Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

RIP Chrysler, Hummer, and GMAC????

quagmire

quagmire

macrumors 604
Original poster
Apr 19, 2004
7,045
2,587
Cerberus has just announced that they sold most of their stake in the Chrysler group and GMAC to 90 investors. Could this be the end of Chrysler as we know it? Depending on who bought up the Chrysler group( or was it sold off individually?), Chrysler may lack the funds to stay afloat. I knew Cerberus involvement in Chrysler would be short lived, but I didn't know it would be this short.

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/...erus-sells-most-chrysler-gmac-holdings-64960/


EDIT: This is interesting, now Chrysler has denied Cerberus has sold its stake in it.
 
Good riddance to bad rubbish I say

You know how many SUVs have been unleashed on the world because of them? Think about the untold misery that has wrought, I for one say, "hooray, less SUVs!"
 
foidulus said:
You know how many SUVs have been unleashed on the world because of them? Think about the untold misery that has wrought, I for one say, "hooray, less SUVs!"
Click to expand...

You can't blame the automakers 100% for selling vehicles the public demanded . I hope you are not giving Toyota a free pass here because of the Prius and other Synergy drive equipped vehicles and they produce some gas guzzlers too you know.....
 
Ugh, I had the misfortune of driving a PT Cruiser the last time I rented a car. I say the less crappy Chryslers out there the better.
 
quagmire said:
You can't blame the automakers 100% for selling vehicles the public demanded . I hope you are not giving Toyota a free pass here because of the Prius and other Synergy drive equipped vehicles and they produce some gas guzzlers too you know.....
Click to expand...

Exactly. Plus, I like Chryslers a lot. I've owned a few and they ran forever. I don't own a car and haven't for many years, but the Challenger is terribly tempting. I would feel really guilty driving it though. The mileage is awful. I'd probably just put it in a garage, rub it with a diaper and never drive it. :)
 
If true it's terrible news for Detroit and a couple 10,000 people who work for Chrysler. Otoh, perhaps some consolidation in the auto market is warranted. Cars might get more expensive, but quality may improve with less price-cut competition, ala the airline industry...
 
GSMiller said:
I will not miss Chrysler, no more Dodge Caravan!!! *Happy Dance*
Click to expand...

I will do the happy dance once all minivans die. Or at least minivan drivers need to learn how to drive. It's safer going the speed everyone else is going then to impede the flow of traffic going the speed limit.
 
I'd like the next president, either McCain or Obama, to do something really bold (by the way, I have no hope that this will ever happen). I'd like for the next president to bail out the American car companies while at the same time insisting that they retool their factories (they did this immediately after the attack on Pearl Harbor). This would coincide with a "Manhattan Project" for the 21st century, one that would decide what the next technology would be for the automobile (ethanol, hydrogen, electricity, something else?). The US could then lead the world in a new technology, getting a head start on the Japanese automotive industry. We would also boost American jobs and cut our ties to the Saudis. As I said above, I don't see this happening--only a dictator wold have the kind of power required to implement this entire idea--but it's nice to dream.
 
Kashchei said:
I'd like the next president, either McCain or Obama, to do something really bold (by the way, I have no hope that this will ever happen). I'd like for the next president to bail out the American car companies while at the same time insisting that they retool their factories (they did this immediately after the attack on Pearl Harbor). This would coincide with a "Manhattan Project" for the 21st century, one that would decide what the next technology would be for the automobile (ethanol, hydrogen, electricity, something else?). The US could then lead the world in a new technology, getting a head start on the Japanese automotive industry. We would also boost American jobs and cut our ties to the Saudis. As I said above, I don't see this happening--only a dictator wold have the kind of power required to implement this entire idea--but it's nice to dream.
Click to expand...

