• Nov 29th 2010 at 10:01AM
  • 26
It's beginning to look like Fiat's plan for Chrysler includes heavier use of the C-EVO platform that underpins the Alfa Romeo Giulietta. There's already going to be a Dodge based off the C-EVO, and Fiat has just laid out plans to build a new Jeep model on the platform at the company's Mirafiori plant in Italy. The Jeep model will share the production line with Alfa models, and Fiat is trying to get the work rules tweaked to help support the 280,000 vehicle per year volume. The Detroit News reports that Italian unions are pleased with the plan that bumps volume by about 100,000 cars versus 2009 output.

Most of the Italian-built Jeeps will be exported, mainly to the United States. Engines and transmissions will come from Chrysler's U.S. operations, at least for vehicles headed here. Fiat and Chrysler are sharing plants and volume with apparent ease, with a planned Maserati SUV coming out of Detroit's Jefferson North plant and sharing much with the excellent Jeep Grand Cherokee. A mid-size Fiat SUV is also expected to use the Dodge Journey as a canvas; all moves that underscore how stingy things were under Daimler.

[Source: The Detroit News I Photo: Fiat]

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
      • 4 Years Ago
      Is this the Liberty replacement or the compass/patriot replacement?
      • 4 Years Ago
      More proof that Fiat actually cares about Chrysler and using Chrysler to actually make money, rather than just strip them down and take their resources without giving them anything in return. Good news for everyone.
        • 4 Years Ago
        What can we say, but it's a perfect match for these two companies!
        • 4 Years Ago
        Hey Justin, did you not read the part about the Maserati being made here, as well as all the drive trains?
        • 4 Years Ago
        what happened to Obama's "made in America"?

      • 4 Years Ago
      A round of applause to both Fiat and Chrysler for being able to play nice and get along so well. The continuing news regarding the alliance between these two companies appears to be quite promising.
      • 4 Years Ago
      A Fiat-based C-EVO platform Jeep is fine by me.

      All I ask of Fiat is, please don't make it look like the last-gen Jeep Compass.
      • 4 Years Ago
      In the Italian article it mentions that in the same factory they will build an Alfa Romeo SUV which will be built alongside the Jeep sister model.
      The same factory is going to build the new Alfa sedan called Giulia which will replace the 159.

      The Jeep CUV will replace the Patriot and the compass.

      They are going to be exciting times ahead for Chrysler and Fiat in the next 2-3 years
      • 4 Years Ago
      Just last week there were reports that some future Maserati SUV/crossover was going to be built in Michigan, and this week we find out that some Jeep will be built in Italy.

      That's perfectly fine. That's what trade is all about.

      It's when we start talking about Chinese-made goods that it becomes a 1-way street that ends up screwing us over.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Instead of Daimler 'hand-me-downs', such as the 300's rear suspension, this looks to be a great merger of two companies that sell nearly at same price-points in the market..its just been two separate markets.

      Looks like Fiat will make a pretty nice return to the US and this surely will help sell even more Chrysler product in the EU. Win-win.
      • 4 Years Ago
      A Jeep isn't a Jeep if it doesn't have solid axles front and rear. I hope Fiat doesn't bother diluting Jeep's brand equity any further by building more faux-by-four's. Ever since the XJ/Cherokee and WJ/Grand Cherokee were discontinued, the only real Jeep has been the Wrangler.

      All these mallcrawlers that DaimlerChrysler, Cerberus, and now Fiat have been cranking out aren't fooling anyone. The ONLY proper setup for a Jeep is a proper pair of solid axles. Independent suspension just doesn't cut it off-road.
        • 4 Years Ago
        @fpcolol, keep telling yourself that IFS/IRS is just fine for off-road use, that it is as strong or provides as much articulation as a pair of solid axles. You're just making yourself look like a fool. The reason all the vehicles you mentioned (except the HMMWV, which is a different story altogether) have gone IFS/IRS is to cater to the mallcrawler crowd. There are perfectly overwhelming reasons why the only Jeep intended for actual off-road use (the Wrangler) has solid axles.

        Don't think you can fool us with tales of the new Jeep's and Land Rover's supposedly fantastic IFS/IRS articulation; even the mega-travel IFS in the Ford Raptor is nothing compared to the solid front axle of the otherwise similar Dodge Power Wagon. And a ZJ/WJ solid-axle Grand Cherokee will articulate circles around a WK/WK2 independent-suspension Grand Cherokee even without disconnecting the sway bars. But true trail users prefer solid axles more for their strength, simplicity, and upgradability than for its superior articulation.

        I'll give you this, though: you are absolutely right that the off-road and heavy-duty crowd decried the downgrade to unibody design with the XJ, ZJ, WJ, etc. Those vehicles would definitely have been better had they been built with a proper ladder frame. But the solid-axle suspension provided the off-road ability that the core users needed, and the aftermarket provided the fixes for sagging unibodies that crack and/or prevent the doors from opening and closing anymore - for anyone who was smart enough to address these Jeeps' engineering shortcomings before their vehicle crumpled upon itself.

