Chrysler pentastar returns

[AMGoff]

Well although I'm new here and new to Cadillacs in general (hell, this is only my second car from the General) I thought I had to chime in. First of all, the Pentastar is the corporate logo, the Chrysler division will retain the winged badge.

My entire life I've always been a Mopar man, I still own two and will always have at least one in my possession until the day I die. I've never understood why people like to bash Chrysler. We still have our '97 Sebring convertible that we bought new. Although it's been relegated to weekend duty during the summertime, we've only ever had to replace a tierod end in 85,000 miles. Even after ten years it is still one really good looking car. We also have our '89 Jeep Grand Wagoneer which I have owned for the past 13 years. It has 120,000 miles on it's 360 and the old gal barely feels broken in. Two of the four most dependable engines ever made came from Chrysler/AMC - the 5.9L V8 and the 4.0L straight six (the other two of course being the General's 3.8 and 5.7). A CJ-8 was my first car ever and I wish I never got rid of her. I've owned two Cherokees and each had over 200,000 miles when I got rid of them. My brother still has one of them with... wait for it... 302,000 miles, original motor and tranny. I also had a 300M which was my daily driver from 2000-2004, and then was my wife's dd from 04-last week, we gave it to my mom with 79,000 miles with never a single thing gone wrong with it.

Just remember, Chrysler was waaayyy ahead of both GM and Ford back in the 90's and would have continued putting out great cars if it weren't for those damn germans. Although I suppose if it weren't for the whole Diamler nonsense I probably never would have bought my Seville... but still Chrysler has never done me or a lot of other people for that matter, wrong. So quit the bashing, especially if you've never owned one... or six.

[Playdrv4me]

If it were not for the damn Germans, ruin it as they may have, Chrysler probably wouldnt exist at all today. For as long as I can remember, Chrysler has merely SURVIVED in the marketplace where it's two primary competitors often flourished and only until recently had serious turmoil of their own.

I've owned several Chrysler products, most of them Jeeps, which are the only Chrysler thing I will drive. Even though I love Jeeps, save for a 1996 Grand Cherokee Laredo 4.0L Selec-Trac I owned, they were the most problematic vehicles I've ever had. My 1999 Grand Cherokee Limited 4.7 AWD (designed well before Mercedes had anything to do with Chrysler mind you), was probably among the 2 worst vehicles I EVER owned. And I remember the constant chagrin I had over the fact that it was the cheesiest shit that would break, but it was always enough to leave you stranded somehow. Good riddance.

[I~LUV~Caddys8792]

I don't like a lot of modern Mopars for reasons that are found before a car is even bought. Things like exterior and interior design, build quality of interior pieces, etc etc. Aside from the 1st generation LHS and 300M, their whole "cab forward" design theme killed it for me...made a lot of big sedans that looked a lot like big elongated jellybeans. And I know this is kind of a moot point, but GM and Ford both have their luxury lines, and Chrysler hasn't really had once since 1983, when the Imperial was axed (yeah yeah, I know there was an Imperial made in like 1990 and 1991, but wasn't it just a Fifth Avenue with a different front end?). And it's like, yeah, Lincoln and Cadillac both offered a V8 in their large FWD sedans, Chrysler only had a V6. Granted, it was a great V-6, but still.

Other than those sort of things, Chrysler is ok in my book. And I really like old Mopars, from about 1957-72, that was such a great era.

[AMGoff]

Originally Posted by Playdrv4me

If it were not for the damn Germans, ruin it as they may have, Chrysler probably wouldnt exist at all today. For as long as I can remember, Chrysler has merely SURVIVED in the marketplace where it's two primary competitors often flourished and only until recently had serious turmoil of their own.