I would love it if some new technology came along but currently non of these options are viable due to the massive amounts of fossil fuels needed to produce them. You can not really use electric vehicles since they still use fossil fuels at power plants and we have no where near the power generation capability to create energy to fuel our cars. Unless we build many Nuclear Fission Reactors or manage to get a Nuclear Fusion Plant online the US could not generate enough electricity to power all of Americas vehicles. Solar and Wind energy would not work at all even if they were 100% efficient you would probably have to cover half of the continent with either to generate enough energy.

With ethanol you have the massive land resources needed to grow sufficient crops and food prices would soar to unbelievable levels, probably making starvation really spread across third world nations since the current meager level of relief could not be maintained at the likely price hike.

Hydrogen seems to be the best bet but it is highly volatile and still requires massive amounts of energy to separate hydrogen from oxygen in water or you separate the hydrogen from fossil fuels, which seems pointless. Thus Nuclear power again.

Even the hybrids are not that great. With all of the added weight for their dual powerplants much of the fuel efficiency is loss, just compare highway gas mileage of a 90's super light weight fuel efficient death traps to the current much heavier hybrids of the same size and they are not too different, but much more sluggish and expensive.

What would work great are Nuclear batteries 10-20 years of constant power output. We'll just put terrorists on the honor system:rolleyes:.
 
velocityG4: That was a good response. I'm glad someone else out there recognizes a lot of the hype in the environmental movement.

I see too many people that think they can drive a hybrid, drink ethical coffee, build wind farms, etc, to save the world. Many people do this because they don't actually want to change their lifestyles but still be able to "save the planet." I sure wouldn't purchase a hybrid at this point, and I won't switch to compact fluorescents (which take a tremendous amount of energy to create compared to incancesdents) But I actually ride my bike to work (even in the rain, which is no fun) and I don't drive my car if I can help it. I think those are the changes that will actually make a difference. Driving a hybrid or ethanol burning vehicle is really not any better in the grand scheme of things compared to a regular gas burning vehicle.
 
Hasn't who ever owned Chrysler been trying to dump that boat of fail for years??
 
NT1440 said:
Hasn't who ever owned Chrysler been trying to dump that boat of fail for years??
Click to expand...

Daimler had owned Chrysler then screwed it up due to Mercedes unwillingness to work with Chrysler and vice versa. They then sold it to Cerberus last year. Now Cerberus has denied they sold Chrysler and now this report of Hummer being killed. I think this week will be officially, make up crap week just to get hits.
 
quagmire said:
Daimler had owned Chrysler then screwed it up due to Mercedes unwillingness to work with Chrysler and vice versa. They then sold it to Cerberus last year. Now Cerberus has denied they sold Chrysler and now this report of Hummer being killed. I think this week will be officially, make up crap week just to get hits.
Click to expand...

well i know daimler sold Chrysler a while ago, but i seem to remember "the car doctor" (a rather good AM radio show) talking about Chrysler being up for grabs but that no one wanted to touch it. If i recall correctly this was about 4 months ago, then again I could just be getting all jumbled up in my memories.
 
quagmire said:
I will do the happy dance once all minivans die. Or at least minivan drivers need to learn how to drive. It's safer going the speed everyone else is going then to impede the flow of traffic going the speed limit.
Click to expand...

Minivans are much more efficient vehicles than SUVs and trucks, and the drivers are usually careful because their children are in the back. Anyway, as long as you stay out of the left (PASSING) lane there's nothing wrong with going the speed limit.
 
Lord Blackadder said:
Minivans are much more efficient vehicles than SUVs and trucks, and the drivers are usually careful because their children are in the back. Anyway, as long as you stay out of the left (PASSING) lane there's nothing wrong with going the speed limit.
Click to expand...

