When I was a child, my dad would take me to car showrooms (after some intense pestering) and we came home with "Beep Beep" after one foray. I played it on my little record player INCESSANTLY. Decades later, the whole family could still sing it, start to finish. If we were all in the car together, all somebody had to do was sing, "Whiiiile riiiiiding in my Cad-ill-ac" and we were off to the races. Great memories!
I realy like the additional videos you make! Thanks a lot! They are complementing the main video very well and the audience can choose weather they want more details about a car and its history or not. Allthough for me it could be all information in one video and I enjoy it so much - I could watch you talk about a car for hours! Great work!
When I was growing up my dad had a 1973 Dodge Challenger. My grandma had a 1984 Mercedes 300SD. I remember a lot of grumblings in my high school auto shop from students and teachers lamenting the Daimler-Chrysler merger. A lot of my high school auto shop friends hated that Chrysler was the "K-Car company" and missed the days of the high horse power muscle cars from the 60s and 70s. I remember some really harsh things being said like "The Germans have taken over Chrysler like they did France" They never had a good word to say about the merger. When I graduated high school in 2002 I moved from the country to the city, and I was given the Mercedes as a safe car to drive in the city. I really fell in love with that car I still own it, along with a few other Mercedes cars. I know a lot of the local Mercedes shops and local collectors, I've pretty much become a Mercedes guy at this point. I'm still friends with a lot of my high school auto shop friends. It makes me laugh every time I hear one of them tell me how wonderful it is that Chrysler is now making rear wheel drive muscle cars again. This really makes me laugh as I know that all the RWD parts that Chrysler has today are a result of the Daimler merger decades ago. I wonder how many of the muscle car guys in the USA now look at the merger more fondly since it made it possible for Chrysler to get back in to the muscle car game.
How I came to own 2 Crossfires simultaneously: I knew nothing of the Crossfire. Landing at SFO airport the only car available was a large SUV. That's what I drove at home and wanted something sportier. Upon departing the airport I saw some Crossfires in a corner, slammed on the brakes and returned to the car rental office. Secured the xfire and off I went to Monterey. Wow, wow, wow! I was not only impressed but was in heaven. I stopped along the way just to enjoy it in different settings and to also "show it off" -- this was 2008. I fell in love with the Crossfire. Upon returning home, I gave my son my truck and I needed a car to commute into downtown DC, where parking is sparse & tight. Why should I get another utility vehicle .. why not a fun car since I am the only one driving it. Ah ha, the Crossfire. I bought a used 2004 grey xfire coupe. Loved it. But when I heard the Crossfire was being discontinued, I bought a new 2008 silver coupe. So I had two -- one for commuting and one for weekends. Wife told me to reduce my inventory so the 2004 had to go. I still have the 2008 silver+cedar xfire with 58k miles on it (as of Feb 2023) and love driving it every time but on local trips now - no interstates or expressways. Thanks for the story and optional add-on about how the Crossfire came to be and what led to its demise after just 4-5 years. I even have the luggage designed for it which is a cool extra I've not heard of before with other cars. One feature in the concept / prototype Crossfire I wish was carried into production was the center crease in the rear window glass to continue the single center line from front to rear. Yes, the window would cost quite a bit more but wow, what a cool and unique feature it would have been -- reminiscent of the split rear windows of the early VW Beetle and Corvette Stingray. Really enjoyed your video reviews of the Crossfire -- thanks so much!
Being from Mercedes-town Stuttgart and growing up there in the 90s, I remember how immensely critical everybody was when Schrempp announced this merger. Not only the employees but all the way to the supermarket cashier where afraid of the “poor American quality”, and at the same time everybody felt overwhelmed by the refreshing “modern/new” approaches in American culture (e.g. this new “internet” thing). Remember, this was Mercedes producing the rust prone W210 E-Class, so quality compared to the 80s had already taken a huge hit and now THIS. Mercedes being such a large employer really made the region shiver over Schrempp’s “world leading” aspiration that had gone wrong before when Daimler wanted to become “an integrated technology group”, buying shares in the European version of NASA and appliance maker AEG in the 70s (+ „world leading“ and German … well…other things come to mind that didn’t actually work out). Not only did they lay off many Chrysler employees, a lot of German Mercedes employees followed, and many have not forgiven Schrempp his adventure. He’s one of the most disregarded managers in Germany one could say. One has to realize that even today but even more so in the 90s, things as “buying stocks“ or „the internet“ weren’t on the map of most Germans with our social security system and history of producing physical goods as opposed to digital ones. Not that this is better or worse, it was just a complete culture shock…with the „merger of equals“ everybody suddenly learned the term „shareholder value“ - and most didn’t like the concept of it. P.S. Last fun fact: The Mercedes A- and B-Class had the fuel cap on the driver side (opposed to all other Mercedes’) because it also is a Chrysler influenced Plattform.
I very much appreciated your Swabian view of that ill-conceived merger and its Zeitgeist. Your comment, '„world leading“and German… well…other things come to mind that didn’t actually work out"' is the most tactful and brilliant description of the _____ era I've ever read. Thank you (I'm going to borrow it). Tschüss!
The Nash Metropolitan as others have said was built by Austin. One of the conditions was that Austin (BMC) kept the rights to the name - hence the later Austin Metro. The original car marketed in the US was so Austin based it was powered by the 1489cc version of the B series engine and standard BMC gearbox and back axle from the A40 range of cars
Thanks for the video. I actually think the Daimler Chrysler short lived marriage did achieved something, mostly benefiting Cyrsler such as cars like Crossfire and 300C. I think Fiat Chrysler is an even bigger mess. I think you should consider doing one on Nissan Renault and of course the impact of Carlos Ghosn. It would be very interesting.
I agree - FIAT/Chrysler in my view hasn’t been a good marriage. FIAT in particular, has completely lost its way, 500 aside, and I’ve never liked Chrysler’s European car range - too big, too chintzy, and a bit cheap feeling.
The Nash Rambler at 08:31 reminds me of the old Tatra T87 from former Czechoslovakia. I quite liked the Crossfire when they first came out, still do. And used ones can be found for £not many these days. Interesting video, many thanks!
From a longtime fan from the PNW, and a Nash aficionado, your history isn’t too bad. The only further connection I’d make is that Nash merged with Hudson in 1954 to form American Motors (AMC), which built the Rambler Marlin that showed a similar fastback/taillight design to the Crossfire coupe. AMC bought Jeep in 1970, and Chrysler bought AMC in 1987, which is how they got ahold of Jeep, and why they considered the Airflyte name to be part of their heritage. One of the main reasons that Chrysler was able to produce cars at such low cost in the ‘90s was because of Francois Castaing and the team they inherited from the AMC buyout in 1987, which had been producing vehicles on a shoestring budget for decades at AMC. The Nash/Hudson Metropolitan (which later became its own marque once both the Nash and Hudson brands were dropped in 1957) was indeed built on the Austin A40 platform at Longbridge. Its exterior design was purely American, however. But the Rambler, 600/Statesman, and Ambassador were all Nash’s own work and used the American industry’s first iteration of monocoque construction on a volume basis. Another thing I’d note since you mentioned MATRA in the main video is that Chrysler Europe owned 50% of MATRA at the time the Espace was first being developed. So regardless of who was “first,” Chrysler had a hand in both the Espace and the US K-based minivans, which came to market about 6 months before the Espace did. Because PSA weren’t interested in MATRA’s project, Renault swooped in, bought that 50% stake in MATRA, and marketed the Espace as their own. Ironically, when Chrysler bought AMC in 1987, AMC was 46.4% owned by Renault, and was in serious negotiations to begin offering the Espace in the US market through AMC dealers. In fact, they showed a Federalized Espace at the 1985 Chicago Auto Show, and magazines tested it against its contemporaries on the US market at the time, believing its launch to be imminent. Had AMC succeeded on offering the Espace, it would have been entirely possible that, after the Chrysler buyout, both minivans would have been sold through Chrysler dealers in the US. Concerning Stellantis, it’s also worth noting that Chrysler sold its European operations to PSA in 1978, and now both companies are fully under one roof at Stellantis. Another reunification under Stellantis: Maserati and Citroën. A third bit of interesting Stellantis trivia: They now contain parts of each of the Big Three’s historical European operations. SIMCA moved away from its FIAT-based origins at about the same time they acquired Ford of France. SIMCA was then bought by Chrysler progressively until they had full ownership in 1967. Chrysler then sold SIMCA, Rootes, and Barreiros to PSA in 1978. When PSA bought Opel/Vauxhall from GM in 2017, the company made their conquest of American operations in Europe complete. SIMCA getting its start building FIATs under license in France is, of course, another historical industry reunification under Stellantis, as FIAT used to own much of SIMCA before the latter went independent.
Optional extras are so much fun. It's like you are just talking to us, if that makes any sense, and it's enjoyable. I was always a Chrysler guy until Stellantis, then I got scared... hahaha. Chrysler has always been the engineering company that is unmatched for creativity and pushing the envelope so far. Yes folks laugh at the PT and Crossfire, but which company had the courage to do these kinds of radical concepts? To say nothing of the awesome Prowler with one of the most intricate suspensions put into a production car. Thanks so much for both videos. Very very enjoyable to watch.
Glad to have you Matthew. If I could bring this naturalness to the main videos, I would. But there are specific things I want to get across and I need a script to do that. Ugh!
The Nash Metropolitan was made by Austin in the UK - I remember seeing them regularly while growing up in Liverpool - even as a kid I could see that they were different - odd but interesting.
I've thought about taking these videos and publishing them as podcasts, but there's little advantage to me, as it would be hard to monetise. I could get sponsors, but I don't want to be doing with all that. As for new content, I'm working full time on the videos I produce already, so any extra work would kill me! And I don't want to take on other people to help - I got out of my last job because I was managing people, I don't want to go back to that.
