All I’ve ever wanted is for the now-Stellantis brands to live up to their potential. It’s not about getting specific vehicles (I can accept that the Hellcat-powered Pacifica probably ain’t happening). These are important carmakers, and each has a role in the greater marketplace. In particular, I’ve harped a lot on Stellantis for letting Chrysler and Dodge wither on the vine, but it comes from a place of caring.
It’s why a new report hinting that Stellantis may be trying to help those brands out is music to my ears. This is good news, and I’m feeling like I need to make The Morning Dump a little more positive after Archie Manning disappointed the Longhorn faithful again this weekend.
Other good news? Well, it sounds like the White House might be considering offsetting tariff costs for manufacturers who build cars in the United States. What’s that going to look like? No one knows! How will that work? See the previous answer.
BYD doesn’t have to worry about U.S. tariffs at the moment, and it can now officially celebrate besting Tesla for four straight quarters in EV sales. In five years, that might look like when the Red Sox beat up on the Astros earlier this season. It doesn’t matter anymore!
And, finally, Genesis has established itself as a real player in the luxury space. The next move? Show it can build a performance identity.
How To Fix Stellantis, Redux
I have never been even partially responsible for a company that’s built a car. When David finishes the Jeep, I suppose that’ll change. Until then, I understand why you’d wonder where I get off telling car execs what they’re doing wrong. Sure. Fair.
Though, in the case of Stellantis, I specifically pointed out all the reasons why I thought the company was in bad shape, even after reporting huge profits. Stellantis shuffled off its CEO less than a year later, for many of the reasons that I identified, and the company has swung from big profits to losses.
I think I like the new guy, Anthonio Filosa, or at the very least, I think he’s saying the right things and deserves some time to try and get it right. According to a new report from Bloomberg, he’s maybe going to get a lot right:
Stellantis NV is planning to invest about $10 billion in the US as the troubled maker of Jeep sport utility vehicles and Ram pickups refocuses on the market that’s pivotal to its profits, according to people familiar with the situation.
The carmaker may announce in the coming weeks about $5 billion in fresh money on top of a similar amount earmarked earlier in the year, said the people, who declined to be identified discussing information that’s not public. The investments over several years could be funneled into plants — including re-openings, hiring and new models — in states such as Illinois and Michigan, the people said.
Stellantis is focused on reclaiming the past success of the Jeep brand and is considering fresh investments into Dodge, which could result in a new Dodge V8 muscle car, and possibly even the Chrysler brand in the long term, some of the people said. Talks are ongoing, no final decision has been made and the amount and targeted projects could still change, the people said.
I guess it’s time to play the “Re-Build Stellantis Plan Waltz” one more time:
- Jeep: A top and bottom approach. The most important brand, so give engineers more money and fight back against Bronco with a more modern Wrangler. At the same time, more volume hybrids that looks good.
- Ram: I still think putting it under Dodge is smart, but in lieu of that: A midsize hybrid truck, which the company has basically said will happen.
- Dodge: Muscle car? Sure. A replacement for the Durango is also key, and an entry-level crossover that can compete with the HR-Vs of the world. Maybe something French?
- Chrysler: Literally, anything that’s not a van. More specifically, make it your luxury brand, build a luxury car and a luxury SUV. And, when you do that, you should also…
- Kick The Italian Brands Out Of The US: You can’t do everything at once. Sergio’s dream was a great dream, but it wasn’t implemented properly. Sell Maserati (I know, I know, “it’s not for sale,” but sell it). Keep Alfa for Europe. Keep Fiat for Europe. I don’t care what you do with Lancia.
- Keep Peugeot And Citroën, Dump DS: I love the French brands, and I can’t pretend like I don’t (I probably am emotionally invested in Lancia’s outcome a little). The French government owns a big chunk of the company, so there’s really no choice here. I’d dump DS, but if you get rid of Maserati then maybe DS can do what Chrysler is going to do in the United States (no V8s for Europe, though).
- Leapmotor: Seems fine!
This gets way more complicated in practice.
