What comes next for the Chrysler PT Cruiser?
Peter Valdes-Dapena has penned a nice piece examining Chrysler's options for the next PT Cruiser. It's an interesting question, as Valde-Dapena notes, because no retro vehicle has ever been substantially redesigned. Like the recent refreshening of the Volkswagen New Beetle, Chrysler's redo of the PT Cruiser for 2006 amounted to minor visual tinkering. Reportedly, however, Chrysler is looking to have an answer ready for an end of the decade launch.
But what to do? The new Sebring offers a larger frame on which the next PT Cruiser could be built, along with the ability to accept a V6 engine. American tastes, however, are moving away from larger vehicles with less fuel efficient engines, which is one reason the current Cruiser with its fuel-efficient four cylinder is still selling well after six years on the market. Valdes-Dapena also suggests Chrysler could rebadge the similarly sized Dodge Caliber and skin it in a retro theme.
Regardless of what platform the next PT Cruiser employs, the real question is how will Chrysler update a look that's based on distinct visual cues from the past? The article picks the brain of David Zatz, the purveyor of Allpar.com (score one for the web journalists!), who offers the best quote of concern when he says, "Will they attack all the things people pick out as problems and sandpaper off all the edges until there's nothing?" We'll have to wait and see.
[Source: CNN.com]
[Vote for this article on Netscape]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg "2011 Audi A8: Live from Miami")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
JB 7:28AM (6/26/2006)
That's the problem with retro styling. If you go into the past, how do you move on? Do you go farther back? Airflow anyone?
I guess DCX could grow the PT so it fits on the Caliber/Compass platform, keeping the front end and rounded back hatch.
It can't get too big, or it will steal customers from Pacifica, which is finally getting a bigger V6 to move its heavy weight. I think the PT should stay with 4 cylinder, 2.4L power, and have the turbo. They need more fuel efficiency, not another V6, unless its a M-B Diesel V6.
I think we are seeing the first of many difficult decisions about retro cars (Beetle, Mustang (still hard to believe the Probe almost was the Mustang)) in the near future. Where are all the futuristic car designs? Like the Civic we don't get here, or some European and Japanese designs. They don't seem to be stuck in retro mode. Even the current Alfas look modern, but still can be recognized as being Alfas, especially from the front.
Reply
Gunnar Heinrich 7:31AM (6/26/2006)
The sandpaper referrence is quite good. There's plenty of room for improvement in the next PT's design without losing the original character.
http://www.automobilesdeluxe.blogspot.com
Reply
Reagan 8:32AM (6/26/2006)
The fact that we call the engine the Cruiser has "fuel efficient" says something unpleasant about the US car amrket... It might be better than an SUV, but the most disappointing thing about the Cruiser (to my family anyway) has been its poor gas mileage (17-19 mpg around town). I'm glad Chrysler realizes a lot of people want smaller, fuel efficient cars, now I'd like to actually SEE one.
Reply
Michael Karesh 8:36AM (6/26/2006)
My wife has a PT Cruiser. As Reagan says, "fuel efficient" it isn't. In suburban driving you can expect around 20. On the highway, maybe 25.
People buy the current PT based on styling, practicality (generous rear legroom and large cargo area with seats folded/out), and price. Chrysler cut the price significantly a year or two ago.
Compare the PT's price to that of other cars:
http://www.truedelta.com/models/PT.php
Reply
GhostDoggy 10:32AM (6/26/2006)
What attracts buyers to the PT? I mean, I thought it was something of a novel idea to owning something retro. I never considered it to being marketed as a fuel-efficient vehicle or a family-oriented vehicle.
How about redesigning what is underneath the sheetmetal? I'd start with making it RWD and them go buy a BMW I6 to put into it and call it PTRT. :)
Reply
gearhead 10:45AM (6/26/2006)
The pt cruizer is a wonderfull driving machine which is remembered for that perticular look there is really no room for improvement. However they should not water it down over the years like so many other classics like the corvette. One feature they could ad to the overall styling is a fully extended grill (from the bottom of the hood to the top of the air dam). there are kits on the market to do this already and they make the car look so much better. Chrysler should take this as a clue that this is what people want
Reply
CJ 11:13AM (6/26/2006)
Why do people think this design can't be updated? Sure it's retro, but it's a MODERN interpretation of older style. That can definately be updated. Sharpen up the edges for one thing, redo the face, which would need to be done so you can shove an engine in there with a little more oomph! (yes I know there a turbo already... I'm talking about the base engine.) And I hate to beat a dead horse but they already did a nice update concept a while ago...
http://www.mrmikes.com/ptconceptscalifornia.htm
They need to just keep going with that idea!
