Fiat 500: If This is Chrysler's Future, There is None
Count Floyd
model, no room for more than probably two people, where is the family
going to sit? Load of groceries? That is what is wrong with this car:
This is not the car for Americans. I am a loyal Chrysler owner and the
2007 Caliber is just enough car for the job. These damn mini-cars are
great if you have a Durango/Aspen around to haul the family and
everything else. Just keep the PT Cruiser.
David E. Powell
They're jumping into a very crowded market with that idea, if they
bring the Fiat 500 to the US. Toyota has the high end of it with the
Prius (Overpriced IMO) while Honda has the stalwart Civic and Ford has
actually gone pretty solid with their own smaller cars. Chevy is also
angling for Toyota's "high end small car" market share with the Volt.
If Chrysler can stay "bad boy" with the muscle cars, there's an
opportunity for "counterprogramming" with an old school rebel image.
Also, they ought to be getting more manual shifters if they can if
they want that image, and offering both manual and auto versions
(maybe an auto stick?) on their sporty rides.
Count Floyd
>
> If Chrysler can stay "bad boy" with the muscle cars, there's an
> opportunity for "counterprogramming" with an old school rebel image.
> Also, they ought to be getting more manual shifters if they can if
> they want that image, and offering both manual and auto versions
> (maybe an auto stick?) on their sporty rides.
"Bad boy" image, yeah, bring back the Dodge sheriff with the sunglasses!
I think he was the inspiration for Jackie Gleason's character, Sheriff
Buford T. Justice. I remember the old Dodge commercials, I think that
they were using the Charger? Certainly not the Coronet!
QX
When I was stationed outside of Naples, Italy in the 1970's we were
always amazed at how many folks would ride around in the Fiat 500, or
"Cinquecento" as it was called. The locals would routinely get 5-6
folks in one of them!
Count Floyd
Yes, but were they coming up through a trap door in the bottom like a
clown car! It is like the French Citroen CV-2, cute, but completely
unacceptable for American roads.
Daniel Who Wants to Know
"David E. Powell" <David_Po...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:7f89c6e9-b60a-4818...@j9g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> They're jumping into a very crowded market with that idea, if they
> bring the Fiat 500 to the US. Toyota has the high end of it with the
> Prius (Overpriced IMO) while Honda has the stalwart Civic and Ford has
> actually gone pretty solid with their own smaller cars. Chevy is also
> angling for Toyota's "high end small car" market share with the Volt.
>
Umm... The NHW20 (2004-2009) and ZVW30 (2010-...) Prius are both classed as
midsize cars. The NHW11 (2001-2003) was a compact however. The vaporware
Volt is a compact car too.
who
QX <nom...@nospam.com> wrote:
> When I was stationed outside of Naples, Italy in the 1970's we were
> always amazed at how many folks would ride around in the Fiat 500, or
> "Cinquecento" as it was called. The locals would routinely get 5-6
> folks in one of them!
Italians are usually of a smaller body form. <:)
Josh S
"Daniel Who Wants to Know" <danielt...@merrychristmasi.com>
wrote:
The Prius is mid sized in interior VOLUME only.
Much of that volume is forward of the dash, useless for passengers.
I've been in many Prius, both owned by a relative and taxis. Here in
Vancouver many (maybe the majority) of taxis are the Toyota Corolla,
Pruis and Camry. I listed them starting at the most common.
IMO the Prius is a smaller than mid sized car, actually a bit smaller
than the Corolla for both passengers and luggage.
erschro...@gmail.com
wrote:
> On Aug 24, 1:43 pm, Count Floyd
>
> <CountFl...@MonsterChillerHorrorTheater.com> wrote:
> > Saw the pics and specs on this car. Another Mini clone. No four door
> > model, no room for more than probably two people, where is the family
> > going to sit? Load of groceries? That is what is wrong with this car:
> > This is not the car for Americans. I am a loyal Chrysler owner and the
> > 2007 Caliber is just enough car for the job. These damn mini-cars are
> > great if you have a Durango/Aspen around to haul the family and
> > everything else. Just keep the PT Cruiser.
>
> They're jumping into a very crowded market with that idea, if they
> bring the Fiat 500 to the US. Toyota has the high end of it with the
> Prius (Overpriced IMO) while Honda has the stalwart Civic and Ford has
> actually gone pretty solid with their own smaller cars. Chevy is also
> angling for Toyota's "high end small car" market share with the Volt.
