Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Fiat Chrysler’s Proposed Merger With Renault Crashed

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 53 posts

Re: How Fiat Chrysler’s Proposed Merger With Renault Crashed

#21

Post by rleigh »

hocuspocus wrote: post #15
chrisseaton wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the latter, it seems like a strange feature to have/want. Seems dangerous - to not be able to accelerate out of a collision in an emergency if that is the safest thing to do.

Same as cruise control, the limiter disengages when you floor the accelerator pedal.

It doesn't in my car (Nissan Qashqai). You can floor it and it will accelerate up to the limiter's setpoint and stay there. It would kind of defeat the point of it to disengage in this situation.

I use it in 30 and 40mph zones, where there's a lot of traffic, speed cameras etc., and sticking the limiter on means you're not going to go over the limit.

Re: How Fiat Chrysler’s Proposed Merger With Renault Crashed

#22

Post by rpiguy »

nimbius wrote: post #7

Disclosure: im an automotive mechanic for a chain of midwest shops. Chrysler has been the "frat boy on probation" for nearly 40 years now. Renault was wise to reconsider what they would get. wind back the clock to Daimler Chrysler and youll see there was nothing but mistrust from the start. German execs wanted an inroad into an american market segment that their luxury brands couldnt target at the time, and Chrysler…

Profits from RAM and Jeep kept FCA alive for a decade while Fiat floundered. Consumers do not want cheap, reliable cars that are good on gas - they want SUVs. Even Toyota knows this and has three times as many SUV models than cars. Fiat and Alfa sales are down in the US again almost 30% but RAM and Jeep are selling like gang busters.

Dodge and Chrysler brands sales suffer primarily because they lack SUVs.

Re: How Fiat Chrysler’s Proposed Merger With Renault Crashed

#23

Post by GordonS »

petre wrote: post #16
tyingq wrote: post #4

Are the current Renault vehicles competitive? From the US, so I don't have much insight into the brand outside of Nissan.

Yes, they are cheap. Not particulary reliable but okay, kind of like most French cars. They'll get you from point A to point B. They've got EVs. If you want a better trim you buy Nissan, which is more and more like an overpriced Renault. Not what they used to be. I remember the old Patrol GRs, built like a tank.

My personal experience of French cars is that they're cheap, but you get what you pay for. I recall a Renault Clio I had several years ago, bought new, where almost immediately after the 3 year warranty expired the problems stated - a door handle literally came off in my hand, the gear knob came off in my hand, and numerous electrical problems occurred.

I made the mistake of buying French cars for years after that (because they were cheap, and I guess I kind of am too!), but eventually learned my lesson.

Re: How Fiat Chrysler’s Proposed Merger With Renault Crashed

#24

Post by stjohnswarts »

rpiguy wrote: post #22
nimbius wrote: post #7

Disclosure: im an automotive mechanic for a chain of midwest shops. Chrysler has been the "frat boy on probation" for nearly 40 years now. Renault was wise to reconsider what they would get. wind back the clock to Daimler Chrysler and youll see there was nothing but mistrust from the start. German execs wanted an inroad into an american market segment that their luxury brands couldnt target at the time, and Chrysler…

Profits from RAM and Jeep kept FCA alive for a decade while Fiat floundered. Consumers do not want cheap, reliable cars that are good on gas - they want SUVs. Even Toyota knows this and has three times as many SUV models than cars. Fiat and Alfa sales are down in the US again almost 30% but RAM and Jeep are selling like gang busters. Dodge and Chrysler brands sales suffer primarily because they lack SUVs.

Yep Americans want SUVs and Trucks mostly these days. Most people who want cars either want cheap/gas efficient ones (commuters/college students) or muscle cars. The 4 door sedan is in a death spiral

Re: How Fiat Chrysler’s Proposed Merger With Renault Crashed

#25

Post by gsnedders »

petre wrote: post #13
Shivetya wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fiat got Chrysler to get Ram and Jeep. Ram took off very well and recently had landed many accolades for their trucks. Jeep turned around nicely but has seen a slide for the last few quarters but has a solid foundation of vehicles to include their first PHEV and pickup. Chrysler/Dodge are mostly sustained by their minivans. Chrysler/Dodge was the first of the American brands to ditch sedans. Ford and GM followed. Cha…

These models won't sell well in former Warsaw Pact states. Most of them are in the EU now and fuel is quite expensive. People in those states buy mainly used German cars, mainly diesels, plus cheap domestic cars (Dacia and Skoda) and French cars (Renault and PSA brands). They'd probably sell in North Africa and maybe the Arabic peninsula but that's debatable. The Emiratis are so well off that their police drives Lamb…

> cheap domestic cars (Dacia and Skoda)

(Owned by Renault and VW Group respectively, for those unfamiliar with those marquees.)

