Amidst all the wheeling and dealing going on at Chrysler LLC., the automaker still has a lineup of current cars that needs attending to. The Chrysler Sebring/Dodge Avenger duo have been underperforming in the marketplace since they were introduced in 2006, and in an interview with The Detroit Free Press, Chrysler's executive vice pres Frank Klegon reveals exactly what's going to happen to this company's midsize sedans in the future. Chrysler is readying a mid-cycle fix for the Sebring/Avenger that will include improvements that Klegon calls "cosmetic" and some "more functional things". Hopefully the quality of the interior materials is addressed, as well as the engine lineup of these vehicles featuring a four- and six-cylinder that don't match up well with the competition in terms of power or fuel economy. But Chrysler is also looking beyond the five-year life cycle of the current cars to what comes next. It has formed a special task force dubbed Project D, which has begun work on the next Chrysler D segment platform that will likely spawn sedans, hatchbacks and CUVs and be sold the world over. We have no details yet on the car, which should first arrive around 2011/12 in the form of replacement for the Sebring and Avenger. And as far as we know, Chrysler is not testing on chimpanzees.
[Source: The Detroit Free Press]
New KITT Attack Mode revealed at Comic Con
London 2008: Honda OSM concept roadster says, "Cheerio!"
London 2008: Lotus unveils the Evora
2010 Chevy Camaro - Official Details and Images
2010 Chevy Camaro - LIVE from the reveal
First Drive: Maserati Quattroporte S in Europe
First Drive: 2008 MINI Cooper S JCW
In the Autoblog Garage:2009 Nissan GT-R
North American Exclusive First Drive: Alfa MiTo
First Drive: 2009 Kia Borrego
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Chris @ Apr 16th 2008 12:06PM
LOL!!!
SPG @ Apr 16th 2008 12:09PM
The poster was brilliant.
Fixing the Sebring and Avenger just makes sense.
Jared @ Apr 16th 2008 12:14PM
Good luck to them. They'll sure need it if they try to stay the course. But I expect Chryslerbus will sell out to Nissan entirely before Project D is completed. Then Nissan will just kill it, along with 2/3 of the Chrylserbus product line.
Ian @ Apr 16th 2008 12:24PM
Is this the a sequel to Project D, or is it the Initial D?
MemphisNET @ Apr 16th 2008 12:17PM
Media/Journalists (with too much need for speed) have killed these cars. They are fine runabouts.
I'm not saying the gripes are untrue, but blown way out of proportion.
Glad to see they're fixing the issues.
Jared @ Apr 16th 2008 12:25PM
No, the media did not kill these cars -- Chrysler did.
The fact is that the Sebring/Avenger are woefully bad cars. They are nowhere near as good as their competitors. Their exterior styling is atrocious. The interior styling and quality is even worse. The drivetrains are substandard in every way -- performance, noise, vibration, harshness, and economy. And to add insult to injury, their reliability is substandard as well.
Frank @ Apr 16th 2008 12:31PM
Lol i testdrove an avenger r/t, it was HORRIBLE ... for the engine and price it had it shoulda been pretty decent. My 03 dakota v8 is quicker than that piece of junk w/ an r/t label thrown on it. They have a right to complain ........ they're right.
John R @ Apr 16th 2008 12:53PM
No. I can't agree.
The Accord, Malibu, Altima, Camry (when you pick its best trim), the Mazda 6 & its (to me) lesser cousins, and even the 4th generation Hyundai Sonata are "fine runabouts".
Sebring/Avenger was...something else.
PJ @ Apr 16th 2008 3:34PM
I have to respectfully disagree as well. I drove the top-trim Sebring and Avenger back-to-back with their rivals at a media event last year, and the difference was painful. The trim quality and fit in both are worse than in most company's $15K compacts.
Moreover, their cabins feel narrow, the seats are narrow, the visibility is pinched, the armrests are squared-off and positively rock-hard... these are the sorts of things non-enthusiasts notice straight off the bat, and have nothing to do with performance expectations. They're just horrifically outclassed.
And with only "cosmetic" improvements coming in the next few years, their future doesn't look bright.
MemphisNET @ Apr 16th 2008 1:06PM
That's fine. You don't have to agree.
My father has an 06 (2nd gen) and I borrow it from time to time and I have no gripes other than it blends in.
I have a beef with the plastics in the 3rd gen car, but it doesn't mean its a bad car - just a bland one.
oZ @ Apr 16th 2008 1:19PM
So, Jared, you drove one, then?
I had a rental Avenger last week, and it was at least a better car than the rental Accord I had. I don't really have much else to compare it to, except for the previous generation Altima, which had a horrible interior filled with hard plastic. The Avenger wasn't speedy as a 4 cylinder, but it was a comfy car and handled quite well for a near-base model.
oZ @ Apr 16th 2008 1:19PM
So, Jared, you drove one, then?
I had a rental Avenger last week, and it was at least a better car than the rental Accord I had. I don't really have much else to compare it to, except for the previous generation Altima, which had a horrible interior filled with hard plastic. The Avenger wasn't speedy as a 4 cylinder, but it was a comfy car and handled quite well for a near-base model.
AMGoff @ Apr 16th 2008 1:27PM
I agree completely.
Whether or not people particularly like a car or not is irrelevant. The fact remains that no one (with the possible exception of some Chinese makes) really makes "bad" cars anymore... some are just varying degrees of better than others.
I'd gladly drive an Avenger R/T AWD... the 3.5L has always been a fine motor and in this car, it's finally coupled to a six-speed, not to mention AWD. The exterior is far more exciting than most of its competition... and the interior isn't as bad as the many aficionados of AB make it out to be... it's actually a fairly handsome design - but then we have to hear about the quality of the materials... find me a sedan in the $20-25K price range that doesn't use plastics in the interior.
