Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Auto News' started by R1600Turbo, May 27, 2019.
So would that mean that we could see Renault in North America then?
Heh. I pulled up a pic of an Alliance before I even clicked the thread link.
I can't wait for them to be chased out of the American market again!
See? You already know.
Maybe, maybe not. Their new cars are incredibly attractive looking inside and out IMHO and seemed to be rather competent at the least every where else.
If they brought over the 508 liftback or wagon I would definitely be looking at one depending where they sit in terms of price.
Wrong brand, PSA is Peugeot not Renault.
Oops. Well, the hype is dead then. Other than the Alpine I can't really think of any Renaults at the moment...
I hope someone in one of these offices pays attention to the -show of the 80s and learns what not to do. Renault-AMC, if I'm not mistaken, damn near killed both sides and the DaimlerChrysler episode is still in mind for many. If all sides pull their weight it can work, but that's every company. If Renault is hoping for the same boon Alfa seems to be having here, I don't know that they'll get it.
I think Peugeot has said that they're planning for an American relaunch anyway.
Though on the subject of Renault I really want them to bring the Alpine A110 over.
Fiat Chrysler Officially Proposes 50-50 Merger With Renault Group
Hellcat Twingo inbound?
Edit1: Kidding aside, please, please bring the Twingo to the US in some form.
Edit2: Somebody (probably me) needs to do a flowchart of the history and various partnerships of these two automaker conglomerates....they are vast.
An electric V8 Twizzy.
Like the McLaren P1? Or was that a V10? I swear it was a hybrid...
Yup, hybrid V8.
This seems like such a weird marriage if the merger does indeed happen. It has to solely be about money right? I can't see a ton of technology sharing that's needed from either side.
I mean at least when Fiat and Chrysler merged, Chrysler products ended up with an influx of unibody platforms to develop new products on. This really isn't the case with Renault since FCA already has various platforms to work with, even if many of them are woefully outdated. The engine selection really isn't anything to write home about either and FCA seems rather far behind the curve in terms of EV tech.
The only thing of any real value with FCA is the Jeep brand, which is already sold in Europe.
I do suppose FCA could finally redesign the 500 so it's no longer riding around on something from 2003. I mean in theory, it could use the rear drive platform of the Twingo so the 500 goes back to how it should've been all along. FCA could also get access to the Alaskan platform too for the new mid-sized truck it wants to make. But I'm not sure if they'd be able to use it since it was co-developed with Nissan (I'm not sure how that all works).
Or is Nissan part of this? I keep seeing conflicting reports.
I think Renault wants a stable presence in the US market (Chrysler - Jeep) especially as Nissan languishes, and FCA wants better tech + an investment partner. It seems like a reasonable merger. I really don't see how Fiat can manage to stick around in the US market, to be honest. They are losing dealer support left and right.
I'm not seeing what either company gets out of this really in the near future. Renault's current platforms and drivetrains don't help FCA's US operations and FCA's current platforms and drivetrains don't help Renault's European operations. Renault would be out of their mind to actually try to do the same thing they did in the 1980s, so unless I'm wondering if this is just a synergy thing to throw combined money at EV development.
Nissan could certainly give Chrysler in particular some immediate assistance that could even be reciprocated, but they sent a guy to prison for 6 months without trial to avoid Renault influencing any direct control over them so they'd need to already be interested (which they may be with their own sales problems) and Renault probably wants them to play nice to try and help with whatever the hell they bought into Mitsubishi for.
I suppose that makes sense.
And really Fiat could do well, or at least better in the US. It just needs to update its models. The 500 is riding around on something from 2003 and the 500X/500XL are cruising around on something GM helped develop back in 2005. Both of those platforms are ancient. Also, the 500 looks more or less the same since it first came out 12 years ago. That's a long time to sell the exact same product. But, like MINI, Fiat designed themselves into a corner and can't really do anything worthwhile with the 500 looks wise.
At least the 124 is a Miata, but I guess I don't understand why you'd buy the Fiat version instead of just going to a Mazda dealer.
Many of the Fiat Chrysler dealers around where I live (NorCal, which should be prime Fiat territory) have ceased selling Fiats in the last year. I was actively pursuing buying a 500 Abarth, and there were a grand total of 5 available in the entire Bay Area, non of which were manual transmissions. In addition to that, Fiat's OWN US website still shows 2018 year model for all of their cars. They must surely be departing eminently.
The 124 is a Miata, sure, but (barring the Abarth) just worse in ways it really shouldn't be. They should have given that thing a big fat 2.4L N/A lump and made it an unapologetic cruiser. The 1.4T, especially when paired to the automatic, is awful.
I can't imagine anyone in America snubbed their nose at the various 500 models because the platforms are old, assuming they even had a reason to know as much for cars that weren't on sale in America until long after they debuted in Europe, when there are several far more pressing reasons to snub their nose at the 500, 500x and 500L.
Like the model range existing exclusively in market segments that Americans have been completely abandoning (Mini's sales haven't been terribly pretty either in the past few years), or having hopelessly terrible drivetrains.
Even that might be too deep of a dive. While the 500 still manages to look pretty good, somehow, the X and L are hilariously unattractive, in addition to the issues you pointed out. I honestly don't know who or why somebody would pick a 500X or 500L over anything else in their respective segments. I think Fiat entered the US market with no real long term plans. Our old, outdated 500 isn't even up to date with Europe's old outdated 500.
Maybe FCA and Renault looked across at each other, saw Fiat, saw Nissan, and then understood that they were really kindred spirits and belonged together.
Matteo Salvini has given his blessing to this deal so long as they dont cut jobs in Italy. Gonna need put that in writing knowing how that same agreement played out the last two times with the Agnellis.
FCA has withdrawn their offer.
I guess Nissan wasn't interested in giving up their electric technology without a fight so FCA bailed?
The article is written weird. They make it sound like FCA backed out because of the French Government, but then mention Nissan for some reason.
Fiat went into this not expecting Nissan to fight against it or the French government to meddle around with it?
Nissan sure is going out of it's way to suggest "we should see other people" to Renault, no?
Everything I've read says that Sergio Marchionne and Carlos Ghosn were the driving force behind the merger talks, without the both of them commanding the proceedings I can't see how this had any chance of going through.