Reply
L3 11:24AM (6/26/2006)
How about those 'Apple-bottom' jean headlights. Something for everyone!
Reply
MarkWeb 11:27AM (6/26/2006)
1. Move over the better performing, better gas mileage "world engine" from the Caliber - 2.4 only. The PT is a little heavy and the current 2.4 (which was designed for the minvans) is a solid, but not distinguished, performer (relative to what's out there these days - it certainly is better than the previous generation 2.2's from Toyota and Honda that it competed with when it first came out). I've heard the 2.7 V-6 won't fit in either the Caliber or existing PT platform engine compartments. Offering turbos instead is ok, although I personally think the 2.7 V-6 is underappreciated and dropped into the wrong cars (the 300, Magnum).
2. With the Caliber platform, they can offer AWD PT's. Yay!
3. With the Caliber platform, they can offer the CVT, which eliminates the need for a 6 speed auto. Yay! And using the same engine and transmission over a couple of platforms saves money.
4. The PT seems some safety upgrades - standard side curtain airbags, ABS, tire pressure monitoring, and stability control (it IS tall and therefore needs stability control more than a lower vehicle like the Sebring). Add value while keeping the price a hidden bargain and customers will keep coming for the functionality.
Reply
Tim UF 11:53AM (6/26/2006)
Seems to me i saw a PT Cruiser customized to fit a Viper's V10. It fit nicely, if a bit tight, and requiring certain things be moved to the back (like the battery).
Granted, it was really a project putting a pt chassis on a viper drivetrain.
But, given enough motivation, there is plenty of room for wedging a narrow v6 into the frame.
I saw keep the styling similar to now, and just move on from the neon based architecture. The new caliber platform should provide a much safer starting point (I've read more than one place the horrors of the PT's crash performance). Give it the new engine, options of light turbo, and AWD. And it MUST have improved interior fit and finish compared to the caliber, sinc ethe chrysler brand fancies itself as upmarket to dodge.
Reply
Fabulo 12:18PM (6/26/2006)
There's already a restyle PT Cruiser on the market, it's called the HHR. Built exactly as a me-too copy. PT is hosted by the Neon platform, HHR hosted by the Cobalt platform (and the similarities do not stop there).
Although I like the HHR styling better, there is still plenty of room for improvement. DCX can come up with something great for that one.
And if you want better fuel economy, you have to make lighter cars, not give them smaller engines. This is a nobrainer. In that respect, most cars on the market are heavy pigs. 20 mpg around town for a PT cruiser? Just a smidgen better than a Tahoe. Wow.
Reply
Bill 12:35PM (6/26/2006)
Why does it need to be updated? Why not just let it go after it's run?
Conceptually, the Caliber replaces it anyway, a 4 door compact hatch, edgy styling, affordable price.
There is no reason why a nameplate has to continue for decades, like say Impala, Thunderbird, etc. There's no shame in making a one-time design, then letting it go, with something new & fresh in it's place that isn't captive to the past. Modern platform sharing makes this possible.
Reply
Stphane Dumas 2:08PM (6/26/2006)
Interesting point you mention Fabulo, however with the requirement of various safety devices (airbags, beams,etc...) unless replacing stell with more use of aluminium, graphite iron or carbon fiber, we can't remove lots of weight. Meanwhile in Europe there the 2.2 cdi diesel version of the PT Cruiser who give a more interesting mileage (around 6.5 à 7.0 liters per 100km)then the gas version, I spotted 2 test-drives of this version but it's in French, you have to use Google to translate from French to English, here the links http://www.caradisiac.com/php/essai_tun/ess_nou/nouv250/mg_12505_chrysler_pt_cruiser.php
http://www.321auto.com/Actu/Essais/Chrysler-Pt-cruiser.asp
Reply
Vctor Rubiera 2:44PM (6/26/2006)
Let´s make some drawings to see what we would like to see.
