and corruption. Plain and simple. We have handed them every opportunity to get a product developed on a silver platter and they backstabbed us in the process. Now they are falling under the natural consequences of their actions. If I were a board member, I would fire the entire excecutive team. I have no sympathy for them.

Toyota, Mazda & Nissan already have a strong following in the younger generation. Hard to believe, but true. Older Japanese cars are already gaining in price and demand. I purchased one myself for my long daily commute, a '69 Corona with '93 Toyota truck drivetrain. A powerful, economical old car albeit, not very safe in a wreck.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
wizard
Posted 2008-10-21 2:42 PM (#149011 - in reply to #149008)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Board Moderator & Exner Expert 10K+

Posts: 12309
500050002000100100100
Location: Southern Sweden - Sturkö island
Amen to that Nathan!
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Rob
Posted 2008-10-21 7:11 PM (#149056 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"


Elite Veteran

Posts: 984
500100100100100252525
I'm in agreement with the comments made here.

I have a Honda, buy only Hondas, but collect Plymouth & Dodge.

GM is losing 1 billion cash a month, Chrysler has a stockpile of cash.

I had hoped Daimler would fix Chrysler's quality problems.

GM has too many brands. Buick & Pontiac are in trouble, weak sales. The most likely scenario is the dropping of Dodge and Chrysler, keeping Jeep.

GM also has too many plants.

Sad to see Chrysler go, but all the ever really did was make junk, as do GM and Ford. The more interesting cars will live on as collector cars. Chrysler did have a run of good quality for the era cars, early 30's to early 50's, but downhill from there on out.

1968 was the high water mark for Chrysler (15% market share). It was also the high water mark for Volkswagen. 1968 was the first year for the Corolla.

Corolla's still around and respected.




Top of the page Bottom of the page
forwardlookparts
Posted 2008-10-21 7:16 PM (#149058 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 2721
2000500100100
Location: Minneapolis
"Sad to see Chrysler go, but all the ever really did was make junk..." Watch your step, Rob. Them's FIGHTIN' words!
Top of the page Bottom of the page
vedette
Posted 2008-10-21 7:50 PM (#149064 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"


Expert

Posts: 3039
2000100025
Location: Scotland
Oh yes,the Corolla well respected by Taliban the world over.Because of supposed Americans like "Rob"(really Abdullah) here is what the USA is due Asia http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Rob
Posted 2008-10-21 8:32 PM (#149070 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"


Elite Veteran

Posts: 984
500100100100100252525
Sorry you fellows do not agree with me, but I'm just telling it as it is.

Please note that I did not single out Chrysler, I also mentioned GM and Ford.

By 'respected' I meant that the Corolla is a strong seller here in the US, holds its value, and is known for its quality and fuel economy.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
vedette
Posted 2008-10-21 8:45 PM (#149071 - in reply to #149070)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"


Expert

Posts: 3039
2000100025
Location: Scotland
Rob - 2008-10-21 8:32 PM

Sorry you fellows do not agree with me, but I'm just telling it as it is.

Please note that I did not single out Chrysler, I also mentioned GM and Ford.

By 'respected' I meant that the Corolla is a strong seller here in the US, holds its value, and is known for its quality and fuel economy.

It is not as it is,GM and Ford Europe build top quality cars that deliver 50 to 60 miles per gallon and in my vast motoring experience are more durable than the Jap stuff.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Rob
Posted 2008-10-21 9:22 PM (#149083 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"


Elite Veteran

Posts: 984
500100100100100252525
Yeah, but that's in Europe. I'm speaking of what we have here in the US.

Yes, GM and Ford do export cars/models/options that are not available here in the US. They also take their best cars for export.

The Japanese do it the other way around, they keep their best stuff in Japan.


Top of the page Bottom of the page
Doctor DeSoto
Posted 2008-10-22 2:07 AM (#149124 - in reply to #149083)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



50005000500050002000500
Location: Parts Unknown
On another board I am on, a discussion is going around about living in neighborhoods with covenants and deeding restrictions that prohibit various and sundry items to be kept in said neighborhoods. This can range from disallowed house paint colors to motorhomes, boats, and project cars and many other things considered "unsightly" by ..... I'll call them "the powers that be".

This whole idea of neighborhood rules and regulations seems to have occurred within my lifetime. Maybe I am off-base on that, .... I grew up on a farm in the relative "sticks". But we did live in the 'burbs prior to buying the farm in 1969, and I clearly remember MANY homes in our still-being-built neighborhood having project cars and hotrods being tinkered on in the driveway.

