#Chrysler Has "10-year Window" To Prove Itself, Says New Owners

[Auto Styling News]

Chrysler has 10 more years to prove itself as a viable brand, says it's new European Masters, Stellantis.

CEO Carlos Tavares says he's giving his brand execs a 10-year window to prove their worth. He says all 14 brands (Abarth, Alfa Romeo, Chrysler, Citroën, Dodge, DS, Fiat, Jeep, Lancia, Maserati, Opel, Peugeot, Ram and Vauxhall) are being "given a chance."

“We’re giving each a chance, giving each a time window of 10 years and giving funding for 10 years to do a core model strategy. The CEOs need to be clear in brand promise, customers, targets and brand communications. If they succeed, great. Each brand is given the chance to do something different and appeal to customers.”

As you may or may not know, Chrysler currently has an anemic lineup of just two name plates, the Pacifica minivan, which comes both as a combustion engine and electric version as well as a stripped-down version they're calling the Voyager. 

They also have one car, the 300, which, while it has been updated several times, essentially is the same four-door sedan as when it was introduced in 2005.

If Tavares is honestly giving this brand a chance, he needs to seriously rethink the strategy of the previous owners, FCA.

To succeed, Chrysler will have to somehow developed a mini ute - the most popular vehicle in America right now, which is for some reason lacking in its lineup. It will also have to develop an electric strategy because many cars, if not most, in the 2030s will be electrified.

California is looking at going with a ban on all combustion engine car sales in the 2030s, as are several nations in Europe, such as Ireland and Germany.

Chrysler should look to other luxury car brands and see them as competitors once again. Clearly, the brand has lowered its standards and saw itself as a competitor to the likes of Ford and Chevy in the past few years. They need only look at Genesis to see how to build a highly successful luxury brand in this segment.
___________________________________
Auto Styling News is a blog that covers car concepts, newly released models, and the auto industry.

As Stellantis Takes Over Chrysler, Can the Storied Name Be Saved? (Yes! Here's how!)

[Auto Styling News] 

Stellantis is the new owner of Chrysler. And very likely its last one.

The new brand name (created by marketers from the Latin word "stello," meaning, "to brighten with stars") consists of a mish-mash 14 Italian, French, German, British, and American automakers including Abarth, Alfa Romeo, Chrysler, Citroën, Dodge, DS, FIAT, Jeep®, Lancia, Maserati, Opel, Peugeot, RAM, and Vauxhall.

The newly minted brand name takes over this month from FCA (Fiat Chrysler Automobiles) a company that oversaw extremely weak US sales not only for Chrysler, but for FIAT, Abarth, and Alfa Romeo. FCA Group acquired Chrysler in 2014.

Chrysler Corporation was of course founded as an American company in 1925 by Walter Chrysler from the remains of the Maxwell Motor Company. In 1998, it was acquired by Daimler-Benz, and the holding company was renamed DaimlerChrysler. 

The German-American union was not a happy one, with many differences coming to the surface about the direction of the company. In short, it was a really bad fit.

After Daimler divested Chrysler in 2007, the company briefly existed as Chrysler LLC (2007–2009) and Chrysler Group LLC (2009–2014) before merging in 2014 with the Italian holding company Fiat S.p.A. and becoming a subsidiary of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles.

Chrysler has clearly fallen on hard times. It has two nameplates, the aging 300 sedan (first introduced in 2005) and the Pacifica van (it has an electric version of the van and a stripped-down model now using the iconic Voyager name, but these are just badge-engineering exercises. They have two.)

That's really sad for several reasons, not least is which that company has a recent history of innovation and large, exciting lineups. Lee Iacocca revived the company from bankruptcy and (paid back government loans - early!) with the K-Car line. In the 1990s, the company had success after success with exciting concept cars that they brought to market. Among them was the PT Cruiser, which sold in the millions.

The 300, back in the day, was also a huge hit. The Crossfire fired imaginations, and the LHS was a gorgeous car that made it to production as a beautiful vehicle, part of the "cab-forward" design style that captured America's imagination. They introduced many new nameplates that sold well in that era.

