This has been well publicized for some time now...the change is likely to coordinate with the introduction of the Grand Wagoneer which is based on the same new platform.
This and Ram are probably FCA's most important vehicles (volume sellers and high margin)...it is a very bad sign if they can not get this product out on time. The delay probably has to do with powertrains...they need new engines for the GC and Grand Wagoneer. The 3.6L is a bit underpowered (and inadequate for a bigger grand wagoneer) and the 5.4L is not competitive in terms of fuel consumption. The 3.6L update due next year may serve as a good base engine for GC, but they need a forced induction V6 to be competitive in this class, and possibly a new V8 if they want a powerful SUV to slot in below the SRT/Trailhawk.
The current vehicle lies on an outstading platform...hopefully they don't try to cut corners and put the GC/GW on some sort of some beefed up car platform.
Actually I see it as a good sign. From a business perspective, if they are selling all the jeeps and Rams they can build why spend the money to change until sales dip or trend a little downward? It's called maximizing revenue. ?
Actually I see it as a good sign. From a business perspective, if they are selling all the jeeps and Rams they can build why spend the money to change until sales dip or trend a little downward? It's called maximizing revenue. ��
Today you need to keep your product fresh to succeed long term. What you describe is the old 80's and 90's way of thinking that did not work. It's a good way to go out of business as your product can became old very quick. This just my opinion of course.
To be honest it's not a bad sign at all. The current model Jeep and RAM are very competitive in the market and their stylish designs can last for a few more years. I think it's imperative for FCA to ensure their new models will be just as competitive and done right.
That or maybe they know VW or GM will buy them prior and then it's their responsibility. LOL.
Looks like the delay has nothing to do with maximizing profits, aligning with the Grand Wagoneer launch, etc. It's because the money is being diverted to new Alfa Romeo product. Maybe it won't be bad - the Explorer remained the top seller in the class despite no big changes for 6 years (2011-2015).
Honestly, they can afford to do this as they did huge refresh for MY2014. If they wanted to they could have called that a redesign. Look at the "redesign" Subaru outback that came out this year - LED DRL lights, some tweaks to the exterior and new infortaintment system.
MY11-13 look quite outdated right now but MY14, 15 + they are definitely still fresh and competitive. They barely got all the bugs worked out in that platform, why abandon it now? Maybe they can get better reliability ratings. There is another light refresh scheduled for MY16, should be enough for another 2 model years. Staying with the current platform for another year or two It just makes sense to me ...
All that being said I will stay away from first model year like from a wildfire. Way to many issues on a brand new 50k truck. Yes, things get fixed but every time I visit dealership It is like pulling teeth to get things fixed - "i cannot replicate the issue", "that is how it should work", "we don't have parts", etc ... I think I did hear every type of excuse possible.
The fact is everyone has their opinions whether it's good or bad for the delay. At the end of the day imho I'm kinda glad they will milk whatever they can out of the current wk2. More parts for yrs to come. Some agree and others do not.
I see FCA just added 322,000 2011-14 Chargers to the recall list because the side curtain airbags can deploy if you slam the doors too hard.
They said 843,000 Rams were recalled last week for the same problem and adding the Chargers was the result of an internal investigation because of the truck recall.
Agree, 3.6 is not underpowered even pulling my 3500 lb trave trailer, and I have a '12.
Now if they added Direct Injection so they could also add boost and keep 87 PON, I might consider a new one.
Problem with the Ford EcoBoost is that the 2.7 goes into power enrichment too easily and that really affects MPG. Personally think the geometry of the Pentastar 3.6 is near ideal for a gas engine. (would take a few hours and references to Sir Harry to explain why).
Pretty much takes a fanatic to tell my '12 from a newer one. Kinda like a Zippo.
ps true, my GC weighs about 800 lbs less than others which helps.