Chrysler Engineering reputation
Chrysler Engineering reputation
(OP)
Years ago part of Chrysler's marketing, was it's engineering expertise. Is it deserved, either in the 1950's, or today? I had an uncle, would only buy THEIR products, and gushed about "Superior Engineering" at every family gathering. Can someone point to specific advances that would give them this cache'. Or, is there more "sizzle" then "steak" ? Mass produced the "hemi" engine, pretty good automatic transmission; anymore?? Seems like they had an electronic fuel injection system, predating Bosch, in the early '50's?





RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Given any cataclysm that causes or allows a company to shed costs, modern managers always get rid of their most expensive, and most experienced, people.
The unfortunate side effect is that 'the company' forgets much of what 'the company' actually knew... particularly the "dear school" stuff that nobody wrote down.
We are all reaping that harvest now...
Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
TTFN
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
I don't know how representative of Chrysler's engineering gene pool they may or may not be.
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
http:
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Can't say this car is indicative of better engineering or not but I think it's very cool.
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Also, one of the vintage racers in the club is an ex Chrysler Engineering type. He left in the early 90's to start his own company. 'He ain't no dummy'!!!
I've tried to get him to join the forum, "Too busy" says he.
Rod
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
I wonder if Lee actually did them a favor, bringing out the K car and making them financially solvent again. Maybe it would have been better for them to die an honorable death instead of being remembered for those awful econoboxes.
"The ambassador and the general were briefing me on the - the vast majority of Iraqis want to live in a peaceful, free world. And we will find these people and we will bring them to justice." - George Bush, Washington DC, 27 October, 2003
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
"The ambassador and the general were briefing me on the - the vast majority of Iraqis want to live in a peaceful, free world. And we will find these people and we will bring them to justice." - George Bush, Washington DC, 27 October, 2003
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
TTFN
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Such is life.
Rod
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
It also ignores their variants like the Lebaron/Lancer GTS, with 2.2 turbo's and a halfway decent chassis. Some Chryslers were first to use electroluminescent instrument panels, and the optional computer readouts for mileage etc were class-leading innovations.
I owned a '93 Eagle Vision TSi, with a wonderful 3.5L OHC engine and a super chassis for the size of car. Compared to a Taurus or Celebrity or comparable foreign jobs, they were great cars IMO.
That was then, this is now, and I don't see a lot of the innovative stuff coming from their corner.
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
But, compare a K-car to a Honda Accord of the day - as long as you were okay with manual transmission. Hondamatics only had two speeds in that era. Having said that, I still see the occasional K-car out on the road, and I don't remember the last time I saw a first-gen Accord out on the road.
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
TTFN
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Just last month A cantankerous Chevy advocate acknowledged that by his eyewitness recollective account Mopar musclecars did not shuck their drivetrains nearly as often as Chevys under serious abuse.
To my eye they have had a few styling triumphs too.
Manufacturing engineering is engineering too.
Genius designs poorly assembled make few friends.
Speaking of poorly assembled, Justified or not, Ever know "labor" to intentionally slow things way down, or even foul things up intentionally?
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Yes, but there's always a backstory.
<tangent>, likely boring to most of you
The story:
Setting: An axle plant, where axles with cast center sections are/were assembled on a slowly moving conveyor with the pinion pointing down, and the center section gasket and cover put on last.
Someone on the line put in a formal suggestion that we cover the center sections while the line was shut down at night, to avoid contamination.
As the new, green, assistant manufacturing process engineer in training for that line, I had to provide a written response to the suggestion.
I conducted an investigation. That part of the factory was then new, the ceiling was in good shape, and the place was kept at least as clean as our offices. I asked the people in charge of warranty records; we weren't having a problem with contamination of any kind.
So I wrote a polite response, declining to implement the suggestion. It was typed up (long time ago), reviewed, and sent out in snail mail.
A couple of days later, there was a panic in the morning because many of the axles under construction had been contaminated with floor sweepings, machining chips, dirt, and assorted junk, while the line was down overnight. No one was mystified.
We knew exactly who should have been fired, but it was a union shop. Lacking irrefutable evidence, and maybe even if we had had it, we couldn't do a damn thing about it.
The backstory:
There was a substantial financial incentive to at least submit suggestions. The Company rewarded implemented suggestions with something like one percent of the first year's savings, in cash. That doesn't sound like much, but because of the production volume, a savings of a penny per car would net you enough of a reward to buy yourself one of those cars, brand new. It had happened.