The company could use a dose of the spirit of the '90s and early 2000s right about now - a spirit that showed many concepts taken to the market, a daring can-do spirit that showed it was a bold car designer, not just a retread, recycling old nameplates on boring vehicles, as they are now.

The once-luxury brand has no top-of-the-line "halo car," no SUVs, no mini-Utes (the hottest vehicle type on the market) and no sports cars for middle aged men to buy during their mid-life crises.

Last year sales were anemic. It sold around 110,500 vehicles, about one-third its volume in 2015, according to company figures.

Fiat, a maker of small cars reintroduced to the US in 2011, also saw a sharp drop-off in sales.

Experts believe there is a consolidation of the new car conglomerate's 14 brands coming, and that doesn't bode well for Chrysler.  One news site suggested that Chrysler was already dead (as a name, anyway) when their sign was replaced with the Stellantis one at their storied Auburn Hills, Michigan headquarters.

Regardless of when it happens, it almost seems inevitable that the brand is going to fade away, unless someone in the new company's Amsterdam, Holland headquarters decides to revive it in a BIG WAY.

It's not hard to see how it could regain its footing. It must launch a solid, stylish luxury SUV. It must launch a dependable mini-UTE that actually stands out from its many vanilla competitors, and it must launch a hot sports car that captures imaginations.

That's a tall order, since new vehicles take 2-5 years to produce through the traditional  auto design pipeline. But these are not ordinary times, and innovation is called for if Chrysler hopes to survive to see its 100th birthday.

___________________________________
Auto Styling News is a blog that covers car concepts, newly released models, and the auto industry.

Electric #Chrysler Portal Concept: Appealing To Millennials(?) [Auto Styling News]

The all-electric Fiat Chrysler "Portal" concept car is aimed squarely at the Millennial Generation (born roughly after 1982) and is designed to grow with the family.

The car is said by the designers to be a "forward-thinking interpretation of the 'fifth generation' of family transportation focused toward the millennial generation."

The four modes of family transportation have been defined as station wagons, minivans, SUV and crossovers; millennials (think the designers) will seek their own version of a family vehicle. Based on internal research, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles say they will want a vehicle that is reflective of their personality, offers value and flexibility, integrates advanced technology and is socially responsible.

The electric-powered concept is estimated to give more than 250 miles of range on a full charge. And of course, the interior will be fitted out with a Wi-Fi network (as are most Chevys these days.)

The Portal concept was created in collaboration with supplier partners who shared their innovations and expertise to bring to life future technologies. These partners include Adient, Magneti Marelli, Panasonic Automotive and Samsung Electronics.

So, how does it look?

The boxy, yet curvaceous exterior centers around an illuminated, portal-shaped front end, and rear doors that allow for easy entry and exit.  It's reminiscent in some ways of 2015's Mercedes Tokyo Vision concept, including the outside illumination idea. (And that it was designed to appeal to Millennials. And that it featured Wi-Fi. And modular interior seating.) It ever better resembles a Kia Soul or a Honda Fit in its shape.

About that seating, the passengers get three seats in the back that move back and forth and side to side for ultimate adaptability. It's a good concept, but no car as of yet has implemented it, probably for safety and practical reasons, such as they may break away from their pillars in accidents, or if they move during travel, passengers may fall out of them. Or stuff like that.

The doors all slide either forward or outward, and that's just ludicrous, and won't make it to production.

The front end looks like a bit of a multi-layered birthday cake, and just as exotic. Some will say it looks like the car is wearing a mask for some reason. Regardless, it's utterly unique.

The rear of the vehicle looks as distinctive as the front, with massive tail lamps that seem to signal the direction all cars are going in the next few years. That alone would make this car distinctive. For now.

The Portal, if it makes it to market, probably won't be anything like this, but will at least be a hybrid with some of these features. That's the standard way these things shake out. But it's a decent-looking car/vehicle/thing, and should do well with the Millennials. If they can afford it.

Photos courtesy of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles

Mini Recycles Old Plymouth Concept

Mini is shopping a "pickup truck" concept of the Mini Paceman that had me thinking of a previous concept. See if you notice the similarities.