My point is that somewhere along the line, it was WE, the American public that got sold on an entirely different way of seeing the world than had been largely present prior to the 1970's. I can only speculate on the reasons, but it seems pretty clear that an attitude of "clean" has supplanted our collective desire for "interesting". This is reflected in these homeowner associations and covenants, as well as the buying public settling for products like cars that are as interesting as a well worn bar of soap, preferring electronic doo-dads over soul and substance.

I guess, for me, all this old crap I surround myself with is some sort of "salve" to try and hold onto a world when things were a whole lot more fun to look at, ride in, work on, whatever. Maybe I am all washed up, but "new" used to mean "better". In the last 30 years, it seems to mean nothing at all, and should cause a person to have a skeptical eye towards the quality of the subject in question.

As it relates to this thread, whether or not this Chrysler Corp. we have today stays or fades away is pretty much an irrelevant concern to me, because what I hold onto as dear and of importance is not the name or the brand, but a "period" and a set of principles that were "Mopar" at a particular time. In graduated steps, the fine folks guiding Chrysler have made clear and conscious decisions to abandon all those things I personally felt were what made their product the best things ever offered and slowly but surely morphed themselves and their cars into something I see zero value in. As if the insult weren't bad enough, the proverbial "salt in the wound" is to get force fed a line of crap about how "new and improved" their products are. The thinking mind will automatically ask "Compared to WHAT?", but there is no reply. There is no answer. It is just a slogan. I know better, I work on these machines! But Chrysler was never about principles. It was about business, and business is about profit. It was MY mistake to think otherwise. I held to a silly notion that things just got better and better and that if you liked last year's product, just wait till you see what we have coming next year ! I know it is a nostalgic thing, but it is MY indulgence. I will take these FL cars for all their problems - and God knows my DeSoto is a huge set of problems - over anything that has come before or since. For my interest in style, driving, general car ownership, the FL cars represent the absolute zenith in post-war automotive design. Granted, they have their problems, but I can fix what Mother Mopar overlooked and between the two of us produce the finest automotive experience ever attained.

When Chrysler gave up on those things I hold dear, I gave up on Chrysler. Just that simple. As far as I am concerned, Chrysler was intermittently on the decline since 1958 and went utterly down the tubes after 1971. There is nothing to mourn today. The funeral was 35 years ago.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Chrycoman
Posted 2008-10-22 3:32 AM (#149128 - in reply to #148701)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 1803
1000500100100100
Location: Vancouver, BC
Billy-Jack Ebare - 2008-10-18 5:41 PM

Doug, you know I can't say for sure how many times I have heard Chrysler folks complain about the take over by Daimler-Benz, and now this Cerberus Capital firm of Chrysler Corp... The fact is, back in the late 20's when Durrant was attempting to form a unified company, Chrysler was on the forefront of that historic business merger (as was Ford). It is said by many that it was a late time decision by WPC himself that saved the company from becoming part of General Motors. Perhaps, these merger talks aren't too far removed from that of Chrysler Corps Historical roots, as at the time of the talks of the late 20's Chrysler was a fairly new company... Who knows what the outcome of these talks will be??? But, for the purpose of history, it isn't the first time Chrysler has faced General Motors at the discussion table... Perhaps the old saying that "history repeats itself" is true...


The large unified company dreamt up by Durant was in 1908 - the year he formed the General Motors Company. Chrysler was a manager at Buick at the time, working under Charles W. Nash, and had no say in running Buick. The mass merger was dead in the water when Henry Ford demanded cash for his stock in Ford Motor Company, followed shortly thereafter by Ransom E. Olds at REO.

Durant's partners in the scheme, the Briscoe Brothers, went on to form the United States Automobile Company and acquired Brush, Stoddard-Dayton, Columbia, Sampson, Maxwell and a number of other companies teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. When United States Auto collapsed in 1912, ex-Ford executive Walter Flanders was hired to run the new Maxwell Motor Corporation, and when that company was on the verge of collapse in 1920, the banking group with millions invested in Maxwell hired Walter P. Chrysler, who had just quit his job as president of Buick, to turn things around.

By 1920 Durant was out of General Motors for good and instead formed a new company, his third - Durant Motors, Inc. Shortly after, the Willys Corporation, a holding company created by John N. Willys and run by Walter P. Chrysler for the same banks that sunk money into Maxwell, was on the auction block. Included in the deal was a new assembly plant at Elizabeth, New Jersey, and a new car called the Chrysler (later referred to as the model A). Chrysler and his backers went for the company but were outbid by Durant. The Chrysler car would see the light of day as the Flint and the assembly plant produce Durant's low-priced Star 4.