One of the production managers got his ne'er-do-well son a summer job there, and sort of pushed through a suggestion on the kid's behalf. It was not a bad idea. It probably didn't save nearly as much money as was asserted, but it did help. It may even have actually been the kid's idea, but I didn't think he was quite that bright.
What he was, was insufferable.
The kid bought a new car with his money, a flashy one, and drove it proudly, and bragged about how he got it, to anyone who would listen, and to all who were tired of hearing about how smart he thought he was.
True, the Company had actually rewarded actual valuable suggestions over the years, but not that many, and none were as technically trivial as The Kid's. All two thousand people at that plant, except his Dad, hated or at least resented that brat.
Of course, I didn't know the backstory when I catalyzed the events in the frontstory. It would have been cheaper to give a token reward, and let them cover the axles until they got tired of doing it... just like the old timers in my office had advised me to do.
Hey, I knew everything, and they were just ... old. Now I'm old, and try real hard to give good advice, just like they did, to about the same effect.
Because of that experience, for a while I thought that all union shops were run like, and necessarily had the emotional atmosphere and petty politics of, high school, or maybe middle school. Since then, I've found a few union shops where the employees were treated like, and behaved like, adults. I'm told that factory's culture changed about ten years after I left.
If I learn just a little bit more, I'll know absolutely nothing.
</tangent>
Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
I don't know if it was by design or accident that the steering wheel was slightly right of what the typical GM and Ford cars were of the time, and that gave me room to not impale the wheel.
I gotta say though, my current experiences with Chrysler electrical stuff leaves me shuddering.
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Unfortunately, they were usually bean-countered to death, so they were never as great as they COULD have been.
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
In the field of alternative energy they had several in house pioneers who deserve more credit for doing more with less than they got at the time.
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
He needs to design most fit or purpose best using the available resources. A crappy little car like a Gogomobile can be the result of good engineering if a Gogomobile iswhat is required.
Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &
http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm
for site rules
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
- Steve
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
25% of the Institute graduates immediately left for Ford or GM...
I wasn't too impressed with MoPar quality even while I worked there, and nothing I've seen since has inclined me to believe they're other than a third-rate outfit.
When I worked in Light Trucks at Ford, we never even tested Dodge trucks: we didn't consider them to be "competition" as the Chevrolet trucks were.
I also worked for an auto supplier company for some years, and frequently met with Chrysler car engineers: echoing what Mint Julep said, I often found it difficult to discuss technical topics with them - they just weren't equipped for it.
Sure, there are exceptions, and the '60s era cars at least had bullet-proof transmissions, but the cars and trucks they build today are sub-standard.
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
I also worked for an OEM I worked with some good ones from every oem.
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
And they, not Ford, are lined up with their hands out in Wahsington...
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Bob Eaton raped the place and sold them down river to Daimler. Daimler management bought a good company and put some good people out and promoted others as they saw fit. There was no merger of equals. Plenty of good engieers left or were thrown on their rears.. Not defending management but I will defend a lot of their engineers. Lots of them move around to or from other oem's. A lot of the work is also done by their vendors who also move around. This thread has some comments that seem a bit myopic and insulting. I know people from about 1/2 of the worlds automakers and they all have some wineers and losers. All of them and Chrysler is no exception.
Honda has a great reputation but my 1982 civic had rusting a pillars when it was 1 year old. By 3 years they were both rusting through. Had a 01 toyota sequoia.. now that was a great machine but would intermittently turn off the a/c. Dealer never fixed it and Toyota would not pay for the problem.. a partially melted wire harness pinched behind the dash.. Not ripping on their engineers but any brand has mfg issues but most of them are pretty good overall nowadays.
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
I'm going to have to disagree with you. I'd take a Dodge over a Ford Truck any day. Working for an automotive supplier, I've had the opportunity to test both vehicles and interface with both Ford and Chrysler chassis engineers. Quite frankly, I'm more impressed with the talent and resourcefulness at the Chrysler group. Also, despite what you may think, the Ford engineers are very interested in the Dodge Truck product and do in fact have them in their vehicle fleets for benchmarking purposes. The '09/'10 LD and HD Ram's are terrific! Have you driven a Ford lately? Instead of speaking in general terms why don't you point to some specifics to support your opinion?
As for Ford not needing government assistance, this is merely due to them mortgaging everything they owned when credit was more available. I don't even think they own the pencils they write with at this point! We'll see how they do when their 11 billion in loans become due next year.
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
The new Dodge trucks are pretty good. You can give me some thanks for the ride and handling. If you look at the recent truck sales, despite the overall downturn in the the truck marker, the Dodge Ram trucks are doing better than anyone else in the industry:
http://new
You guys forgot to give Chrysler a credit for the Minivan and the Jeep.
