Will there be some sort of used pickups available soon at your local auctions?
Fiat/Chrysler to buy back pickups
- Thread starter Kruse
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
Will there be some sort of used pickups available soon at your local auctions?
Just add IFS and out the door you go.
Will there be some sort of used pickups available soon at your local auctions?
Just add IFS and out the door you go.
Haha.. Chrysler
Asw an engineer, I don't see what solid front axles has to do with the problem. Sound like a hydraulic steering stabilizer would fix it. These don't use Kingpins correct? I just never liked the Leading front control link design - on the old Cherokee at least. Basically a GM B body 4 link rear end turned around.
The issue was the steering shaft components, not the solid front axle.
Amazing no one here has touched on the driving reason for the forced buyback and the fine- massive inaction by Cerebus & Fiat for many years.
Amazing no one has touched on the inadequacy of the fine- $105M sounds like a lot until you realize that FCA is sitting on $20B of cash and cash equivalents. They will write a check and move on as if nothing ever happened.
Now that the worst is over, we'll hear a lot less about the need for Fiat to merge out FCA.
Amazing no one here has touched on the driving reason for the forced buyback and the fine- massive inaction by Cerebus & Fiat for many years.
Amazing no one has touched on the inadequacy of the fine- $105M sounds like a lot until you realize that FCA is sitting on $20B of cash and cash equivalents. They will write a check and move on as if nothing ever happened.
Now that the worst is over, we'll hear a lot less about the need for Fiat to merge out FCA.
Originally Posted By: crazyoildude
itguy08...
What engine in that escape and what oil weight do you use?
3.0 and 5w30 now to try to stem the valve train cover oil leak that plagues them. Been using that for the past 25k or so. Prior to that it was 5w20.
itguy08...
What engine in that escape and what oil weight do you use?
3.0 and 5w30 now to try to stem the valve train cover oil leak that plagues them. Been using that for the past 25k or so. Prior to that it was 5w20.
Originally Posted By: HangFire
Amazing no one here has touched on the driving reason for the forced buyback and the fine- massive inaction by Cerebus & Fiat for many years.
And poor design and engineering at Chrysler. That's their MO since they have been around. Garbage.
Quote:
Amazing no one has touched on the inadequacy of the fine- $105M sounds like a lot until you realize that FCA is sitting on $20B of cash and cash equivalents. They will write a check and move on as if nothing ever happened.
The fine is quite small. However the buyback will cost them a bunch.
500,000 units * $5,000 each = $2,500,000,000.00 That's $2.5 Billion or ~10% of their cash. And given some of those units are 2012 vehicles, I't think the buyback will be more then $5k. The cost could be quite large.
My question would be is this a true buyback in that "Take my car and I'll take your $5k." Or will it be "Take my car and you'll give me $5k towards a new FCA vehicle."? The former will sting a lot. The latter won't.
Amazing no one here has touched on the driving reason for the forced buyback and the fine- massive inaction by Cerebus & Fiat for many years.
And poor design and engineering at Chrysler. That's their MO since they have been around. Garbage.
Quote:
Amazing no one has touched on the inadequacy of the fine- $105M sounds like a lot until you realize that FCA is sitting on $20B of cash and cash equivalents. They will write a check and move on as if nothing ever happened.
The fine is quite small. However the buyback will cost them a bunch.
500,000 units * $5,000 each = $2,500,000,000.00 That's $2.5 Billion or ~10% of their cash. And given some of those units are 2012 vehicles, I't think the buyback will be more then $5k. The cost could be quite large.
My question would be is this a true buyback in that "Take my car and I'll take your $5k." Or will it be "Take my car and you'll give me $5k towards a new FCA vehicle."? The former will sting a lot. The latter won't.
If it affects the 1500s as well, it shouldn't have to do with having solid axles or independent suspension. The 1500s use rack and pinion and the 2500+ would use a steering box setup.
Solid axles on the from have been around for years and no problem. I had a 1994 Dodge Ram 1500 and it had a solid front axle and my Dodge 2500 has one without issues. Its a 2006. They put IFS to save money. Less steel and a lot cheaper.
As much fun as it is to participate in the "flavor of the month" brand bashing, all I see in this recall/buyback is the NHTSA taking longer to catch up with FCA than it did with Toyota, GM, Honda, and probably others (does the Hyundai/Kia $100 million false fuel economy fine count?).