In 1995, Plymouth shopped around a very similar, but perhaps more feminine, baby pick-up called the Plymouth Backpack based on what would become the Dodge Neon.

As a long-time fan of the Backpack, I must say the Paceman version is more "butch" and does look better.

The Chrysler 200 Goes Under the Knife - and Comes out Pretty

Chrysler's 200 has, since it's introduction in 2012, had a problem. And that problem was the headlight design. The headlights are ghastly on the current model. Almost literally laughable.

In one of our first posts here, Auto Styling News eviscerated the 200 for this and other sins, but mostly the sin of actively advertising this vehicle as 'distinctive' and having funny little eyebrows, and a grille "that's shaped just like the interior clock," somehow made it so. To have "luxury car" pretensions, and have such a glaring mistake right there on the front of the car seemed unforgivable.

In fact, the car's introductory ad itself was called "Why do the headlights have eyebrows?" Why, indeed. (The video screenshot below doesn't do justice to the silliness that ensues when one of these is seen on the road.)

The sad part about the 2011 re-do of the Sebring is that the rest of the car looked pretty good. The rear was very attractive and the proportions were fine.

Anyway, let's just say all is forgiven. The 2015 model, released at the Detroit Motor Show this week, is a far better looking vehicle on many levels.

The headlights, along with the entire grille, has been refurbished, and now has the class that was sorely lacking on the 2011-14 models. The well proportioned Chrysler "wing" logo is now more prominent as well, and gives the car a proper identity.

Had they stopped there, the company would receive great plaudits from this quarter and many others, I'm sure. But they kept going, and tweaked the entire vehicle (which is now built atop a Fiat chassis.)

The rear end - which they actually got right on the previous 200 - also received a completely facelift, and while the rear spoiler from a certain angle seems to give it a bit of a "duck face" (or duck's a**?) it's tolerable. And while the previous tail lights were just fine, the new ones are certainly appropriate, if not a bit hum-drum.

The side view also looks completely different, and this yields one of the few criticisms, since it looks a lot like most other cars on the road, and it is not at all distinctive.



The rear looks a bit like a Hyundai and one could mistake the profile for a Lexus or even (if you squint) a Jaguar F series. Which isn't a bad mistake for a car seeking to enter "luxury" status (and a $21k luxury car would certainly be welcome.)

With this complete re-think, Chrysler shows that it's serious about reaching into the luxury market - or at least that it knows how to recover when it makes a mistake, and the previous 200 was a big one.

It's too early to say whether the 200 can actually compete with the luxury brands it hopes to take on, or whether it's rather anonymous styling makes it more of a competitor with the Hyundai's and KIA's of the world. But at least it's now a full competitor.

10 Mid-Sized 2013 Sedans: Styling Analysis

Americans looking for a mid-sized Sedan have many, many choices, and the sweet spot of the $20,900-$22,500 range is particularly rich in diversity and style.

Since we are primarily concerned with exterior styling, we're going to focus on that, although all of these models feature engines that are highly evolved from those just a decade ago, as well as far better fuel economy. And almost all of these come in slightly different wrappings with higher mileage "Eco" or Hybrid options, which add about $8,000-$10,000 in cost to the prices below.

Let us begin.

Toyota Camry $22,235 - MOST YAWN-INSPIRING

The Camry is a reliable, solid, dependable car. And it looks like it, too. The styling of the Camry is definitely not out-of-date, but it always has a way of looking like it is. The revised front fascia is an improvement over the immediate previous model, which looked too plastic-y.

The fog lamps add visual interest, but just somewhat, and not enough to boost it into the "wow" range. And it's not supposed to be that kind of car, anyway. The rear of the car is well put-together, but again, yawn.


Chevy Malibu $21,995 - MOST GENERAL MOTORS-Y

The Malibu is a steadily evolving body style that isn't at all unpleasant to look at, and I've generally been a fan of the direction this model has been going. But it's also not anything special to look at, and that's a problem. For a car at the higher end in the sedan market's price point, you'd expect a lot more style, but it just isn't there.

