Jump to content

Is Fiat Chrysler Autos U.S. trying to force a merge with GM?

Gorehamj

Recommended Posts

Gorehamj Senior Enthusiast

Gorehamj

Posted
Posted

Sergio.jpg

John Goreham
Contributing Writer, GM-Trucks.com
6/18/2015

This month the head of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles US (FCA US), Sergio Marchionne, asked General Motors politely if the company would be interested in a merger. Most of the mainstream press made mention of it, many getting a giggle out of GM saying "talk to the hand." GM's actual response may not have been so cocky as was reported.

 

The Irish Times is reporting that FCA US may be trying to line up GM's investors to force a discussion of a merger. Accordingly, the report goes on to say that GM is enlisting advisors (also called lawyers) to be sure it is ready if it comes to a forced merger, buyout or some other form of pressure to merge.

 

Sergio Marchionne is one of the most accomplished heads of any automaker. Although very soft-spoken, he generally gets what he wants and his views are often ahead of the curve. He is well known to have said that car buyers don't care about things like engines and transmissions and that the larger automakers should simply team up to achieve even greater economies of scale. You are reading this at an enthusiast site, so you and I DO CARE about engines and other truck parts. Be honest though, most of our neighbors and relatives can't look at a car and tell which wheels are driven.

 

How would you feel about a merger between Ram's owner and the folks at GM that make Chevy and GMC trucks?

 

Sergio.jpg

Sergio.jpg

Sergio.jpg

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted

This crap has been tried in the past. Kirk Kerkorian tried to buy his way into power at all three U.S. brands during the recession and it didn't work. He pushed mergers too.

 

Not that I really agree with their tactics but the UAW would never let this amount of consolidation (layoffs) occur.

nadrojcote Senior Enthusiast

nadrojcote

Posted
Posted

He's right, the average car buyer doesn't care about engine options and power. They only care that it gets good mileage.

 

This is a huge merger if it happens. How will Ram owners be able to bad mouth GM owners and vise-versa?

JeremyW426 Enthusiast

JeremyW426

Posted
Posted

I'm undecided on this. If a merger were to occur, I'll admit I would be interested to see what the results would be. I grew up dodge, living and breathing mopar for the first 25 years of my life (being 29 now). I currently drive a 2015 Silverado simply because I work at a GM dealer but I do definitely love my truck. Both Ram and GM make solid trucks (arguments can be made, this is just my opinion) and feel that the result of a merge and taking the best from both trucks would produce one hell of a good truck. This all being said, I can't see any of this actually happening but I just think it would be interesting to see.

Chris Senior Enthusiast

Chris

Posted
Posted

Soon we will see Camaros and Vettes with Hemis and Rams with Ecotecs.

galliher_nc Senior Enthusiast

galliher_nc

Posted
Posted

This is a huge merger if it happens. How will Ram owners be able to bad mouth GM owners and vise-versa?

I'll go to Ford and bad mouth both. I don't want a crappy half-Fiat truck.

Victor Ferreira Enthusiast

Victor Ferreira

Posted
Posted

Honestly, people bad mouth Fiat for no reason. Chrysler is the bad part of their company, not the italians. Have owned several Fiats in my life (so has the family), they always turned out to be more reliable and better built than the equivalent GM or Ford product. (Granted I'm not talking about the US Market vehicles). Even owned a 500, and that was a pretty nice city car.

 

Chrysler, on the other hand, has only built crap for the past 20 or so years.

'01LS1 Senior Enthusiast

'01LS1

Posted
Posted

What does it bring to the table? Would it just be operated with GM over the brands? Just do not see an advantage for GM other than some expensive patents/branding that may or may not even be relevant?

Duronimal Enthusiast

Duronimal

Posted
Posted

Fiat ranked dead last of automakers in reliability, behind even Land Rover. The worst. US Today/JD Power. 273 defects per 100 vehicles. Chrysler is at 173.

wilcfr New Member

wilcfr

Posted
Posted

I have owned numerous Fiat sports cars over the years. Insane fun, but rolling piles of s#*t. First time I ever had to carry tools with me at all times. The last thing GM needs is to associate their brand with Fiat or Chrysler.

