The news just keeps on rolling from Auburn Hills today, as Fiat Chrysler continues to detail its five-year growth plan. This time round, we're talking about Chrysler. The troubled American brand has been limited in the past few years to the lamentable Sebring/200, the Town & Country and the 300, although that's likely to change in the coming years.

"The Chrysler brand is not luxury – it's not premium. Chrysler is the mainstream American brand," brand CEO Al Gardner said during today's presentation.

Gardner set a sales target of 800,000 units by 2018, which marks an increase of 350,000 units compared to its 2013 sales results. That's a pretty big ask for a brand that's struggled to define itself over the past decade.

Naturally, then, Chrysler will need some new product to hit that goal. Leading the charge will be a "thoroughly refreshed" 300 sedan, which we can expect to see later this year at the Los Angeles Auto Show. Considering the 300's 2011 arrival, this fits in nicely with the average automotive life cycle.

Following the 300's refresh, 2016 will see the arrival of the Chrysler 100, a C-segment offering that will challenge the likes of the Ford Focus, Honda Civic, Toyota Corolla and Chevrolet Cruze. The 100 may be the most important vehicle in the Chrysler brand's five-year plan, as it will mark its entry into one of the hottest segments in the auto industry.

The new 100 won't have 2016 to itself, though, as Chrysler will launch a brand-new Town & Country, simultaneously killing its badge-engineered Dodge counterpart, the Grand Caravan. The new T&C will include a plug-in hybrid model, which Chrysler is claiming will return the equivalent of 75 miles per gallon, making it the most fuel efficient minivan on the market by a huge margin.

For 2017, Chrysler will turn its attention to the new-for-2014 200 sedan, delivering a refresh on that promising four-door. 2018, meanwhile, will see the debut of a midsize CUV, perhaps aimed at the Ford Escape, Hyundai Santa Fe Sport, Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV4. Not surprisingly, details on this one were the most scarce.

We'll have much more on the Fiat Chrysler five-year plan throughout the day, so stay tuned. Until then, let us know what you think of FCA's plans for Chrysler down in Comments.