During the 1920's Durant was into the stock market all but ignoring his own car company. The big talk of the 1920's was the acquisition of Maxwell, all that was left of the U S A C group. Durant, Studebaker and Chrysler were the main players in the battle to acquire the firm and Chrysler came out on top. With the acquisition of Maxwell, Chrysler was able to introduce the 1924 Chrysler (model B) and create the Chrysler Corporation.

Instead of a big merger in the late 1920's, the ownership of Dodge Brothers was the big question. And that battle was won by Chrysler. Walter Chrysler replaced long time Dodge Brothers manager Frederick Haynes and all the managers at Dodge Brothers with K.T. Keller (formerly with General Motors) and a group of Chrysler managers. Ironically, Frederick Haynes and the rest were hired by Durant to run Durant Motors. The aquisition of Dodge Brothers by Chrysler permitted the entry of Plymouth into the low-priced market.

And in the 1920's General Motors was not interested in acquiring other car firms, at least not in the U.S. They worked on consolidating what they had and increasing their market share. Which they did admirably, becoming #1 in all price markets and the #1 company in the world. Instead of going after Chrysler, Ford, etc., General Motors went overseas acquiring Vauxhall in Britain, Opel in Germany and Holden in Australia. After Durant was shown the door at GM in 1920, the firm was run by Pierre S. DuPont (the DuPont company controlled 30% of GM) and Alfred P. Sloan.

As you can tell, back in the 1920's General Motors produced executives that knew their business, unlike the past couple of decades.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
forwardlookparts
Posted 2008-10-22 1:36 PM (#149187 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 2721
2000500100100
Location: Minneapolis
"The aquisition of Dodge Brothers by Chrysler permitted the entry of Plymouth into the low-priced market."

Not sure what you mean by that. Plymouth was already in the works and slated for that market before WPC bought DB. Remember, the Plymouth was previously the Chrysler "52" (Maxwell, before that) and the "52" was already lower priced than Dodges, but not as low as WPC wanted the Plymouth to be. The DB sale happened days before the first Plymouth rolled off the line after a couple months of negotiating. Chrysler wanted DB a few years earlier, but by the time the bank owners decided they didnt want to play automaker anymore and to sell to WPC, he only wanted DB because of the factories and the dealership network. The actual car and truck lines were more of a bonus than a primary incentive by this time.

GM had made some mistakes by giving each division a subdivision; Oakland, LaSalle, Marquette, etc. The depression took care of that.

I have often wondered how the Corporation's history would have been different had two major things hadnt happened:

1) If either the Airflow was never built or was wildly successful. After the dismal sales of this styling disaster, MoPar would always take a backseat to styling until the FLs came along.

2) WPC's wife had not died before him. He was so heart-broken, he basically became a recluse, handing over the reigns to Keller and dying a few years after that. As it turns out, Keller was obviously not the best choice. While MoPar continued to excell in engineering, styling was lackluster. "If I can piss over the hood, the car's too godd@mned tall!" (Keller)
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Chrycoman
Posted 2008-10-22 3:33 PM (#149216 - in reply to #149187)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 1803
1000500100100100
Location: Vancouver, BC
forwardlookparts - 2008-10-22 10:36 AM

"The aquisition of Dodge Brothers by Chrysler permitted the entry of Plymouth into the low-priced market."

Not sure what you mean by that. Plymouth was already in the works and slated for that market before WPC bought DB. Remember, the Plymouth was previously the Chrysler "52" (Maxwell, before that) and the "52" was already lower priced than Dodges, but not as low as WPC wanted the Plymouth to be. The DB sale happened days before the first Plymouth rolled off the line after a couple months of negotiating. Chrysler wanted DB a few years earlier, but by the time the bank owners decided they didnt want to play automaker anymore and to sell to WPC, he only wanted DB because of the factories and the dealership network. The actual car and truck lines were more of a bonus than a primary incentive by this time.

GM had made some mistakes by giving each division a subdivision; Oakland, LaSalle, Marquette, etc. The depression took care of that.

I have often wondered how the Corporation's history would have been different had two major things hadnt happened:

1) If either the Airflow was never built or was wildly successful. After the dismal sales of this styling disaster, MoPar would always take a backseat to styling until the FLs came along.

2) WPC's wife had not died before him. He was so heart-broken, he basically became a recluse, handing over the reigns to Keller and dying a few years after that. As it turns out, Keller was obviously not the best choice. While MoPar continued to excell in engineering, styling was lackluster. "If I can piss over the hood, the car's too godd@mned tall!" (Keller)


The Chrysler 52 and the succeeding Plymouth model Q were priced above Ford and Chevrolet almost into the Essex and Pontiac price range (where Dodge Brothers was in the early 1920's). Chrysler acquired foundry facilities with the acquisition of Dodge Brothers and that permitted Chrysler to produce their own engine blocks and other cast items. That lowered the costs of production and the thus the price of the Plymouth could be dropped into Chevrolet-Ford territory.