Thanks, I really enjoy the Optional Extras, as well as the main videos, of course. Having been through two really major mergers in my working life, I have a rather jaundiced view of them - from an employee's perspective. You need to look really hard to see WHO actually is benefitting from a merger. In the short to medium term it is rarely the customers, or the shareholders and certainly not the employees. Sometimes, the individual Board members fare extremely well financially from approving such deals - whether through their direct compensation or through share/stock options. This goes some way to partially explain some of the rather strange merger decisions that Boards sometimes seem to make. That and a complete lack of connection with the day to day activities that bring in their company's revenue. During one merger I was involved in, 'a synergy' was a euphemism applied to an employee who lost their job.
Hi there from Sydney, Australia, the vehicle/car that is based on the Austin platform , is the 1953 Nash Metropolitan, there were even badge engineered Hudson Metropolitans (as the 2 old US car firms Nash & Hudson had merged just prior , some "wags" called the merged group HASH as it became a mess) The 2 versions were built for Nash-Kelvinator (-fridges-) by Austin in the Longbridge plant . They have a Austin/Morris early 1200cc B series engine, the overall body design however was penned by Americans in the Nash facility , available as a small coupe, or a small convertible, they were sold primarily in the USA , however they also found their way with other Nash products to places like New Zealand and Australia. Most people found the Airflyte Nash vehicles to be ugly as they did not understand that the low drag shapes had been wind tunnel tested , particularly the 2 big cars with their swoopy fast backs and skirted wheel openings. Metropolitans were all assembled in the UK , bodies punched by Fisher & Ludlow (aka) Pressed Steel Fisher and assembled in either RHD or LHD by Austin , they were very small just 150inchs long, 5 foot wide & about 85 inch wheelbase & had a continental spare tyre kit at the back just for complete overkill, they looked like something from a comic book that had escaped the pages and had mysteriously come alive !! WHY WRERE THEY MADE:- well in the mid 1950's finances were tight and getting more tight as the Korean war wound on. A recession seemed to be looming. Nash wanted a small car to sell if a recession became a depression. They went to several European car makers for this joint project. & Selected Austin. These were released in mid 1953 by 1954 there was a deep recession in the USA, additionally ,the other remaining non big 3 manufacturer Rambler-American motors had always had a smaller production car within their fleet , however it was somewhat bigger and a real family car named the Rambler American. At the said same time Austin amazingly decided to make their own offering to Americans, which was also weird by comparison to most US home market cars , the ill-fated Austin Atlantic luxury coupes & convertibles.
Beep Beep used to be played from time to time by Desmond Carrington on radio 2, it's one of those strange little songs that sticks in your mind one you've heard it.
Great video. Rather important , bcz as usual the devil is in the details... PSA management was able to accomplish a great deal. Namely, the well know OPEL Brand was rescued from the jaws of total failure. And the reborn OPEL appear to have found a second Life. GM sold OPEL for a song, they were unable to understand the European market Neverthless, OPEL used to be a very powerful and successful Corporation before sinking into a sea of Conflicts. Many years ago I found a Popular Mechanics issue from 1959. The main article featured the CEOs of Ford, GM and Chrysler expressing their views about the future.. Seating casually around a conference room , feet on the cofre table (Indeed, furniture serves different purposes), those Detroit genious basically stated that their new models were about to push VW and MERCEDES into the Ocean. There was no future in America for such basic and primitive vehicles. I came across that article in the middle 70s -- and at that moment in time, it was clear that the arrogant and inept ideias expressed in 1959 had missed the mark completely. However, that frame of Mind didn't improved overtime. In the late 80s, GM'S CEO Roger Smith was asked during a Press Conference: "What has GM to offer to a Toyota Camary Prospectiva Buyer?". After thinking for a few seconds, Smith gave his opinion : " A Second Hand Buick !". The story made the headlines and Smith's tenure was already viewed as a failure. Was he trying to be funny ? Or perhaps implying that a Second hand GM vehicle was better than a brand new import? History repeats itself. Detroit managed to run the American Car Industry to the ground. Throughout decades, the "Autistic" viewpoints expressed in 1959, Smith's comment in the late 80s, and GM's hasty decision to dump OPEL (to name a few) reflect the decline of a porweful and creative Industry. Truly, in the 20s, the 30s, the 40s and in part of the 50s, American cars used to be ""Centuries" ahead of the foreign competition. Even after the War in the European Market, the Ford Cortina, the Capri, the Taunus and the Opel used to be fantastic cars. Only ocasionally a few projects like the Mustang were exceptions to the rule. Detroit received several times "medical assistance" in the form of huge subsidies from Washington -- to no avail ! The Industry remains in deep trouble in the American Market and across the World as well. Lee Iacocca, plz Wake Up and Come Back !
I have a 2002 c230 sportcoupe from that same era of Daimler Chrysler. Some odd design choices on that car, like the headlights looking like they came off of a dodge neon. I believe the sportcoupe was based more on the next generation of the slk. I think the sportcoupe was the first model that mercedes used their new e-key in.
The original c class sport coupe was based on the previous 1990s model C class saloon platform with a slightly shortened wheelbase whereas the CLK was an odd (but successful) hybrid of C and E class chassis elements. I was working for MB UK during the 2002-6 period and I can’t recall being told the basis for the second model SLK, which I think was launched in late 2005.
Have you ever seen any of the C32 sport coupe AMG’s? I’ve only seen two but apparently there’s 5 that are known. Of course AMG keeps the numbers vague until whenever they feel like telling the public. They had a program where owners if the wished to pay for it could have the c230 Sport coupe fit with the M112K engine along with other AMG parts. Rumor has it the engine was also tuned around to 370HP instead of the 349HP it normally had came with.
I owed the srt, it was great. A real head turner. Wish I still had it . Now there getting very expressive. Looking to buy another and never sell it. Just a classic design.
The Nash Metropolitan was a joint venture between Nash (designer) and Austin Motor Company (builder with Fisher & Ludlow.) It was built in Birmingham, England and marketed exclusively in the US. Very cool wee cars. Might make a good video ;-)
Both videos are great. I like the optional extra parts because they are like a deleted scene in a movie where it adds unnecessary length or detracts from the point you are trying to make. You add your thoughts as well as a side note to the main video. I think you have subjects from the SLK Crossfire video to talk about such as the 300/E-Class and the ML/GLE-GL/GLS to what the Chrysler equivalent is or was. Also I think you can do an entire video on Daimler and Chrysler from pre merger, during the merger and after the merger. You said in your video that Daimler (Mercedes-Benz) did not do a merger since then, while I guess that is right they did a partnership that didn't last long Nissan (Infinity). On the 4 cylinder C300 (W205) Nissan was building engines for them and also the first generation of the GLA shared the same platform the Infinity equivalent. What you didn't mention a d from what I have heard (don't know if it is true or not) That Chrysler was sourcing the parts for Mercedes that were a hit or a miss. Also there was talks (again not sure if this is true or not) but in the US having Chrysler products and Mercedes products under the same roof. That was shot down because people who drive Mercedes do not want to be sitting next to people driving a Chrysler product. Also you do have some Chrysler dealerships and Mercedes dealerships down the road from one another. I am ok with Mercedes or any brand going down market within the same company. Look at the 190/190E/190D (W201 aka the Baby Benz) that was renamed the C-Class. In the early 80s to today that is working out for them and is still a top seller. However today (maybe 10 years ago) it has been a hit or a miss with the CLA, A, GLA and GLB in the US. MBUSA said it is discontinuing the A-Class next year.
Thanks Andrew - good points. I wasn't aware of the Nissan tie up. I also wasn't aware they're discontinuing the A-Class. Seems a backwards step, but I'm not in their boardroom so I'm sure they know best.
@@LittleCar it was a short partnership that didn't last long. Among car enthusiasts and people who have an interest in Mercedes it was met with dislike and thinking back to the DaimlerChrsyler days. As for the A-Class a car that I feel deserved the nick name "Baby Benz" wasn't a bad car. It handled and performed well. Just wasn't well liked unfortunately. I think the smallest people will go are C and maybe CLA-Class. Among Mercedes and car enthusiasts they thought the A-Class wasn't worth holding the star on the hood. But they seem to forget or be ok with the 190 series (W201) and the C-Class and forgetting or maybe making an exception for said car. I for one was ok and am ok with the A-Class. Your A-Class buyers of today will be your S-Class buyers tomorrow. That is my thinking of it.
It was the Nash Metropolitan that was based on an Austin and built in England. From what I know, it was a subcompact with the Austin engine and 3 on the tree. My parents had one when I was a baby.
I lived through the "Merger of Equals" on the USA/Chrysler side. We all got a "Day One" kit which consisted of a book about Chrysler/Mercedes history, some trinkets, and a Swatch watch. The watch stopped working after 3 weeks. It was a harbinger of things to come. Frankly Mercedes needed to learn how to build vehicles less expensively (Lexus was killing them), and once they had that information Chrysler was useless to them and they cast it aside as soon as Chrysler brands weren't bringing in the majority of the revenue after the .Com collapse.
I sat in a Crossfire convertible at the NY Auto Show. I'm a touch under 6'2" and even with the seats as low as I could get it to go, the top of my head was slightly over top of the windshield. I loved the design but it was never a real option for me (I guess I could have test drove a production model).
My work carpark (in NZ) often had a Crossfire and its Merc cousin parked adjacent. I liked the Crossfire style but couldn't forget a line I read, must have been Car UK, which likened the rear view to that of an otherwise elegant dog squatting to... yeah. Read a great book* on the DC debacle, amusing (as is so often the case) that the business justifications for the split were pretty much the same as those for the merger. * 'Wheels on fire' by David Waller
In the 1950's there was another "Merger of equals" in the American auto industry. Studebaker and Packard were independent companies that sold to two different markets. Packard was more upscale, aiming for the sort of person that would buy a Buick or Cadillac. Studebaker made, sometimes quirky, small family cars. Both were in trouble and saw the merger as a way to strengthen the brands by offering a full line of cars similar to GM. Unfortunately they both needed the same thing from each other, a lot of cash. Both had been using inventive bookkeeping just to stay open. But neither realized how bad the other's situation was until after the merger. There was also infighting, and in some cases outright hatred, between the leaders of the new company. Neither side wanted to do anything that would make them look subservient to the other. A little later Nash and Hudson would also try but with better results, creating AMC.