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
  • 95 Comments
      BipDBo
      • 7 Months Ago
      I'm excited to see somebody making a hybrid minivan that might have the potential for being somewhat affordable. Wow, that may be the lamest comment over on a car blog.
        HVH20
        • 7 Months Ago
        @BipDBo
        Your not alone, that minivan is going to be awesome and hopefully lead the way for full size PHEV's. That will be the biggest MPG saver by comparison of utility and nobody has anything even close coming to market. They'll have a real advantage here especially if they transition the technology to their 1500 trucks and Durango size SUVs.
      express2day
      • 7 Months Ago
      An ambitious sales goal for the Chrysler brand but considering its expanding lineup (new compact sedan/HB, mid-side CUV, full-size CUV), seems doable especially since it also won't have Avenger competing with the 200 or Grand Caravan competing with the Town & Country.
        tbrad
        • 7 Months Ago
        @express2day
        If they get a minivan with 75mpg......Chrysler will be money! That is better mpg than any CUV on the market. Even the prius gets around 50. A ppl hauler with 75mpg.....a delivery van with 75mpg.... that will be major for families and businesses. I wonder if 75mpg is a typo. That is very efficient for a vehicle of that size. That means they could get about 100mpg is a compact car. ....or are they saying 75mpg for 3 miles on full electric.
          Naturenut99
          • 7 Months Ago
          @tbrad
          It's labeled as 75 MPGe. Notice the e at the end. It takes all energyusedinto account. It can seem misleading when they combine it instead of just saying it gets this many EV miles and the ice gets x city x hwy mpg.
          Naturenut99
          • 7 Months Ago
          @tbrad
          Also 3 miles ??? This should be around 20-30 EV miles. 12 kWh battery, using 90% of means a usable of10.8 kWh's. 10800/ 325 watts per mile estimated It's a much bigger vehicle than the others out there. So would use more energy Equals about 33 EV miles but until they actually release the real specs these are just estimations. The reason I used 12 kWh is because of the original specs back in 2009. They also may not use up to 90% of the battery.
          Naturenut99
          • 7 Months Ago
          @tbrad
          The reason they created MPGe was as a way to compare the efficiency between the EV's/PHEV's/gas vehicles.
      Julio B
      • 7 Months Ago
      Can we presume that the new 100 will be based on the Dart?
      dlopez1501
      • 7 Months Ago
      All on the CUSW platform. Except for the minivan. Maybe unless they stretch the platform
      teridavisnewman
      • 7 Months Ago
      Chrysler is a crap brand and has crap products. The single worst vehicle I've ever owned was a 1996 Chrysler Town and Country that was a 40K piece of junk. I'd never buy another Chrysler-Dodge-Jeep product no matter how good the price because I'd never trust it to get me from point A to point B without breaking down. The 300 is the ugliest car on the planet--it looks like a rolling cinder block. I'd push my Lincoln Town Car before I'd drive a Chrysler product!!
        ehisforadam
        • 7 Months Ago
        @teridavisnewman
        Yeah, I base all of my car buying decisions on cars that were produced 20 years ago.
          Julio B
          • 7 Months Ago
          @ehisforadam
          I also hate ignorant comments like those. No car from 20 or even 10 years ago shares a single bolt or nut with the current version. (except maybe for Morgan)
          Yeah yeah
          • 7 Months Ago
          @ehisforadam
          On the one hand, you're right. The cars are totally different than they were 20 years ago. But on the other hand, if you hated a car from a manufacturer 20 years ago, and then you gave them another shot now and it ended up being lousy again, you'd feel like the biggest idiot for not learning your lesson the first time. So most buyers aren't likely to take the chance. They are once burned, twice shy. Even if the burned was 20 years ago.
        lyphesaparty
        • 7 Months Ago
        @teridavisnewman
        The fact that you wrap all Chrysler products from today with your LINCOLN town car shows your ignorance of the automotive industry!
        southpawxj
        • 7 Months Ago
        @teridavisnewman
        Dude... 20 years ago (1994) was 3 owners ago. You don't think things have changed a bit? Chrysler makes some darn nice products now.
        The_Zachalope
        • 7 Months Ago
        @teridavisnewman
        Either you're lying, or you got taken for a ride paying $40K for that '96 T&C, since fully loaded they were just over $30K.
      Levine Levine
      • 7 Months Ago
      Chrysler will be out of business in a few years. Its product offerings are few and with even fewer inspiring styling and innovation. Chrysler is fighting a rear guard action as it retreats from the auto market. Once Fiat consumes the $25billion bailout money given by US government, Fiat will only offer Fiat name plate vehicles while the Chrysler name will be sold off.
      ragtopdodge
      • 7 Months Ago
      Kind of stupid. Chrylser should be known as inexpensive luxury. Like Buick. the 100 will just compete w/the Dart. Doesn't make sense. Gonna miss the Caravan. I think Dodge should keep the Caravan and Chrysler concentrate on luxury CUV/SUV. Bring back another convertible. RWD. *sigh*
        southpawxj
        • 7 Months Ago
        @ragtopdodge
        I disagree. Where does it say Chrysler has to be inexpensive luxury? When has that worked recently in the US? I mean, Buick survives only because of China, Oldsmobile is gone, Mercury is gone... Dart and 100 will share a platform, but not necessarily an architecture. The 100 will be a C-Segment, 200 a D-Segment, and Dart is a tweener. Dart was poorly positioned from the get go to compete in either realm. Caravan was/is a fleet queen (this coming from someone who owned an off-rental Caravan). Town and Country did not have as many sales, but it had more retail transactions (the ones that make the most profit). Dodge will have a performance SUV and CUV. Chrysler will get a C-segment CUV as well. Convertible? LOL. Sales have been dropping for convertibles for the last decade. It was amazing that the 200 lasted as long as it did with a convertible form. RWD is there in the 300. Chrysler Group has a convertible... its called the Jeep Wrangler.
        Benjamin Roethig
        • 7 Months Ago
        @ragtopdodge
        I agree. Focus Chrysler right at Buick and Lincoln. Leaving the Chevy fighting to Dodge.
      Jesus!
      • 7 Months Ago
