Is VW really that bad? I mean, I don't think they're a good fit for the Chrysler brand, but I think they're a pretty ok company. Also this thread is over 10k posts long now. Cool
Not bad per sè. They just can't build anything with proper character and have very little ability to manage different brands - like, SEAT and Skoda are currently completely redundant, their ranges constituted of mostly badge-engineered models and de-contented variants of mainstream VWs. In their hands: - Chrysler would disappear. That's not necessarily a bad thing. - Dodge would end up rebodying federalized SEATs. Or Skodas. Might even get access to Audi tech for their fullsize. Picture this: a rebodied Audi A6 as the next Charger! Nope. - Jeep would end up building their next Grand Cherokee on the Touareg platform. The Grand Wagoneer could be based on the Bentley Bentayga platform. Which, incidentally, is still the Touareg platform... - Next RAM pickup would certainly be a reworked VW Amarok. Too small to replace the fullsize 1500? Well, they can stretch the platform! - FIAT would disappear everywhere but in Brazil. Again, not necessarily a bad thing. - Lancia would disappear too. Well, they are gone already, so it's no big deal. - Alfa Romeos would probably be rebodied Audis if they feel like trying hard enough, otherwise they'd simply slap an Alfa Romeo badge on existing SEATs. VAG like GM, selling the exact same car with 4 different logos - SEAT, Skoda, Dodge and Alfa Romeo. Component sharing at its finest. No, thanks.
I totally agree also that would make vw the biggest car maker in the world and make them a brand wich basically killed alfa wich would be super bad. Also dont forget they would basically kill ferrari like we know them now also i dont want to know what they would do to maserati
Nope they are still over 70 percent owned by fca and only 10 percent are available to be bought but those 10 percent are worth nearly as much as fca alltogether
It was spun-off in 2015. It basically belongs to the same people (Exor), but it's not integral part of FCA anymore. EDIT - It was 2015, my bad.
Oh good, if you'd said "the reliability of a Chrysler" then there would be a real problem. Of course, ignition switches and all that, but still.
Is any company better, because the main three large trucks any Joe can think of is GMC/Chevy (Basically the same), Ford, and Dodge oh I mean, "RAM" and to my knowledge all are pretty much the same except RAM have more interior room.
So IMSA started uploading vintage race broadcasts to YouTube along with some modern ones. Yessssssssss. I love when the YouTube subtitle generator mistakes the car engines for "(music)". A perfect description, I'd say.
That's why convertible versions of unibody cars are heavier than their hardtop counterparts as you need to add extra body strengthening. --- Post updated --- So can they have a smaller Accord in their lineup. The Accord has always been a bigger Civic ever since its inception.
I've noticed that pickups can more or less be sorted into two groups, and people typically only like one or the other. You've got the boxier "American" trucks like the F-Series, Silverado, RAM, and Tundra, then you have the more SUV-ish trucks designed for everywhere else, like the Ranger, Hilux, and VW Amarok. Like @SixSixSevenSeven, I personally much prefer the latter.
I think it's the front fascia that does it for me. The Toyota Tacoma and Hilux are pretty similar in the cab and bed region, but the Tacoma has a much more vertical and aggressive shape while the Hilux has more of a raked-back car front end and I much prefer the looks of the Tacoma.
