Thread: CarBuzzard on Crossfire
View Single Post
Old Feb 28, 2007 | 07:19 PM
  #1 (permalink)  
maxxm's Avatar
maxxm
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,168
Likes: 0
From: Arizona [85255]
Default CarBuzzard on Crossfire


February 28, 2007

I was prepared to write about how DaimlerChrysler had mismanaged the Chrysler side of that conflated organization, but I’m not going to do that because of other news. I was going to say that Daimler had wasted the goodwill value of the Chrysler brand by making it subservient to Mercedes-Benz. Rather than co-equal American and German brands, Chryslers were for those who couldn’t afford - or didn’t appreciate - a Mercedes.



The most clear cut example of this Red Haired Child Syndrome is the Chrysler Crossfire. The Crossfire is a styling knockout, neat in its own way as the legend-in-its-own-time Dodge Viper. It’s a concept car come to life, an American sports car, and it looks like something I doodled in high school study hall - only by someone who actually could draw.

Yet the Crossfire has been a misfire. Why? Let’s ask the Red Haired Child, who notes the Chrysler Crossfire shared chassis with the Mercedes-Benz SLK. But the Crossfire got the SLK’s hand-me-downs. This generation Crossfire got the SLK stuff only after Mercedes was done with it.

 Perhaps it made design and production sense. It was a way to get the Crossfire to market quickly and efficiently. But the American sports car buyer is savvy and doesn’t want to dine on Daimler leftovers and doesn’t want to be seen eating in the kitchen. Therefore the disappointing sales.



The better approach actually comes from General Motors, where the Kappa platform was used for the Pontiac Solstice, Saturn Sky and Opel GT, share and share alike. Admittedly, the latter two are the same car sold in different markets, but the Solstice has its own body, if the same drivetrain. There’s even more room for differentiation within the price range of Crossfire and SLK. There’s no reason the cars could not have sold in the same demographic group because they would appeal to somewhat differing psychographic groups.

 While DaimlerChrysler may have believed that cooperative design between Chrysler and Mercedes models may have diluted the “brand equity” of the latter, using leftover parts for the Chrysler model all but sealed Crossfire’s fate. Relegating the Chrysler brand to second class that now has DaimlerChrysler allegedly shopping its American half around to the highest bidder.

What do you think of this analysis?
 
Reply
0