The evil Germans ransacked the company before they left. Then the Cerberus dogs came and munched on the leftovers. The new Fiat guys seem to be much better, letting us run the regular business the best way we know now to. If the general economy picks up we will fair okay, and will keep making our current products better and bringing in some new ones.
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
IMO, Fiat married up and the venture will improve them. Fiat's were the worlds worst crap decades ago but they made massive improvements in the last decade. Most Americans don't travcel in automotive circles so they find out much later that you will.
Regards, Turbo Cohen
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Most of us considered it the macho thing to drive and own stickshift cars, but the Chrysler Torqueflite automatic trans was considered right up there, and ahead of anything from Ford or GM. It was used heavily in Chrysler-based competition drag machines. The Chrysler "Ramcharger" manifold was also well known in the competition set, with both wedge chamber and the second-gen hemi engine in the late 60's. Their earlier hemi came out in 1953 - my dad had one - and it was known for being one of the most powerful V8s of its type then, and had lots more growth room than other wedge engines for dragging.
I can't tell you exactly what happened over the years, except that Chrysler and the others got out of sync with the changes in the market and had a hard time shifting to new buying paradigms.
I like the Viper, but even the first one out lacked roll-up side windows, a feature the little Mazda Miata has never been without. Eventually Chrysler changed the design. Today, strictly from a gut level, I feel that most of their cars are still out of sync with the marketplace and that they lack the agility to fully recover.
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Of course that is a statement of the obvious. There are plenty of amateurs who have designed succesful racing cars, not many have designed succesful production cars in the last 30 years.
Cheers
Greg Locock
SIG:Please see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Many (if not most)of the better engineers are not particularly "brand loyal", but rather $$$$$$ oriented. I know of several engineers that have worked for ALL the Big Three and are now in second or third tier companies. Pretty much like the car salesmen in many respects. They usually praise the good points of their current employer...Unless you are independently wealthy and don't really need the job!
Just call me Mr. Cynic ...
Rod
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Its sad when you have to look to the 60's for a companies 'best' times
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
I know nothing of Chrysler engineering resources in place today. But, as a young engineer for an automotive supplier, I had the opportunity to work with guys like Pete Hagenbuch, Kim Lyon, Dick Winkles, Pete Gladysz, and others. These Chrysler engine guys were an extremely bright and curious bunch. No aspect of engine performance engineering escaped their scrutiny.
I especially enjoyed talking with Kim Lyon (engine controls engineer) about the time he spent in Italy developing engine controls for the Lambo F1 effort, and with Pete Hagenbuch about the Richard Petty era engine development.
h
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Ewh, You are not mistaken but maybe that is what you meant by your followup post about reading the wiki article more closely.
Several have mentioned similar things about mobility of engineering expertise within the automitive community since that post. I think it is a fantasy to think that any particular auto manufacturer has superior design engineering, manufacturing engineering, production employees, management, bean counters,etc. They all have made contributions to the industry, all have made lemons, etc, etc. It is a living thing, dynamic so that you must take each vehicle year and model and compare it's attributes. For example; IRstuff said "... but 60 yrs ago..." Yes there was a lot of innovation going at that time by that particular auto mfgr. Reo came out with the first electric starter in 1913. "Ford had a better idea" was that when they came out with symmetrical key? Sorry -- that is not very engineering intensive but you get the idea and we could go on and on.
Not only does America have a love affair with the automobile. Some people have a love affair with an automobile company and that's OK! At least it shows some loyalty. Like how can any one be loyal to a baseball team called the LA Dodgers. Did it not used to be the Brooklyn Dodgers. This goes WAY over my head but then I am WAY off track already..........
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
I've spoken to a transmission shop owner and a Dodge minivan owner, and neither of them had anything good to say about the transmission in those. Is there a way to get actual stats of repair interval for those versus other automatics ?
Jay Maechtlen
http://home.covad.net/~jmaechtlen/
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
That speaks volumes to me...
Dan - Owner

http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Rod
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
It was a high risk gamble though, I agree. I wonder if they just took out a lot of insurance, or whether they were so confident in their quality roadmap (Bzzt jargon alert) that they could do that?
Cheers
Greg Locock
I rarely exceed 1.79 x 10^12 furlongs per fortnight
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Dan - Owner

http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
It would seem logical that the Automobile OEM would revert to the sub-component supplier to recoup losses from warranty issues which is likely what they have always done. In this mandate, is GM having the car owner take recourse directly to the sub-component supplier?