Victor Ferreira Enthusiast

Victor Ferreira

Posted
Posted

I have owned numerous Fiat sports cars over the years. Insane fun, but rolling piles of s#*t. First time I ever had to carry tools with me at all times. The last thing GM needs is to associate their brand with Fiat or Chrysler.

New ones or 1970s ones?

 

Also, granted they do have a lot of "defects", but a Range Rover is still better than any GM product. Bentley is rated behind most domestics, and they're still better cars.

 

Not saying Fiats are perfect, because they're not. But I'd rather deal with a door handle that had to be fixed 2 weeks after buying the car (my case with my Fiat Punto) than with a vibration that never goes away and has no cure (our trucks).

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SLESierra Enthusiast

SLESierra

Posted
Posted

Honestly, people bad mouth Fiat for no reason. Chrysler is the bad part of their company, not the italians. Have owned several Fiats in my life (so has the family), they always turned out to be more reliable and better built than the equivalent GM or Ford product. (Granted I'm not talking about the US Market vehicles). Even owned a 500, and that was a pretty nice city car.

 

Chrysler, on the other hand, has only built crap for the past 20 or so years.

Chrysler on the other hand helped pull Diamler Benz out of their crappy production methods and was robbed in the break up, and so far have been the bright side of the FIat/Chrysler Merger in the US. The FCA stock in which I currently own is being driven not by Fiat products but by designs that were in place when Fiat bought Chrysler. Just go to the FCA website and it will give and read the investment reports and you will see what I am saying is fact. As for product, the company I work for has a fleet of trucks that beg to differ with you on crap, some with 240K plus and still pulling loads on the highways without any thought.

wilcfr New Member

wilcfr

Posted
Posted

Owned them back in the seventies. 2 124 Spiders, 2 X1/9 and one 128 sedan. The sports cars were just bat s**t crazy fun. Raced a Mustang through the GSMNP at midnight in one of the X1/9s what a blast. Not enough power to overpower the brakes or handling so you could drive it flat out. Would have loved to have had about 200 extra HP, but then that would have been a Ferrari. The 128 couldn't get up a small southern Indiana hill without dropping down to third gear. All were truly fix it again Tony cars. Had to be towed twice. But gawd they were fun.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • AidenVorpagel
      cam upgrade in CA

      By AidenVorpagel · Posted

      hello I recently bought a 2012 gmc 1500 with a 5.3 and have a AFM disabler on it I'm interested in doing a cam but I'm worried if I remove the AFM system I will fail smog does anyone have info if they are able to detect that or a work around to it (not talking about hot smogging) please let me know thank you  
    • B14Sierra
      Noise after AFM delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Did you figure it out?
    • B14Sierra
      Possible lifter tick after DOD delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Update. I started chasing down my symptoms. Started first with pulling valve covers and looked at everything. Everything looked good and couldn't hear or feel anything different. Then a compression test. 240 psi or really close on each cylinder. I was worried I was a tooth off of timing. Not bad for an engine with 173,000. Granted I did put new heads on. I sprayed water around the injector area to see if I could hear a change. Nothing. I hooked up my new hp tuner which I should have done in the first place but I don't really know what I'm looking at just yet but am learning. I noticed the fuel trims were way off so that told me I have to have either a bad injector or exhaust leak. New injectors, so I did the shop vac on blower and in the tail pipe. Sprayed soapy water and found the exhaust flange on the drivers side was leaking. I didn't think it would be that considereding I pulled the heads and left the manifolds attached. I did have the transmission replaced not long ago. They must have not seated them properly but I guess I didn't notice. I put in new gaskets on both sides. Which by the way isn't a bad job but I had a hard time getting them to seal right. Took two attempts. Reset the fuel trims and the ticking is gone, engine runs smooth and acceleration has improved. Got to feel the real difference with that stage 1 cam. It's not that big of a difference but it does add a little more. It feels like how the truck should have been from the factory.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...