      This makes no sense. So what brand is supposed to go up against Lincoln, Lexus, etc?
        express2day
        • 7 Months Ago
        @Jesus!
        Alfa Romeo and Maserati. Chrysler will still have its 300, though. It's not like Chrysler was ever that competitive with brands like Cadillac, Lincoln, Lexus, etc. other than perhaps the days of the Imperials. Chrysler's luxury vehicles were typically more in line with luxury vehicles from Buick, Oldsmobile and Mercury.
          Jesus!
          • 7 Months Ago
          @express2day
          That makes zero sense. Alfa and Maserati are crap. Looks like another bailout in about a decade.
      • 7 Months Ago
      Why would you purposefully declare that something is not premium/luxury? What's the point of it besides making it look less appealing?
        joe23521
        • 7 Months Ago
        I find that odd as well. Saying you're not "a luxury brand" is one thing, but to say your products are not "premium" is rather strange.
        Human
        • 7 Months Ago
        When did being honest become marketing death? Not every friggin car has to be premium. I wish to god that carmakers made cheaper, simpler, lighter alternatives to the over priced, over tech, over weight cars they do today. MIATA ALL THE THINGS! How about a minivan that weighs 3500 lbs instead of 4500 lbs. Or RWD wagons for 20k$ Premium isn't always the goal. Hell i don't even want it. (also sorry for up voting your comment. I meant to down vote)
          Julio B
          • 7 Months Ago
          @Human
          Completely agree. I enjoy my Wrangler (today without roof or doors) more than my leather and alcantara lined GTO. Simple rules sometimes.
          • 7 Months Ago
          @Human
          Ahahah that's ok I forgive you. What I mean is that marketing (meant for the masses) should be a passionate depiction of what the product actually is, I'm not talking about being dishonest, just as exciting as possible
      throwback
      • 7 Months Ago
      The Chrysler brand is not luxury – it's not premium. Chrysler is the mainstream American brand," This tells me Dodge is going away. My guess is SRT steps up as the performance brand, in essence replacing Dodge. Maserati is the luxury brand for Fiat, Chrysler and Jeep occupy the mid tier and Fiat has small cars. Ram has trucks.
        express2day
        • 7 Months Ago
        @throwback
        Although with more of a performance emphasis, it looks like Dodge is going to be kept intact and expanded more than previously rumored. Gone will be the Avenger (in 2014) and Grand Caravan (in 2016) but Dart, Charger, Challenger, Viper, Durango, and Journey will remain with two other models (B-segment sedan/HB and D-segment CUV) being added. It seems SRT will act as more of a performance trim level to Dodge than a brand.
          D By
          • 7 Months Ago
          @express2day
          I dont think Dart is really staying as it is today- probably just the Dart GT and SRT. I assume the Chrysler 100 will be the mainstream C-class car. 100 Aero, 100 LX, 100 C, Dart GT (instead of 100 S) and Dart SRT will the the 2016 lineup.
        southpawxj
        • 7 Months Ago
        @throwback
        SRT is folding back into Dodge. Dodge is the performance brand. Maserati handles the luxury. Fiat and Chrysler are mainstream brands. Jeep continues to have no real rivals as a brand.
      John
      • 7 Months Ago
      I'm a bit puzzled by the repositioning of Chrysler to "mainstream." It could best be described as "luxury-ish" at present, but mainstream seems a bit downmarket. And with the performance models coming back to the saved-from-the-axe Dodge, does that make that brand NOT mainstream anymore? It would seem they could line up Chrysler with Buick (near luxury) and Dodge with Chevy (bread and butter + zoom), but that doesn't sound like what they are saying, so I'm lost.
      Spec
      • 7 Months Ago
      Plug-In hybrid doesn't arrive until 2016? GM will have their second generation Voltec cars out by then. Nissan will have another generation of pure electric by then. Even VW will have plug-ins on the market before that. Chrysler is being left behind.
        mazeroni
        • 7 Months Ago
        @Spec
        The non-Toyota hybrid segment is still minuscule. For the time being, most automakers cram batteries in the trunk killing space and adding huge weight over the rear wheels making them expensive and unattractive. VW's MQB platform and the Volt allow for the batteries to be place more effectively, but I don't seem other automakers rushing to release all-new platforms that utilize that level of engineering. Once you factor in R&D costs, the hybrid segment is a money loser, at least until there is volume to drive down costs. I would argue if they didn't have a plug-in hybrid by 2025 they are falling behind. For the time being it is more important for Chrysler to invest money into gaining sales and increasing profit margins so they have a steady revenue stream to support future hybrid development. Over the next 5-years battery costs will dive, so for the time being I think taking a wait and see approach is the smartest business approach.
          Nicholas Littlejohn
          • 7 Months Ago
          @mazeroni
          Yeah, get more gas guzzlers coming, that's what Americans want. Not! Chrysler is criminally behind on electric and plug in vehicles. Meanwhile, Chrysler has to buy greenhouse credits from Tesla and other innovators to be able to legally sell any vehicles in several states. I would sell my stock and quickly reinvest in the hottest brands made by smart people like at Tesla. Plus on this news, Toyota will be quickly releasing a plug in minivan that eclipses Chrysler. They already have all the tech and decades of real world experience.
          Spec
          • 7 Months Ago
          @mazeroni
          On the contrary. Chrysler will be forced to license patents from everyone else because they are going to be so far behind the rest of them. And their designs will be klunky because they will not have learned what the others learned by building and selling plug-ins. Microsoft waited a while before creating an OS for portables . . . how are they doing in that space?
          Spec
          • 7 Months Ago
          @mazeroni
          On the contrary. Chrysler will be forced to license patents from everyone else because they are going to be so far behind the rest of them. And their designs will be klunky because they will not have learned what the others learned by building and selling plug-ins. Microsoft waited a while before creating an OS for portables . . . how are they doing in that space?
    • Load More Comments