The lack of sales success with the Airflow most certainly resulted in conservative styling at Chrysler, but I suspect K.T. Keller played a very large role in that situation. He was the man that showed famed stylist Ray Dietrich the door, the man W.P. Chrysler hired to head Chrysler styling, such as it was.

Walter P. Chrysler became a recluse after his wife died in 1937. Given lead times, styling approved in 1937 would have been for 1939-40 models. Chrysler Corporation styling definitely became bland after that point.

And no argument over K.T. Keller - he was Chrysler's one mistake, as Robert Eaton was Iacocca's.

One contender for W.P.'s job was Joseph Washington Frazer. He was the man who came up with the Plymouth name and headed the sales campaigns for Chrysler Corporation that propelled Plymouth to #3 by 1931 and Chrysler Corporation to #2 by 1936. Plymouth would come within 100,000 of Ford production for 1941 and Chrysler would hit 25.1% of the market that same year. From that point on it was all downhill.

Although a sales person, Frazer believed both styling and engineering were needed for a car to be successful. After he left Chrysler in 1938, Frazer became head of Willys. His first action was make the Willys engine reliable (it was said you could tell how fast you were going by what fell off) and then make Willys styling modern and attractive. And his push to get Willys into Jeep production enabled the company to survive after the war.

Frazer left Willys in 1943 and took over Graham-Paige. At the end of WW II, G-P was working on a new medium-priced car called the Frazer, with styling by Howard "Dutch" Darrin. Having no money to underwrite such a project, he teamed up with Henry J. Kaiser - and the Kaiser-Frazer Corporation was born.

Just as Chrysler's first postwar styling plans were more in line with what GM was planning for 1949, Frazer's first styling proposals were more flowing and modern. K-F stylists boxed up the design, flattening the sides and levelling the belt line. Chrysler stylists raised the roof on their models and removed the integrated rear fenders. Chrysler's styling changes pleased Keller, but K-F's did not please either Frazer or Darrin.

To show how knowledgeable Frazer was, when K-F was making plans for the 1949 models, which were to receiving a minor styling freshening, Frazer advised the K-F board they should cut planned production as the opposition would be selling completely new cars. Kaiser and his supporters shot down the idea. Frazer came back with the statement that K-F would sell only about 60,000 cars and lose $33 million.

When the 1949 results were in, K-F sold 80,000 cars and lost $31 million. Not too shabby for an off the cuff estimate. The photo of the board meeting showing the members viewing the financial results for 1949 have all board members save Frazer with very solemn and serious looks on their faces. Frazer is shown sitting in his chair, chin resting on his fingers, looking up to the ceiling. It's almost as if you could hear the thought running through his mind, "I told you so! I told you so!"

By this time G-P was no longer in the car business, having sold its stock in K-F to the Kaisers and its plant on Warren Avenue to Chrysler. The plant was used for DeSoto body and engine production from 1950 through 1958 and then for assembly of the 1959-61 Imperials.

Although many interviewed Frazer on his work at Willys and K-F, no one it seems got his thoughts on working at Chrysler and why he left. I firmly believe if J.W. Frazer had succeeded W.P. Chrysler instead of K.T. Keller, Chrysler Corporation would have held on to #2 position after the war with more modern styling. I also doubt Frazer would have waited until 1954 to bring out a true automatic transmission on all models. Chrysler Corporation was the last manufacturer to offer one as everyone else had one by 1951. K-F offered Hydramatic on its 1950 models.

By the way, Oakland was the GM division and Pontiac the Oakland Motor Company's companion make. Of the companion makes the GM divisions introduced, only Pontiac would be so successful its parent, Oakland, would be laid to rest. LaSalle was also successful, but making the LaSalle models Cadillacs for 1941 sealed Cadillac's destiny to beat Packard and become #1 in the luxury market. Buick's Marquette and especially Oldsmobile's Viking were dead in the water from the beginning.

Companion makes were all the rage in the 1920's, beginning with Hudson's Essex. Others were Ajax (Nash), Erskine (Studebaker), Wolverine (Reo), Falcon-Knight (Willys-Knight), Roosevelt (Marmon), Blackhawk (Stutz), Diana (Moon), Jewett (Paige), and Cleveland (Chandler). Only Essex and Diana would not be absorbed by the parent make and only Essex would survive into the 1930's.