Oh no no no... you don't want to play this game with me. Chrysler had been consistently profitable since the 80's when they had paid their loans back seven years ahead of schedule. Regardless of what you may think the K-cars and the minivans were wildly successful and were the key to their turn around in the 80s. It was those profits of the 80's which helped finance a string of successes in the 90's - the LH cars, the JX "could" cars, the Neon, the Ram, the Wrangler, the Grand Cherokee, etc... Before the "merger" they were one of the most profitable, per car manufacturers in the world, their quality and dependability were up (much more so than Mercedes and other Euro makes), Chrysler Financial was raking in money and they had 8-12 Billion in the bank. Do you honestly think Diamler would have leeched onto a failing company, Chrysler was in a stronger position in just about every area compared to Mercedes. In fact it was the 300M which was the linchpin for the deal, being such large, good handling, potent, well built, mass production car made Chrysler all the more attractive to Mercedes. It was supposed to be a "merger of equals," which we know was a crock... and the rest is history.

Bob Eaton screwed to pooch royally when we went forward with the deal. If you want to go even deeper I partially blame Iacocca for picking Eaton over Lutz, Lutz would have nixed the whole deal from the very beginning.

The point of all of this is that you are talking out your ass. I can already tell you're going to be one of those people who likes to contradict anything anyone says. Others may be fine with it but if you're gonna play the Chrysler game you better do your homework first. The fact remains that Chrysler would have been in a much stronger position right now if it weren't for Diamler, hell they could have started losing money on every vehicle sold and still have turned a profit with Chrysler Financial alone.

If this all isn't enough I can gladly pen part 2 about how exactly Mercedes went about screwing Chrysler, but hopefully we get my point.

[gothicaleigh]

Originally Posted by Sandy

i have often wondered (in silence) why it is that people can come on this forum and "bad mouth" Chrysler Corporation, -OR- Ford Motor Company, -OR- GM, or a particular division of GM, and that's all okay and others may even join in the frey and offer up two pats on the back, figuretivly-speaking - to the original poster. agreeing with his distain for ANYTHING Chrysler or Dodge, or Ford or Mercury or Lincoln, and on those boards, they can bad mouth Cadillac, Buick, Pontiac & Chevrolet, and it's all fine & dandy & business per usual.
But, when I say that i'd ONLY buy an American car, and would never ever buy, lease or in any other way, cause a BMW, VW, mer-SAAY-dees, Porche to be built, and likewise any cars of any Asian manufacturer to be built, that I get critized! ???? Why is my partiotism challeged while others lack of such deemed "fine"?

You begin by essentially telling people to keep their opinions to themselves and then wrap things up by playing the patriotism card? Something is amiss...

Sandy, you are an intelligent guy whose opinions are well (and for the most part, deservedly) respected here. I would have thought that getting offended because some (okay, many) of us do not share those opinions would be beneath you.

For my part, I am very opinionated, and I don't think anyone would accuse me of being shy about it. If a manufactured product is crap, I'm not going to pretend it isn't simply because my opinion may tread upon someone else's preconceived notions or nostalgic feelings of said product.

Originally Posted by Sandy

FYI, about 10% of mechanical "things" that are on the 2006 Cadillac, were "invented" by Chrysler and 1st came to market on the Imperial, back in the fifties !! The very first use of 4-Wheel Disc Brakes on all 4 Wheels, Platinum Tipped Spark Plugs, Anti-Lok Braking System, Power Windows, Power Stering and Cassette Stereo and before that, 8-Track Tape Player and Electronic Ignition Systems ALL appeared FIRST on the Imperial.
Not Lexus, Not Mercedes, Not BMW and Not Infiniti....but on the Imperial!

Congratulations.
Now if they could just produce a decent car to attach all of those things to...

Face it, the best cars Chrysler has managed to produce to date have been based upon designs inherited from Daimler. If I wanted an old Mercedes design, I'd buy a W140, save $20k, and have a star that actually means something on the hood.

[flame on!]