Blimey, where you doing BASIC there? 10 print "Havn't seen" 20 print "that for years" Forgive me if that was wrong but I have almost forgot it! Thanks again for the vid, every day is a school day.........
It's a bit of a stretch to call Daimler and BMW 'relatively small companies compared to Stellantis', at least based on revenue: According to Forbes, in 2021 Stellantis was the 9th biggest car manufacturing company in the world. BMW was 7th and Daimler was 3rd; Daimler's revenue was almost twwice that of Stellantis. Oh, and I thoroughly enjoy these extra videos as well, so keep them coming, please!
Perhaps revenue is not the main yard-stick or meter (metre) to assess or evaluate a Corporation. There are other highly important variables. Economics is a Social Science based upon different elements . I agree with You, the follow-up Videos are extremely relevant. Warm regards , A.
To be fair I didn't look at revenue. My brain gets ahead of me a bit in these off-the-cuff videos (which is why I have a script in the main videos!). I was trying to say that Mercedes & BMW have relatively few models that they're amortising their platform development cost over. If they made a lot of revenue from each car then that's a way of paying it back, but they could come stuck compared to mass market car makers like Stellantis that are amortising the platform development cost over many, many cars. But then they're charging less, and I'm not a car company CFO, so what do I know?
Oh, I absolutely agree; revenue is only one of several measures of a company's size and health, but seeing that the focus in this case was on the merger and subsequent parture between Chrysler and Daimler, I felt that the current numbers were a relevant aspect to concider.
@@TarmenAmzarian I got the impression that you were addressing OPEL' purchase by PSA. Stating that revenue-wise the new entity ranked 8th or 9 th. And I stressed that Economics is Social Science. Therefore, assessing the relevance of a Corporation strictly in terms of its revenue, is bound to miss its real importante and long-term objectives
The Nash Metropolitan was built in the UK for export, it was Austin based and the Nash Healey was UK collaboration but the rest where US built I believe. Peace Charlie 🇬🇧
The Nash Airfylte was really the 49-51 range of 'big' Nashes, and did not encompass the Rambler nor (obviously) the Metropolitan - which was a mechanical Austin, and assembled by them but was very much a Bill Flajole design (NSX). The big bathtub Nash actually WAS aerodynamic for the time - the similarly styled Packard pregnant elephant interpretation of a similar theme was not. I always loved the punch line from Beep Beep - 'hey buddy, how can I get this car out of second gear'. total fantasy of course given the match up. Wasn't even born when the record came out - but all things automotive eventually come to those with interest.
also the PSA group is the acquiring party in name only for accounting (i.e. tax) reasons i believe, the largest share holder in stellantis is Exor the company that the Agnelli family control with 14.4%, the peugeot family have a 7.2% stake with an option for a further 1.5%.
Picking on a couple of things you said: Chrysler and Mitsubishi had shares in each other, sharing component and doing badge engineering long before Daimler came into the fold. In the early '90s, Chrysler was using a 3.0L V6 engine in a lot of its cars, that was based on a Mitsubishi engine, otherwise found in the Mitsubishi/MMC GTO coupe, although tuned very differently. In 1991, my dad bought a Chrysler Saratoga (this was in France), effectively a Dodge Spirit prepped for Europe from '91 to '93, and a Chrysler LeBaron sedan form '93 to '95. It never sold anything like the Voyager or Jeep Cherokee, at least not on our shores.This Saratoga was the family hauler for over 12 mostly very reliable years, and around 265.000kms (~165.000 miles). I once came across a survey from 1991, placing the Dodge Spirit as the 3rd most reliable car in America, thanks, no doubt to its excellent Mitsubishi based engine/automatic transmission combo. 1st and 2nd position were a Toyota and a Honda respectively. When Chrysler acquired AMC from Renault in '87, mainly to snatch Jeep, they turned AMC into a new brand called Eagle (AMC had been selling a model called the Eagle for years, basically all it was selling in the end, beside Jeeps). This brand's first new car was the Eagle Vision, showcasing the new 'cab forward' design. The Vision may have started as a project under Renault, trying to make a big car for the North American market, unless I'm getting confused with the Renault Premiere, or some such car Renault developed. In any case, the Eagle Vision was soon badge engineered as a Chrysler Concorde and Dodge Intrepid. The platform was also used for the gorgeous Chrysler New Yorker/LHS or the period, as well as the 300M. But I digress. The Eagle brand didn't develop much further. Aside from the Vision, the rest of the line up consisted of rebadged Mitsubishis for North America. If I'm not mistaken, underneath the Eagle Talon was a GTO. Eagle was soon killed off. In my opinion, Chrysler and Mitsubishi had a good partnership, with good synergy. Unfortunately, it was disbanded following the divorce from Daimler. Second thing: Chrysler was never a sports car brand, which is not to say they didn't have any fast cars. Their 300 'Letter series', from 1955 to '65, is considered by many to be the very first muscle car. More recently, the 300C, the one based on an old E-Class, had the SRT-8 treatment. P.S.: Third thing, remembering as I'm typing; I believe it was after the introduction of the Crossfire that Chrysler presented the ME 4.12 concept car, standing for Mid-Engine 4 turbos, 12 cylinder. It was developed by Chrysler in record time, using an AMG engine. I seem to remember the chassis had something to do with Pagani. Either way it made the slow gestating Mercedes-McLaren SLR look bad.
Yeah, I remember there was an Eagle version of the Mitsubishi Eclipse. I'd forgotten about that. Thanks for the info Mike. I'd like to do a video about Eagle at some point.
You are right. The Talon wasn't a version of the GTO, but indeed the Eclipse. After my comment, I had to refresh my memory. By contract, after acquiring AMC, Chrysler had to keep making and selling cars, as a kind of back door access for Renault to the US market. Before the Eagle Premiere, based on the the Renault 25, was the Eagle Alliance, and in between , I just discovered, the Eagle Medallion, based on the Renault 21.
Having been through a few mergers/acquistions myself, the problems often start because the "junior" management team believe what the shareholders have been told and have expectations which are too high. When those things don't happen, they become disillusioned and uncooperative, or are fired/resign. Then a new management team is brought in, that is unfamiliar with the business and don't have a clue how anything works. The result is chaos for a few years, which some don't survive.
Interesting you note an S class might be weakened by having an A class. I think of those retail fronts on Regent Street. Surely they can't be profitable but they are a token front making their brand as a whole desirable. People will buy an A because the S is so good. Starting to branch out on your side clips love them
Loved these cars. It was a toss up last year between a crossfire and a jimny as a second/toy for myself. I went for the jimny. See if I can convince the wife......
Fun content. No way the big Nashes, such as the Airflyte were based on an Austin platform. They're humongous. I think even the Rambler line was too big for an Austin Platform. However, the demure Nash Metropolitan was tiny; so perhaps that's where the rumors started... or perhaps they're true. The Playmates' "Beep Beep," 1958.
There was of course a Nash Healey in the early 50s with a Nash engine, and a Nash Metropolitan in the late 50s built by Austin with a B series engine. The Healey body first came from Warwick and later from Turin.
Interesting video - thank you. The Airflite concept reminds me a lot of the concept cars and rendering produced by MG Rover just before they went bankrupt - especially the TCV. The deco look is certainly bold, but in both examples not exactly subtle, or elegant!
It's generally recognized that Daimler insisted on Chrysler reducing the quality of its parts and thereby increasing profit margins; however, this is seen as a major reason why Chrysler had problems, as the cheaper parts are thought to have created a number of new problems, which eventually significantly damaged the brand. Have you heard that, and how accurate is it?
Good info I’ve always loved the Crossfire, way more character than the 350Z and RX8 combined. To me a car is a car is a car. I own a PT Cruiser going on 13 years that I bought used with high mileage and I have a Nissan Versa that I bought used as well. The Nissan is more reliable and a little better on gas but the Chrysler PT looks a lot cooler and I can pull a trailer with it. The PT Cruiser was ahead of its time, look on the road now and you see a lot of crossover utility vehicles, not a minivan and not just a car. Probably Lee Iacocca took Chrysler to its last success, decent cars, very well priced, innovative ideas.
Nice one! If you own a Mercedes or a BMW you don't want a Stellantis car. You're prepared to pay a considerable sum to not have to drive a front-wheel drive, mass market box.
I’m not sure you can get more “mass market box” than a front-wheel drive “premium” crossover such as the (rather excellent) BMW X1 which sells in incredible global numbers. Don’t confuse “expensive” or “premium” with low volumes or exclusivity - that idea went out the window 15years ago when the 3 series started outselling the Ford Mondeo and Aston shifting more DB9s than Ford did Mondeo ST’s.
Have you thought about making a podcast? Your voice is fantastic and it could be something cool to listen to while driving. At least uploading the voice files of the video to podcasts platforms maybe?
I've thought of releasing my "Big Car" videos as podcasts, but I would need to look for different sponsorship opportunities to support it, and that's a major hassle to deal with. If someone else dealt with that I might consider it.
Beep-Beepwas a song about a Nash Metropolitan, NOT a Nash Rambler. The Nash Rambler was an American design, not an Austin chassis. The Metropolitan, however, was powered by an Austin B-series engine and was manufactured by Austin at Longbridge. I'm not 100% sure if the platform was an Austin chassis, or if it was a Nash design and just assembled there. Either way, I believe that the Metroplotan is the car you were thinking of when someone said to you that the Rambler was an Austin chassis......
