|
Fabbrica Italiana Automobili Torino 
|
| # ? Nov 25, 2010 05:16 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2013 02:52 |
|
|
The Moon Babies posted:I figured you wouldn't assume that I thought FIAT actually stood for that but oh well, lolol. Was FIAT ever in the states before? I mean, how would it have gained a reputation if it wasn't? Yeah, I realize you didn't think they would actually name their company "Fix It Again Tony".  And yes, FIAT was here until at least the early 80s. They brought us the much vaunted Fiat/Bertone X/I9. Come to think of it, that's probably the model that got people to come up with the phrase...
|
| # ? Nov 25, 2010 05:17 |
|
|
I can't imagine Chrysler is making much money on these things, either. I'm sure they'd rather sell optioned-out Rams and 300s...
|
| # ? Nov 29, 2010 15:10 |
|
|
rear end in a top hat Bicycle posted:I can't imagine Chrysler is making much money on these things, either. I'm sure they'd rather sell optioned-out Rams and 300s... Yeah, you see how far that got them.  I think the premium compact's time has come. They can still mark it up with options (seriously, look at the price on some of them) and I think the Smart and the Mini have opened a lot of people's eyes to the possibility of small, efficient and genuinely nice cars. Well, maybe not the Smart as much. I like to think of the 500 as a less-useless Smart.
|
| # ? Nov 29, 2010 15:32 |
|
|
VideoTapir posted:So they aren't going to continue screwing people? Come on, they're still dealers. Is relative.
|
| # ? Nov 29, 2010 15:45 |
|
|
rear end in a top hat Bicycle posted:I can't imagine Chrysler is making much money on these things, either. I'm sure they'd rather sell optioned-out Rams and 300s... Per Chrysler, dealers are supposed to expect to clear a $1500 average margin on each vehicle. That's not too bad. At target sales of 50k, that's about 280-300 vehicles per dealer per year for a decent profit. Then add in service lane revenue and they should be pretty set - provided Fiat meets target sales. I don't think it's unrealistic - the MINI moves about 42K units, and most subcompacts are moving about that range as well. KYOON GRIFFEY JR fucked around with this message at Nov 29, 2010 around 15:49 |
| # ? Nov 29, 2010 15:46 |
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Per Chrysler, dealers are supposed to expect to clear a $1500 average margin on each vehicle. That's not too bad. At target sales of 50k, that's about 280-300 vehicles per dealer per year for a decent profit. Then add in service lane revenue and they should be pretty set - provided Fiat meets target sales. I don't think it's unrealistic - the MINI moves about 42K units, and most subcompacts are moving about that range as well. And this comes in below the Mini in price, which ought to attract a lot of potential buyers.
|
| # ? Nov 29, 2010 15:53 |
|
|
Why do people insist that the MINI is some kind of runaway success in North America? It's a very niche vehicle.   There isn't a single subcompact in the top 20.   Compared to large SUVs, subcompacts generally don't sell particularly well, especially not the MINI. IIRC GM's large SUVs are supply constrained this year, all their SUV plants are running at max capacity and they can't build enough trucks to meet demand. With wealth in the US increasingly being concentrated in the hands of boomers and older people who prefer SUVs, while unemployment is concentrated amongst the young, the trend does not suggest a bright future for subcompacts in the US. Throatwarbler fucked around with this message at Nov 29, 2010 around 16:35 |
| # ? Nov 29, 2010 16:27 |
|
|
Moving 4K Minis a month isn't bad movement.
|
| # ? Nov 29, 2010 16:34 |
|
|
The reason that people mention the Mini is that it's the closest approximate target for the Fiat in terms of image, size, price and sales targets. I don't see anyone insisting that the Mini is a runaway success. It's successful in terms of how Fiat is defining success for the 500 - approximately 50k units per year.
|
| # ? Nov 29, 2010 16:57 |
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Why do people insist that the MINI is some kind of runaway success in North America? It's a very niche vehicle. Because success of a car brand is measured against sales projections, not against random things like F-150 sales. Seriously, you have to suffer from some blunt force trauma to the head to look at a top 20 vehicles sold chart and say "no subcompacts, hmm they're all poo poo good sirs". BMW made a good amount of money on MINIs for a while, they don't move as many as Ford does with F-150 but the profit margins are much higher.