Obviously, the UAW loves this plan. The White House is going to love this plan. The Italian government is going to hate it. You can’t make everyone happy, and Stellantis doesn’t have unlimited money.
After a lot of back-and-forth, the Tavares-run Stellantis committed itself to spending more in Europe. But with the company cutting back across the continent due to overcapacity, I don’t get how that’s going to work.
It sounds like Filosa is going to meet with the Italian unions later this month. Oh, to be a mosca on that wall.
The Anti-Inflation White House Allegedly Wants To Address Car Price Inflation
Inflation became such a bad word that President Biden named his signature piece of legislation the Inflation Reduction Act. I’m not sure how much reduction of inflation actually occurred, and it’s clear that the price of eggs had a lot to do with the election of President Trump.
Tariffs are historically inflationary, and it’s only a matter of time before companies raise prices to offset tariffs. Unless, unless… the White House does something to reverse or offset them.
Here’s Senator Bernie Moreno–a car dealer–explaining how this might work in a Reuters exclusive:
“The signal to the car companies around the world is look, you have final assembly in the U.S.: we’re going to reward you,” Moreno said in an interview. “For Ford, for Toyota, for Honda, for Tesla, for GM, those are the almost in order the top five domestic content vehicle producers – they’ll be immune to tariffs.”
[…]
Moreno added automakers with significant final production in the United States should get tariff breaks: “Look, at the end of the day, they’re doing exactly we want them to do – paying employees in America well and doing final assembly in the United States with the cars that they sell here.”
Asked for comment on the proposal, a White House official told Reuters that Trump and the administration “are committed to a nuanced and multi-faceted approach to securing domestic auto and auto parts production. Until any official action is signed by the president, however, any discussion about administration policymaking is speculative.”
I love the “almost in order” there. I guess it depends on which measure you’re looking at, but I assume somewhere in Senator Moreno’s mind he was aware that this is not the correct order. It doesn’t really matter because the concept is sound. If you want more manufacturing in the United States, then the automakers who build here should get some sort of tariff relief.
What this means in Realityville is another question.
The biggest sticking point is probably Canada and Mexico. President Trump clearly doesn’t love that there’s production in those places, but he was the one who wrote the most recent treaty (USCMA) that continued to make it efficient for companies to do so…
Will automakers like Toyota and Honda get a 1:1 discount on imported cars for every car built here? Or are automakers going to get a break if there’s “final assembly” and that means some parts made in Canada are fine? One of the biggest obstacles to building cars efficiently in the United States is the steel and aluminum tariffs, so will automakers get a break from that?
Again, the form that this takes is extremely important.
I’m torn on how to think about some of this. On one hand, President Biden and the Democrats have made a big deal out of bringing manufacturing back to the United States, and no small portion of the plants that carmakers are bragging about are ones that were already going to be built because of Biden-era policies. On the other hand, Democrats seemed mostly content to let the USMCA status quo continue (they might argue that one way to slow cross-border immigration is improve Mexico’s economy and allow more jobs there).
It likely makes sense for automakers to shift as much manufacturing here from overseas as they can because Democrats will probably take credit for the plants being built/planned if they somehow win back the White House in a few years. You think any Democrat President, on the off chance it happens, is going to ship the jobs back?
BYD Beats Tesla For Fourth Straight Quarter
Tesla v. BYD is potentially not the best framing for the Chinese car market over the long term, but it has some value in the moment. The fact that BYD has now gone a year straight selling more electric cars globally is a not-small detail, especially given that BYD doesn’t have the same market access that Tesla has.
It’s also interesting because Tesla and BYD both seem in trouble in China according to this Bloomberg article:
BYD is losing momentum in its home market, where policymakers are increasingly concerned about destructive competition. Tesla will have trouble replicating last quarter’s showing now that the US has phased out federal tax credits supporting EV purchases.
China’s government has sought to temper cutthroat competitive practices in the world’s biggest car market, where manufacturers have waged a relentless price war since early 2023. BYD has been at the fore of the discounting trend and in late August reported a surprise 30% drop in quarterly profit.