        The HMMWV's independent suspension has proven to be barely adequate for traversing flat desert terrain, and utterly hopeless when driving over rocks and similar rough. Show me a Hummer H1 (the civilian version of the HMMWV with all the same IFS/IRS underpinnings) that has completed the Rubicon or Fordyce Trail without breaking suspension or drivetrain parts, and I'll show you 10 that have left their drivers stranded. Yet an unmodified Jeep Wrangler can easily make it through unscathed.

        If Jeep wants all their new "Jeeps" to cater to the softcore mallcrawler crowd who care more about a cushy ride in town than actual durability and off-road ability, then they're doing a great job and I commend them for it. But if they hope that their core market of consumers who want and need a heavy-duty 4x4 (and not just another crossover faux-by-four like every other SUV out there) will continue to buy this new crop of vehicles and/or contribute to Jeep's legacy and reputation for above-average 4x4s, then Fiat/Chrysler are sorely mistaken.

        Hummer, Land Rover, Ford, Chevy, Suzuki, Toyota, and everyone else who used to make capable 4x4s have all given up on their core buyers and lost their reputation for building true off-road vehicles. Jeep is a stone's throw from the same fate. The reason why Jeep continues to sell Wrangler Rubicons faster than they can build them is because it's the only vehicle left in the American marketplace that's worth a damn in the dirt (besides of course the rare and expensive Mercedes-Benz Geländewagen). Jeep proved before that it can build a sporty, comfortable, AND off-road-capable Grand Cherokee with the ZJ and WJ, and they sold gazillions of them. There's no reason why the WK2 has to be emasculated in order to be a hot seller. The handful of faux-wheelers that would be lost in the upgrade to solid axles would be more than made up for by sales to the true four-wheelers.
        • 4 Years Ago
        Sure. Just keep telling yourself that.

        Then tell it to Jeep, who long ago designed a groundbreaking IFS system for more articulation than a solid axle.

        Or the AMC and Jeep group engineers who designed the HMMWV with a fully-independent suspension for capability reasons.

        Or Land Rover engineers or owners the world over, most of whom recognize Land Rover vehicles as the most capable on Earth. (And Land Rover solved IFS/IRS articulation complaints quite cleverly themselves.)

        Very few problems in the real world are 4x4 show test ramps and boulder-stomping. There are plenty of benefits to an IFS or fully-independent setup, and disadvantages they offer in some situations can be readily worked around in both engineering and by the driver.

        Nobody seems to remember it today (least of all the "give me solid or give me death" clan), but the XJ Cherokee itself was decried as a "faux-by-four" because Jeep had the audacity to build a unibody ORV. A unibody Jeep? No way, everyone knows the ONLY proper setup for a Jeep is a proper body-on-frame design.
        • 4 Years Ago
        "The HMMWV's independent suspension has proven to be barely adequate for traversing flat desert terrain...."

        Um, what color is the sky in your world? I have 7 years and 100K miles in combat terrain that says the Humvee is far more durable than you imply. Mine has never, EVER let me down.
      • 4 Years Ago
      I just hope that the C-EVO Jeeps are true Jeeps, and not Jeeps in name only. BTW, I saw a CRD Liberty the other day, just the third one I've ever seen.
        • 4 Years Ago
        Of course......Jepp enginers designJeep, Alfa engineers design Alfa and so on
        Who build the cars doesn't matter
      • 4 Years Ago
      Will they even sell Jeeps in a country with $6-$8/gallon gas?
      • 4 Years Ago
      you don't understand is not a alliance bat a fusion
        • 4 Years Ago
        Not yet, as it stands FIAT has only the 25% of Chrysler not enough to merge it with Fiat
        If Marchionne keeps all his promises to the US Government it will increas to 35% and then they might be able to take over it.

        After that they will IPO Chrysler and they will probably merge FIAT with Chrysler
      • 4 Years Ago
      I see Fiat will build 100,000 Jeeps a year in Italy and export them to the US.
      Meanwhile, Jeep will build how many Maseratis? 1,000?

      Is this really good news for Chrysler and American workers?
        • 4 Years Ago
        You are forgetting about the 100,000 or so Fiat 500's Chrysler will build in its Mexico plant with engines from MI, as well as however many Journey based Fiats they build, the Lancia twins for the Chrysler vehicles, and some number of Alfa Romeos.

        The plan appears to be to develop competence centers for certain platforms and utilize those factories to their fullest. From an investment standpoint this makes a lot of sense. One also has to wonder if trade agreements played a part since the Patriot is the most applicable Jeep model to most export markets.

    • Load More Comments
    Share This Photo X