| FAQ | Member List | Albums | Today's Posts | Search  |
| Welcome Guest. ( logon | register ) | |||||
| ||||||
|
| Topic Tools | Message Format |
| ||
| ||
| ||
| Re: 3.5 V6 Questions iNeon - 7/7/2006 12:54 PM So what's GM and Ford's excuse? I agree that you can't just market your way to a great product -- though Microsoft and others might suggest otherwise -- but you also can't achieve a something special by basically slapping together bits from others. That might work well if you were dealing with a comodity -- notice how often open and blatant parts sharing happens in small, inexpensive cars for example -- but when you're trying to marketing something upscale it just doesn't translate well.taroliw - 7/7/2006 2:35 PM But in this game Brand and messaging is key... Silly me-- I thought it was just about building a great product. If you build a good enough product, you have nothing to worry aboutThe Mercedes brand name, at this point, is the only thing they have going for them ... all went out the window when they sought to cover every niche market in a blanket of swoopy plastic and fake chrome. You mean after the Chrysler acquisition?  Though I would admit that I haven't really been a big fan of Mercedes' expansion into every possible car segment. Entry luxury, like the C, I get. But why SUV's, for heaven's sake? After all, those who really wanted something unique already had a G-wagen; which although they wanted to kill after the GL announcement they have instead reported that the G will still be produced. To me, the ML, R, and GL are just "me too" models -- this is an area where i'd say "part and component share all you like," since it's commodity. But then I suppose it's somewhat telling that all of those models are built solely in the U.S.To me, Mercedes' challenges came from wanting to (or or perhaps that it had to) compete with other brands that play in a variety of other segments. But by dumping Mercedes -- even AMG, which now just seems like a trim level these days -- on the market hasn't helped matters at all. It's difficult to keep quality up with unique products as you build volume, and you run into that problem of brand dilution. How is it meaningful to define one's brand to suggest "you've arrived" (and Dieter did just this recently) when you see them everywhere? If Mercedes wants it's brand to be meaningful again, then it must reduce and focus. Why bother with being a volume leader when DCAG has Chrysler for that? Let Mercedes focus on renewing it's heritage and let Chrysler pay the bills. If you commoditize across the board, you might just as well collapse Chrysler and Mercedes into one. But then since brands are meaningless, that shouldn't be a problem... right? | ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| Re: 3.5 V6 Questions iNeon - 7/7/2006 1:30 PM The point to all of this was that Chrysler's 3.5 is a great engine, and I just wanted to know if it was where Mercedes sourced the part ... I still think there is more commonality between the two 3.5 engines that were seemingly developed simultaneously, by the same company, than any Mercedes owner will admit. Well, I can tell you that the M112 pre-dates DCAG and was Mercedes designed and built. In fact, they got a fair amount of ribbing over the 3-value design, although it was apparently done to improve cold emissions. The M227 is an upgrade of that same design, as noted in the PDF I linked to earlier.As far what engines Chrysler is using, I haven't looked into it. When the Crossfire (which is almost completely based on the R170) and Pacifica were announced, any mention of a 3.2L engine and 5-speed automatic basically led me to understand they were lifting the drivetrain out of an E-class. Chrysler's differentiation then was the Hemi, basically. As for the 3.5L, it's hard to tell from the very scant information Chrysler puts on it's site whether this could be the same engine. If it is, they've tuned it differently. It's delivering fewer HP at higher revs (M227 is rated at 268hp @ 6000 RPM and Chrysler states theirs as 250hp at 6400 RPM, and less torque as well). I wonder, too, if the so-called 2.8L V6 could be related to Chrysler somehow... ? That one is rated at 228hp at 6000 RPM. I suppose if we were to walk up to one and pull the plastic cover off it wouldn't be too hard to tell if they were the same engine.