I grew up listening to that song on a “45” just like pictured in this video. Brings back memories. I didn’t fully get the joke since the soy was before my time. It was maybe my Aunt’s music collection she left at my grandparents house. So the “little Nash Rambler” as referenced in the song was not something I could envision. But I’d seen plenty of 70’s Cadillacs. And I knew there was a size and power discrepancy. So I sorta got the joke. But yeah “Rambler” is what they sang.
The "new" dodge charger and challenger were based on Merc e class chassis. The success of these two cars can be tied directly to the quality of the Mercedes base!
I didn't know PSA bought Fiat Chrysler in 2021, but it was just a matter of time before some merger happened. Ironically, one of the original plans/speculations was that they were going to partner with Renault, which is what happened to American Motors Corporation (who bought jeep), and which Chrysler subsequently bought both of the above from Renault.
I thought my car videos wouldn't date much, as they're looking at history, but some of them are already out of date because they don't reference the Stellantis merger (like the video on Vauxhall)! I'd like to do a video about Eagle (the AMC / Renault thing). I don't think it's well known in Europe.
Great video as usual!!! Since you mentioned the A Class/S Class and their effects on the brand. I'd love to see your take on the Maybach 57/62 debacle. I know the hot take is calling them a "glorified S class" but I personally think they are stunning two tone landyatchs (in the flesh, photos don't do them justice). Cheers,
Funny, I touch on that car in my next video. I wasn't really aware of Maybach until then, and yes it would be interesting to look at Mercedes attempt at taking on Bentley (owned by VW) & Rolls (owned by BMW). Another three-way German battle royale, and Mercedes seems to be losing!
what's crazy to me is that the behemoth that is stellantis is only the 6th largest car company in the world behind VW, Toyota, Renault/Nissan/Mitsubishi, GM and the Hyundai group
As a side note, the Mercedes-Mitsubishi “cooperation” did end up seeing Daimler took over Mitsubishi Fuso (truck division), and allow Mitsubishi trucks to use technologies from Mercedes trucks. Was surprised to learn about platform sharing between Mercedes and Chrysler despite the separate ways. But I wonder with the FCA, and now Stellantis, where the platform sharing act would go. Stellantis, given its core business in Europe with PSA (Citroen, DS, Opel/Vauxhall, Peugeot), they are in lack of D-segment or above platform. Maserati could be a great starting point for large car platform, and it’s worthwhile to push Alfa Romeo and/or Lancia (if the latter still exists as a property functioning brand) upmarket, and be a competitor in the entry-level luxury market (which Alfa had done with Giulia). The hammer, however, might have fallen on Chrysler side of the business. Challenger and Charger do feel old-fashioned (maybe it’s ok in North American market), and Jeep as well as RAM are doing pretty well in SUV and truck market in, again, North America. Dwindling sales of “minivans” as Pacifica leaves fairly limited room for Chrysler to survive. What else could be done? Thanks again for the video, Andy! Enjoying them through and through!
There is something no one (so far) seems to comment on... The excessive use of the term SYNERGY in all mergers and acquisitions in the last few decades and the few companies that ultimately acquire proper use of it. There should be a MEME about such with the cartoon character named SYNERGY (a human-based AI holographic emitting computer, also quite the hacker herself, from the cartoon "Jem and The Holograms" of the mid '80s). Think about "her" (acts on her own so much that can be classified as a "her" and not an "it") with a "comic book style thought cloud" on her feet talking to us: if I had a DOLLAR for every time companies "in the other side of the screen" had "mentioned me in vain" I'd be a MILLIONAIRE, just think about that.
It's one of those phrases like "mission statement" that seemed like a good concept but got overused and bastardised into just a buzz word. Synergy in itself is a good concept, but it has now lost all meaning.
The Misfire wasn’t too bad but those few inches it lost I think did change the profile in a negative way. They would have given some additional boot space that may have allowed this afternoon driver to actually be a weekend getaway car.
Nash Metropolitin was the one that is Austin based, pretty much built in England & shipped to the US, or in the case of Australia, just built here & sold as a Nash/Kelvinator Metropolitan, It's based, pretty loosely, on the A40.
The best year was the one it was axed in! “Scuttle shake” in the convertible version (due to insufficient chassis stiffening combined with the Crossfires very hard ride) made the car, for my taste, almost unbearable to drive. I found this odd because the SLK convertible from which the Crossfire was developed didn’t seem to have such a big problem. By contrast, I quite enjoyed the Crossfire coupe. Ex Merc employee here
I never realized that Chrysler in 90's was in a extremely well. I always thought they were the type of company that goes from one crisis to the next. I would put my view down to it being a distant third of the big American car brands and that it never ingrained its self in Britain they same way Ford and GM did. I would really like to see a video on the other major car to come out of the ill fated merger. The Chrysler 300C.
Chrysler is very cat like. They have 9 lives, and have used up most of them. They do have a history of jumping from one crisis to another, often amazing people that they pulled it off and survived to keep going.
BMW and Daimler will do just fine. As the income of people in poorer countries continues to rise there will and is a growing market for luxury brands. BMW and Daimler sales are through the roof in East Asia, the Middle-East and Africa. And, as of a few weeks ago, Daimler has changed its name to Mercedes-Benz Group.
Not sure. It's how I say it and with my UK / US influences I don't know where I got it from. There's going to be a whole lot more in the next video as well!
10:17: You say BMW got the Mini and Rolls Royce out of the Rover deal but didn't you mean Mini and Land Rover? The Rolls Royce deal was quite separate, wasn't it?
@@LittleCar - the Sprinter large van was also sold as a Freightliner (commercial / heavy truck brand Daimler still owns) until very recently. The Dodge / Ram version was replaced by the Ram Pro Master, a version of the Fiat Ducato.
So what about the Mercedes Citan and the Renault Kangoo? It seems weird a luxury brand like Daimler work with Renault. Is that just out of convenience to build a van and what else is Daimler using from Renault in their cars?
Renault's small Diesel engines can be found on the A- and B-Class, CLA, GLA and GLB. Also the X-Class pickup truck was co-developed with the Nissan Navara and Renault Alaskan. And of course the Smart and the current Twingo are closely related.
@@JK061996 - the Smart ForFour and the 2nd generation Renault Twingo were developed jointly... (both 4-door and rear-engined, something not seen on a Renault since the '60s, IIRC)
The truck manufacturer and the luxury car maker are now separated. Daimler means trucks and Mercedes continues as the luxury brand. Little Mercedes may have Nissan/Renault engine under hood but the engine will have a Mercedes type plate attached. The current Citan or t class is a safer car than Kangoo and looks very different.
Well Chrysler cprporation did some interesting cars in the 00's but you can't call them exciting or solid. I remember seeing Dodge Caliber when it was launched - some interesting design festures but cheap materials and average fit'n'finish for the car that expensive (in Russia at least). That's why people in our country prefered Ford or Chevy over Chrysler and Dodge.
When I was a child, my dad would take me to car showrooms (after some intense pestering) and we came home with "Beep Beep" after one foray. I played it on my little record player INCESSANTLY. Decades later, the whole family could still sing it, start to finish. If we were all in the car together, all somebody had to do was sing, "Whiiiile riiiiiding in my Cad-ill-ac" and we were off to the races. Great memories!
It was part of a radio show in Boston, Ma called Saturday Night Live at the Oldies and Beep Beep was always played early in the show.
I realy like the additional videos you make! Thanks a lot! They are complementing the main video very well and the audience can choose weather they want more details about a car and its history or not. Allthough for me it could be all information in one video and I enjoy it so much - I could watch you talk about a car for hours! Great work!
Thanks Erwin. Glad you're enjoying them!
ingenious implement
When I was growing up my dad had a 1973 Dodge Challenger. My grandma had a 1984 Mercedes 300SD. I remember a lot of grumblings in my high school auto shop from students and teachers lamenting the Daimler-Chrysler merger. A lot of my high school auto shop friends hated that Chrysler was the "K-Car company" and missed the days of the high horse power muscle cars from the 60s and 70s. I remember some really harsh things being said like "The Germans have taken over Chrysler like they did France" They never had a good word to say about the merger.
When I graduated high school in 2002 I moved from the country to the city, and I was given the Mercedes as a safe car to drive in the city. I really fell in love with that car I still own it, along with a few other Mercedes cars. I know a lot of the local Mercedes shops and local collectors, I've pretty much become a Mercedes guy at this point. I'm still friends with a lot of my high school auto shop friends. It makes me laugh every time I hear one of them tell me how wonderful it is that Chrysler is now making rear wheel drive muscle cars again. This really makes me laugh as I know that all the RWD parts that Chrysler has today are a result of the Daimler merger decades ago. I wonder how many of the muscle car guys in the USA now look at the merger more fondly since it made it possible for Chrysler to get back in to the muscle car game.
How I came to own 2 Crossfires simultaneously: I knew nothing of the Crossfire. Landing at SFO airport the only car available was a large SUV. That's what I drove at home and wanted something sportier. Upon departing the airport I saw some Crossfires in a corner, slammed on the brakes and returned to the car rental office. Secured the xfire and off I went to Monterey. Wow, wow, wow! I was not only impressed but was in heaven. I stopped along the way just to enjoy it in different settings and to also "show it off" -- this was 2008. I fell in love with the Crossfire. Upon returning home, I gave my son my truck and I needed a car to commute into downtown DC, where parking is sparse & tight. Why should I get another utility vehicle .. why not a fun car since I am the only one driving it. Ah ha, the Crossfire. I bought a used 2004 grey xfire coupe. Loved it. But when I heard the Crossfire was being discontinued, I bought a new 2008 silver coupe. So I had two -- one for commuting and one for weekends. Wife told me to reduce my inventory so the 2004 had to go. I still have the 2008 silver+cedar xfire with 58k miles on it (as of Feb 2023) and love driving it every time but on local trips now - no interstates or expressways. Thanks for the story and optional add-on about how the Crossfire came to be and what led to its demise after just 4-5 years. I even have the luggage designed for it which is a cool extra I've not heard of before with other cars. One feature in the concept / prototype Crossfire I wish was carried into production was the center crease in the rear window glass to continue the single center line from front to rear. Yes, the window would cost quite a bit more but wow, what a cool and unique feature it would have been -- reminiscent of the split rear windows of the early VW Beetle and Corvette Stingray. Really enjoyed your video reviews of the Crossfire -- thanks so much!