Re: How Fiat Chrysler’s Proposed Merger With Renault Crashed

#26

Post by stjohnswarts »

sl1ck731 wrote: post #17
seszett wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cars usually have both at the same time. I rarely use it but I can see the appeal of a speed limiter for people who don't pay much attention to their speed but just want to be sure they don't get flashed by a speed cam.

Is this outside of NA? I've never seen this feature in the US.

I don't think it's an option except in special cases or on company vehicles and large transport trucks

Re: How Fiat Chrysler’s Proposed Merger With Renault Crashed

#27

Post by sl1ck731 »

benj111 wrote: post #18
chrisseaton wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the latter, it seems like a strange feature to have/want. Seems dangerous - to not be able to accelerate out of a collision in an emergency if that is the safest thing to do.

I'm dubious that accelerating out of danger is the 'best' option in any but the most contrived of circumstances.

Happens often on interstates. Only a couple days ago my only option was to get ahead of a semi that was intent on merging into my lane. The other option would have been to brake and hope I can decelerate fast enough to get out of the way of his entire trailer, and the traffic behind me doing 80 would have been a problem.

Re: How Fiat Chrysler’s Proposed Merger With Renault Crashed

#28

Post by kgwgk »

sl1ck731 wrote: post #17
seszett wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cars usually have both at the same time. I rarely use it but I can see the appeal of a speed limiter for people who don't pay much attention to their speed but just want to be sure they don't get flashed by a speed cam.

Is this outside of NA? I've never seen this feature in the US.

This is a feature that (coming from Europe) I've missed when driving in the US. I didn't know that it was generally unavailable, I thought I had bad luck with my rental cars.

Re: How Fiat Chrysler’s Proposed Merger With Renault Crashed

#29

Post by geff82 »

tyingq wrote: post #4

Are the current Renault vehicles competitive? From the US, so I don't have much insight into the brand outside of Nissan.

As a Renault driver I can say: much cheaper than German cars, the latest generation models have very advanced technology, they are reliable and they are quite comfortable. Also, some models have a really good design. The list price is medium-high, but high rebates are the norm. I never thought I would buy Renault - but the current model range has its merits.

Re: How Fiat Chrysler’s Proposed Merger With Renault Crashed

#30

Post by Theodores »

Although Renault have joint ventures and plenty of operations around the globe they are part owned by the French government and that government are keen to hold on to their auto sector. Their sector is different to what the German marques chase on the international stage, however, French cars are very popular in France. Whatever government is in Paris they are obligated to defend the French auto sector, they would be very unpopular if they did not.

Meanwhile, what does FIAT make in Italy these days?

FIAT get cars made in the former Eastern Europe, slap an Italian flag on and pass off the product as having Italian design. That is what motorists buy into, the Italian style and not the Italian workmanship. They don't care if the tin box is made in Timbuktu, so long as it expresses their personality in some way then they will buy it.

Italy has gone the way of the British auto sector, they have lost the ability to have Italian companies making mass market cars in actual Italy. Sure there are few thousand Ferraris and other lifestyle accessories churned out but those FIAT 500 cars for the ladies are not made in Italy. Those days are over.

Aside from the poor communication between Renault and Nissan, the proposed deal strikes me as over pushed by the FCA management. It went down with the French establishment as well as the post-Brexit British idea of outsourcing the NHS to American private healthcare providers. A complete non-starter because the management was not a cultural fit. Having Renault thrown in with some brash American led FCA was not on the table. The publicity for the merger was over-eager, as if that would make it happen by making it appear the deal was as good as done.

It is important to understand how the 'captains of industry' work. They are capitalists, not Marxist social workers. They don't care about making jobs or even delivering a product for the regular working/middle class person. They are not cast from the same stuff as Henry Ford. They get their bonuses for merger and acquisition activity and move on to the next deal.

Post reply on HN