[Playdrv4me]

Originally Posted by AMGoff

Oh no no no... you don't want to play this game with me. Chrysler had been consistently profitable since the 80's when they had paid their loans back seven years ahead of schedule. Regardless of what you may think the K-cars and the minivans were wildly successful and were the key to their turn around in the 80s. It was those profits of the 80's which helped finance a string of successes in the 90's - the LH cars, the JX "could" cars, the Neon, the Ram, the Wrangler, the Grand Cherokee, etc... Before the "merger" they were one of the most profitable, per car manufacturers in the world, their quality and dependability were up (much more so than Mercedes and other Euro makes), Chrysler Financial was raking in money and they had 8-12 Billion in the bank. Do you honestly think Diamler would have leeched onto a failing company, Chrysler was in a stronger position in just about every area compared to Mercedes. In fact it was the 300M which was the linchpin for the deal, being such large, good handling, potent, well built, mass production car made Chrysler all the more attractive to Mercedes. It was supposed to be a "merger of equals," which we know was a crock... and the rest is history.

Bob Eaton screwed to pooch royally when we went forward with the deal. If you want to go even deeper I partially blame Iacocca for picking Eaton over Lutz, Lutz would have nixed the whole deal from the very beginning.

The point of all of this is that you are talking out your ass. I can already tell you're going to be one of those people who likes to contradict anything anyone says. Others may be fine with it but if you're gonna play the Chrysler game you better do your homework first. The fact remains that Chrysler would have been in a much stronger position right now if it weren't for Diamler, hell they could have started losing money on every vehicle sold and still have turned a profit with Chrysler Financial alone.

If this all isn't enough I can gladly pen part 2 about how exactly Mercedes went about screwing Chrysler, but hopefully we get my point.

Youre telling me that Daimler's entire financial decision to purchase Chrysler was based around the rework of a rework LH platform 300M? It was a decent enough car, but...Give me a break.

Funny you should mention homework... I did my homework on the subject of Chrysler's many mishaps LONG ago, in fact it was a school project. Rather than argue your stodgy position with me, read the book "COMEBACK" by Paul Ingrassia (among others). It details with GREAT substance, all of the mis-steps chrysler made in the 80s and well into the early 90s. And that was *before* MB bought them out. The LH car, Neon and Ram era of the mid 90s was nothing more than a temporary bandage on a serious underlying problem. And what ended up happening? Exactly what was expected, a revamped product line, HEAVILY praised by the motoring press at the time (I read most every article ever published on the Cirrus/Breeze/Stratus triplets), was allowed to languish and become again nothing but a few platforms reworked to death to produce mediocre vehicles. Combine that with the Dodge Truck division's mounting transmission problems, several thousand paint lawsuits during the 90s over Chrysler's piss poor handling of basecoat and primer applications, and the financial stresses the company was already dealing with from Iacocca's reign... Well, I can continue.

In the end, Chrysler only has itself to blame for selling out to MB. Mopar-heads love to paint a picture of the German Luftwaffe swooping down upon Chrysler headquarters and demanding a merger.

Oddly enough, Chrysler is once again in a unique position to prove it's worth to the rest of the auto industry again... *If* the new leadership can "turn the ship around" so to speak. The golden age for Chrysler was the 60s and 70s, some might even throw some of their 50s creations in there... but after that it just became a joke.

[I~LUV~Caddys8792]

Originally Posted by AMGoff

Oh no no no... you don't want to play this game with me. Chrysler had been consistently profitable since the 80's when they had paid their loans back seven years ahead of schedule. Regardless of what you may think the K-cars and the minivans were wildly successful and were the key to their turn around in the 80s. It was those profits of the 80's which helped finance a string of successes in the 90's - the LH cars, the JX "could" cars, the Neon, the Ram, the Wrangler, the Grand Cherokee, etc... Before the "merger" they were one of the most profitable, per car manufacturers in the world, their quality and dependability were up (much more so than Mercedes and other Euro makes), Chrysler Financial was raking in money and they had 8-12 Billion in the bank. Do you honestly think Diamler would have leeched onto a failing company, Chrysler was in a stronger position in just about every area compared to Mercedes. In fact it was the 300M which was the linchpin for the deal, being such large, good handling, potent, well built, mass production car made Chrysler all the more attractive to Mercedes. It was supposed to be a "merger of equals," which we know was a crock... and the rest is history.

Bob Eaton screwed to pooch royally when we went forward with the deal. If you want to go even deeper I partially blame Iacocca for picking Eaton over Lutz, Lutz would have nixed the whole deal from the very beginning.