Reply
Bob 5:48AM (6/27/2006)
I recently bought a 2006 PT Cruiser GT convertible. I am amazed what a great little car this is. Fast and comfortable, handles well and is surprisingly roomy both front and rear. The top is extremely quick and easy to operate. Its also very quiet on the road for a convertible. Its also the least expensive convertible, if you buy the base model. As for the next version, it should be easy to come up w/ one. Slightly improve certain characteristics and make it look like a retro 50's car in lieu of a retro 40's car...or even a modified retro 40's car. It's always going to sell well if they don't mess with it too much.
Reply
David Zatz 9:15AM (6/27/2006)
Why do they keep the PT running, in response to Bill? Because it sells 120,000 units per year, largely to nontraditional buyers (that is, people who don't normally buy Chryslers), and because it makes a good profit without cannibalizing their other sales. Indeed, had the PT been badged as a Plymouth, as it was supposed to be, we'd probably be seeing a larger PT right now based on the Voyager.
As for the V6, I agree that the key is not a bigger engine but less weight. The PT is a fairly small vehicle. The engineering costs were minimized in this case because development was not officially blessed for much of the time; the two-door Neon budget was used to create the PT, which has a different rear suspension and floorpan! You can imagine how much lighter the PT could be (and safer) if they had devoted more engineering time to it. I think most PT owners are very happy with the small size - it's pretty big inside, and how much space do most people really need, anyway? The PT fits into very small garage spaces, with a footprint smaller than even the Neon, and is terribly easy to parallel park - yet holds a tremendous load of groceries and, with rear seats folded or removed, can carry surprisingly big stuff.
The Caliber might be pretty safe, but it's hardly light, and a PT with the Caliber chassis could well be even heavier than the current model, and really need a V6.
The new World Engine 2.4 produces about 170 horsepower as I recall - 20 hp more than the current model - and should be able to get better mileage at the same time. Just dropping that engine in _might_ make the PT considerably faster, if the new 2.4 isn't one of those "peaky" engines that only makes power in a tiny little band at the top of the tach.
Hell, I think they should just reengineer the current PT and make a small car off the platform instead of paying another car company hundreds of millions of dollars for the rights to their tech. I mean, why remake an old Jetta when they can rebuild the PT and base a small car off it? That car would have the sportiness of the original Neon and the reliability of the PT (which has been way up there in quality rankings), and because they've already invested so much in PT engineering, it would probably still be cheaper than adapting a Volkswagen to meet Dodge needs.
Reply
Chrysler Me Four-Twelve 9:24AM (6/27/2006)
Bah, I am waiting for more supercars like the Me Four-Twelve model.
Reply
Eliot 9:25AM (6/27/2006)
"There is no reason why a nameplate has to continue for decades, like say Impala, Thunderbird, etc."
Tell that to the folks at Honda. They've been making Civics and Accords for decades. If you make a good car and upgrade it properly, there is no need to stop producing it. It will sell based on its merits, like the Accords and Civics. If DC does this with the PT, it will be around for a long time.
Reply
Tommy Cummings 11:29PM (6/28/2006)
If I can do it, Chrysler can and probably will. I installed a Chevy 3.8 V-6 with a rear wheel drive transmission into my 2002 PT Cruiser. The front suspension and frame is completely stock. The rear suspension is a solid coil over rearend housing from a 2002 Jeep Wrangler. You can view some pictures at the URL listed above. I have not completed the project yet. However, I would be interested in receiving your comments and suggestions. Thank you for your time, Tommy.
Reply
Tommy Cummings 11:51PM (6/28/2006)
Sorry, I forgot to post the URL in thread # 19 above.
Here it is: http://www.automotivepictures.com/showphoto.php?photo=520&cat=500&ppuser=19507
I hope you enjoy the pictures. If you would like to send me a personal message, this is my email address:
kamaki8@hawaii.rr.com Thank you, Tommy.
Reply