• Sep 10, 2006
Despite rumors that have been floating around since the debut of the Hornet concept in Geneva this year, Volkswagen will not be providing Dodge with a platform to produce a B-segment vehicle.

According to an article that's due for publication this Monday in the German magazine Automobilwoche, VW's bid to share its Polo's underpinnings was too high for the German-American automaker. However, DaimlerChrysler's plans to produce the Hornet or a similar vehicle will not be thwarted, as D.C. is still the process of negotiations with Chinese, Japanese and European manufacturers.

Although this may be a small hurdle for Dodge's new sub-compact, the relationship between VW and Dodge to produce a mini-van has been left intact.

[Source: The Auto Channel and Automobilwoche via The German Car Blog]

Related Posts:


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 13 Comments
      • 8 Years Ago
      Thank God. VW doesn't need to be associated with a horrifically butt-ugly monstrosity on 4-wheels as that! :eek:
      • 8 Years Ago
      Don't confuse the Swift + that Canada gets with the REAL Suzuki Swift. It is not imported into the USA or Canada. I think the Swift would be to expensive. I'm betting on the Chinese or Mitsu
      • 8 Years Ago
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Engine_Manufacturing_Alliance

      Hyundai(block) built at GEMA, and Chrysler will use it in the Caliber, 2 new Jeeps, upcoming Dodge Avenger(2007)sebring, and in Hyudnai Sonata. As it says her,e initial design(engine block?)originally was handled by Hyundai.
      The Caliber, Compass, etc...Mitsu platform.Read the Avenger was a Mitsu platform, but Chrysler tweaked it sooo much, it is nowe considered to be more Chrysler(or Chrysler only) platform.

      Whatever.

      They need better warranties, to catch up to Ford, GM, and others with even better warranties.

      I hope they do not make this thing a "tiny" vehicle, whomever builds it for them. At least, try something say less than 4-5 inches shorter than the Chrysler PT Cruiser, and maybe 10 inches shorter-Rabbit-length(at the most) shorter than Caliber .

      Something barely 12 feet long, in USA?
      Not in my aprt of town, you won't see many. Too many 12 ton suv's still around. I want"crunch" room between me and the front and rear bumpers, in case of an accident!
      • 8 Years Ago
      Either Mitsubishi or Chery will get the deal, and if Chrysler wnats cheapest cost to build, then Chery will win( Chrylser provide the goods, assemble it in China, sip to USA= save slots of money for D/C and buyers).

      GM has been having Shanghai build their V6's for over a year now, for the Chevy Equinox(of course, under their direction, parts, etc)and so far, no recalls, complaints, etc, about the engine, so why not Chery, under Chrysler general supervision?
      • 8 Years Ago
      "this proves chrylser cant do anything on their own, they need to call in another manufacturer because if they built it themselves it would suck."

      I can't believe the ignorance and stupidity of some people! Chrysler has been seeling cars of their own design and manufacture for WAY longer than your precious Japanese cars. In fact...they don't make any with anyone's help at the moment save for buying platforms from Mitsu on a car or two
      • 8 Years Ago
      #11 Stop spending time with the Wikie god and do your own research next time. You sound so pathetic is using someone elses poor excuse of journalism.

      The problem here is the initial cost of research, development, and platform sharing. I see that most never quite got that concept when all auto manufacture do it one time or another.
      Jim
      • 8 Years Ago
      this proves chrylser cant do anything on their own, they need to call in another manufacturer because if they built it themselves it would suck.
      • 8 Years Ago
      Whatever delays this car as long as possible is fine with me. This may be the ugliest car I've ever seen.
      • 8 Years Ago
      Platform sharing is desireable for an automaker because it reduces the tooling & engineering costs. However, in the long run it doesn't pay to work with your competitor. Very few shared platforms have worked out. Later everyone figures it out that it is the same as 'X' competitors vehicle and questions why they should have have any brand loyality.

      Everyone looks to business models like the Apple Ipod where you just create the product/marketing and contract everyone else to build it for you. The problem for an automaker believing this strategy is no one has created the "next best thing" in the automotive world. So if you take this route you will soon be pushed out the door since you you no longer own all the pieces of the puzzle. Your suppliers would then be stronger than you and they are now you!
      • 8 Years Ago
      What is the official reason for the refusal ?
      • 8 Years Ago
      What if some how DCX bought the plans for the old (current) Mini Cooper platform...I mean the new one is coming out next year anyways.
      • 8 Years Ago
      Wow TDI.. alittle blind brand loyalty there huh? I dont see the problem with platform sharing, I mean hey VW sought chrysler enought to want to use they're minivans and its not like small VWs are the best cars in the world or anything.
    • Load More Comments