Being from Mercedes-town Stuttgart and growing up there in the 90s, I remember how immensely critical everybody was when Schrempp announced this merger.
Not only the employees but all the way to the supermarket cashier where afraid of the “poor American quality”, and at the same time everybody felt overwhelmed by the refreshing “modern/new” approaches in American culture (e.g. this new “internet” thing). Remember, this was Mercedes producing the rust prone W210 E-Class, so quality compared to the 80s had already taken a huge hit and now THIS.
Mercedes being such a large employer really made the region shiver over Schrempp’s “world leading” aspiration that had gone wrong before when Daimler wanted to become “an integrated technology group”, buying shares in the European version of NASA and appliance maker AEG in the 70s (+ „world leading“ and German … well…other things come to mind that didn’t actually work out).
Not only did they lay off many Chrysler employees, a lot of German Mercedes employees followed, and many have not forgiven Schrempp his adventure. He’s one of the most disregarded managers in Germany one could say.
One has to realize that even today but even more so in the 90s, things as “buying stocks“ or „the internet“ weren’t on the map of most Germans with our social security system and history of producing physical goods as opposed to digital ones. Not that this is better or worse, it was just a complete culture shock…with the „merger of equals“ everybody suddenly learned the term „shareholder value“ - and most didn’t like the concept of it.
P.S. Last fun fact: The Mercedes A- and B-Class had the fuel cap on the driver side (opposed to all other Mercedes’) because it also is a Chrysler influenced Plattform.
I very much appreciated your Swabian view of that ill-conceived merger and its Zeitgeist.
Your comment, '„world leading“and German… well…other things come to mind that didn’t actually work out"' is the most tactful and brilliant description of the _____ era I've ever read.
Thank you (I'm going to borrow it). Tschüss!
The Nash Metropolitan as others have said was built by Austin. One of the conditions was that Austin (BMC) kept the rights to the name - hence the later Austin Metro. The original car marketed in the US was so Austin based it was powered by the 1489cc version of the B series engine and standard BMC gearbox and back axle from the A40 range of cars
I just started this episode but had to tell you that I thoroughly enjoy these extras, sir! Thank you, Robin
Glad you like them Robin!
Thanks for the video. I actually think the Daimler Chrysler short lived marriage did achieved something, mostly benefiting Cyrsler such as cars like Crossfire and 300C. I think Fiat Chrysler is an even bigger mess.
I think you should consider doing one on Nissan Renault and of course the impact of Carlos Ghosn. It would be very interesting.
Yeah, that would be a fun one!
I agree - FIAT/Chrysler in my view hasn’t been a good marriage. FIAT in particular, has completely lost its way, 500 aside, and I’ve never liked Chrysler’s European car range - too big, too chintzy, and a bit cheap feeling.
The Nash Rambler at 08:31 reminds me of the old Tatra T87 from former Czechoslovakia. I quite liked the Crossfire when they first came out, still do. And used ones can be found for £not many these days. Interesting video, many thanks!
From a longtime fan from the PNW, and a Nash aficionado, your history isn’t too bad. The only further connection I’d make is that Nash merged with Hudson in 1954 to form American Motors (AMC), which built the Rambler Marlin that showed a similar fastback/taillight design to the Crossfire coupe. AMC bought Jeep in 1970, and Chrysler bought AMC in 1987, which is how they got ahold of Jeep, and why they considered the Airflyte name to be part of their heritage. One of the main reasons that Chrysler was able to produce cars at such low cost in the ‘90s was because of Francois Castaing and the team they inherited from the AMC buyout in 1987, which had been producing vehicles on a shoestring budget for decades at AMC.
The Nash/Hudson Metropolitan (which later became its own marque once both the Nash and Hudson brands were dropped in 1957) was indeed built on the Austin A40 platform at Longbridge. Its exterior design was purely American, however. But the Rambler, 600/Statesman, and Ambassador were all Nash’s own work and used the American industry’s first iteration of monocoque construction on a volume basis.
Another thing I’d note since you mentioned MATRA in the main video is that Chrysler Europe owned 50% of MATRA at the time the Espace was first being developed. So regardless of who was “first,” Chrysler had a hand in both the Espace and the US K-based minivans, which came to market about 6 months before the Espace did. Because PSA weren’t interested in MATRA’s project, Renault swooped in, bought that 50% stake in MATRA, and marketed the Espace as their own.
Ironically, when Chrysler bought AMC in 1987, AMC was 46.4% owned by Renault, and was in serious negotiations to begin offering the Espace in the US market through AMC dealers. In fact, they showed a Federalized Espace at the 1985 Chicago Auto Show, and magazines tested it against its contemporaries on the US market at the time, believing its launch to be imminent. Had AMC succeeded on offering the Espace, it would have been entirely possible that, after the Chrysler buyout, both minivans would have been sold through Chrysler dealers in the US.
Concerning Stellantis, it’s also worth noting that Chrysler sold its European operations to PSA in 1978, and now both companies are fully under one roof at Stellantis. Another reunification under Stellantis: Maserati and Citroën.
A third bit of interesting Stellantis trivia: They now contain parts of each of the Big Three’s historical European operations.
SIMCA moved away from its FIAT-based origins at about the same time they acquired Ford of France. SIMCA was then bought by Chrysler progressively until they had full ownership in 1967. Chrysler then sold SIMCA, Rootes, and Barreiros to PSA in 1978. When PSA bought Opel/Vauxhall from GM in 2017, the company made their conquest of American operations in Europe complete.
SIMCA getting its start building FIATs under license in France is, of course, another historical industry reunification under Stellantis, as FIAT used to own much of SIMCA before the latter went independent.
Optional extras are so much fun. It's like you are just talking to us, if that makes any sense, and it's enjoyable. I was always a Chrysler guy until Stellantis, then I got scared... hahaha. Chrysler has always been the engineering company that is unmatched for creativity and pushing the envelope so far. Yes folks laugh at the PT and Crossfire, but which company had the courage to do these kinds of radical concepts? To say nothing of the awesome Prowler with one of the most intricate suspensions put into a production car. Thanks so much for both videos. Very very enjoyable to watch.
Glad to have you Matthew. If I could bring this naturalness to the main videos, I would. But there are specific things I want to get across and I need a script to do that. Ugh!
The Nash Metropolitan was made by Austin in the UK - I remember seeing them regularly while growing up in Liverpool - even as a kid I could see that they were different - odd but interesting.
In a way, I prefer the Optional Extra segment because it's more personal and it's kinda small dive into your main video's script.
Really like these "optional extra" vids. Have you ever considered doing a podcast about car companies and their histories? I'd subscribe for sure :)
I've thought about taking these videos and publishing them as podcasts, but there's little advantage to me, as it would be hard to monetise. I could get sponsors, but I don't want to be doing with all that. As for new content, I'm working full time on the videos I produce already, so any extra work would kill me! And I don't want to take on other people to help - I got out of my last job because I was managing people, I don't want to go back to that.
Thanks, I really enjoy the Optional Extras, as well as the main videos, of course. Having been through two really major mergers in my working life, I have a rather jaundiced view of them - from an employee's perspective. You need to look really hard to see WHO actually is benefitting from a merger. In the short to medium term it is rarely the customers, or the shareholders and certainly not the employees. Sometimes, the individual Board members fare extremely well financially from approving such deals - whether through their direct compensation or through share/stock options. This goes some way to partially explain some of the rather strange merger decisions that Boards sometimes seem to make. That and a complete lack of connection with the day to day activities that bring in their company's revenue. During one merger I was involved in, 'a synergy' was a euphemism applied to an employee who lost their job.
Hi there from Sydney, Australia, the vehicle/car that is based on the Austin platform , is the 1953 Nash Metropolitan, there were even badge engineered Hudson Metropolitans (as the 2 old US car firms Nash & Hudson had merged just prior , some "wags" called the merged group HASH as it became a mess) The 2 versions were built for Nash-Kelvinator (-fridges-) by Austin in the Longbridge plant . They have a Austin/Morris early 1200cc B series engine, the overall body design however was penned by Americans in the Nash facility , available as a small coupe, or a small convertible, they were sold primarily in the USA , however they also found their way with other Nash products to places like New Zealand and Australia. Most people found the Airflyte Nash vehicles to be ugly as they did not understand that the low drag shapes had been wind tunnel tested , particularly the 2 big cars with their swoopy fast backs and skirted wheel openings. Metropolitans were all assembled in the UK , bodies punched by Fisher & Ludlow (aka) Pressed Steel Fisher and assembled in either RHD or LHD by Austin , they were very small just 150inchs long, 5 foot wide & about 85 inch wheelbase & had a continental spare tyre kit at the back just for complete overkill, they looked like something from a comic book that had escaped the pages and had mysteriously come alive !!
WHY WRERE THEY MADE:- well in the mid 1950's finances were tight and getting more tight as the Korean war wound on. A recession seemed to be looming. Nash wanted a small car to sell if a recession became a depression. They went to several European car makers for this joint project. & Selected Austin. These were released in mid 1953 by 1954 there was a deep recession in the USA, additionally ,the other remaining non big 3 manufacturer Rambler-American motors had always had a smaller production car within their fleet , however it was somewhat bigger and a real family car named the Rambler American. At the said same time Austin amazingly decided to make their own offering to Americans, which was also weird by comparison to most US home market cars , the ill-fated Austin Atlantic luxury coupes & convertibles.
I do like these Extras, as well.