I don't ask that everyone should say only nice things about every car featured on AB... but just gain a little perspective. Are these Chrysler mid-sizers the best cars on the market? Absolutely not... but automotive history is littered with cars more poorly made than these and even today there are some cars that pale in comparison.
They're not "bad" cars... because again, none of the major players really make bad cars anymore... there are just those that are better.
MemphisNET @ Apr 16th 2008 1:45PM
AMGoff:
Falling on deaf ears. Apparently being a satisfied OWNER (not renter, not getting someone's abuse) means nothing. I can't count on my fingers and toes how many 'better' cars there are in this segment, but you're right - its not bad by any means.
Reliability is moot. I can change my own oil and do my own brakes. There's no mechanical deal-breaker in this car. People like to spread fear, and the internet is a great brewing ground for that. The people that fire off on me personally on those who have never owned one, or another Chrysler (or American) car. They tend to lease and trade in after 2 years.
Oh well. At the end of the day, its your money - I'd rather spend 10k on this, than 20k on the used accord just because its 'better'
As a new car, I'd definitely pass - but only because I don't buy new cars.
Jared @ Apr 16th 2008 1:53PM
Oz: yes, unfortunately, I've driven one. And I've recently driven a number of other cars, including current generation Camry, Corolla, and Civic. I'd take either of those three, in base specification, long before I'd take a Sebring/Avenger.
John R @ Apr 16th 2008 2:32PM
Memphis, blog readership and the buff books are not only turning people at large off to this car. Prior ownership is too.
I've owned an Intrepid. And I will never go back to a Chrysler product. I may be able to change my own oil, but I can't rebuild a transmission on my own.
Being burned by prior ownership coupled with the fact that the car (Sebring/Avenger) brings nothing to the table when compared to its competitors domestic or foreign means it doesn't even enter the equation.
Nobody is drinking Kool-Aid. The car needs major work. Chrysler made a so-so attempt in a hyper-competitive segment and you're surprised and upset with the results?
Everyone in this segment excels at SOMETHING. What did the Sebring/Avenger excel at?
AMGoff @ Apr 16th 2008 2:55PM
M-NET:
The thing that has always got me about the majority of AB denizens is that I've never come across such a large group of people who consistently confuse their own opinions for facts. Even the grammar experts of AB are guilty of such overly-authoritative hogwash from time to time...
Regardless... you and I (and hopefully a hand full of others) realize that these aren't BAD cars, simply because there really aren't any BAD cars on sale here anymore. I had the chance to spend a day with the previously mentioned Avenger R/T and despite the OPINIONS of others... my opinion is that it is a decent, middle of the road sedan that actually had styling, unlike some of its competition. I felt it had a composed ride... I didn't feel any of this horrible "harshness" others complain about... it was fairly quiet, fairly comfortable, nicely equipped, and had more than adequate power. I'm still a fan of the 3.5L V6 and the 6-speed transmission made it all the better - I thought the upshifts were smooth and the downshifts were quick. I also don't care how it compares to a Camcord either... I've rode in them, but I'll never go out of my way to go drive one because I don't like them, plain and simple... it's the same logic which dictates why I don't go and comment on posts about them... why would I waste my time reading and commenting on something I don't like.
Like I said before... it's by no means the best car on the market, but no matter which way you cut it... it's far from being a bad car. But as I've mentioned a long, long time ago... This is AB - logic need not apply.
MemphisNET @ Apr 16th 2008 3:50PM
John R,
Not saying you're wrong - but neither am I. I've written many many times about my 1996, 400,000+km, Chrysler Intrepid that had no major, deal-breaking problems - and would definitely purchase another Intrepid as long as it was up to my standards of a used car : Documented history, low mileage, good price, and addressed recalls. I also know that in an Intrepid, the 2.7 is NOT a good fit because of weight, gearing, etc - in the Sebring, especially a 2004-2006 where most sludge problems were addressed - the motor is just fine. Transmission as well. Chrysler 4 speed horror stories are from the past, and do not apply today. Besides, most 4 speed problems were computer and shady-mechanic related anyway.
Two of my sisters has been collectively burned 4 times by Honda. This is extreme and totally NOT common, I know. But between sh!t service from the dealership, and 4 lemons in a row, it's enough to sour my family.
Just saying is all.
Ligor @ Apr 16th 2008 12:28PM
interior is in need of a lot of help, hopefully they make a jump like Hyundai has been doing
they should also make AWD an option in all their cars 4 and 6 cylinder, FWD and RWD
Jared @ Apr 16th 2008 12:46PM
It isn't just the media who thinks that the Sebring/Avenger interiors are terrible -- Chrysler executives and insiders agree that they completely screwed up. From the Detroit News:
"A top Chrysler Group executive said in a recent frank internal question-and-answer session with employees that the automaker seriously misjudged the market in developing the panned Chrysler Sebring and Dodge Nitro last year, and is swiftly moving to improve current and future vehicles.
Answering often pointed questions from employees on Chrysler's internal Internet system, Bob Lee, head of powertrain engineering, acknowledged that many people at Chrysler are "outraged" over the issues with the Sebring sedan and Nitro SUV, according to a copy of the Q&A obtained by The Detroit News. Both vehicles received highly critical evaluations from Consumer Reports, which is influential with car buyers.
Chrysler CEO Tom LaSorda and Chief Operating Officer Eric Ridenour are "quite upset" and agree the company "missed where the market was to end up versus our projections," Lee wrote.
Chrysler underestimated competitors, set standards too low in some areas and was not where it needed to be in areas such as fuel economy, interior quality, and limiting noise and vibration. "
Full text is here: http://www.detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070608/AUTO01/706080377/1148