The front end is pleasant enough, and it's clearly identifiable as a Chevy on your first glance. The head lamps are a bit over-large, but so is the grille area and the hood itself. The overall look is one of molded plastic, which is not a good look. The sides are free from the creases or other visual cues that would make it more distinctive and add at least SOME visual interest. As it stands, it has nearly none. The rear is a departure, featuring four square tail lamps that are very attractive and are historic throw-backs to earlier models. This, oddly, makes this car more interesting from behind than up front. GM needs to keep working on this car's styling to hit the right notes.

Ford Fusion $21,900 - BEST OVERALL!

The Fusion is in the middle of the pack in pricing but at the top of the heap in styling. This is Ford's Wunderkind, and is absolutely gorgeous. Its grille, which instantly brings to mind Aston Martin (a brand which used to reside in Ford's stable of vehicles) is gorgeous, well-proportioned and the culmination of sleek creases in the softly bulging hood.

The head lamps are squinting works of art, which I bet in the next version will be a bit wider, but are nonetheless nicely done here and properly proportioned to the hood. The sides feature a crease mark high on the door panels, cleverly bisecting the door handles and slightly curving downward to give the rear some visual heft. The tail lights are smart hexagons framing another hexagon between them, all of which is as nicely executed as the front. Overall, this is Ford's masterpiece.

Nissan Altima $21,760 - MOST COHESIVE STYLING

This Altima is all-new, and is one sharp car. The grille features a unique "pinched" look that's nicely framed in aluminum and sets off the stunning head lamps which mimic the subtle "kink" in the grille. The sides are rather muted (with a subtle BMW-style "Hoffmeister kink" for the rear window) but the rear features a perhaps over-large aluminum strip setting off - or one could say, holding IN - tail lamps that look, from a certain angle, as if they're going to fall right off the sides! Still, a repeat of the "kink" in both the head and rear lamps shows a cohesiveness in style, though it may not be to everyone's liking.


Honda Accord $21,680 - MOST COMPETENT DESIGN

One look at the Accord shows that there are definitely some nice elements here, although a second or third look will give one the sense that these are rather derivative of previous models and are kind of bland. The grille is nice, but not over-done, the head lamps are a bit large but are quite nice, too. There's some good creasing on the sides, but not overpowering. The rear tail lamps are perhaps over-large, but well put-together with a subtle aluminum device. Again, there's nothing exciting here, but also nothing offensive. And that's just as they wanted it, I'm sure.

Kia Optima $21,350- MOST SAAB-LIKE

The Optima is an attractive car, and it's moderate price tag comes with a lot of style. That much of its style is derivative of other cars is almost immaterial. Its head lamps resemble the Accord's, though they're connected by way of a uniquely Kia grille that is easily recognizable. The LED lights in the fog lamp assembly are clever, but are becoming ubiquitous, and look a bit like aftermarket add-ons here. Its Buick-style side ports are cliches, but seem to add a bit of flourish to the otherwise flat side panel. The rear trunk is slickly sloping and reminds you of the late SAAB brand, and in fact, when one squints and looks at the front and rear from the view above, the whole car does! The tail lamps are beautifully wrought, and thankfully lack the near-standard aluminum bar connecting them. The half-curve at the bottom of the tail lamps is quite attractive, since they're indented.

Hyundai Sonata $21,195 - MOST ATTRACTIVE

The Sonata is stunningly beautiful, the most curvacious of this entire class, and the revamped, sixth-generation model of this old standard is probably responsible for the good looks of many of the other models in this class. We've always been appreciative of its impact on this entire class of cars. The nicely notched grille, with creases flowing down from the hood, is framed (or "hugged") by two elongated and quite stunning head lamps. The large, pronounced crease juts out on the side and door panels are  unique to this car, but have again been imitated (somewhat) by other models like the Accord and others outside this class. They continue onto the back of the trunk, gently caressing the tail lamps. And those elongated tail lamps are stunning, connected by an aluminum bar that looks as if its holding them together and doing so elegantly in one of the most pleasant rear panels of the class.