The Fiat 500 is not a competitor for those cars. It's Toyota Yaris,
Nissan Versa, Honda Fit, new Ford Fiesta, Chevy Aveo (and maybe
Cruze), and yes, Mini.
>
> If Chrysler can stay "bad boy" with the muscle cars, there's an
> opportunity for "counterprogramming" with an old school rebel image.
> Also, they ought to be getting more manual shifters if they can if
> they want that image, and offering both manual and auto versions
> (maybe an auto stick?) on their sporty rides.
The problem is, the sales are often too low to justify the emissions
certification expense. But since Fiat sells most of its cars with
manuals, maybe you'll see that here.
erschro...@gmail.com
> In article <h6vqf6$mj...@news.netins.net>,
> "Daniel Who Wants to Know" <danielthechs...@merrychristmasi.com>
>
>
>
> wrote:
> > "David E. Powell" <David_Powell3...@msn.com> wrote in message
> >news:7f89c6e9-b60a-4818...@j9g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > They're jumping into a very crowded market with that idea, if they
> > > bring the Fiat 500 to the US. Toyota has the high end of it with the
> > > Prius (Overpriced IMO) while Honda has the stalwart Civic and Ford has
> > > actually gone pretty solid with their own smaller cars. Chevy is also
> > > angling for Toyota's "high end small car" market share with the Volt.
>
> > Umm... The NHW20 (2004-2009) and ZVW30 (2010-...) Prius are both classed as
> > midsize cars. The NHW11 (2001-2003) was a compact however. The vaporware
> > Volt is a compact car too.
>
> The Prius is mid sized in interior VOLUME only.
> Much of that volume is forward of the dash, useless for passengers.
No, interior volume is calculated from measurements of leg, head, hip,
and shoulder room. Room above the dash isn't included.
> I've been in many Prius, both owned by a relative and taxis. Here in
> Vancouver many (maybe the majority) of taxis are the Toyota Corolla,
> Pruis and Camry. I listed them starting at the most common.
>
> IMO the Prius is a smaller than mid sized car, actually a bit smaller
> than the Corolla for both passengers and luggage.
The range for mid-size is rather large, as for full-size (the Honda
Accord and the Lincoln Town Car, for example, are both full-size).
Josh S
<a500f523-3df1-490b...@a26g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
"erschro...@gmail.com" <erschro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 25, 11:51�pm, Josh S <J...@clean.spam> wrote:
> > In article <h6vqf6$mj...@news.netins.net>,
> > �"Daniel Who Wants to Know" <danielthechs...@merrychristmasi.com>
> >
> >
> >
> > �wrote:
> > > "David E. Powell" <David_Powell3...@msn.com> wrote in message
> > >news:7f89c6e9-b60a-4818...@j9g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > > > They're jumping into a very crowded market with that idea, if they
> > > > bring the Fiat 500 to the US. Toyota has the high end of it with the
> > > > Prius (Overpriced IMO) while Honda has the stalwart Civic and Ford has
> > > > actually gone pretty solid with their own smaller cars. Chevy is also
> > > > angling for Toyota's "high end small car" market share with the Volt.
> >
> > > Umm... The NHW20 (2004-2009) and ZVW30 (2010-...) Prius are both classed
> > > as
> > > midsize cars. �The NHW11 (2001-2003) was a compact however. �The
> > > vaporware
> > > Volt is a compact car too.
> >
> > The Prius is mid sized in interior VOLUME only.
> > Much of that volume is forward of the dash, useless for passengers.
>
> No, interior volume is calculated from measurements of leg, head, hip,
> and shoulder room. Room above the dash isn't included.
It is in the measurements I've seen in a Toyota document.
Dori A Schmetterling
DAS
To send an e-mail directly replace "spam" with "schmetterling"
---
"Count Floyd" <Count...@MonsterChillerHorrorTheater.com> wrote in message
news:dqFkm.632506$Lo1.1...@en-nntp-04.dc1.easynews.com...
[...]
CountFloyd
Would you like to be on an Interstate Highway, with everybody going 70, huge semi-trucks, etc. I would feel very
unsafe in that car.
--
"What do you mean there's no movie?"
Joe Pfeiffer
> Just curious. Why would a 2CV be unsuitable for American roads?
wikipedia.... top speed finally achieved 71 MPH in 1981, 33 years after
it was introduced. So let's say it was almost as unsuited for American
roads as for the German Autobahn. Then dial in the fact that the state
I live in is just slightly smaller than the entire country of Germany.