|
| # ? Nov 29, 2010 16:59 |
|
|
Autism Sundae posted:Because success of a car brand is measured against sales projections, not against random things like F-150 sales. Seriously, you have to suffer from some blunt force trauma to the head to look at a top 20 vehicles sold chart and say "no subcompacts, hmm they're all poo poo good sirs". BMW made a good amount of money on MINIs for a while, they don't move as many as Ford does with F-150 but the profit margins are much higher. BMW makes a profit on MINI because the vast majority of MINI sales are in Europe and Asia. 4,000 ~$25k cars per months is nothing compared to 3,000 $60k X5s. Also, do you have any idea about the profit margins on the F-series trucks? Historically American BOF trucks and SUVs are the most profitable vehicles made by anyone in the world. This is recognized even by non-automotive publications. The claim that MINI profit margins are anywhere close to F-150 margins is extraordinary and you will need to show some kind of extraordinary evidence.
|
| # ? Nov 29, 2010 17:09 |
|
|
Oh no this tiny car will not approach X5 or F150 margins, it must be a dismal failure.
|
| # ? Nov 29, 2010 17:37 |
|
|
You also have to account for the fact that the Mini is actually quite old by car-model standards now (nearly 10 years old).
|
| # ? Nov 29, 2010 18:37 |
|
|
el topo posted:You also have to account for the fact that the Mini is actually quite old by car-model standards now (nearly 10 years old).
|
| # ? Nov 29, 2010 21:26 |
|
|
You Am I posted:Huh? You know the Mini was updated a couple of years ago? No, apparently not. And neither do most potential Mini buyers.
|
| # ? Nov 30, 2010 05:45 |
|
|
I called FIAT telephone info line and talked to a lady who did confirm the Abarth is coming to the states in "late 2012" but she couldn't confirm which model it would be, the 135 HP, the 160 HP (SS), or the 190 HP (AC). Now comes the waiting...
|
| # ? Nov 30, 2010 22:17 |
|
|
Xarthor posted:I called FIAT telephone info line and talked to a lady who did confirm the Abarth is coming to the states in "late 2012" but she couldn't confirm which model it would be, the 135 HP, the 160 HP (SS), or the 190 HP (AC). That gives me enough time to save money, thanks.
|
| # ? Dec 7, 2010 23:14 |
|
|
At one point I heard we would be getting an Abarth that was more US-market specific using the 170HP 1.4 from the Alfa MiTo but that seemed more like idle speculation. If it was a MiTo with the MiTo interior styled like a 500 Abarth on the outside I would fuckin go wild.
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2010 20:10 |
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:At one point I heard we would be getting an Abarth that was more US-market specific using the 170HP 1.4 from the Alfa MiTo but that seemed more like idle speculation. If it was a MiTo with the MiTo interior styled like a 500 Abarth on the outside I would fuckin go wild. This is quite simply too awesome to ever happen 
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2010 21:49 |
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:This is quite simply too awesome to ever happen That's why I dismissed it out of hand. It would probably be pretty expensive, too.
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2010 21:53 |
|
|
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/12/21/...0-tw/#continued Cool video. Note that this is not the engine that will be on our shores.
|
| # ? Dec 22, 2010 02:52 |
|
|
toaster_pastry posted:http://www.autoblog.com/2010/12/21/...0-tw/#continued Did I miss something? Early in the video he says it's "almost as fast" as the four cylinder but by the end it's gotten faster than the four cylinder?  The mileage testing was kinda bunk too. Even when he was trying to hit the claimed 68 MPG he was still doing a lot of stop-start driving and acting like it should still hit the (admittedly highly idealized) number. Either way it's a neat engine and it's a shame we don't even have the option. It might be a little too slow for US roads, although it's about as fast as my 91 Tercel was and I could still make it work.
|
| # ? Dec 22, 2010 03:11 |
|
|
Detroit Q. Spider posted:Did I miss something? Early in the video he says it's "almost as fast" as the four cylinder but by the end it's gotten faster than the four cylinder? At 1:15, he says it's faster. Is there an earlier time where he counters that?
|
| # ? Dec 22, 2010 03:42 |
|
|
kimbo305 posted:At 1:15, he says it's faster. Is there an earlier time where he counters that? He says it's faster than the 1.2 L 4 cylinder, and almost as fast as the 1.4 L 4 cylinder.
|
| # ? Dec 22, 2010 04:01 |
|
|
MetaJew posted:He says it's faster than the 1.2 L 4 cylinder, and almost as fast as the 1.4 L 4 cylinder. Oh OK. drat Euros and their many engine options
|
| # ? Dec 22, 2010 04:12 |
|
|
There's a Fiat dealer opening close to my parent's house and I'm now on the list to test drive a 500 whenever the first demo car comes in, which is "sometime in January". If I like it I have just enough money to pay for one in full. They couldn't give me an idea on when you could actually buy one...
|
| # ? Dec 30, 2010 04:36 |
|
|
Is there any reason fiat won't be using the world engine four banger? In turbo form if gets well over 200hp.
|
| # ? Dec 30, 2010 21:11 |
|
|
Elephanthead posted:Is there any reason fiat won't be using the world engine four banger? In turbo form if gets well over 200hp.