Mazda 6 $20,880 - MOST IMPROVED

The prow of the 2013 and 2014 Mazda 6 is stunningly beautiful and instantly recognizable. It's also a 500% improvement over the last iteration, which was wan and weak and had almost no visual appeal. The grille seems pulled out onto the far edge of a curvaceous hood, which makes a quick drop towards a nicely-proportioned grille featuring a large but not overly large) Mazda emblem, bisected by an aluminum line that sits just right in the upper quadrant. This front end is a work of art, and the art continues with aggressive head lamps that seem to flow into the grille work. The underside features a balanced grille and sharply pointed fog lamps that complement the lights. The rest of the car curves gently upwards and then down towards tail lamps that resemble the heads, with rounded LEDs inside, connected with the ubiquitous aluminum connectors that seem to just sit there, though comfortably, between them.

VW Passat $20,845 - MOST READY FOR THE CHINESE MARKET

Let's not waste much time on the Volkswagen Passat, because it's just about the most bland and derivative car in its class when styling alone is considered. The previous version had far more visual interest when it wasn't trying to morph into a Honda. The grille and lamp fixtures are bland and poorly executed, and if you took away the large-ish VW logo in the center, we would be hard-pressed to identify this car's brand. In fact, it looks like a mid-2000s KIA or Honda, which is damning in today's competitive market. VW can do better, and they must, especially if they want to ask over $20K for this vehicle.


Chrysler 200 $20,795 - UGLIEST FRONT FASCIA/MOST FIXABLE

The poor Chrysler 200 has been fully dissected here before and the 2013 model is not improved from the 2011 model which bowed with a new name. This car is the child of the Sebring, which had a poor reputation as rental fleet fodder but at least had head lamps that were well-proportioned. These look blind, with odd "eyebrows" above them and they seem stranded on the sides of the hood, with a too-small grille lonely in the center. The sides look exactly like the Sebring, which I believe is a good thing. The upward slanting crease is nice, as is the roof's curvature above the rear window, which ends in a black triangle rather than a "kink" or a too-small window. The rear is done nicely, with tail lamps that lap gently onto the sides of the raised trunk area and reach out to "grab" an aluminum bar that pulls it together nicely under the graceful Chrysler logo. If they can re-work the front fascia for 2014 (or perhaps give us the concept car design that was promised) this car DOES have a chance. But as it stands, it's hardly worth the nearly $21K base price, and competes better with the $16K Chevy Cruze, which it resembles.

Auto Styling News: AD WATCH - Fiat 500 Strikes Out with Confusing "Baby" Ad.

AD WATCH: Fiat 500
There's no question that the FIAT 500 is a cute car. But the advertising for this vehicle leaves me scratching my head.

The early 500 ads featuring Jennifer Lopez were perplexing enough - and they drew fire because she was actually filmed on a movie set while her "block" back in New York City was filmed separately (a common tactic, but it didn't translate well, and created a backlash and swamped the message of the ad when it premiered.) Still, the idea that this is a slick little women's car was drilled into the viewers of this nicely produced ad.

Then there's this recent one. Take a look.



Two guys are headed to the game. The driver of the 500 picks up his buddy, and his buddy's kid. "It was girls night out," he says, apologetically.

He and the baby are shown in the next shot being driven to the game, only to come up behind a (nice, sweet, classic, bitchin') late 1960s Chrysler Imperial driven by an old man. Slowly.

The baby stares down the old driver as they pull up beside it, and shouts in Italian "What are you lookin' at?" Problem #1: there is no translation , and I relied on others to give me that verbiage.

Problem #2: Is that really funny? Inasmuch as the well-known E*Trade baby is funny (and that joke has grown stale after, what, five Superbowls? The latest showed a baby "speed dating" other babies. Ew.)

The bigger problem for me is that the guy is emasculated by his wife, and the other guy drives a car aimed at a female demographic. In fact, the entire ad seems cleverly aimed at women, despite the two men. (The baby is the give-away.)