The NHTSA has been criticized for its handling of the earlier recall crises and its apparent they are trying to live up to their promises to get tougher.
One commonality of these massive recalls is that it seems to not affect sales. Go figure. If one wants to claim owner loyalty based on manufacturer integrity, the list is very short. In all of these massive recalls with fines, one of the real issues has been the lack of integrity by ALL of the manufacturers to handle the problems:
Toyota - "The agencies accused Toyota of burying knowledge of safety defects. As part of a deferred prosecution settlement with the Justice Department, Toyota admitted "that it misled U.S. consumers by concealing and making deceptive statements about two safety issues affecting its vehicles, each of which caused a type of unintended acceleration."
GM - "The fault had been known to GM for at least a decade prior to the recall being declared. Some have suggested that the company actually approved the switches in 2002 even though they knew they might not meet safety standards. The company is facing multiple investigations into why it did not attempt to fix these faulty ignitions sooner, including a federal criminal probe..."
Honda- "The $70m fine imposed on Honda was related to two serious infractions the company acknowledged in November amid the airbag furor. One was for failing to report 1,729 claims over the past 11 years that alleged deaths and injuries occurred in accidents involving its vehicles. The second was the result of Honda under-reporting the number of warranty claims during the same period."
There's several parts of the FCA recall/buyback that don't add up. FCA states that 60% of the trucks have already been repaired and that owners can choose repair over buyback. It states some of the problems cannot be repaired. It also states that FCA can repair and resale the vehicles it buys back.
Toyota was fined $50 million for all of their mess. GM was only fined $35 million (ignition debacle) vs. Honda and FCA's $70 and $100 million.
Who will be next??
Maybe itguy08's beloved Ford?? I see that just 2 years ago Ford was fined $17 million for its mishandling of circa 2002+ Ford Escape's death inducing throttles that may not have been repaired correctly....better check that out: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/russell-mokhiber/ford-fined-1735-million-n_b_3732186.html
The NHTSA has been criticized for its handling of the earlier recall crises and its apparent they are trying to live up to their promises to get tougher.
One commonality of these massive recalls is that it seems to not affect sales. Go figure. If one wants to claim owner loyalty based on manufacturer integrity, the list is very short. In all of these massive recalls with fines, one of the real issues has been the lack of integrity by ALL of the manufacturers to handle the problems:
Toyota - "The agencies accused Toyota of burying knowledge of safety defects. As part of a deferred prosecution settlement with the Justice Department, Toyota admitted "that it misled U.S. consumers by concealing and making deceptive statements about two safety issues affecting its vehicles, each of which caused a type of unintended acceleration."
GM - "The fault had been known to GM for at least a decade prior to the recall being declared. Some have suggested that the company actually approved the switches in 2002 even though they knew they might not meet safety standards. The company is facing multiple investigations into why it did not attempt to fix these faulty ignitions sooner, including a federal criminal probe..."
Honda- "The $70m fine imposed on Honda was related to two serious infractions the company acknowledged in November amid the airbag furor. One was for failing to report 1,729 claims over the past 11 years that alleged deaths and injuries occurred in accidents involving its vehicles. The second was the result of Honda under-reporting the number of warranty claims during the same period."
There's several parts of the FCA recall/buyback that don't add up. FCA states that 60% of the trucks have already been repaired and that owners can choose repair over buyback. It states some of the problems cannot be repaired. It also states that FCA can repair and resale the vehicles it buys back.
Toyota was fined $50 million for all of their mess. GM was only fined $35 million (ignition debacle) vs. Honda and FCA's $70 and $100 million.
Who will be next??
Maybe itguy08's beloved Ford?? I see that just 2 years ago Ford was fined $17 million for its mishandling of circa 2002+ Ford Escape's death inducing throttles that may not have been repaired correctly....better check that out: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/russell-mokhiber/ford-fined-1735-million-n_b_3732186.html
Originally Posted By: doitmyself
Maybe itguy08's beloved Ford?? I see that just 2 years ago Ford was fined $17 million for its mishandling of circa 2002+ Ford Escape's death inducing throttles that may not have been repaired correctly....better check that out: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/russell-mokhiber/ford-fined-1735-million-n_b_3732186.html
Thanks for calling me out. While I drive Fords and generally like them, they are not my beloved. They are basically average vehicles. And we've had good luck with them. As did my previous Nissan product.
