Dodge/Chrysler News

Midnight_Rider · Post by **Midnight_Rider** » Wed Jan 22, 2014 1:17 am

MyNeonSaysHi wrote:Fiat completes Chrysler takeover, company is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Fiat

W-A-Y better than Daimler or Cerberus but sad that the new company will be headquartered overseas.

MyNeonSaysHi · Post by **MyNeonSaysHi** » Thu Feb 06, 2014 11:44 pm

Chrysler's SRT head, Ralph Gilles, has downplayed rumors pointing to a Barracuda nameplate revival.

Speaking at the Chicago Auto Show, the executive noted that the idea "has grown legs of its own" despite no internal decision to develop such a project, according to quotes posted by Automobile Magazine.

To fit within the current SRT offerings, he argues that a Barracuda would have to be smaller than the Challenger. Consequently, it would require significant investment to build a new platform.

The company is said to be open to a small performance-oriented car, though it will likely start with an SRT-badged Dart once an appropriate powertrain has been chosen.

Gilles did not absolutely dismiss the Barracuda, noting that "I never say never" and acknowledging persistent interest in the "romantic, very storied name."

Early rumors suggested the company was preparing to replace the Challenger with the Barracuda. This may have been under consideration when Challenger sales began to waver, but Dodge shows no signs of axing its current two-door muscle car.

Post by **occasional demons** » Fri Feb 07, 2014 9:27 pm

MyNeonSaysHi wrote:
To fit within the current SRT offerings, he argues that a Barracuda would have to be smaller than the Challenger.

I think he hit his head signing Gramp's dash.

Midnight_Rider · Post by **Midnight_Rider** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 1:00 am

I really think that Ralph has something up his sleeve- just way too much speculating in the press for him to say anything right now.

catalyst · Post by **catalyst** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:22 am

Dart coupe rebadged as an SRT Barracuda...

theColonel · Post by **theColonel** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 12:03 pm

catalyst wrote:Dart coupe rebadged as an SRT Barracuda...

I believe the 2015 Chrysler 200 platform holds promise ... 295hp V6 with AWD

INVUJerry · Post by **INVUJerry** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 1:05 pm

theColonel wrote:
catalyst wrote:Dart coupe rebadged as an SRT Barracuda...
I believe the 2015 Chrysler 200 platform holds promise ... 295hp V6 with AWD

I would prefer something lighter than the 200 or the dart. The 200 weighs 3400 lbs and the dart weighs almost as much. A sporty 2 door car like the subaru brz/scion frs at 2500lbs with 200hp and rwd would be the ticket.

sidepipe87 · Post by **sidepipe87** » Sun Feb 09, 2014 10:52 am

occasional demons wrote:
MyNeonSaysHi wrote:
To fit within the current SRT offerings, he argues that a Barracuda would have to be smaller than the Challenger.

I think he hit his head signing Gramp's dash.

No, I think this is accurate and history tells the story. The original Barracuda was smaller than the Challenger....

...By 2 inches in the rear floor pans

theColonel · Post by **theColonel** » Sun Feb 09, 2014 11:54 am

sidepipe87 wrote:
MyNeonSaysHi wrote: To fit within the current SRT offerings, he argues that a Barracuda would have to be smaller than the Challenger.
No, I think this is accurate and history tells the story. The original Barracuda was smaller than the Challenger....

...By 2 inches in the rear floor pans

in addition to the history, current Mustangs and Camaros weigh less than the Challengers and handle better ...
a smaller car would be more competitive. The current Challenger SRT-8 is basically a two door version of the
Chrysler 300C SRT-8

Post by **occasional demons** » Sun Feb 09, 2014 12:26 pm

The original was a(n A body) Barracuda, and there wasn't a sister car. The E body 'Cuda and the Challenger shared the same platform. So depending on which version you want... I prefer the E body style over the original A body, but would take a later A body version over the E body.

But my point was, marketing aside, other than some sheet metal changes, there is nothing holding them back from making a 'Cuda based off of the current Challenger.

Back to the E bodys, I will take working on them over either A body platform.

theColonel · Post by **theColonel** » Sun Feb 09, 2014 12:41 pm

occasional demons wrote:The original was a(n A body) Barracuda, and there wasn't a sister car. The E body 'Cuda and the Challenger shared the same platform. So depending on which version you want... I prefer the E body style over the original A body, but would take a later A body version over the E body.

But my point was, marketing aside, other than some sheet metal changes, there is nothing holding them back from making a 'Cuda based off of the current Challenger.

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/04/29/old- ... package-f/

gtxtreme19 · Post by **gtxtreme19** » Sun Feb 09, 2014 2:15 pm

mmm, I've always wanted a Sox and Martin cuda. I'm not even sure why, they're kind of ugly. The mid 60's fast back cars (barracudas and chargers mostly) are some of my favorites.

sidepipe87 · Post by **sidepipe87** » Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:49 pm

occasional demons wrote:The original was a(n A body) Barracuda, and there wasn't a sister car. The E body 'Cuda and the Challenger shared the same platform. So depending on which version you want... I prefer the E body style over the original A body, but would take a later A body version over the E body.

I KNEW technicality was going to come back and bite me in the ass when I typed that but I was too lazy to go back and correct it. I figured, "meh, he'll know what I meant when I said 'original' ". So what I really meant was one from the original era they were produced alongside the Challenger, not a 65-69 bodied car.

theColonel · Post by **theColonel** » Tue Feb 11, 2014 11:01 am

sidepipe87 wrote:
occasional demons wrote:The original was a(n A body) Barracuda, and there wasn't a sister car. The E body 'Cuda and the Challenger shared the same platform. So depending on which version you want... I prefer the E body style over the original A body, but would take a later A body version over the E body.
I KNEW technicality was going to come back and bite me in the ass when I typed that but I was too lazy to go back and correct it. I figured, "meh, he'll know what I meant when I said 'original' ". So what I really meant was one from the original era they were produced alongside the Challenger, not a 65-69 bodied car.