This ad follows on the heels of the FIAT 500 Abarth ad in which a rather stereotypical Italian woman (representing the car) sexually toys with a man and, in the end, slaps him. Note to FIAT: Men, like women, don't like to be slapped. Especially in public.

But this ad also suffers from other issues. There's so much going on in the ad, it's hard to focus on the car's features. The guy says (of the tickets to the sporting venue) "These are nice seats," but shouldn't he be focusing on the seats in the car? We do get glimpses of the vehicle, of course, and it's not an ugly car. The shifter gets a half-second close-up, and it's quite attractive, as is the speedometer, which is shown for the one second the car is slowing down behind the Chrysler. I'm sure the rest of the car is nice, too. We just don't get to see much of it in this confusing ad.

The 2012 Chrysler 300: A Winning Luxury Car - from Detroit!

The 2012 Chrysler 300 is a major step up for Chrysler. It's a beautiful vehicle that has retro styling and modern features. They really hit a home run with this one.

The 2012 300 is changed somewhat from the original 2005 model year vehicle, which successfully, and to critical acclaim, revived the well-respected model nameplate from the 1950s through the 1970s.

This is a car that, from the first glance, makes the heart race and the blood pump. It's worthy of the Chrysler name. And that's saying a lot, considering some of the cookie-cutter vehicles they've given us in years past.

It's at once smoother and more luxurious-looking than the previous 300 and instantly recognizable as the same model. That's a feat in itself worthy of great admiration and praise to Chrysler's design team.

The first major change can be seen in the headlamps, which have shed the rounded appearance of the previous decade's models and have become more of a curved rectangle, with brilliant LED lights in a sideways "U" pattern facing inward towards the grille (reminding one of the Audi headlamps, but without that brand's rather garish "pout" look.) These are far more pleasing and more modern than the earlier model, and they are executed much better than on its sister car, the Chrysler 200, which is saddled with lamps that look plain and boring. Here, their excitement is palpable, as it their beauty, and they add to the design significantly.

The grille, even from a distance, is gorgeous, with a slight indentation on either side, making the center prominent and shimmery. The deck of the hood is creased nicely down the center, and one hopes for an even deeper crease in future models, as was seen in the Crossfire.

The side doors are large and tall - one of the defining features of the older model which continues on this one. Thankfully so, since this gives it a character and presence that isn't found on other cars on the road, and while some think this is a "gangsta" feature, it also hearkens back to cars in the '50s and '60s which were larger and heftier than today's models - and looked it.

The overall shape of the car is a symphony of curves that are gentle and pleasing. A crease that leads from just under the rear window into the trunk section carries the eye to the rear with great ease and is quite stunning in its execution

The tail lamps are as beautiful and intricate as the headlamps, with a peaked crease down the center, punctuated with a white section that also features beautiful styling. It's obvious when care has been taken to get the details right. Without these tail lamps, the overall design of the rear section might be compared to the Nissan Altimas of the last decade, which it does still resemble. But the lamps are far more integrated with the lower bumpers than that Altima's was, and the gently curved "wing" on the trunk puts those kinds of comparisons to rest rather quickly.

The interior is lush and gorgeous, as one might expect. The blue-lighted gauges are substantial-looking and quite retro in their styling, and the steering column features a beautiful rendition of the winged Chrysler name badge that can also be found on the hood and tailgate.

With a base price of just over $28,000, Chrysler has positioned the 300 as a true American luxury car (far more plausibly than the 200, which clearly does not belong in that category, despite Chrysler's insistence.) The 300, I believe, will easily hold its own and compete with Buicks and Cadillacs in the same price range, as well as lower-end Lexus's and Acuras. I sincerely hope the build quality lives up to the amazing styling, because if it does, Chrysler has another winner on their hands.

(Both photos above from the Chrysler 300 promotional website: http://www.chrysler.com/en/2012/300.)

Ad Writers for the Chrysler 200 Need To Win An Award. The Razzie.

2011 Chrysler 200 Commercial - Why do the headlights have eyebrows?
by Stephen Abbott

“Why do the headlights have eyebrows? Why is the shape of the grille like the shape of the clock? Why do the gauges appear to be floating? Why does it seem like the grille is always smiling? Because the details are everything.”

