Packard Forum Index » General

Actually, a major blow to S-P's survival was when the government, under Secy of Defense Charlie Wilson (ex GM) took away S-P's defense contracts, and gave them to GM as I remember. To say that his action was unethical is to put it mildly.

The only time I recall the government actually trying to help a minority maker was in the 70s or 80s when they encouraged GM to help AMC with emission control technology, in the interests of keeping GM from becoming a monopoly. Remember, that was the era when GM was very concerned that the government might force them to break up.

"The only time I recall the government actually trying to help a minority maker was in the 70s or 80s when they encouraged GM to help AMC with emission control technology, in the interests of keeping GM from becoming a monopoly. Remember, that was the era when GM was very concerned that the government might force them to break up."

Owen

There is that, but at the same time telling Chrysler to quit producing push-button trannys because they wanted all MFGR's to produce like equipped vehicles when in actually
the other guys could not get a push push button unit to work. The ones that Ford(Edsel) had were electric and they never could iron out the bugs. I don't know if GM ever tried it, but Chryslers was a dream, I feel in part because it was mechanical and not electrical. some time it just does not pay to have the best of something.

Gerardo: Concerning the Fiat Sedici is nothing more than a Suzuki SX4 with Fiat badges on it. The Sedici and the SX4 are produced in a Suzuki owned plant in Hungary. According to US News & World Report and J.D. Power and Associates the Suzuki SX4 has a poor reliability rating. Based on that information I would say that the same can be said about the Sedici.

The other thing about the Sedici that I would like to point out is that it comes equipped with all wheel drive which is different than four wheel drive. So I still stand by my statement that Fiat needs Chrysler knowledge to build true four wheel drive vehicles and SUVs.

It is interesting to note that as late as 2005 that Fiat's
car market share in Italy had dropped from a high of 60 percent in earlier times to a low of 28 percent. So it seems that many persons in Italy walked away from Fiat in vast numbers, the same as has happened to GM in the USA. Since 2005 how much home market share has Fiat gained back?

The last two pictures that I have posted are of the Sedici and the Suzuki SX4. Are the car buyers in Italy willing to buy a Japanese product with a reputation of poor reliability with a Fiat name plate on it.


John F. Shireman

Attach file:

---

  (64.61 KB)


  (28.50 KB)


  (14.38 KB)


  (55.46 KB)

I really don't know what your point is in all of this or why you brought up Fiat in the first place, into a discussion that was about Detroit, but ... well... OK....

Re: Fiat Sedici: please note that the article I posted clearly explains the Suzuki origins of the Sedici. I only posted to it (without comment BTW) to illustrate Fiat's involvement with 4 wheel drive in an SUV.

Fiat's new SUV will be this... to be introduced at the end of the year:

http://www.motorauthority.com/wp-content/uploads/Fiat/Bravo/SUV/BravoSUV.jpg

Fiat's Jeep-like 4x4 vehicle is the Iveco Campagnola introduced for 2009:

http://www.autoblog.it/post/15626/la-galleria-ufficiale-delliveco-campagnola

Iveco Campagnola web site (please click on "technical features" and read):http://www.campagnola.iveco.com/main_en.html

Iveco's "Massif 4x4":http://www.massif.iveco.com/

And you might be surprised to see Fiat's non-passenger 4x4s:

http://www.italiaspeed.com/2006/cars/other/iveco/11/investor_presentation_lingotto/niche_products.html

As you can see Fiat needs no Chrysler knowledge to build true four wheel drive vehicles. LOL.

It is no secret that the big prize for Fiat's involvement with Chrysler is the Jeep brand. It is really the only Chrysler brand that has cachet around the world. The name is an icon. It will be a great addition to Fiat's sterling brand names.... marques that still have romance and allure: Ferrari, Maserati, Alfa Romeo. Taking the Jeep brand and adding Fiat off-road technology will ensure Jeeps survival.

Hats off to the Challenger and Viper, but aside from perhaps them, no one is lusting after the Chrysler and Dodge brand names.

(BTW an aside: expect Italy's Ducati to announce buying another iconic American brand: Harley Davidson.)

Anyway, Chrysler/Fiat: as has been continually reported in the automotive and business press: it is Chrysler that is in the most needy situation:

"Fiat has been reborn with a knack for producing cool, small cars; its desire to return to the U.S. market after a 20-year break marks the best, perhaps only, hope for Chrysler."