I've got no issues with other automakers with the exception of Chrysler. With good reason - they failed TWICE and got bailouts each time. That's something that should have never happened Should GM get another one, I'll ride them as hard too.
But then again, I'm not the "new school" where everyone gets a trophy. There are winners and losers in life. Chrysler has been a loser for at least the past 40 years. Time for them to go.
Maybe itguy08's beloved Ford?? I see that just 2 years ago Ford was fined $17 million for its mishandling of circa 2002+ Ford Escape's death inducing throttles that may not have been repaired correctly....better check that out: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/russell-mokhiber/ford-fined-1735-million-n_b_3732186.html
Thanks for calling me out. While I drive Fords and generally like them, they are not my beloved. They are basically average vehicles. And we've had good luck with them. As did my previous Nissan product.
I've got no issues with other automakers with the exception of Chrysler. With good reason - they failed TWICE and got bailouts each time. That's something that should have never happened Should GM get another one, I'll ride them as hard too.
But then again, I'm not the "new school" where everyone gets a trophy. There are winners and losers in life. Chrysler has been a loser for at least the past 40 years. Time for them to go.
Originally Posted By: Kira
Hello, Allow me to repeat myself.
"I'd rather be fitted with an outdated, unwashed, artificial heart hacked from the chest of an AlQuida operative with a different blood type than me than own a MOPAR, RAM or any other vehicle they make.
FCA should make septic tanks and garbage cans.....oh wait, they already do! Kira
I'm sorry...do you have anything to add that ANYONE cares about?
Thought not.
Hello, Allow me to repeat myself.
"I'd rather be fitted with an outdated, unwashed, artificial heart hacked from the chest of an AlQuida operative with a different blood type than me than own a MOPAR, RAM or any other vehicle they make.
FCA should make septic tanks and garbage cans.....oh wait, they already do! Kira
I'm sorry...do you have anything to add that ANYONE cares about?
Thought not.
Originally Posted By: B20z
Wow, that is a lot of trucks. It's hard to believe that they couldn't come up with a solid repair/retrofit that cost less than a buyback. I hope the owners are properly compensated.
The Jeeps should be recalled. It's a bad design that could've been easily avoided. Every time I see one on the road I shake my head. I know their owners love them and all but driving one of those stock is a huge liability.
SO...you want to recall a vehicle that is TWENTY YEARS OLD and met all safety standards when built? Crazy.
What next: recall my Dakota because it has only one air bag? recall my wife's Blazer for not having stability control?
Wow, that is a lot of trucks. It's hard to believe that they couldn't come up with a solid repair/retrofit that cost less than a buyback. I hope the owners are properly compensated.
The Jeeps should be recalled. It's a bad design that could've been easily avoided. Every time I see one on the road I shake my head. I know their owners love them and all but driving one of those stock is a huge liability.
SO...you want to recall a vehicle that is TWENTY YEARS OLD and met all safety standards when built? Crazy.
What next: recall my Dakota because it has only one air bag? recall my wife's Blazer for not having stability control?
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: Kira
Hello, Allow me to repeat myself.
"I'd rather be fitted with an outdated, unwashed, artificial heart hacked from the chest of an AlQuida operative with a different blood type than me than own a MOPAR, RAM or any other vehicle they make.
FCA should make septic tanks and garbage cans.....oh wait, they already do! Kira
I'm sorry...do you have anything to add that ANYONE cares about?
Thought not.
+1
Originally Posted By: Kira
Hello, Allow me to repeat myself.
"I'd rather be fitted with an outdated, unwashed, artificial heart hacked from the chest of an AlQuida operative with a different blood type than me than own a MOPAR, RAM or any other vehicle they make.
FCA should make septic tanks and garbage cans.....oh wait, they already do! Kira
I'm sorry...do you have anything to add that ANYONE cares about?
Thought not.
+1
With an Anti-Chrysler, you don't need a Mechanic. You need an Exorcist!
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: B20z
Wow, that is a lot of trucks. It's hard to believe that they couldn't come up with a solid repair/retrofit that cost less than a buyback. I hope the owners are properly compensated.