Both BYD and Tesla are more than capable of overcoming these challenges, although only BYD seems truly interested in building better cars. Tesla seems more into robots right now.
‘Driving Control, Precision, And Confidence’ Will Define The Future Of Genesis Performance Cars
![[hero6]genesis Magma 2](https://images-stag.jazelc.com/uploads/theautopian-m2en/Hero6Genesis-Magma-2-scaled.jpg)
The larger automaker known as Hyundai went on a bit of a buying spree about a decade ago, bringing on some of the best designers and engineers from peak-era Germany. It’s how we ended up with the guy behind the best M cars tuning Velosters, and the guy who designed some of the best Audis, transforming Genesis into a real luxury player.
The Hyundai N cars are never quite the fastest, but damn if they don’t just feel right.
Genesis also has a host of highly competitive vehicles (I encouraged a friend to test one, and he fell in love), but it’s apparently not enough to merely make nice cars. What’s missing, according to the company, is a sense of true performance. That’s where the company’s Magma performance brand comes in.
BTW, let’s please recognize how metal that name is: MAGMA. I’m pretty sure I saw them open for Rob Zombie at L’Amour.
A big part of MAGMA’s mission will be planned by Manfred Harrer, head of the Vehicle Development Technology Unit at Hyundai (and ex- of Porsche, BMW, Audi, Apple…). Here’s what he told Automotive News what’s key to making this work:
“In my eyes, we have one gap with the brand and the brand image, and that’s the performance part,” Harrer said in a separate interview at the automaker’s Namyang R&D center south of Seoul.
“And this should be covered by our new Genesis Magma lineup.”
Part of the Magma proposition will be raw power and torque, acceleration and top speed, Harrer said. But the differentiator, he said, will be driving control, precision and confidence.
“This is the philosophy, from an engineering standpoint,” said Harrer, who previously worked on Apple’s discontinued electric vehicle project and earlier at Porsche, BMW and Audi. “It’s the preciseness and controllability of the powerful engines in these powerful cars.”
I like the way that sounds. Pure power is getting super boring, and while it’s not like AMG is just handing out 1,000 HP cars (that’s what SRT is for), I think N is a good example of Hyundai prioritizing feel over numbers.
What I’m Listening To While Writing TMD
If you don’t have a daughter or, maybe, you don’t have ears, you may be unaware there’s another Taylor Swift album that just dropped on Friday. I don’t love it. I respect that she puts out a bunch of music and tries things. It’s also not really for me, sure, but as an enjoyer of the odd pop tune, I don’t think it’s doing anything new. Both the latest Sabrina Carpenter and Charli XCX album feel like they’re doing a lot more.
Oh, right. Sabrina Carpenter shows up on this album on the titular track and is predictably one of the better ones. The best song on the album thus far is probably “Actually Romantic.” People who care more than I do seem to think this is about Charli XCX, and I think that’s probably right (inasmuch as the song is about any one person and not about a few individuals, like the people in New York Magazine).
I suppose Charli fired the first shot with “Sympathy is a Knife,” but that song feels like less of a diss track and more just an artist sharing her own feelings of inadequacy? This kinda feels like punching down. Also, it’s pop music, it doesn’t matter.
The Big Question
What should Jeep do with the money?
Top photo: Chrysler
Kia’s killing the Soul, so it’s time to bring out a new PT Cruiser. They’re similar enough in size. Make it cheap and comfortable.
Jeep needs a subcompact to replace the Renegade (which actually sold pretty well, until it began aging out). The European-market Jeep Avenger would work fine, but they’d have to tool up a plant here to build it to get around most of the tariff issues.
And find a way to spin off a smaller pickup underneath the Gladiator, the new Fiat Strada is supposed to share an architecture with the Avenger, maybe give that a Jeep-like snout and bring that here, too, as a new Jeep Commando or something.