The point of all of this is that you are talking out your ass. I can already tell you're going to be one of those people who likes to contradict anything anyone says. Others may be fine with it but if you're gonna play the Chrysler game you better do your homework first. The fact remains that Chrysler would have been in a much stronger position right now if it weren't for Diamler, hell they could have started losing money on every vehicle sold and still have turned a profit with Chrysler Financial alone.

If this all isn't enough I can gladly pen part 2 about how exactly Mercedes went about screwing Chrysler, but hopefully we get my point.

Boy, 11 posts and you're already flaming moderators. You're gonna go far here. Like the man said, he's owned multiple Jeeps before, so he's done his homework.

[Playdrv4me]

Originally Posted by gothicaleigh

You begin by essentially telling people to keep their opinions to themselves and then wrap things up by playing the patriotism card? Something is amiss...

Sandy, you are an intelligent guy whose opinions are well (and for the most part, deservedly) respected here. I would have thought that getting offended because some (okay, many) of us do not share those opinions would be beneath you.

For my part, I am very opinionated, and I don't think anyone would accuse me of being shy about it. If a manufactured product is crap, I'm not going to pretend it isn't simply because my opinion may tread upon someone else's preconceived notions or nostalgic feelings of said product.



Congratulations.
Now if they could just produce a decent car to attach all of those things to...

Face it, the best cars Chrysler has managed to produce to date have been based upon designs inherited from Daimler. If I wanted an old Mercedes design, I'd buy a W140, save $20k, and have a star that actually means something on the hood.

[flame on!]

I agree with you to a point, absolutely.

However, let us not forget that the brand that carried Chrysler through most of the 80s and early 90s was Jeep (the Caravan played a role there as well). Up until VERY recently, Chrysler had left Jeep mostly to it's own devices, which resulted in some stellar 4x4s over the years. The ZJ and even the WJ Grand Cherokee while problematic, were no doubt some of the most capable luxury equipped off-roaders on the planet, on par or just behind anything Land Rover had to offer, with far more reliability. Jeep has for the most part, been immune to the problems affecting the company's other divisions, but now that they finally ceded control over to the top brass... The writing is as much on the wall for Jeep as it is any other division of Chrysler. Things started getting curious when the Liberty showed up... but the Patriot, Commander and especially that hideous Compass atrocity are an embarrasment to everything Jeep has stood for for nearly a century.

[AMGoff]

Originally Posted by I~LUV~Caddys8792

Boy, 11 posts and you're already flaming moderators. You're gonna go far here. Like the man said, he's owned multiple Jeeps before, so he's done his homework.

Moderator? Am I to be impressed or worried?

What's gonna happen, I get banned? If so that would certainly show the caliber of those running this site. He has an opinion and I think he's wrong. If that is what you call "flaming," then you are correct sir, I am. I think there are worse things in this world than disagreeing with some moderator on a Cadillac message board. I've never shut my mouth with anyone I've disagreed with before so why would I start now?

When I signed up I didn't realize this was some "good ol' boys" club run by arrogant snobs. Needless to say I already know there are some good people on here who like to talk about Cadillacs and give advice on them without bragging, pretension, or looking down on others.

[I~LUV~Caddys8792]

A educated and mature discussion is one thing, we love those, flaming is another. This is flaming and we don't tolerate that, especially by someone that's so new. We're not an arrogant bunch, heck no, not at all, but we don't need a bunch of people running around insulting everyone. And we don't particularly like being called a bunch of arrogant snobs.

[Playdrv4me]

Originally Posted by AMGoff

Moderator? Am I to be impressed or worried?

What's gonna happen, I get banned? If so that would certainly show the caliber of those running this site. He has an opinion and I think he's wrong. If that is what you call "flaming," then you are correct sir, I am. I think there are worse things in this world than disagreeing with some moderator on a Cadillac message board. I've never shut my mouth with anyone I've disagreed with before so why would I start now?