I'm sure people drove 2CVs all over Europe without being killed by an
oncoming Mercedes that failed to notice them. People managed the same
feat in the US in the original postwar VW Beetle. Neither one was even
marginally suitable for those roles.
--
As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin)
Bill Putney
> wikipedia.... top speed finally achieved 71 MPH in 1981, 33 years after
> it was introduced...
Now that's slow acceleration - 0-70 mph in 33 years!! bada-boom
--
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')
Dori A Schmetterling
{<HUGE (but appreciative) GROAN>}
DAS
To send an e-mail directly replace "spam" with "schmetterling"
---
"Bill Putney" <bp...@kinez.net> wrote in message
news:7g48jrF...@mid.individual.net...
[...]
Dori A Schmetterling
high-speed roads with large lorries on them. Even in lil' ol' Englande we
have them.
And under certain conditions the (non-commercial) traffic moves
bumper-to-bumper at 80 miles an hour or more, despite a lower speed limit.
I would suggest that the 2CV is not suited to any such road, American or
otherwise, and, I suggest, it was not meant for them. More a post-war
low-cost transport for rural and urban roads.
The fact that a US state might be bigger in area than Germany implies that
there are no motorways criss-crossing the Continent. Another US prejudice,
it seems.
For decades now there has been a Europe-wide system of road numbering (green
E numbers....) that covers all major routes, similar to US Interstates, so
one can cover hundreds of miles and cross a border or two (now as trivial as
crossing a US state line in most places of the EU) and still see the same
road number, in addition to the national one. Different countries have
shown different degrees of enthusiam in displaying these numbers, but they
exist, and some of the motorway-construction plans are
internatioally-coordinated.
DAS
To send an e-mail directly replace "spam" with "schmetterling"
---
"Joe Pfeiffer" <pfei...@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote in message
news:1b4ornb...@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net...
[...]
Steve
> Interesting. There seems to be an implication that in Europe we don't have
> high-speed roads with large lorries on them. Even in lil' ol' Englande we
> have them.
I think its also a consideration of what percentage of its life a car
will spend at high speeds. There are parts of the US today (urban areas)
where high speeds rarely apply- and things like Smart cars are getting
fairly common in some of those areas also.
But out in the open areas, almost every time a car gets on the road it
travels many miles at high speed. A 2CV just wouldn't hold up to that
*mechanically*, never mind safety. Maybe a Smart would hold up
mechanically, but with that short wheelbase and tall cab, I don't think
I'd like to ever drive one over 50. If I were in the market for a truly
tiny car, something with a better overall aspect ratio- like Mini or
Yaris, would be more to my liking.
Joe Pfeiffer
> Interesting. There seems to be an implication that in Europe we don't have
> high-speed roads with large lorries on them. Even in lil' ol' Englande we
> have them.
Well, in my post I did say it was as unsuited to US highways as to the
Autobahn.
> And under certain conditions the (non-commercial) traffic moves
> bumper-to-bumper at 80 miles an hour or more, despite a lower speed limit.
>
> I would suggest that the 2CV is not suited to any such road, American or
> otherwise, and, I suggest, it was not meant for them. More a post-war
> low-cost transport for rural and urban roads.
>
> The fact that a US state might be bigger in area than Germany implies that
> there are no motorways criss-crossing the Continent. Another US prejudice,
> it seems.
This may indeed be just a US misunderstanding, but I do have a sense
that I'm much more likely to hop in the car and visit my daughter 225
miles away (or vice versa) than a European does of making the same
drive. The European automatically thinks in terms of taking a train
that distance; no passenger train between here and Albuquerque even
exists.
MoPar Man
> This may indeed be just a US misunderstanding, but I do have a sense
> that I'm much more likely to hop in the car and visit my daughter
> 225 miles away (or vice versa) than a European does of making the
> same drive. The European automatically thinks in terms of taking
> a train that distance;
Yes, and probably going 140 km/hr at that.
And spending less for that train ticket than you'd be spending on gas,
even at US prices.
Dori A Schmetterling
DAS
To send an e-mail directly replace "spam" with "schmetterling"
---
"MoPar Man" <Mo...@Man.com> wrote in message
news:4A9DD2C3...@Man.com...
> Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>
>> This may indeed be just a US misunderstanding, but I do have a sense
>> that I'm much more likely to hop in the car and visit my daughter
>> 225 miles away (or vice versa) than a European does of making the
>> same drive. The European automatically thinks in terms of taking
>> a train that distance;
DAS: Not necessarily. Especially E Europeans drive very large distances to
western Europe. But is true we have a denser rail network.
>
> Yes, and probably going 140 km/hr at that.
DAS: Or more, increasingly. 250 km/h at peak from London to Paris and
Brussels. Wheee....
>
> And spending less for that train ticket than you'd be spending on gas,
> even at US prices.
DAS: Not necessarily...
Josh S
Joe Pfeiffer <pfei...@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:
> People managed the same
> feat in the US in the original postwar VW Beetle. Neither one was even
> marginally suitable for those roles.
I drove many highway miles in VW Beetles during the '58 to '63 period.
My highway speeds were 65 mph if I could get it to that speed. with the
wind, no problem, against he wind a problem, long hills a big problem.
The Beetle was the only small car at that time in Canada which could
cruise at 60+ mph without experiencing early engine failure. This is why
they became so popular, as well their excellent traction in snow. They
had a reputation for being tough and pushed off the roads the British
cars of that time, such as Austin, which was very fragile.
They did have their problems though, poor brakes, poor heater and
defroster, short muffler life, and sensitivity to cross winds and under
steer on slippery roads.
For their era they gave excellent fuel mileage, about the same as I now
get with my '95 Concorde and '04 300M.
Bill Putney
Didn't they also require valve adjustments every 3000 miles or so or
they would eat the valves? New valve tubes were required each time? I
never owned one, but seems I always heard that about them.
Ashton Crusher
In the US they way people drive, yes. I made a European "tour" back
in the 70's driving a VW Microbus that topped out at 65 km/hr (no I
don't mean mph) and had no problems on the German Autobahns because
people followed lane discipline. I stayed in the right lane and
people drove past us in the left lane, often looking at us funny.
Josh S
Bill Putney <bp...@kinez.net> wrote:
I didn't experience that valve problem, nor did I hear of it.
I adjusted the valves about every 20k miles.
Basically the engine was very solid and reliable, but some years changes
introduced minor problems. My '56 VW engine was 100% reliable, but was
very prone to carburetor icing during warm up on cold humid days. Later
a heater was added.
My '61 had an distributor problem, burning the points. A friend's had
cam problems during guarantee, about '59.
Bill Putney
From some quick Googling:
http://www.vwtrendsweb.com/tech/0106vwt_valve_adjustment/index.html
http://www.glenn-ring.com/tech/valve_adjustment.htm
http://autorepair.about.com/cs/doityourself/l/aa081603c.htm
http://www.airheadparts.com/page.asp?recid=73
Not sure why I heard about it and that it was critical to engine life
and you didn't. Anybody else remember this stuff?
wwilson
missing and misbehaving in general.
the upside was that I could go out on a Saturday morning and adjust the
valves in less than 10 minutes. The easiest valve adjustment I ever saw.
Some people did point out some real disadvantages. They were way
underpowered and could not keep up with highway traffic. At the slightes
hill, my '61 microvan would drop down to 40 miles per hour. Pretty scary
with a big semi tailgating behind.
They were also very light and were all over the road when the wind was
blowing.
Overall, I had mixed feelings. I liked it when I bought it and was glad
when I traded it in for a full size Dodge van that had no trouble keeping
up with traffic.
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Josh S
Bill Putney <bp...@kinez.net> wrote:
Only the first URL mentioned fear of engine failure on VW valve
adjustment.
Perhaps the reference was to later higher powered VW engines than mine.
I had a '56 and '61, only about 35 & 40 HP, also very low revving.
I didn't drive them very hard, just chugged along.
The main problem I heard around 1960 was people driving the VW van (BTW
the first mini van!) too hard and burning up the engine.
Being air cooled the engine was sensitive to hot temperatures and being
driven too hard.
Most times it was cool where I lived and the VW generally wasn't bought
by those wanting to race. They were driven moderately, so I expect that
was why valve adjustment wasn't a big problem where i lived.
I notice one chap said a valve adjustment was easy to do, only 10
minutes. I say BS to that, particularly if you didn't have a hoist.
You had to lay on your side, remove the valve cover, position the engine
cam, then adjust the valves. The valve cover needed to be properly
replaced with a good gasket, or it easily leaked. Repeat on the other
side!