For Chrysler, I’d sort of copy the Buick model, its worked pretty well for them. Somewhat upscale, classy crossover vehicles that are much more car-like in design than truckish and off-roady. Also, bring back a moderately priced and practical 5-seater convertible and a longitudinal STLA-based 300 sedan. The Pacifica also needs a total redesign
Dodge needs to get a RWD-only, naturally aspirated, Charger base model, a new Durango, and a couple of new smaller crossovers to slot in under the Durango. The cheaper Pacifica should be sold as a Dodge, instead of a separate model name under Chrysler (Voyager). Long range planning, after things stabilize, think about doing a new Viper, but only after the rest of the turnaround plan is implemented and starting to show results
RAM should not exist as a brand and just be Dodges. But, if you are keeping it as a brand, then create a unified model name for their large pickups (call them the RAM R-Series or something), come up with a new midsize RAM Dakota, and bring back a smaller commercial van a la the ProMaster City.
Agreed on a Buick-ification of Chrysler. Not my thing, but lots of folks want “a nice car” they can step into easily. Plush interior. Straightforward infotainment. Hybrid from the upcoming Cherokee. Some chrome. Don’t try to market to ‘younger buyers’.
Honestly it all boils down to this:
Jeep: Boxy, rugged crossovers.
Chrysler: Mellow, car-like crossovers.
Dodge: “Attitude” crossovers.
As long as one of those vehicles replaces the Journey, they’re sorted.
Yeah, Dodge really needs a new Journey yesterday, the old one probably paid the electric bill at over half their dealerships. It was borning and kind of crappy, but it moved like nothing they’ve got now
Chrysler needs to go upscale.
Rebadge a Durango or a grand Cherokee or a wagoneer as luxury versions.
Keep the higher trim pacificas and give dodge the lower trims as Voyager or Grand caravan. Dodge also gets a lower trim wagoneer. Grand Durango anyone.
A new 300 based on the new charger wouldn’t be a bad idea either.
And then you have your rams and the mid size (please just call it Dakota). Ram should be Dodge but, whatever, you do you Ram.
I think I’ve just suggested recreating 2012 Chrysler but I also don’t think that’s a bad thing.
I feel like the traditional Chrysler buyer and the traditional sedan buyer overlap a lot. Bringing the 300 back as a proper big RWD American large sedan feels like it would be a good move. It doesn’t have to be a performance car–that’s what Dodge is for. I’m thinking more like a classic 1980s Mercedes or upscaled Volvo.
Of course they’d only sell 3.
I have a sweet spot for a large luxury sedan. But yes, apparently the average American buyer does not.
Honestly what I actually want is a big American luxury wagon with a manual trans. But they would sell negative three of those.
‘look, you have final assembly in the U.S.: we’re going to reward you,”
And by reward you we mean that when you’re about to start up your plant we’re gonna send ICE in to arrest and deport the people starting it up.
Hate to tell you but $10 billion isn’t much money. Not nearly enough to turn around Dodge or Chrysler. That will get you about one new from scratch vehicle. 2-3 if building on an existing platform with shared powertrains.
I think a gentrified (Genesisified?) Stinger would have been an interesting move/vehicle.
Stellantis needs to be on the retro hatchback wave, with something genuinely small, cheap and cool. By all means call it a Dodge Omni in America, a Fiat in Italy, an Opel in Germany and so on.
Oh man, that 1960 Chrysler at the top of the post is the car I got my first driver’s license in. Always a favorite.
If anything, FCA US needs to take the 5 billion (I think they already announced 5 billion of the 10 commented on here earlier this year) and:
Genesis – Just stick to making (mostly) cool-looking comfortable luxury cars at a decent discount below rivals.
I am so goddamn sick and tired of car companies thinking they need every one of their models to have track-ready suspension, rock-hard seats and a million horsepower just because some pinhead journalists thinks that’s what a luxury car needs to be.
No, they’re wrong. They write copy for barely above minimum wage because they have no goddamn clue about business and what consumers want. We want COMFORT. And QUALITY. And a SMOOTH RIDE.
Grandpa Joe, who is about the only one in the family who can afford an expensive luxury car, wants a soft, cushy ride. These fuck head journalists already ruined so many other brands by making them chase performance, don’t let that happen to Genesis too.