Edited by taroliw 7/7/2006 4:56 PM | ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| Re: 3.5 V6 Questions iNeon - 7/7/2006 5:46 PM There are more parallels between the Pacifica and the R than people care to admit-- both use these 3.5 engines as well. Likewise the Commander and GL. I certainly have no problem admiting that... but that's the first time you've mentioned these comparisons. Actually, the Pacifica (original) was reportedly based directly on the E-class chasis and drivetrain... hence the 3.2L with 5-speed auto. There was no GL or R for the Pacifica to have originally shared these components on such a long chassis in 1998, and the ML was a newly released model then. That was pretty widely accepted. The GL and R are known to be based on exactly the same chasis, but that is supposedly a modified ML chassis. And in fact they are all assembled in exactly the same factory. Is that enough parallel for you?I do not know for sure where the Pacifica is assembled, but I don't believe it's Alabama. Needless, I'd suspect that the drivetrain sharing there probably hasn't stopped. But I would absolutely point out that it was Mercedes designed/built components that were shared. These were not sourced from elsewhere. So, under the presumption that the Chrysler 3.5L is really the M227 I wonder if they will also get get the GDI (Gasoline Direct Injection) version when it starts rolling out. ... It makes no sense to me why they would waste so much money developing redundant technologies for two different segments of their company and I only wanted to clairify it, ... Well, so far the major chassis sharing seems to be happening in the SUV/light truck category. And, from Mercedes' perspective, this makes total sense. Why indeed would they want to drop big bucks on a segment where the driver is volume? I don't know what the plan in is the passenger car segments. I could see where basic drivetrains might be shared, but I seriously doubt they'd want to pressure the differentiation barrier between their luxury and non-luxury segments. And as an actual DCX shareholder, this is what I expect them to do... cost and component share where it makes sense, but don't ride the cost efficiency train all the way to Brand Dilution Station. That would indeed be the end of the line. | ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| RE: 3.5 V6 Questions I just got a couple calls on my car today, and if I sell it this week guess what car I'm most likely going to buy? 1999 300M, how ironic...feels nice I'm still somewhat driving a mercedes if this engine deal is correct. (000000016221.jpg) Attachments ----------------  000000016221.jpg (57KB - 3 downloads) | ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| RE: 3.5 V6 Questions The Pacifica and Crossfire were shared platforms from day one and were both out before 2000, IIRC. That's probably why drivetrains were shared as a whole, rather than pieced out. They hadn't had time yet to compare all the detailed specs to come up with a short list. I'm not entirely sure what the status of the 300 was from the start, though. | ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| RE: 3.5 V6 Questions The latest on Mercedes V6es... Next generation, starting 2010 ro be shared with the Chrysler Car Group.  Chrysler may invest in Kenosha, 2 other plants Company to spend $2 billion, trade publication reports By THOMAS CONTENT tcontent@journalsentinel.com Posted: July 27, 2006 An auto industry trade publication is reporting that DaimlerChrysler AG is preparing to invest $2 billion at three plants, including one in Kenosha, as it prepares to unveil a new V-6 engine. Advertisement Chrysler Plant By the Numbers 214 Workers at the Kenosha plant laid off indefinitely last month 1,050 Total employees at the Kenosha plant, according to DaimlerChrysler Related Coverage Earnings: DaimlerChrysler profit rises, but Chrysler Group goes into slump Quoting union sources, Automotive News said DaimlerChrysler will seek to build engines for both Mercedes and Chrysler vehicles in Kenosha; Trenton, Mich.; and Toledo, Ohio. Gov. Jim Doyle met with Chrysler Group President and Chief Executive Tom LaSorda in Detroit more than a month ago in a bid to show the state's willingness to pitch in to help secure an investment in Kenosha, Doyle spokesman Matt Canter said. Chrysler Group is the Detroit-based subsidiary of DaimlerChrysler. Michele Tinson, a Chrysler Group spokeswoman, said the company has nothing yet to announce regarding the potential investment in the plants. A Mercedes plant in Germany also would make the engines, Automotive News said this week. "We are reviewing the potential opportunities for each of those venues," she said of Kenosha, Trenton and Toledo. Tinson said a decision is likely to be announced before the end of the year. In April, workers at the Kenosha plant agreed to work rule changes as a way to lure new DaimlerChrysler investment. Last month, 214 workers in Kenosha were laid off indefinitely after the company decided to shift production of 4.0-liter engines for the Jeep Wrangler to the Trenton plant. The Kenosha plant continues to employ about 1,050 workers, DaimlerChrysler said. According to Automotive News, DaimlerChrysler is looking to invest about $500 million in Kenosha, $800 million at Trenton and $700 million at Toledo, with Kenosha projected as "probably" the first one to produce the new engines, which are expected to debut on 2010 model vehicles. The new V-6 engine would replace four different types of V-6 engines now made by Chrysler plants, including those made in Kenosha, Automotive News reported. Union officials in Kenosha couldn't be reached for comment Thursday, and they declined to comment earlier this year on specifics of the changes being sought by the company. The Kenosha plant makes a 3.5-liter engine, used on the Chrysler Pacifica and 300, and the Dodge Magnum and Charger models, as well as a 2.7-liter engine used on the 300, Stratus, Charger, Chrysler Sebring and Dodge Magnum models. The opening of the 3.5-liter engine line, in 2002, came after the company invested $624 million in a 450,000-square-foot expansion of the plant. The Kenosha plant was built in 1917 and was bought by Chrysler in August 1987 when it acquired American Motors. Vehicle production in Kenosha stopped in 1988. Canter said Doyle met with LaSorda during a two-day trip to Detroit that also included a meeting with General Motors executives to discuss possible expansion opportunities for the Janesville assembly plant that makes full-size sport utility vehicles. From the July 28, 2006 editions of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel | ||
| ||
| ||
| RE: 3.5 V6 Questions Not to be presumptuous or rude (too late!), but I'm damn glad I got mine when I did!  | ||
| ||
|