You have a great channel.
🚗🙂
"I don't know that much about cars." If only all of us were that humble and hungry for new information.
Thank you for the informative video. I enjoy all of your videos, keep up the good work.
Thanks Thomas.
Beep Beep used to be played from time to time by Desmond Carrington on radio 2, it's one of those strange little songs that sticks in your mind one you've heard it.
Love the deep dive on this!
Great video. Rather important , bcz as usual the devil is in the details...
PSA management was able to accomplish a great deal.
Namely, the well know OPEL Brand was rescued from the jaws of total failure.
And the reborn OPEL appear to have found a second Life.
GM sold OPEL for a song, they were unable to understand the European market
Neverthless, OPEL used to be a very powerful and successful Corporation before sinking into a sea of Conflicts.
Many years ago I found a Popular Mechanics issue from 1959.
The main article featured the CEOs of Ford, GM and Chrysler expressing their views about the future..
Seating casually around a conference room , feet on the cofre table (Indeed, furniture serves different purposes), those Detroit genious basically stated that their new models were about to push VW and MERCEDES into the Ocean.
There was no future in America for such basic and primitive vehicles.
I came across that article in the middle 70s -- and at that moment in time, it was clear that the arrogant and inept ideias expressed in 1959 had missed the mark completely.
However, that frame of Mind didn't improved overtime.
In the late 80s, GM'S CEO Roger Smith was asked during a Press Conference:
"What has GM to offer to a Toyota Camary Prospectiva Buyer?".
After thinking for a few seconds, Smith gave his opinion : " A Second Hand Buick !".
The story made the headlines and Smith's tenure was already viewed as a failure.
Was he trying to be funny ?
Or perhaps implying that a Second hand GM vehicle was better than a brand new import?
History repeats itself.
Detroit managed to run the American Car Industry to the ground.
Throughout decades, the "Autistic" viewpoints expressed in 1959, Smith's comment in the late 80s, and GM's hasty decision to dump OPEL (to name a few) reflect the decline of a porweful and creative Industry.
Truly, in the 20s, the 30s, the 40s and in part of the 50s, American cars used to be ""Centuries" ahead of the foreign competition.
Even after the War in the European Market, the Ford Cortina, the Capri, the Taunus and the Opel used to be fantastic cars.
Only ocasionally a few projects like the Mustang were exceptions to the rule.
Detroit received several times "medical assistance" in the form of huge subsidies from Washington -- to no avail !
The Industry remains in deep trouble in the American Market and across the World as well.
Lee Iacocca, plz Wake Up and Come Back !
Thanks so much for both of thse videos on Chrysler and the Crossfire. I remember it well from "back in the day" and was quite sad to see it fail.
You are a cool guy sir. I like your narration a lot. Keep like that!👏
The extra video provided great nuggets of info!
I have a 2002 c230 sportcoupe from that same era of Daimler Chrysler. Some odd design choices on that car, like the headlights looking like they came off of a dodge neon. I believe the sportcoupe was based more on the next generation of the slk. I think the sportcoupe was the first model that mercedes used their new e-key in.
The original c class sport coupe was based on the previous 1990s model C class saloon platform with a slightly shortened wheelbase whereas the CLK was an odd (but successful) hybrid of C and E class chassis elements. I was working for MB UK during the 2002-6 period and I can’t recall being told the basis for the second model SLK, which I think was launched in late 2005.
Have you ever seen any of the C32 sport coupe AMG’s? I’ve only seen two but apparently there’s 5 that are known. Of course AMG keeps the numbers vague until whenever they feel like telling the public. They had a program where owners if the wished to pay for it could have the c230 Sport coupe fit with the M112K engine along with other AMG parts. Rumor has it the engine was also tuned around to 370HP instead of the 349HP it normally had came with.
Really enjoyed this one. Keep up the gr8 work
I owed the srt, it was great. A real head turner. Wish I still had it . Now there getting very expressive. Looking to buy another and never sell it. Just a classic design.
I just bought a crossfire 2004 and i love 💘 it
Good stuff, I really enjoy both of my Crossfire's.
The Nash Metropolitan was a joint venture between Nash (designer) and Austin Motor Company (builder with Fisher & Ludlow.) It was built in Birmingham, England and marketed exclusively in the US. Very cool wee cars. Might make a good video ;-)
Yes - thanks for the info Doug.
Can you imagine if they really went full on brand engineering and produced a Mercedes badged Chrysler Neon?
That would be like the Cadillac Cimmaron.
Very well explained. Good job for a guy who dont know nothing about cars.
Good job!
A super Optional Extra 👍
If I remember right. The B.B.C. did a program about this merger failing. They talked to many of the executives who were at the time.
This is great ! Love the tidbits
I really like Chrysler cars I can’t wait for them to do a comeback
Both videos are great. I like the optional extra parts because they are like a deleted scene in a movie where it adds unnecessary length or detracts from the point you are trying to make. You add your thoughts as well as a side note to the main video.
I think you have subjects from the SLK Crossfire video to talk about such as the 300/E-Class and the ML/GLE-GL/GLS to what the Chrysler equivalent is or was. Also I think you can do an entire video on Daimler and Chrysler from pre merger, during the merger and after the merger.
You said in your video that Daimler (Mercedes-Benz) did not do a merger since then, while I guess that is right they did a partnership that didn't last long Nissan (Infinity). On the 4 cylinder C300 (W205) Nissan was building engines for them and also the first generation of the GLA shared the same platform the Infinity equivalent.
What you didn't mention a d from what I have heard (don't know if it is true or not) That Chrysler was sourcing the parts for Mercedes that were a hit or a miss. Also there was talks (again not sure if this is true or not) but in the US having Chrysler products and Mercedes products under the same roof. That was shot down because people who drive Mercedes do not want to be sitting next to people driving a Chrysler product. Also you do have some Chrysler dealerships and Mercedes dealerships down the road from one another.
I am ok with Mercedes or any brand going down market within the same company. Look at the 190/190E/190D (W201 aka the Baby Benz) that was renamed the C-Class. In the early 80s to today that is working out for them and is still a top seller. However today (maybe 10 years ago) it has been a hit or a miss with the CLA, A, GLA and GLB in the US. MBUSA said it is discontinuing the A-Class next year.
Thanks Andrew - good points. I wasn't aware of the Nissan tie up. I also wasn't aware they're discontinuing the A-Class. Seems a backwards step, but I'm not in their boardroom so I'm sure they know best.
@@LittleCar if people like you and me were in the board room I think we can come up with a few ideas.
@@LittleCar it was a short partnership that didn't last long. Among car enthusiasts and people who have an interest in Mercedes it was met with dislike and thinking back to the DaimlerChrsyler days.
As for the A-Class a car that I feel deserved the nick name "Baby Benz" wasn't a bad car. It handled and performed well. Just wasn't well liked unfortunately. I think the smallest people will go are C and maybe CLA-Class. Among Mercedes and car enthusiasts they thought the A-Class wasn't worth holding the star on the hood. But they seem to forget or be ok with the 190 series (W201) and the C-Class and forgetting or maybe making an exception for said car.
I for one was ok and am ok with the A-Class. Your A-Class buyers of today will be your S-Class buyers tomorrow. That is my thinking of it.
The Chrysler LHS is one of the most beautiful cars and satisfying to drive cars ever made.
Found it interesting you shared how much you're learning about cars. Love both channels.
I love history! BBC4 documentaries are what I like to watch.
It was the Nash Metropolitan that was based on an Austin and built in England. From what I know, it was a subcompact with the Austin engine and 3 on the tree. My parents had one when I was a baby.
Thanks Michael!
wonderful extras-- thank you! love the auto & corporate history in your very educational vids-- much appreciated!
Glad you enjoyed it Andrew
I lived through the "Merger of Equals" on the USA/Chrysler side. We all got a "Day One" kit which consisted of a book about Chrysler/Mercedes history, some trinkets, and a Swatch watch. The watch stopped working after 3 weeks. It was a harbinger of things to come. Frankly Mercedes needed to learn how to build vehicles less expensively (Lexus was killing them), and once they had that information Chrysler was useless to them and they cast it aside as soon as Chrysler brands weren't bringing in the majority of the revenue after the .Com collapse.
I sat in a Crossfire convertible at the NY Auto Show. I'm a touch under 6'2" and even with the seats as low as I could get it to go, the top of my head was slightly over top of the windshield. I loved the design but it was never a real option for me (I guess I could have test drove a production model).
The same applies to the early SLKs which were almost as cramped but yes the Crossfire has an exceptionally tight interior space.
Enjoyed that very much. Thank you.
My work carpark (in NZ) often had a Crossfire and its Merc cousin parked adjacent. I liked the Crossfire style but couldn't forget a line I read, must have been Car UK, which likened the rear view to that of an otherwise elegant dog squatting to... yeah.
Read a great book* on the DC debacle, amusing (as is so often the case) that the business justifications for the split were pretty much the same as those for the merger.
* 'Wheels on fire' by David Waller
The dog comment was from Early CHM Top Gear ruclips.net/video/k-tjiKIUhf0/видео.html
In the 1950's there was another "Merger of equals" in the American auto industry. Studebaker and Packard were independent companies that sold to two different markets. Packard was more upscale, aiming for the sort of person that would buy a Buick or Cadillac. Studebaker made, sometimes quirky, small family cars. Both were in trouble and saw the merger as a way to strengthen the brands by offering a full line of cars similar to GM.
Unfortunately they both needed the same thing from each other, a lot of cash. Both had been using inventive bookkeeping just to stay open. But neither realized how bad the other's situation was until after the merger. There was also infighting, and in some cases outright hatred, between the leaders of the new company. Neither side wanted to do anything that would make them look subservient to the other.
A little later Nash and Hudson would also try but with better results, creating AMC.
Blimey, where you doing BASIC there?
10 print "Havn't seen"
20 print "that for years"
Forgive me if that was wrong but I have almost forgot it!