Not just journalists, don’t forget the last-braincell iNfLuEnCeRs. Social media has turned two entire generations into mindless husks that will do and say anything for attention, views, and likes.
Isn’t that the truth. FFS things are bad and only getting worse.
Man, that’s so exciting that they plan to offset tariffs!! And true, we don’t know yet the details, but they picked the program name already:
It’s the Business Relationships Involve Beneficial Exchanges Act. Which makes a lot of financial sense if you think about it, really for everyone.
Great points on the Stellantis strategy; I wish they saw the obvious a few years ago but let’s hope they can still turn this around. I would also add that they need some refining on their brand(s) image, especially at Jeep and Dodge. Badly in need of a good agency.
There’s no way that program isn’t disingenuous. It stands for BRIBE! There’s NO way that’s an accident.
A small and cheap real 4×4, that’s what Jeep should make. Another one should be the new Cherokee, with liveaxles (at least at the rear) and a longitudinal engine, with the 8 speed ZF and the “transfercase” from something like a Grand Cherokee.
CJDR simply needs models. Anything really. Something to sell.
Jeep should be:
Smaller BOF “Wrangler Jr.”
Wrangler
Compass (I guess, even if it sort of sucks)
Cherokee
Grand Cherokee
Grand Wagoneer (Wagoneer isn’t a brand you fucking twits, put the Jeep name back on it and don’t be so freaking dumb next time)
Dodge:
Compact Sedan/Coupe, yeah that’s right, bring back a Dart of some sort, but make it a budget model with a coupe option to bring young buyers back to the brand. You’re hardly even a brand anymore, offer something unique please.
Hornet (fix the Hornet reputation somehow… extend the warranty)
New Durango
Ram (yep, bring Ram back under the Dodge name)
Grand Caravan (yep, bring the van back under the Dodge name)
Charger Sedan/Coupe
Chrysler: Either bring in a bunch of French badge jobs, make serious tweaks to the French cars to make them more Chrysler-esque, or just kill the brand already.
Ram: Now Dodge, stop splitting up everything into separate brands, it weakens the identity of your mainstream brands to be selling only 1-3 models.
Ideally you make Chrysler your luxury brand in the end, and now offer something for everyone at the CJD dealer. Jeeps for the adventure brand people. Dodge for the mainstream and performance brand people (these do not have to be exclusive of each other, you WANT the halo effect of the upper Dodge models to sell the lesser ones) and Chrysler for those looking for a more stylish, luxurious car.
Time for a revival of the Neon SRT-4! Or maybe expand the Dart lineup with a spicy SRT trim. In any case, they need to come up with a few more SRT models that actually make proper use of the badge.
Wagoneer’s were officially called Jeeps starting in like 2024, and the current rumor is the Wagoneer is going to be dropped (despite being the better seller of the two) so that the Grand Wagoneer will be the only model in 2026.
I would be very happy to see the development of 2-3 new US models and a healthy dose of Iacocca-style badge engineering for the rest of the range.
Introduce several North American front-wheel-drive models by either using the STLA Medium Platform or making a new one. If making a new one, use it to update the Compass and Pacifica as well. This platform must use a North American inline-4, have space for a Pentastar in the larger models, and include 2-row and 3-row CUV’s.
Sell the cheap ones and the fast ones under Dodge, the nice ones and PHEV’s under Chrysler and the square ones with trick differentials and/or removable doors under Jeep.
As for badge-work:
The Daytona is dead, long live the Chrysler 300!
The Wagoneer is dead, long live the Chrysler Aspen and Dodge Durango!
Here is the Grand Wagoneer, here is the Chrysler Imperial!
I feel like Jeep needs to hit the 5-door market with something akin to the Rivian R3. Maybe with the rear squared off because Brand image.
Make it a hybrid and make it a shared platform with Dodge, where Dodge gets a low ride height and FWD only options. Call the Dodge one the Omni, and give it a GLH trim level.
Jeep gets ride height, standard AWD, and cladding. Name it the Alpine or the Ibex or some other goat name and go after Subaru’s Crosstrek. Hell, maybe use the Eagle name.