Top of the page Bottom of the page
Chrycoman
Posted 2008-10-22 3:48 PM (#149220 - in reply to #149056)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 1803
1000500100100100
Location: Vancouver, BC
Rob - 2008-10-21 4:11 PM

I'm in agreement with the comments made here.

I have a Honda, buy only Hondas, but collect Plymouth & Dodge.

GM is losing 1 billion cash a month, Chrysler has a stockpile of cash.

I had hoped Daimler would fix Chrysler's quality problems.

GM has too many brands. Buick & Pontiac are in trouble, weak sales. The most likely scenario is the dropping of Dodge and Chrysler, keeping Jeep.

GM also has too many plants.

Sad to see Chrysler go, but all the ever really did was make junk, as do GM and Ford. The more interesting cars will live on as collector cars. Chrysler did have a run of good quality for the era cars, early 30's to early 50's, but downhill from there on out.

1968 was the high water mark for Chrysler (15% market share). It was also the high water mark for Volkswagen. 1968 was the first year for the Corolla.

Corolla's still around and respected.



Chrysler's "stockpile" of cash is $11 billion in cash and "marketable securities". Given the market melt down in the last few weeks, I wonder just how much of that $11 billion is really there. And at GM's $1 billion a month losses, it hardly a stockpile - it could not carry GM for a year. I suspect that melt down is firing Cerberus's intention to dump Chrysler. Chrysler is bleeding cash not only in its daily operations, but in its assets valuations. Not very healthy.

Although Chrysler had 15% in 1968, its true height was 1941 - 25.1% and the #2 spot. Chrysler has had a long slide down from the heights of Walter P. Chrysler, with brief respites under Lynn Townsend and Lee Iacocca.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
59finnedwarrior
Posted 2008-10-22 9:22 PM (#149268 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: RE: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Veteran

Posts: 269
1001002525
Location: Alberta Canada
my brother bought a brand new limited edition bright orange Challenger RT hemi, the whole bit.He's getting all the attention with that car since August-it stops traffic but now we're seeing lesser 09 Challengers on the streets and to be honest,they look great but next year when he wants to stop traffic I'm going to let him drive my Viper Red 59 Belvy 2 dr. ht.

Technically that new Challenger is unsurpassed but you just can't beat the presence of the fin cars-you guys know that, I'm preaching to the choir.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
forwardlookparts
Posted 2008-10-23 2:06 AM (#149299 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 2721
2000500100100
Location: Minneapolis
Just in...

"(Chrysler) would remain largely intact as a partner in the Renault-Nissan alliance.

It would participate in the joint purchasing, vehicle platform development and other programs, slashing its costs. But it would have its own management and retain its brands. There is little overlap among Renault, Nissan and Chrysler brands in most of the world."

Much better than if GM dissolved them!
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Rebels-59
Posted 2008-10-23 4:22 PM (#149362 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Board Moderator & Exner Expert 10K+

5000500020001001001002525
Location: .Norfolk..Mafia.. ,England UK
The Merger has Started.................

http://www.forwardlook.net/forums/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=22983&...
Top of the page Bottom of the page
forwardlookparts
Posted 2008-10-23 6:16 PM (#149375 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 2721
2000500100100
Location: Minneapolis
yuck.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Chrycoman
Posted 2008-10-24 12:24 AM (#149417 - in reply to #149375)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 1803
1000500100100100
Location: Vancouver, BC
There are rumours now that Renault-Nissan is interested in acquiring an interest in Chrysler. R-N apparently has been considering joining up with an American manufacturer. This is one union that would be good for Chrysler as both Renault and Nissan make vehicles that Chrysler could add to their line-up and vice-versa. Nothing in Chrysler's present car line-up competes with anything Renault or Nissan has. Plus there is the minivan and Jeep.

A Chrysler and GM "union" would be a kiss of death for Chrysler while a link up with Renault-Nissan would give hope to a Chrysler survival.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Doctor DeSoto
Posted 2008-10-24 12:26 AM (#149418 - in reply to #149417)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



50005000500050002000500
Location: Parts Unknown
Could this mean the return of fins and chrome ????
Top of the page Bottom of the page
forwardlookparts
Posted 2008-10-24 12:48 AM (#149420 - in reply to #148685)
Subject: Re: "Worries grow as GM-Chrysler talks gain momentum"



Expert

Posts: 2721
2000500100100
Location: Minneapolis
I love how no one reads previous posts before submitting. Seems to happen all the time on this site.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [50 messages per page]
Jump to forum :
Search this forum
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread



(Delete all cookies set by this site)