PT Cruiser production to end

Professional Engineer & PE Exam Forum

Help Support Professional Engineer & PE Exam Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Capt Worley PE

Run silent, run deep
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
13,369
Reaction score
649
Location
SC
By Eric Mayne - WardsAuto.com, Jun 7, 2010
The countdown to oblivion has begun for the iconic Chrysler PT Cruiser.

Chrysler Group LLC declines comment, but numerous sources tell Ward’s the C-segment hatchback is scheduled for build-out July 9.

“It’s a little bit bittersweet,” says Tom Gale, retired Chrysler design chief who helped develop the vehicle. “That car still looks good to me on the road.”

Cleverly crafted as a light truck, which afforded Chrysler an advantage in the face of corporate average fuel economy requirements, the PT Cruiser has been deemed out of step with the product plans that have evolved from the auto maker’s bankruptcy-induced alliance with Fiat Automobiles SpA.

And when that day comes, it will mark the end of a product program that confounded critics, charmed consumers, entrenched the word “retro” in the industry lexicon, introduced a new face to the design world, spawned a controversial copy and accounted for more than 1.2 million sales worldwide since its launch in 2000, according to Ward’s data.

While Chrysler executives and industry observers have marveled at the PT Cruiser’s longevity, Gale is not surprised. “I can remember the marketing guys telling us – a lot of them are good friends and I don’t mean to discredit them – we were only going to sell 25,000 units.”

Chrysler delivered 106,829 PT Cruisers the first year in North American, Ward’s data shows. The next year saw sales peak at 160,382. The sales tally did not fall below 100,000 units until 2008, driven by more than a dozen limited-edition models that played up the PT’s street-rod flair.

The vehicle certainly made dealers giddy. “It was always a good seller for us,” John Scott, general manager-Snethkamp Chrysler Jeep in Redford, MI, tells Ward’s. “We rode the wave on the PT Cruiser for a long time. That car was hot.”

While Gale says the vehicle was the product of many “champions,” from engineers to then-Chrysler Vice Chairman Bob Lutz, he acknowledges Bryan Nesbitt as the designer who penned the seminal sketch.

The car’s notoriety propelled Nesbitt to celebrity status in the industry, which led him to accept an elevated position at the former General Motors Corp. where he went on to design the Chevrolet HHR – considered a PT Cruiser knockoff by critics.

Lutz, who also had moved on to GM, famously denied the copycat accusation, saying the HHR, which launched in 2005 and has outsold the Cruiser the last three years, was inspired by the ’49 Chevy Suburban.

Says Gale: “That’s pure unadulterated…whatever.”
Full article at: http://wardsauto.com/ar/pt_july_build-out_100607/

 
The PT cruiser had a retro "truck" look to it. The HHR has a retro CHEVY truick look to it. IMO, the HHR was spawned as a response to the successful PT, but it wasn't a copy or a clone. The idea was copied but the vehicle was not. That's like saying the new camaro or new challenger are new mustangf clones. All the vehicles are flashing back to old styling cues but they aren't necessarily copying each other.

 
Gary Coleman dies and production of the little hearse comes to an end. Coincidence?

 
I really cannot figure out the auto industry, they have a car that sells, but they will discontinue and go into a costly campaign to replace those sales with something else. I guess there is some economics in there somewhere that an engineer cannot understand. Then we have the Saturn which they claim never turned a profit despite all the sales??

 
The PT cruiser is a dog though. The problem is kinda like the new VW bug. They made something that looked cool enough to sell, they just forgot to add any fun to it. The engine combo package was sluggish at best....it was just not much. I think the Chevy version is a little bigger and has some more potent engine combo's to choose from.

 
I really cannot figure out the auto industry, they have a car that sells, but they will discontinue and go into a costly campaign to replace those sales with something else. I guess there is some economics in there somewhere that an engineer cannot understand. Then we have the Saturn which they claim never turned a profit despite all the sales??
There aren't any economics other than pandering to the government for more bailout money and that is why so many went tits up.

 
The PT cruiser is a dog though. The problem is kinda like the new VW bug. They made something that looked cool enough to sell, they just forgot to add any fun to it. The engine combo package was sluggish at best....it was just not much. I think the Chevy version is a little bigger and has some more potent engine combo's to choose from.
A 230hp/245ft-lb turbo with 90% of peak torque from 2300-5000rpm isn't potent enough for you?