Jeep needs a Suzuki Jimny. Since the Wrangler has gone so far upmarket (and gotten too large to fulfill its original purpose, anyway), there’s a nice, fat hole in the market where the barebones base two door wrangler CJ5, YJ, and TJ used to live.
Oh man, dropping the 2-door Wrangler and slotting in the Jimny would be great.
200% true. The high volume low MSRP market is there for the plucking.
I’m starting to see things that say it might be cheaper to build cars in Mexico and pay the import tariff, than build in the US and pay the steel/aluminum tariffs. Pretty soon there will be so many band aids slapped on that it’ll just be one big sticky mess of temporary adhesives, for an intentional self inflicted wound that was never necessary in the first place.
I think the end goal is pretty clear now if you look at what happened with other industries from crypto to pharmaceutical: pay the piper and exemptions shall be granted. All you need is nonsensical restrictions, then corruption flourishes. Not hard and a tried and true process really.
“How To Fix Stellantis, Redux”
I agree with most of that… just some tweaks… Ram ABSOLUTELY SHOULD be put back under Dodge.
Chrysler should be ‘mass market luxury’ for North America and whereever else the brand makes sense (probably not Europe)
Dodge should be sporty cars, sporty SUVs and trucks… with all Rams put back under Dodge.
Jeep should carry on as a global brand with the off-road focus… just clean up some stupid naming choices… like “Wagoneer S”… which has nothing in common with the Wagoneer… not even its size.
DS should simply be a top-of-the-line Citroen MODEL (not a fucking brand)
The Italian brands… Definitely get rid of Fiat and Alfa Romeo in North America. HOWEVER, keep Maserati and have it as a global ultra luxury brand along the lines of Bentley, Aston Martin, etc.
Keep Lancia as Europe’s Chrysler.. essentially the EU version of mass market luxury. Alfa Romeos should be sporty versions of the Lancias.
Vauxhall… LHD market specialist.
The other problem… how to keep Opel/Fiat/Peugeot/Citroen not cannibalizing each other. And for that, I’d say only offer 2-3 of the brands in each market where it makes sense. As I understand it, each of these brands has their strengths in different regions… so just build on existing strengths.
I think what Jeep really needs is a 4Runner competitor. People pit the 4R against the Wrangler, but that’s not really a straight matchup.
If someone wants to buy an offroad capable 4×4 SUV with a fixed roof in the 40-60K price range, their only option is Toyota.
The Wrangler and Bronco both outperform the 4R off-road but can’t match it on-road, where most of these vehicles spend the majority of the time. The Bronco does a decent job of splitting the difference, but a flappy soft-top or rattly hardtop are still deal breakers to some people.
In other words, a real replacement for the Cherokee XJ.
Yes, or even the ZJ Grand Cherokee.
Yes! I’ve wondered how many people buy a Wrangler (or Bronco) in search of a replacement for the ZJ or XJ. There needs to be something that handles well on and off-road, but isn’t too fussy inside, and doesn’t look like a plastic-clad jellybean on the outside.
They have the Cherokee but the truth is it will be hard to scale now, with so many great options in various off / on-road formulas: beating the 4R is hard enough, let alone against the defender, even some Kia trims, Honda Pilot now, Bronco etc. it’s just so crowded.
The Kia, Honda, Hyundai, etc are crossovers and not proper off-roaders. I’m not going to go as far as to say a proper off-roader must be body on frame, but it MUST have a low range transfer case, which none of the crossovers have.
Mm good point. I still think could be a demand thing – seems easier to add a beefier trim than make a whole new car.
Yes, but the trims are largely appearance packages. For someone who wants to actually offroad, that won’t cut it.
Ideally one would want a low range transfer case, at least one solid axle, and at least one mechanically locking differential. None of the crossover packages have that.
At the +/- 50K group, there’s basically just the Wrangler, Bronco, and Toyota TNGA-F triplets. If you want a fixed roof but don’t want a Toyota, you now need to start looking at pickup trucks.