"Documents released by the Obama administration show that Chrysler can't survive without merging with Fiat SpA."
http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200903300015DOWJONESDJONLINE000005_FORTUNE5.htm

More (from the Associated Press) Chrysler CEO Nardelli speaking:

"Fiat would make available to us its entire product portfolio and powertrain technology, worldwide distribution capabilities for vehicles we produce today and synergies in the areas of purchasing and engineering, among others,"

http://www.suntimes.com/autos/news/1479314,AP031609

------------

BTW: something interesting from a BusinessWeek article in 2006 back when GM bought into Fiat:

"But now, Fiat's slow-moving restructuring suddenly seems to be getting serious traction, making GM's decision to divorce Fiat look like a $2 billion blunder. "

http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/jul2006/gb20060726_749437.htm

------------

Re: Fiat's market share: Fiat with a 60% market share in Italy in 2005? This figure is wrong. Please site your sources. In the meantime: under Marchionne's management the company is continually increasing it's market share at home and the rest of Europe. Some info about Fiat's smash sales success the 500:

http://cars.uk.msn.com/news/car_news_article.aspx?cp-documentid=6735029

Gerardo,

There's little doubt in anyone's mind who has ever lived overseas, anywhere, but that Fiat IS a world player and has been, lo, these many, many years. Fiat had major problems in the United States because, like Morris, Renault and many other European manufacturers of the time, they didn't appear to really understand the distances, extreme heat and sustained highway speeds inherent in driving in this country. Fiats are plentiful all over the world (as are Renaults) yet, as in a recent post by Irish Packard, Chrysler is capable of building a serviceable, reliable product for use in other parts of the world. Chrysler, for many years, was a pioneer in innovative engineering. Their downfall occurred during the late 1960s and throughout the 1970s. There still wasn't anything wrong with their engineering and design efforts (to any greater extent than any other of the U.S. manufacturers) but they suffered even more unnecessary and unforgivable quality control problems than GM, Ford and AMC. After they quit building Packards, I owned several dependable Chrysler products and liked them until the trim started falling off of them, the fit and finish deteriorated and I got one (1975) that only had primer under the paint on the front half of the car.

I think that the marriage between Chrysler and Fiat could turn out to have positive advantages to all of their two sets of customers and might well be good for both companies.

Gerardo: First of all Iveco is just one of many divisions of Fiat SPA. However I was only talking about one division of Fiat SPA that being the automobile division not Fiat SPA commercial division and what they build.

The vehicle that you refer to that Fiat is coming out with in 2009 isn't a SUV. That vehicle is part of the current rage sweeping the auto industry today, which is called a crossover vehicle. Nothing more than another name for a station wagon equipped with all wheel drive. Which again is different from four wheel drive.

It seems that Fiat SPA is having a great deal of trouble with the off road technology that Iveco has in that they can't transfer that knowledge to the Fiat car division so that Fiat can build true four wheel vehicles and SUVs under the Fiat brand. This is were Fiat needs Chrysler's know how in building four wheel wheel drive vehicles and SUV"s for private purchase, that will sell and turn Fiat a profit. The is no doubt that Chrysler needs Fiat's help in a big way or it goes out of business. However I still maintain that in some
ways Fiat need Chrysler just as bad.

Now to clear up a statement I made last night. After WW II Fiat's home market share of autos sold in Italy at onetime was over 60 percent that market share decreased over the years until it reach a low 28 percent around 2005.

Talking about money problems it seems that Fiats might have some money problems for 2009 and 2010. According to Standard & Poors Fiat might have some problems on making payments on debt that is coming due in 2009 and 2010.

Sorry to say that I am no big fan of Fiat because of what I have seen in the past in the USA concerning Fiats lack of quality. There have been other companies from Europe that have come into this country and have tried owning and running American car companies and it has been a great failure both times.I really doubt that the third time will be the one that works. I certainly hope that I am wrong.

John F. Shireman

On the subject of GM I just watched a documentary on the Science Channel about the lunar rover, and how GM was able to build a rover that could fit into a equipment storage locker on the Lunar Module that was a pie shape of 5" deep by 5" high. So basically the created a vehicle where the tires folder up over the body, and then both end of the rover folder in. Basically the entire thing was spring loaded, so when then opened the cargo locker, it just folder out, and sprung into place. It had 4 wheel steering, and open steel mesh tires that would shed lunar sand as they rolled.

GM basically built it on their own dime as Nasa has cancelled a plan for a bigger rover/mobile lab as it would have required it's own rocket, and would have had to be send ahead of the Apollo 15 to the moon. But GM wanted to contribute, so Nasa jokingly told them if you can build a rover that fit in this equipment locker, then sure. Thinking that no one could have serious built a rover that deal with the terrain, seat two, and fold up into a pie sharped compartment.

GM did it in 16 months.

I found it fascinating. It pretty scary to think that the Apollo missions went to the moon and back when the computing power on the command module was actually less powerful than a Commodore 64 computer. Basically a Ipod shuffle has much more computing power.

Back to the current economic crisis...already in progress.

Odds, anyone?http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090405/ap_on_bi_ge/gm_henderson

comparing FIAT's old imports to the US with the Vega and Pinto might be a fair comparison, but not very relevant to today. All pretty much crap by today's standards. I'd be delighted to see Alfa Romeo bring in their current mid-size range - attractive and fun to drive cars.

Weren't there alot of cross breeding cars built in the late 70's to today?

Examples I can remember:

Dodge Colt= Mitsubishi 1980's
Geo Prizm= Toyota Corolla 1990's
Ford Courier= Mazda 2200 1970's-2000's
Ford Explorer= Mazda SUV's 1990's-2000's

Or Foreign operations vehicles imported to the states:

Mercury Capri 1970's
Buick Opel 1960's-70's
Ford Merker 1980's


I don't see why Chrysler Fiat wouldn't work well together.