|
| # ? Dec 31, 2010 00:43 |
|
|
Elephanthead posted:Is there any reason fiat won't be using the world engine four banger? In turbo form if gets well over 200hp. Why would they? The car was designed and released before the merger with Chrysler.
|
| # ? Dec 31, 2010 03:21 |
|
|
I'd have massive respect for them if they put the 1750 TBI engine in a 500, 230hp should be good for a few laughs, but I'm afraid that engine is Alfa-only, and the Giuletta QV is hella expensive...
|
| # ? Dec 31, 2010 11:00 |
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:I'd have massive respect for them if they put the 1750 TBI engine in a 500, 230hp should be good for a few laughs, but I'm afraid that engine is Alfa-only, and the Giuletta QV is hella expensive... It sounds ridiculous. http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evo...o_1750_tbi.html quote:Looks like the V6, sonorous as it is, might be on borrowed time as the motor industry's latest example of intelligent downsizing breaks cover. So what's the secret? And this Giuletta is putting out 230hp out of the 1.75l? I thought the 204hp 1.8t in the Mercedes E250 was impressive.
|
| # ? Dec 31, 2010 18:19 |
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:And this Giuletta is putting out 230hp out of the 1.75l? I thought the 204hp 1.8t in the Mercedes E250 was impressive. It does and they're working on a GTA model which should have around 300hp or so, possibly from the same engine.
|
| # ? Dec 31, 2010 19:55 |
|
|
If anything, a better comparison might be closer to the Ford Fiesta.
|
| # ? Dec 31, 2010 20:30 |
|
|
Jimmy Carter posted:If anything, a better comparison might be closer to the Ford Fiesta. You mean 500 vs Mini or 500 vs Fiesta? I think the issue is that lots of people bought the Mini for its looks, and I can see that for the 500. While the Fiesta looks great, I don't think it appeals in the same retro way. Is it confusing at all that Chrysler sells the Fiat 500 and a Chrysler 300? I imagine they'd want people to know Fiat was a Chrysler product (sort of) to blunt older people's memories of why Fiat left the US market.
|
| # ? Jan 1, 2011 07:14 |
|
|
kimbo305 posted:You mean 500 vs Mini or 500 vs Fiesta? I think the issue is that lots of people bought the Mini for its looks, and I can see that for the 500. While the Fiesta looks great, I don't think it appeals in the same retro way. On the other hand, there's lots of people who would be turned off by the car if they thought it was a Chrysler product. And I think that Fiat recognizes this, what with having seperate showrooms for the Fiats. Still, I'm really excited about this car, and I'm looking forward to about a year from now when their "ooh wow new toy" effect has worn off a bit and I can pick one up without a terrible mark up. The one I drove was so great, I can't think of another daily driver I'd rather have. Well, not one that's sold in the states.
|
| # ? Jan 1, 2011 09:11 |
|
|
kimbo305 posted:Is it confusing at all that Chrysler sells the Fiat 500 and a Chrysler 300? I imagine they'd want people to know Fiat was a Chrysler product (sort of) to blunt older people's memories of why Fiat left the US market. But old AND young people have memories of why Chrysler almost left the US market.
|
| # ? Jan 2, 2011 01:39 |
|
|
VideoTapir posted:But old AND young people have memories of why Chrysler almost left the US market. It's a pretty depressing marriage. Still pulling for it to work out.
|
| # ? Jan 2, 2011 02:00 |
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:But just after the power stroke is completed and the hot exhaust gases are being expelled, another little squirt of fuel combines with the remaining oxygen and causes the gases to expand further in the exhaust manifold. This, of course, drives the turbo with yet more energy. I wonder if this would result in a cooked turbo after a decent number of miles. It sounds very similar to traditional ALS that inject fuel directly into the exhaust before the turbo or fire the spark plug well after the piston has left TDC...which is great for keeping the turbo spooled, but no so much for longevity. Geoj fucked around with this message at Jan 2, 2011 around 07:57 |
| # ? Jan 2, 2011 07:54 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2013 02:52 |
|
|
Mr. Wiggles posted:Still, I'm really excited about this car, and I'm looking forward to about a year from now when their "ooh wow new toy" effect has worn off a bit and I can pick one up without a terrible mark up. The one I drove was so great, I can't think of another daily driver I'd rather have. Well, not one that's sold in the states. If the Mini and New Beetle were any indication, it'll take more than a year. I remember the Beetle being especially sought after for a few years and I think the Mini was as well. I really want a new 500 and i want the popularity to die down as quickly as possible, but having it take a few years will also help me build up enough cash to just buy it outright. Or maybe I can afford an Abarth when they bring it here.
|
| # ? Jan 2, 2011 14:36 |
|