I knew what you meant ... E body cars (70-74) are the most valuable to present day collectors. E body was wider, and shared many
components with B body cars, like the Plymouth Roadrunner. The wider cars allowed 440 wedge, and 426 hemi engines to fit without bizarre
exhaust manifolds, that reduced horsepower.

r/tguy02 · Post by **r/tguy02** » Tue Feb 11, 2014 11:19 am

mmm sexy hood

MyNeonSaysHi · Post by **MyNeonSaysHi** » Thu Feb 13, 2014 12:49 am

Chrysler made what was one of the biggest debuts of the 2014 North American International Auto Show last month when it debuted the heavily redesigned 200. While impressive on its own, the sleek sedan's Mopar counterpart, which was tucked away in a corner during the Detroit show, adds even more visual flair.

Based on the Chrysler 200S, the showcar had already benefitted from Lunar White Tricoat paint and meaty, 19-inch wheels (now in Satin Lite Bronze finish). White leather seats with bronze stitching accented the cabin treatment.

For Chicago, Chrysler added a Mopar body kit and new upper and lower grilles, both of which give the four-door a considerably more menacing look. The rear fascia is set off by a new bumper and a revised set of exhaust tips. The cabin is unchanged from the Detroit car.

Have a look up top for our live photos from the floor of McCormick Place in Chicago

More pictures:
http://www.autoblog.com/2014/02/07/mopa ... cago-2014/

C1DoG · Post by **C1DoG** » Thu Feb 13, 2014 7:49 am

That Chrysler is actually pretty nice looking.

Post by **jonnymopar** » Thu Feb 13, 2014 8:21 pm

Damn that is one nice looking car.

theColonel · Post by **theColonel** » Thu Feb 13, 2014 9:20 pm

X3 ... sure beats the Chevrolet Volt, which comes from Obummer's other car company

C1DoG · Post by **C1DoG** » Thu Feb 13, 2014 10:25 pm

http://www.chrysler.com/en/2015/200/

I am liking this one. http://www.chrysler.com/en/2015/200/s/

Midnight_Rider · Post by **Midnight_Rider** » Fri Feb 14, 2014 12:43 am

theColonel wrote:X3 ... sure beats the Chevrolet Volt, which comes from Obummer's other car company

There is no ownership of Chrysler Group LLC by the federal government so I don't understand your comment.

theColonel · Post by **theColonel** » Fri Feb 14, 2014 9:22 am

Midnight_Rider wrote:There is no ownership of Chrysler Group LLC by the federal government so I don't understand your comment.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfishe ... tudy-says/

Post by **occasional demons** » Fri Feb 14, 2014 9:43 am

The loans have been repaid, so what's your point?

Also from the link you provided:

(Everybody also seems to forget that George Bush authorized the bailouts.)

The better man won the election, maybe not the best person, but better than the other selections. Hopefully better choices are produced in the future.

Get over it, and focus on the future.

/end of political BS in a car thread.

theColonel · Post by **theColonel** » Fri Feb 14, 2014 11:50 am

occasional demons wrote:The loans have been repaid, so what's your point?

Also from the link you provided:

(Everybody also seems to forget that George Bush authorized the bailouts.) And the government engineered a reorganization that upended two centuries of bankruptcy law by handing the equity in Chrysler to the United Autoworkers to cover their pension plans, rather than honoring the claims of other creditors. This big favor to the UAW may have bred bad feelings among the millions of auto buyers who didn't receive similar treatment from the government.
/end of political BS in a car thread.

... try reading the whole paragraph ... I agree that both candidates in 2012 really sucked

http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2012 ... rkers.html

MyNeonSaysHi · Post by **MyNeonSaysHi** » Sat Feb 15, 2014 11:13 am

/end of political BS in a car thread.

Word.

http://www.allpar.com/cars/me412.html

Anyone remember this car! ^^^

theColonel · Post by **theColonel** » Mon Feb 17, 2014 7:28 pm

Fiat's access to Chrysler funds curbed by dividend cap, debt covenants

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/ ... AO20140217

r/tguy02 · Post by **r/tguy02** » Mon Feb 17, 2014 8:50 pm

^ that doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling, I see history repeating itself again

ragek23 · Post by **ragek23** » Mon Feb 17, 2014 9:50 pm

hmm Dart GT: $21,000
200 LX (base)$ 21,700
200 Limited $23,255

all three cars have the same engines and curb weight. The Dart gets the worst fuel economy and its the only manual. If your looking for the commuter family sedan id say go with the 200.
Do these cars share the same sub frame? If so it makes me wonder about the SRT4 AWD since the 200S comes in AWD and 295hp.

Post by **racer12306** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 1:57 pm

Any more, automatics are, as a rule, getting better fuel economy than the manual versions of a car. There are exceptions but in the economy minded configurations, automatics are winning. The programming and designs of modern automatics are definitely doing their part.

Post by **jonnymopar** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:04 pm

racer12306 wrote:Any more, automatics are, as a rule, getting better fuel economy than the manual versions of a car. There are exceptions but in the economy minded configurations, automatics are winning. The programming and designs of modern automatics are definitely doing their part.

100% truth. For several compact models, this is old news. Sophisticated TCMs as well as far advanced mechanical designs have really driven automatics to new levels.