The Jeeps should be recalled. It's a bad design that could've been easily avoided. Every time I see one on the road I shake my head. I know their owners love them and all but driving one of those stock is a huge liability.
SO...you want to recall a vehicle that is TWENTY YEARS OLD and met all safety standards when built? Crazy.
What next: recall my Dakota because it has only one air bag? recall my wife's Blazer for not having stability control?
My Jeep doesn't even have ABS
Well, I guess it does in the fact that the brakes are horrible. Maybe there should be a recall because the brakes are small enough to fit 13'' wheels?
Originally Posted By: B20z
Wow, that is a lot of trucks. It's hard to believe that they couldn't come up with a solid repair/retrofit that cost less than a buyback. I hope the owners are properly compensated.
The Jeeps should be recalled. It's a bad design that could've been easily avoided. Every time I see one on the road I shake my head. I know their owners love them and all but driving one of those stock is a huge liability.
SO...you want to recall a vehicle that is TWENTY YEARS OLD and met all safety standards when built? Crazy.
What next: recall my Dakota because it has only one air bag? recall my wife's Blazer for not having stability control?
My Jeep doesn't even have ABS
Well, I guess it does in the fact that the brakes are horrible. Maybe there should be a recall because the brakes are small enough to fit 13'' wheels?
My 2007 Corolla didn't have ABS. I think it was one of the last models available without it. Didn't some form of stability control become mandatory on some types of vehicles in 2008 or 2009? I think that requires ABS for its functionality.
But yeah...ABS was optional on that era of Corolla. I tell you -- that was one dead simple car. 5-speed stick, no ABS, no traction control, disc/drum setup. But...it was an LE model, so it had the power locks, power windows, A/C, etc. Kind of a unicorn model that I just happened to find one weekend and bought it on the spot.
But yeah...ABS was optional on that era of Corolla. I tell you -- that was one dead simple car. 5-speed stick, no ABS, no traction control, disc/drum setup. But...it was an LE model, so it had the power locks, power windows, A/C, etc. Kind of a unicorn model that I just happened to find one weekend and bought it on the spot.
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: B20z
Wow, that is a lot of trucks. It's hard to believe that they couldn't come up with a solid repair/retrofit that cost less than a buyback. I hope the owners are properly compensated.
The Jeeps should be recalled. It's a bad design that could've been easily avoided. Every time I see one on the road I shake my head. I know their owners love them and all but driving one of those stock is a huge liability.
SO...you want to recall a vehicle that is TWENTY YEARS OLD and met all safety standards when built? Crazy.
What next: recall my Dakota because it has only one air bag? recall my wife's Blazer for not having stability control?
Jeep meet a testing standard however failed violently in the real world burning folks and apparently a toddler alive. No other SUV, truck or car has such a high record of this so they are considered safe. Your logic is flawed.
Jeep was chastised for flaw in design not a lack of any safety system.
Originally Posted By: B20z
Wow, that is a lot of trucks. It's hard to believe that they couldn't come up with a solid repair/retrofit that cost less than a buyback. I hope the owners are properly compensated.
The Jeeps should be recalled. It's a bad design that could've been easily avoided. Every time I see one on the road I shake my head. I know their owners love them and all but driving one of those stock is a huge liability.
SO...you want to recall a vehicle that is TWENTY YEARS OLD and met all safety standards when built? Crazy.
What next: recall my Dakota because it has only one air bag? recall my wife's Blazer for not having stability control?
Jeep meet a testing standard however failed violently in the real world burning folks and apparently a toddler alive. No other SUV, truck or car has such a high record of this so they are considered safe. Your logic is flawed.
Jeep was chastised for flaw in design not a lack of any safety system.
Originally Posted By: madRiver
No other SUV, truck or car has such a high record of this...
Are you sure about this? I understood that the Jeeps involved here did not show a higher injury or fatality rate due to fire than other vehicles of their kind.
Do you have statistics that show Jeeps have a 50% (or whatever the number is) higher fatality rate due to gas tank location compared with other similar SUVs?
No other SUV, truck or car has such a high record of this...
Are you sure about this? I understood that the Jeeps involved here did not show a higher injury or fatality rate due to fire than other vehicles of their kind.
Do you have statistics that show Jeeps have a 50% (or whatever the number is) higher fatality rate due to gas tank location compared with other similar SUVs?
- Status
Similar threads