Thanks again for the vid, every day is a school day.........
It's a bit of a stretch to call Daimler and BMW 'relatively small companies compared to Stellantis', at least based on revenue: According to Forbes, in 2021 Stellantis was the 9th biggest car manufacturing company in the world. BMW was 7th and Daimler was 3rd; Daimler's revenue was almost twwice that of Stellantis. Oh, and I thoroughly enjoy these extra videos as well, so keep them coming, please!
Perhaps revenue is not the main yard-stick or meter (metre) to assess or evaluate a Corporation.
There are other highly important variables. Economics is a Social Science based upon different elements .
I agree with You, the follow-up Videos are extremely relevant.
Warm regards , A.
To be fair I didn't look at revenue. My brain gets ahead of me a bit in these off-the-cuff videos (which is why I have a script in the main videos!). I was trying to say that Mercedes & BMW have relatively few models that they're amortising their platform development cost over. If they made a lot of revenue from each car then that's a way of paying it back, but they could come stuck compared to mass market car makers like Stellantis that are amortising the platform development cost over many, many cars. But then they're charging less, and I'm not a car company CFO, so what do I know?
Oh, I absolutely agree; revenue is only one of several measures of a company's size and health, but seeing that the focus in this case was on the merger and subsequent parture between Chrysler and Daimler, I felt that the current numbers were a relevant aspect to concider.
Letting your brain get ahead of you is a very healthy exercise to regularly indulge in.
@@TarmenAmzarian I got the impression that you were addressing OPEL' purchase by PSA.
Stating that revenue-wise the new entity ranked 8th or 9 th.
And I stressed that Economics is Social Science.
Therefore, assessing the relevance of a Corporation strictly in terms of its revenue, is bound to miss its real importante and long-term objectives
Thank you for being a positive influence
You're welcome.
The Nash Metropolitan was built in the UK for export, it was Austin based and the Nash Healey was UK collaboration but the rest where US built I believe.
Peace
Charlie 🇬🇧
The exact comment I was about to post... You are 100% right my friend!
It's nice having people who know about cars watch my videos. Thanks Charlie!
@@LittleCar and it's nice learning how much I don't know from your videos ♥️
The Nash Airfylte was really the 49-51 range of 'big' Nashes, and did not encompass the Rambler nor (obviously) the Metropolitan - which was a mechanical Austin, and assembled by them but was very much a Bill Flajole design (NSX). The big bathtub Nash actually WAS aerodynamic for the time - the similarly styled Packard pregnant elephant interpretation of a similar theme was not.
I always loved the punch line from Beep Beep - 'hey buddy, how can I get this car out of second gear'. total fantasy of course given the match up. Wasn't even born when the record came out - but all things automotive eventually come to those with interest.
also the PSA group is the acquiring party in name only for accounting (i.e. tax) reasons i believe, the largest share holder in stellantis is Exor the company that the Agnelli family control with 14.4%, the peugeot family have a 7.2% stake with an option for a further 1.5%.
Thanks, fun to see
Picking on a couple of things you said: Chrysler and Mitsubishi had shares in each other, sharing component and doing badge engineering long before Daimler came into the fold. In the early '90s, Chrysler was using a 3.0L V6 engine in a lot of its cars, that was based on a Mitsubishi engine, otherwise found in the Mitsubishi/MMC GTO coupe, although tuned very differently. In 1991, my dad bought a Chrysler Saratoga (this was in France), effectively a Dodge Spirit prepped for Europe from '91 to '93, and a Chrysler LeBaron sedan form '93 to '95. It never sold anything like the Voyager or Jeep Cherokee, at least not on our shores.This Saratoga was the family hauler for over 12 mostly very reliable years, and around 265.000kms (~165.000 miles). I once came across a survey from 1991, placing the Dodge Spirit as the 3rd most reliable car in America, thanks, no doubt to its excellent Mitsubishi based engine/automatic transmission combo. 1st and 2nd position were a Toyota and a Honda respectively.
When Chrysler acquired AMC from Renault in '87, mainly to snatch Jeep, they turned AMC into a new brand called Eagle (AMC had been selling a model called the Eagle for years, basically all it was selling in the end, beside Jeeps). This brand's first new car was the Eagle Vision, showcasing the new 'cab forward' design. The Vision may have started as a project under Renault, trying to make a big car for the North American market, unless I'm getting confused with the Renault Premiere, or some such car Renault developed. In any case, the Eagle Vision was soon badge engineered as a Chrysler Concorde and Dodge Intrepid. The platform was also used for the gorgeous Chrysler New Yorker/LHS or the period, as well as the 300M. But I digress. The Eagle brand didn't develop much further. Aside from the Vision, the rest of the line up consisted of rebadged Mitsubishis for North America. If I'm not mistaken, underneath the Eagle Talon was a GTO. Eagle was soon killed off. In my opinion, Chrysler and Mitsubishi had a good partnership, with good synergy. Unfortunately, it was disbanded following the divorce from Daimler.
Second thing: Chrysler was never a sports car brand, which is not to say they didn't have any fast cars. Their 300 'Letter series', from 1955 to '65, is considered by many to be the very first muscle car. More recently, the 300C, the one based on an old E-Class, had the SRT-8 treatment.
P.S.: Third thing, remembering as I'm typing; I believe it was after the introduction of the Crossfire that Chrysler presented the ME 4.12 concept car, standing for Mid-Engine 4 turbos, 12 cylinder. It was developed by Chrysler in record time, using an AMG engine. I seem to remember the chassis had something to do with Pagani. Either way it made the slow gestating Mercedes-McLaren SLR look bad.
Yeah, I remember there was an Eagle version of the Mitsubishi Eclipse. I'd forgotten about that. Thanks for the info Mike. I'd like to do a video about Eagle at some point.
@@LittleCar I look forward to it.
You are right. The Talon wasn't a version of the GTO, but indeed the Eclipse.
After my comment, I had to refresh my memory. By contract, after acquiring AMC, Chrysler had to keep making and selling cars, as a kind of back door access for Renault to the US market. Before the Eagle Premiere, based on the the Renault 25, was the Eagle Alliance, and in between , I just discovered, the Eagle Medallion, based on the Renault 21.
Never watched an ‘optional extra’, I will do in. The future.
Good man!
Having been through a few mergers/acquistions myself, the problems often start because the "junior" management team believe what the shareholders have been told and have expectations which are too high. When those things don't happen, they become disillusioned and uncooperative, or are fired/resign. Then a new management team is brought in, that is unfamiliar with the business and don't have a clue how anything works. The result is chaos for a few years, which some don't survive.
Here in Australia the Dodge Neon was sold as the Chrysler Neon
I was impressed the one and only time I was behind a Crossfire on a motorway. It seemed it could shift and as a hardtop it looked good.
Interesting you note an S class might be weakened by having an A class. I think of those retail fronts on Regent Street. Surely they can't be profitable but they are a token front making their brand as a whole desirable. People will buy an A because the S is so good. Starting to branch out on your side clips love them
Loved these cars. It was a toss up last year between a crossfire and a jimny as a second/toy for myself. I went for the jimny. See if I can convince the wife......
Fun content. No way the big Nashes, such as the Airflyte were based on an Austin platform. They're humongous. I think even the Rambler line was too big for an Austin Platform. However, the demure Nash Metropolitan was tiny; so perhaps that's where the rumors started... or perhaps they're true. The Playmates' "Beep Beep," 1958.
According to other posts the Metropolitan was based on the Austin A40.
Celine Dion also drove a Crossfire in the video for "Goodbye's (The Saddest Word)" released in 2002. It gets quite a lot of screen time too.
That's some encyclopedic knowledge Sam!
at that time Celine was in many commercials for Chrysler Canada, having a crossfire in a music video was probably product placement
Read the book "Taken for a ride" many years ago, fascinating story about the Daimler Chrysler merger.
There was of course a Nash Healey in the early 50s with a Nash engine, and a Nash Metropolitan in the late 50s built by Austin with a B series engine. The Healey body first came from Warwick and later from Turin.
Yeah, Healey would be a good marque to look into at some point.
One Corporation you forgot to mention in recent years is Mercedes and Infiniti (Q30, QX30) and Renault (Diesel engines)
Interesting video - thank you. The Airflite concept reminds me a lot of the concept cars and rendering produced by MG Rover just before they went bankrupt - especially the TCV. The deco look is certainly bold, but in both examples not exactly subtle, or elegant!
It's generally recognized that Daimler insisted on Chrysler reducing the quality of its parts and thereby increasing profit margins; however, this is seen as a major reason why Chrysler had problems, as the cheaper parts are thought to have created a number of new problems, which eventually significantly damaged the brand. Have you heard that, and how accurate is it?
Good info I’ve always loved the Crossfire, way more character than the 350Z and RX8 combined. To me a car is a car is a car. I own a PT Cruiser going on 13 years that I bought used with high mileage and I have a Nissan Versa that I bought used as well. The Nissan is more reliable and a little better on gas but the Chrysler PT looks a lot cooler and I can pull a trailer with it. The PT Cruiser was ahead of its time, look on the road now and you see a lot of crossover utility vehicles, not a minivan and not just a car. Probably Lee Iacocca took Chrysler to its last success, decent cars, very well priced, innovative ideas.
The Nash Metropolitan I believe was based on the Austin A40.
Nice one!
If you own a Mercedes or a BMW you don't want a Stellantis car. You're prepared to pay a considerable sum to not have to drive a front-wheel drive, mass market box.
I’m not sure you can get more “mass market box” than a front-wheel drive “premium” crossover such as the (rather excellent) BMW X1 which sells in incredible global numbers. Don’t confuse “expensive” or “premium” with low volumes or exclusivity - that idea went out the window 15years ago when the 3 series started outselling the Ford Mondeo and Aston shifting more DB9s than Ford did Mondeo ST’s.