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Cheers
Greg Locock
I rarely exceed 1.79 x 10^12 furlongs per fortnight
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
I would find it amusing, too, except that I got burned on an UltraDrive minivan to the tune of $1800, 5k miles over the warranty.
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
On my '01 Lincoln I've had two AWA's, one for rear wheel bearings at 65k and one for the AC switch that controls the cabin distribution (about the same time).
It is not always easy to make something like this work, it may require legal help, but it can often be an aid to the consumer.
Rod
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Discussion with wife in front of service manager giving us a A$700 quote to fix it again.
Me to SM
As this was replaced about a year ago it should have original 3 year warranty from time of repair.
SM
Replacement parts only have 12 months or to expiry of original warranty whichever is the later.
Me to SO
Why did you buy a Toyota.
SO
Because I thought they are 100% reliable and never have recurring problems.
SM
Toyota's do not have recuring problems.
Me to SM
Well 3 times in 3.5 years sounds like a recuring problem to me.
SM
Well maybe this particular car has a recuring problem.
Me to SM
It certainly is an expensive recurring problem. Can you explain we can fix it permanantly.
SM
Not really, I will talk to the shop foreman about the details.
Me to SO as the SM was about to leave
Do you think you will ever buy another Toyota.
SM after return from workshop
Does your car have a sun roof (Moon roof to some).
Me
Yes
SM
They are locally fitted by subcontractors and the drain directs water to the speed sensor.
Me
So you just blow them off with compressed air and try to charge us $700 every time.
SM
We would never do something like that.
Me
Well why not just put a cover over it or deflect the drain to the side or rear.
SM
Turned and walked away without answer.
SO to me
I never saw you be so rude to someone before.
Me
Well you never saw me dealing with a lying crook who tried to treat me like an idiot before.
Inspection by me actually revealed, that being EW mounted normally front wheel drive layout, the speed sensor was actually on top of the gearbox, fairly high up in front of the firewall and nowhere near any drains.
AS made in Japan, rainwater would normally enter via the radiator grill and radiator and wet the speed sensor area.
A dealer fitted after market cruise control unit had been fitted when new before delivery. The sub contractor who fitted it spliced a wire to the speed control unit in such a way that water shorted it out. It appeared the speed control unit had never been removed.
Bottom line, Toyota almost got a real bad reputation because of poor quality work and dishonesty by the dealer.
A well placed dab of silicone rubber fixed the problem permanently at a cost so low it cannot be calculated.
AS I do not think many people would have the knowledge or the front to take my approach to this, I wonder how many other owners of Rav4s with cruise control think Toyotas have this recurring problem and therefore their engineers were at fault on this issue.
It seems evident that stylist over ruled engineers on the Rav4 design in other areas and there are design problems as a consequence, but that is another story.
Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &
http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm
for site rules
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
I bet the "sub contractor was a local audio/trim/window tinting shop, with some pimply faced High school drop out-handling the "installation".
There's a few dealers around here that take exactly that route.
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
- Steve
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
- Steve
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
I had a Chrysler once. Worst POS I have ever owned (all I could afford at the time). In some ways I was glad when my left turn was intercepted by a Dodge running through the red light. Two crap Chrysler cars killed with one stone.
- Steve
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Decent enough car overall, but it still wasn't enough to keep me brand-loyal to the pentastar, as I have not owned one since selling it.
On the other hand, my Dad has never owned anything except Dodges for the family's primary transportation since '58. He's currently driving a Neon.
Norm
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Not too sure of the details yet. The way it was explained to me, it doesn't quite make total sense. If a component fails then the component supplier is responsible for warranty replacement cost. So rather than the cost of the component, they would also have to cover replacement cost, documentation cost, etc. That isn't cheap. Where it's fuzzy to me is where it's an interactive component and not a standalone failure. For example, an axle tube may crack but was it from improper use/loading or from a faulty axle tube? Microstructural analysis will show some of that, but at the cost of such who is going to go into that detail. For onesy-twosies, maybe. But at hundreds of dollars per analysis to justify not paying, that has the potential to be a lot of $$$. I'm guessing the component supplier will accept the hit, pay the $, and jump up the margin to cover an expected # of service failures (meaning a more expensive car, right?). Just curious if anyone from the OEM side knows the full details as I don't know that I'm getting the entire picture.
RE: Chrysler Engineering reputation
Cheers
Greg Locock
I rarely exceed 1.79 x 10^12 furlongs per fortnight