 
The PT cruiser is a dog though. The problem is kinda like the new VW bug. They made something that looked cool enough to sell, they just forgot to add any fun to it. The engine combo package was sluggish at best....it was just not much. I think the Chevy version is a little bigger and has some more potent engine combo's to choose from.


The PT cruiser is a dog though. The problem is kinda like the new VW bug. They made something that looked cool enough to sell, they just forgot to add any fun to it. The engine combo package was sluggish at best....it was just not much. I think the Chevy version is a little bigger and has some more potent engine combo's to choose from.
A 230hp/245ft-lb turbo with 90% of peak torque from 2300-5000rpm isn't potent enough for you?
Was that motor offered in the PT? The only time I drove one is when I got one for a rental on a business trip. To me it seems just like an original VW bug (I had a '69 at one time). Very close quarters inside, big one-gage dashboard, couldn't punch it's way out of a paper bag.

 
Was that motor offered in the PT? The only time I drove one is when I got one for a rental on a business trip. To me it seems just like an original VW bug (I had a '69 at one time). Very close quarters inside, big one-gage dashboard, couldn't punch it's way out of a paper bag.
Same here. It got me where I was going but that was about it. Not a lot of room and not a lot of power.

 
Both the PT Loser and the HHR were ugly as sin. Only difference was that the HHR cost double.

 
The PT cruiser is a dog though. The problem is kinda like the new VW bug. They made something that looked cool enough to sell, they just forgot to add any fun to it. The engine combo package was sluggish at best....it was just not much. I think the Chevy version is a little bigger and has some more potent engine combo's to choose from.


The PT cruiser is a dog though. The problem is kinda like the new VW bug. They made something that looked cool enough to sell, they just forgot to add any fun to it. The engine combo package was sluggish at best....it was just not much. I think the Chevy version is a little bigger and has some more potent engine combo's to choose from.
A 230hp/245ft-lb turbo with 90% of peak torque from 2300-5000rpm isn't potent enough for you?
Was that motor offered in the PT? The only time I drove one is when I got one for a rental on a business trip. To me it seems just like an original VW bug (I had a '69 at one time). Very close quarters inside, big one-gage dashboard, couldn't punch it's way out of a paper bag.
IIRC, two turbo engines were optional. 220hp with automatic, 240 with a stick. basically the Neon SRT engine in differnt tunes.

240hp in a PT CRuiser ought be plenty.

 
The PT cruiser is a dog though. The problem is kinda like the new VW bug. They made something that looked cool enough to sell, they just forgot to add any fun to it. The engine combo package was sluggish at best....it was just not much. I think the Chevy version is a little bigger and has some more potent engine combo's to choose from.
A 230hp/245ft-lb turbo with 90% of peak torque from 2300-5000rpm isn't potent enough for you?
you didn't really ask me is 230hp wasn't enough, did you? lol

 
By Eric Mayne - WardsAuto.com, Jun 7, 2010
Chrysler delivered 106,829 PT Cruisers the first year in North American, Ward’s data shows. The next year saw sales peak at 160,382. The sales tally did not fall below 100,000 units until 2008, driven by more than a dozen limited-edition models that played up the PT’s street-rod flair.
WTF? :jerkit:

The PT cruiser is a dog though. The problem is kinda like the new VW bug. They made something that looked cool enough to sell, they just forgot to add any fun to it. The engine combo package was sluggish at best....it was just not much. I think the Chevy version is a little bigger and has some more potent engine combo's to choose from.
A 230hp/245ft-lb turbo with 90% of peak torque from 2300-5000rpm isn't potent enough for you?
A turbo'd car going mid 15's in the 1/4 mile gets a tick mark in the FAIL column for me.

 
And you can use a 5lb sledge to frame a house. Right tool for the right job.

 
Apparently there was some change later in the life of the model that made the turbo auto faster, though I'm not fully aware of the details.

 
Apparently there was some change later in the life of the model that made the turbo auto faster, though I'm not fully aware of the details.

Probably a crappy driver.

 
Back
Top