Seriously? Seriously, Chrysler? This is actually what you’re presenting to the American public as a car commercial in the second decade of the Twenty-First Century?

Very, very sad. And insulting, frankly.

The new Chrysler 200 – for which this nonsense was written and was actually FILMED for a national TV ad – is far from a luxury car. Though, to be fair, it’s far from the worst car Detroit has ever made. Chrysler wins a few awards for those, too, especially the crap they put out in the 1990s. But let’s not go there. This time.

Let’s get back to this ad. Eyebrows? Really?

Okay, when I think of eyebrows on a car’s headlamps, I’m thinking about an Audi. And they do it beautifully. Even though it’s more like eyeliner when they do it. But that doesn’t matter. The LED lights on the A8 gently curve under the large, well-defined and well-designed headlamps, giving the front end at once a sinister and aggressive stance. Combined with a wide, aggressive grille, the Audi A8 looks like, and is, a force to be reckoned with. That’s even before the engine springs to life.

But the 200? It’s grille is admittedly meant to be “always smiling,” so right off the bat, one knows aggression isn’t supposed to be a trait of this vehicle. And the fact that these are happy eyebrows dancing above these plain-Jane headlights further signals that the target market isn’t men, it’s women.

And while it’s just peachy that the ever-grinning grille is shaped EXACTLY like the arguably pretty pearl-backed clock on the dash, I’m sorry, Chrysler, but those gauges do NOT appear to be floating. The ones I have seen, and as we can plainly see in the ad, are plain-Jane gauges. But their ad writers got paid to come up with some dazzling crap to write about this loser of a vehicle, and that’s what they came up with. Thanks, guys, for the 30 seconds of hype.

I could see these poor guys now, huddled midway through an all-nighter, scratching their heads about this bland, boring Blahmobile: “People, people, come on! It’s GOT to have a feature we can blow into something interesting.”

One finally must have said: “Wait, show me those pictures again. Yeah! The grille is kinda shaped like the clock. Let’s mention that!”

“That’s great!” says the head writer in relief. “And let’s throw in Bob’s idea about the grille smiling and Doug’s thing about beautiful eyebrows.”

One wonders: do they want ANY men to buy this car?

Chrysler may want to imply that their car looks like an expensive Bentley with its standard equally expensive Breitling clock inside that also sort of “matches the shape of the grille” but… no.

The ad fails to mention the only pleasant feature of the 200 - its rear. It instantly reminds me of the superbly handsome 2012 Ford Taurus, with its long chrome band that incorporates oval corporate logo. The tail lamps of the new Taurus were borrowed from the Ford Interceptor show car and instantly give it class. But let’s wake from that wet dream back to the nightmare of 200.

I do sympathize with the ad writers’ dilemma of having to “sell” this rather lame “luxury” vehicle, which is the replacement for arguably more beefy and attractive Sebring. That car had, by the late 2000s, begun to sport aggressive headlamps and large, IN YOUR FACE tail lamps, along with punchy, Crossfire-like creases flowing from the windscreen to the attractive front-end grille.

The problem was never with the looks, IMO, though they could have been toned down if that was a problem. The issue was always with the spindly, wimpy engines that were grossly unreliable, sending them by the hundreds of thousands straight into the fleets of Enterprise and National Car Rental lots in sleepy airports across the nation.

A new grille and fancy clock on the 200 is a bland answer to a “does the curtain match the drapes” question that wasn’t being asked by anyone.

There's Something Horribly Wrong Over at Chrysler

It's pretty bad when the entire advertising and marketing campaign strategy for a car company's lineup of vehicles is based on the idea of keeping them in the shadows as much as possible.

That seems to be Chrysler's strategy, especially with its Sebring replacement, the 200, which debuted in a much-ballyhooed commercial during this year's Super Bowl. As you remember, rap star Eminem hyped the poorly photographed car traveling amongst the ruins of Detroit touting the benefits not so much of the car but of the city - which is about as prosperous today as is Kandahar or Benghazi.