When I signed up I didn't realize this was some "good ol' boys" club run by arrogant snobs. Needless to say I already know there are some good people on here who like to talk about Cadillacs and give advice on them without bragging, pretension, or looking down on others.

No one is threatening to ban you, and no one is certainly asking you not to disagree with anything you see posted on this site.

What we *are* merely asking is that if you want to play in our sandbox, you check that south Jersey attitude at the door. You are certainly entitled to run your mouth all you want, but that doesn't mean anyone has to listen, especially with an abrasive attitude.

Take Sandy for example, a fellow Jersey-ite of yours, and a man with whom I share MANY disagreements on imports, however no matter how heated our debates get, he has NEVER accused me of "talking out of my ass" or anything else of that caliber. Nor have I ever made such a comment toward, or about him. I consider Sandy a great personal friend and have nothing but respect for him, despite our disagreements.

Also, no where is it written that anyone has to share your opinions/views/thoughts on Chrysler to be a "good person" capable of giving quality advice and information about an entirely different car. We are all equals here with differing points of view.

[I~LUV~Caddys8792]

Yeah dude, we like a interesting discussion from time to time, it keeps things fresh around here, but please, keep the attitude at the door. I think it's great that we have people on here that like cars other than Cadillacs and talk about them, it keeps things fresh, so you're more than welcome to stay as long as you abide by our meager rules.

[dkozloski]

Originally Posted by Sandy

i have often wondered (in silence) why it is that people can come on this forum and "bad mouth" Chrysler Corporation, -OR- Ford Motor Company, -OR- GM, or a particular division of GM, and that's all okay and others may even join in the frey and offer up two pats on the back, figuretivly-speaking - to the original poster. agreeing with his distain for ANYTHING Chrysler or Dodge, or Ford or Mercury or Lincoln, and on those boards, they can bad mouth Cadillac, Buick, Pontiac & Chevrolet, and it's all fine & dandy & business per usual.
But, when I say that i'd ONLY buy an American car, and would never ever buy, lease or in any other way, cause a BMW, VW, mer-SAAY-dees, Porche to be built, and likewise any cars of any Asian manufacturer to be built, that I get critized! ???? Why is my partiotism challeged while others lack of such deemed "fine"?
FYI, about 10% of mechanical "things" that are on the 2006 Cadillac, were "invented" by Chrysler and 1st came to market on the Imperial, back in the fifties !! The very first use of 4-Wheel Disc Brakes on all 4 Wheels, Platinum Tipped Spark Plugs, Anti-Lok Braking System, Power Windows, Power Stering and Cassette Stereo and before that, 8-Track Tape Player and Electronic Ignition Systems ALL appeared FIRST on the Imperial.
Not Lexus, Not Mercedes, Not BMW and Not Infiniti....but on the Imperial!

The disc brakes on old Imperials were not the disc brake we know today. They were stacked up discs kind of like a clutch and were adapted from brakes originally intended for utility trailers. The first U.S. car with disc brakes like those on cars today was the Crosley "Hotshot". The first car with disc brakes that actually worked were on the "C" model Jaguar. GM had electronic ignition that actually worked before Chrysler. In fact, Chrysler had a couple of disasterous tries at electronic ignition while AC Delco sailed along.

[dkozloski]

By the way 90% of the mechanical stuff on Chrysler products was invented by GM. The lifelong history of Chrysler engineering is "a day late and a dollar short". No worse series of transmissions has ever been put into a vehicle than the crap stuck in Chryslers in the forties and fifties. Their salvation came with copying a Ford effort. Anything innovative that came out of Chrysler was brilliantly conceived and poorly executed. The so-called Hemi took years to work the bugs out of the valve train. It was hopelessly overweight and still is.

[Jesda]

I happen to like the Chrysler of the 90s. It was among their most creative years (HOW CAN YOU FORGET THE VIPER YOU WHINY OLD FARTS), despite poor execution. Arrogance and apathy were big problems in Auburn Hills, just like at GM and Ford, but it seemed much worse because Chrysler always had much less of a pillow to fall on.

Oh and LOL@IAN for spending so much time reading about cloud cars!