How about when it is a 2 lane road? Everyone wants to go 40, and yet the minivan is going 30. What's safer having 5 pissed off drivers behind you or going 40 like everyone else is going? If you want to go 30 fine, but if you notice people are starting to back up behind you, please be considerate and pull over and let them go by as you are impeding the flow of traffic.
 
quagmire said:
How about when it is a 2 lane road? Everyone wants to go 40, and yet the minivan is going 30. What's safer having 5 pissed off drivers behind you or going 40 like everyone else is going? If you want to go 30 fine, but if you notice people are starting to back up behind you, please be considerate and pull over and let them go by as you are impeding the flow of traffic.
Click to expand...

I admit I get impatient as a driver, but if someone is doing the speed limit and someone behind loses their temper it's their own fault if they do something unsafe. People need to be responsible for themselves...

I agree that going too slow can be as dangerous as going too fast. But there is NO excuse for tailgating, passing on a double yellow or any of that road rage BS. A car can be a dangerous weapon and it is simply stupid to fool around in that manner just because of some bizarre sense of entitlement.

If someone is doing 30 in a 40mph zone, yes, that is unsafe. But if they are doing 30 in a 30 and some (*^&% behind feels the need to do 40, he/she has no right to endanger themselves and others in order to do so. By the same token drivers who chose to go the speed limit should be checking their rear view in case someone behind wants to pass.

All too often speeders get impatient around trucks/busses/trailers, cutting them off or trying to drive around them any way they can. This is unacceptable. If you've ever driven a large vehicle you'll understand that they aren't go-karts...they can't stop and turn on a dime...
 
Lord Blackadder said:
I admit I get impatient as a driver, but if someone is doing the speed limit and someone behind loses their temper it's their own fault if they do something unsafe. People need to be responsible for themselves...

I agree that going too slow can be as dangerous as going too fast. But there is NO excuse for tailgating, passing on a double yellow or any of that road rage BS. A car can be a dangerous weapon and it is simply stupid to fool around in that manner just because of some bizarre sense of entitlement.

If someone is doing 30 in a 40mph zone, yes, that is unsafe. But if they are doing 30 in a 30 and some (*^&% behind feels the need to do 40, he/she has no right to endanger themselves and others in order to do so. By the same token drivers who chose to go the speed limit should be checking their rear view in case someone behind wants to pass.

All too often speeders get impatient around trucks/busses/trailers, cutting them off or trying to drive around them any way they can. This is unacceptable. If you've ever driven a large vehicle you'll understand that they aren't go-karts...they can't stop and turn on a dime...
Click to expand...

I agree, I just think people need to be a bit more considerate on the road. That will lessen road rage, etc.

And I know how it feels to be cut off when driving a large vehicle. I have driven my parents Suburban many times and have been cut off. It seems people have no idea how much more room vehicles like that need to stop compared to their vehicles. I even noticed other people driving Suburbans having no idea how much room they need to do anything with that vehicle.
 
Antares said:
Chrysler makes some really good cars and has been great about putting some really innovative and bold designs out. They're a good car company but were often mismanaged and "caught in the middle" of parent company bickerings.
Click to expand...

Good exterior designs, but the interiors are horrible. With my experience, reliability was not there as well.

3 minivans- one was reliable, but the other 2, one had a blown transmission and the other burned oil.

2000 Jeep Cherokee- kept on overheating no matter what work was done on the vehicle to try to rectify it

2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee- blown transmission at 35K miles. Dealer kept on denying it was the transmission even though it refused to shift to 3rd gear. Faulty sensors

2001 Chrysler Sebring convert- Whistling noise from passenger window. Dealer fixed it,but kept on coming back. The suspension made unusual noises, but dealer said normal.
 
As the owner of a 2000 Chrysler 300M with 106,000 miles and no major component failures I'm saddened by the tumultuous past 10 years of Chrysler. I know Lee Iccocca is pissed! Chrysler has had a couple of rough patches but they have shown to be capable of bring innovative designs to the industry, but of course the corporate suits mess it up. As for the Cerberus purchase, I've felt from the beginning that an organization that has anything to do with Donald Rumsfeld is destined to fail. Being right sucks sometimes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back