The missing element was the car, which was filmed at night and in severe close-ups. At the time, I thought this was a "teaser" and that we'd get to see more of the car in future ads. Well, this ad was all we'd see, and shorter versions of it have been the sum total of what we've seen of the 200.

Good thing, it turns out. In one of our first blog posts here, we exposed the true and hideous nature of this car, which frankly looks worse than the Sebring, or at least just as cheap.

Surprisingly, though (or perhaps not, given the looks of the thing) the "shadow" campaign continues on the company's website, where it features the woefully small and pitiful four-car lineup for the "major" automaker photographed in shadows, making the black cars look dark and mysterious, but also strangely LESS elegant - and one assumes that's what the photographer was going for.

Even more oddly, in the "gallery" section for the 200 on the company's site, most of the photos are again in shadow, or in extreme close-up. It's incredibly difficult to get a handle on what the car looks like, or any of them, for that matter.

Is this deliberate? I think so. The four cars Chrysler is putting on the market in 2011 run from just over $19,000 for the 200 to just over $30,000 for the Town and Country minivan (rated one of the worst cars on the market by Consumer Reports last year.) All of them are shown in deep shadow and in solid black.

From a styling point of view, these are among the worst cars Chrysler has ever produced. They are bland, lack imagination and vision, and do not excite in the least. The new headlights on the 300, for example, are meant to be more elegant than the 2005 300, which was a rare hit for the company. Why mess with good, unless you're going to make it better?

I have a few questions for Chrysler:
What happened to your Glory Days? Chrysler has put more concept cars on the road than any other car company. To name just three: the PT Cruiser, the Pacifica, and the aforementioned Crossfire (which, despite that unfortunate name, outsold the Audi TT for a brief while in the mid-2000s.)

Where is your Vision? The Crossfire was a beautifully executed vehicle that took chances. So did the PT Cruiser, which sold millions. What happened to your mojo? It's sure not in the 200.

Where is your electric car? Chrysler was working on a secret weapon, the daringly styled ecoVoyager (see drawing below) which would have theoretically gotten 300 miles for each charge of its lithium-ion batteries, or even run on hydrogen (though we were promised this with the Chevy Volt, too, but never mind.) This was in 2008, when it hit the auto show circuit. Flash ahead to 2011, and Nissan literally cannot produce enough of its plug-in electric Leaf vehicles, nor can Toyota create enough Prius's to meet demand. Chrysler could have been the talk of the industry with this vehicle. But Chrysler blew it. Again.

Chrysler Comes up Short with the 200

It was easy to suspect something was wrong when, in the much-hyped 2011 Super Bowl ad for the (supposedly) brand new Chrysler 200, the car itself isn't the star, but the gutted remains of Detroit, which used to make cars. Or to be generous, used to make more of them.

The car is only hinted at behind a lot of shadows and smoke, and there's a good reason for that. It's a dud. It is far from the "luxury car" pretensions promised both in its Auto Show days and in the ad.

Note the beautiful vehicle to the right, on the bottom. That's the gorgeously wrought, curvaceous 200 America was promised in 2009. The dud on the top is what we got - a Sebring with a new grille and hood treatment. In fact, the Sebring had an arguably more beautiful grille and the creased hood brought to mind the sexy, though short-lived, Chrysler Crossfire.

The 200, by contrast, is dull, and when you first see one in the daylight, you may laugh out loud, as I did, in utter amusement that THIS is the famed "luxury car" in the famous ad.

Admittedly, few production cars will ever meet the expectations the concept raised. Though one must give Chrysler/Dodge some credit on that front, since it has brought to production more concepts than any other car maker (think: Neon, PT Cruiser, Pacifica, etc.) and sometimes, as in those examples, they even come close or exceed the concept.

Which makes it even sadder when this same car company fails so completely to "wow" after putting together such a great concept.

(As a footnote: Does anyone doubt that Hyundai would be able to translate the car in the bottom picture to market AS IS? After all, they put out the more curvaceous, gorgeous, above-expectations 2011 Sonata.)