I my family a good number of Chrysler cars past by, they where always good cars. Did you not forgot Opel ?
Have you thought about making a podcast? Your voice is fantastic and it could be something cool to listen to while driving. At least uploading the voice files of the video to podcasts platforms maybe?
I've thought of releasing my "Big Car" videos as podcasts, but I would need to look for different sponsorship opportunities to support it, and that's a major hassle to deal with. If someone else dealt with that I might consider it.
Beep-Beepwas a song about a Nash Metropolitan, NOT a Nash Rambler. The Nash Rambler was an American design, not an Austin chassis. The Metropolitan, however, was powered by an Austin B-series engine and was manufactured by Austin at Longbridge. I'm not 100% sure if the platform was an Austin chassis, or if it was a Nash design and just assembled there. Either way, I believe that the Metroplotan is the car you were thinking of when someone said to you that the Rambler was an Austin chassis......
The song itself begs to differ: ruclips.net/video/ayTJtVzHOLs/видео.html
I grew up listening to that song on a “45” just like pictured in this video. Brings back memories. I didn’t fully get the joke since the soy was before my time. It was maybe my Aunt’s music collection she left at my grandparents house. So the “little Nash Rambler” as referenced in the song was not something I could envision. But I’d seen plenty of 70’s Cadillacs. And I knew there was a size and power discrepancy. So I sorta got the joke.
But yeah “Rambler” is what they sang.
The "new" dodge charger and challenger were based on Merc e class chassis. The success of these two cars can be tied directly to the quality of the Mercedes base!
Interesting - I wasn't aware of that.
Might be better than the “real” video :-)
Consider it the "dessert" after the main course.
Of course it’s now Peugeot’s second time with Chrysler, albeit the first time was just a purchase of the European division. But to buy it twice
Yeah - I completely forgot about that!
@@LittleCar when I told the Chrysler psa story in a nutshell to a friend it sounded even weirder than it is lol
what could Daimler possibly have to gain from merging with Chrysler? I never understood that. I definitely saw the Chrysler benefit
I liked the crossfire.
I didn't know PSA bought Fiat Chrysler in 2021, but it was just a matter of time before some merger happened. Ironically, one of the original plans/speculations was that they were going to partner with Renault, which is what happened to American Motors Corporation (who bought jeep), and which Chrysler subsequently bought both of the above from Renault.
I thought my car videos wouldn't date much, as they're looking at history, but some of them are already out of date because they don't reference the Stellantis merger (like the video on Vauxhall)!
I'd like to do a video about Eagle (the AMC / Renault thing). I don't think it's well known in Europe.
Great video as usual!!! Since you mentioned the A Class/S Class and their effects on the brand. I'd love to see your take on the Maybach 57/62 debacle. I know the hot take is calling them a "glorified S class" but I personally think they are stunning two tone landyatchs (in the flesh, photos don't do them justice).
Cheers,
Funny, I touch on that car in my next video. I wasn't really aware of Maybach until then, and yes it would be interesting to look at Mercedes attempt at taking on Bentley (owned by VW) & Rolls (owned by BMW). Another three-way German battle royale, and Mercedes seems to be losing!
The Airflite itself was not produced, but it's styling was adapted, poorly, in the 2007 Chrysler Sebring.
what's crazy to me is that the behemoth that is stellantis is only the 6th largest car company in the world behind VW, Toyota, Renault/Nissan/Mitsubishi, GM and the Hyundai group
As a side note, the Mercedes-Mitsubishi “cooperation” did end up seeing Daimler took over Mitsubishi Fuso (truck division), and allow Mitsubishi trucks to use technologies from Mercedes trucks.
Was surprised to learn about platform sharing between Mercedes and Chrysler despite the separate ways. But I wonder with the FCA, and now Stellantis, where the platform sharing act would go.
Stellantis, given its core business in Europe with PSA (Citroen, DS, Opel/Vauxhall, Peugeot), they are in lack of D-segment or above platform. Maserati could be a great starting point for large car platform, and it’s worthwhile to push Alfa Romeo and/or Lancia (if the latter still exists as a property functioning brand) upmarket, and be a competitor in the entry-level luxury market (which Alfa had done with Giulia).
The hammer, however, might have fallen on Chrysler side of the business. Challenger and Charger do feel old-fashioned (maybe it’s ok in North American market), and Jeep as well as RAM are doing pretty well in SUV and truck market in, again, North America. Dwindling sales of “minivans” as Pacifica leaves fairly limited room for Chrysler to survive. What else could be done?
Thanks again for the video, Andy! Enjoying them through and through!
Thanks Jason - I wasn't aware of that. Glad you're enjoying the videos!
There is something no one (so far) seems to comment on... The excessive use of the term SYNERGY in all mergers and acquisitions in the last few decades and the few companies that ultimately acquire proper use of it.
There should be a MEME about such with the cartoon character named SYNERGY (a human-based AI holographic emitting computer, also quite the hacker herself, from the cartoon "Jem and The Holograms" of the mid '80s). Think about "her" (acts on her own so much that can be classified as a "her" and not an "it") with a "comic book style thought cloud" on her feet talking to us: if I had a DOLLAR for every time companies "in the other side of the screen" had "mentioned me in vain" I'd be a MILLIONAIRE, just think about that.
It's one of those phrases like "mission statement" that seemed like a good concept but got overused and bastardised into just a buzz word. Synergy in itself is a good concept, but it has now lost all meaning.
The Misfire wasn’t too bad but those few inches it lost I think did change the profile in a negative way. They would have given some additional boot space that may have allowed this afternoon driver to actually be a weekend getaway car.
I bumped into a roadster today after our walk. Yeah, that car in the flesh is TINY!
Nash Metropolitin was the one that is Austin based, pretty much built in England & shipped to the US, or in the case of Australia, just built here & sold as a Nash/Kelvinator Metropolitan, It's based, pretty loosely, on the A40.
Thanks - glad to get to the bottom of that!
Very interesting and informative videos! What was the best year for the Daimler Chrysler Crossfire convertible? Thanks.
The best year was the one it was axed in! “Scuttle shake” in the convertible version (due to insufficient chassis stiffening combined with the Crossfires very hard ride) made the car, for my taste, almost unbearable to drive. I found this odd because the SLK convertible from which the Crossfire was developed didn’t seem to have such a big problem. By contrast, I quite enjoyed the Crossfire coupe. Ex Merc employee here
It Makes Sence that more Car Companys share Many Platforms
All can Be Differnt?
I never realized that Chrysler in 90's was in a extremely well. I always thought they were the type of company that goes from one crisis to the next. I would put my view down to it being a distant third of the big American car brands and that it never ingrained its self in Britain they same way Ford and GM did.
I would really like to see a video on the other major car to come out of the ill fated merger. The Chrysler 300C.
The 300 looks cool. Maybe in the future.
Chrysler is very cat like. They have 9 lives, and have used up most of them. They do have a history of jumping from one crisis to another, often amazing people that they pulled it off and survived to keep going.
Make a "Solitaire" video please!
That's all I know about it!
In Germany the "merger of equals" was called the "Hochzeit im Himmel" (marriage in heaven).
Not The Axis, then?
BMW and Daimler will do just fine. As the income of people in poorer countries continues to rise there will and is a growing market for luxury brands. BMW and Daimler sales are through the roof in East Asia, the Middle-East and Africa. And, as of a few weeks ago, Daimler has changed its name to Mercedes-Benz Group.
😀 I found the name change out recently, and it makes an appearance in my next video.
Could you advise whom pronounces Daimler as Dime-ler. Is it a USA form or Germanic in origin.
Not sure. It's how I say it and with my UK / US influences I don't know where I got it from. There's going to be a whole lot more in the next video as well!
10:17: You say BMW got the Mini and Rolls Royce out of the Rover deal but didn't you mean Mini and Land Rover? The Rolls Royce deal was quite separate, wasn't it?
I meant MINI and Rolls Royce, but yes they were of course from separate deals. This is why I write a script!
@@LittleCar Ah, okay - thanks for clarifying.
So what did the Rolls Royce deal have to do with Rover? 🤔
BMW didn't just get Mini from Rover. They also got 4x4 technology from Land Rover.
Yeah, there was that.
What happened with the commercial and truck side of things within this merger?
The heavy truck side stayed pretty much on its own. One of the Mercedes vans was rebadged as a Dodge.
@@LittleCar - the Sprinter large van was also sold as a Freightliner (commercial / heavy truck brand Daimler still owns) until very recently. The Dodge / Ram version was replaced by the Ram Pro Master, a version of the Fiat Ducato.
So what about the Mercedes Citan and the Renault Kangoo? It seems weird a luxury brand like Daimler work with Renault. Is that just out of convenience to build a van and what else is Daimler using from Renault in their cars?
Renault's small Diesel engines can be found on the A- and B-Class, CLA, GLA and GLB. Also the X-Class pickup truck was co-developed with the Nissan Navara and Renault Alaskan.
And of course the Smart and the current Twingo are closely related.
@@JK061996 - the Smart ForFour and the 2nd generation Renault Twingo were developed jointly... (both 4-door and rear-engined, something not seen on a Renault since the '60s, IIRC)
The truck manufacturer and the luxury car maker are now separated. Daimler means trucks and Mercedes continues as the luxury brand. Little Mercedes may have Nissan/Renault engine under hood but the engine will have a Mercedes type plate attached. The current Citan or t class is a safer car than Kangoo and looks very different.
Nash Metropolitan, was based on the Austin.
🚗🙂
Well Chrysler cprporation did some interesting cars in the 00's but you can't call them exciting or solid. I remember seeing Dodge Caliber when it was launched - some interesting design festures but cheap materials and average fit'n'finish for the car that expensive (in Russia at least). That's why people in our country prefered Ford or Chevy over Chrysler and Dodge.
I've always found the interiors or Chrysler or GM cars to feel cheap. The Crossfire looked a bit better though.