You actually nailed it – I don’t know about the new one, but the KL Cherokee Trailhawk checked all those boxes – pretty good pavement cruiser but also had legit off-road chops (low range, rear lockers, good departure/approach angles etc)
Unfortunately, it was ugly AF and was IFS/IRS so it had very poor suspension travel and articulation. Nobody took it seriously as an off-roader.
“The Wrangler and Bronco both outperform the 4R off-road but can’t match it on-road, where most of these vehicles spend the majority of the time.”
That was kind of the point, no one (including me) ever suggested that the Cherokee was a dedicated rock-crawler – but it was objectively a pretty good compromise for purposes which are mostly at odds with each other.
I cannot help but think these pop singers implicitly dissing each other in their songs is prearranged before hand by their management. It creates more gossip, more sales, more celebrity for all involved.
It’s not exactly pretty, but that orange Genesis Magma hatchback (I’m sure they won’t refer to it as such) appeals to me.
Apropos of nothing: along with Suzuki and all three major French brands (Renault, Peugeot, and Citroen) another make that I wish would enter the US market is Dacia. Maybe it’s their value-for-money mantra that I’m responding to in these times of almost $50,000. average new cars, but they’ve got some interesting production cars and concepts. There are also some Skoda products that I’d like, even if the VW underpinnings give me cause for concerns (as a former multi-VW owner).
The Kia PV5 electric van seems kind of awesome, and is priced right (if the projected figures turn out to be true when it gets to the states). Yes, it’s got that cyberpunk exterior that Kia’s been embracing lately, but it’s not overstyled to the point where it’ll feel dated right away. And yes, the interior is kind of muted/conservative compared to the VW ID. Buzz (it’s closest competitor in the American market) but it looks sensible, usable, and long-wearing. Finally, the PV5 is remarkably miles/kWh efficient for what’s essentially a big box.
I honestly think that the Kia PV5 EV van would/will make a great vehicle for families as well as tradesmen/small businesses. I don’t need a van myself, but to be honest, the smaller PV5 configs would seem to be just as nice to daily as your average EV crossover.
Orange was the best Veloster colour, too, and I am often sad I sold it. The paint wasn’t great, though. Stone chipped if you looked at it wrong. Maybe it’s better now than back in 2013.
The only Veloster I know somewhat well (except for a test drive when it first came out) is one that belongs to a friend. I don’t know how the paint is for her because she paid too much for a wrap right after she bought it. I do know that she’s afraid to drive it up to my house because of the bumpy road… she’s worried the air dam thingy might rip off. I don’t think it would provided you took it slow and avoided the worst of the crates, as I do w/my cars.
I disagree.
There’s no viable, long-term, export market from the USA until someone stops burning bridges.
Who knew that beating your trading partners with a stick (the Trump tariffs) when they were already chasing the carrot (the IRA tax credits) would not turn out well?
Art of the (bad) deal!
Letting manufacturing go overseas hasn’t worked so far.
Even if it’s not cost effective to have it here, the security risk is already critical.
A country where most people can’t afford to live won’t be safe for anyone, esp without defense infrastructure.
Chrysler doesn’t need any help going POOF!
“Well, it sounds like the White House might be considering offsetting tariff costs for manufacturers who build cars in the United States”
These are things that kids in second year of a Poli Sci or Economics degree comprehend have to be thought of BEFORE you institute tariffs. Gradual, predictable, and with offsets is the only way to use tariffs. Mouthbreathers.
I’ve seen magma flow. It’s really slow and boy does it come with a lot of toxic gas. Seems perfect for a 21st century performance brand. /s
I’m not sure where to look this up. Does anybody know how many people are directly employed in US automotive manufacturing? Including parts suppliers? I’m curious as to how significant it really is and how much potential growth/upside there could be.
But sometimes magma explodes and destroys everything around, so it does have that excitement going for it… Maybe they’ll have a pyroclastic flow special package
I bet you’ve seen lava flow, but not magma. Magma = inside the earth, lava = outside the earth.
I stand corrected.