Consultant: GM merger would eliminate most Chrysler vehicles

Not news at all. Diesel was up to $5 and thats what your story was based on. Currently its down to $2.50 here, less than it was a year ago.

well there's seems to be a lot of dodge and ford diesel trucks down here in fla......towing mowing and landscaping equipment everywhere

But the prime market -- contractors and the like -- are out of work and many are going bankrupt.

Everyone buys things because of their needs which in turn are based on wants. I tow a trailer 1 or 2 weekends a month. The other weeks its hauling family around. The Durango fits our needs and wants perfectly. Not many other vehicles would.

Bull. It seats 7 quite comfortably. The newer models seat 8 but I have never been in one to see how they increased the room.

The Armada was far more expensive in the year we bought our Durango. I wouldn't have bought it anyways. The Aramada lacks a solid rear axle that I feel is a necessity for highway towing. The Durangos frame and suspension is far better suited for the task. Also, the Hemi Durango will flat out run away from the Armada towing the same load at highway speeds.

Far more money than a Durango and again, the Hemi Durango out performs the Sequoia with ease.

In 2004 I paid $24,000 for a new Durango SLT Hemi 4x4 with tow package. Try to find anything that can do what it can for anywheres close.

Not really. That market remains quite solid- even in the Great Depression work vehicles continued to sell. Luxury items take the bigger hit- especially when those luxury items burn lots of gasoline. Even though diesel fuel is more expensive than gasoline right now, the prices will re-align and diesels are inherently more efficient especially at heavy loading.

I had the Pathfinder and the X-terrible reversed in my brain last week. The Pathfinder is the one that's as big as a Suburban now. But I'm sticking to my theory- IF there were a Nissan/Chrysler alliance, Nissan should dump their whole truck line.

You call 20 city MPG on a 7 to 8 passenger or 3/4 ton cargo vehicle "don't do much?" And The Durango is quite a new platform, only about 3 years old. FAR less "truckish" than the Escalade and Yukon, which are still C/K pickups underneath.

None of which changes the point that its a crossover...

Neither does Infiniti. It was invented out of whole cloth in the late

80s to combat Lexus, which it failed to do completely. Of the three so-called "Premium" Japanese brands, Infiniti is the biggest joke.

Yes he does. LOTS of people need what you don't need. Get over yourself.

Because its a piece of mechanical excrement.

As an owner of a Chrysler-built Jeep, I can tell you that you're dead wrong. They drastically IMPROVED Jeep.

I will grant you that the Patriot and Compass are abominations that should NEVER have gotten the Jeep brand at all, and the Liberty is an inferior offroad vehicle to the Cherokee it replaced but is rather better on-road, and the rest of the line is better than ever.

Actually you can now. A friend is taking delivery of a 3.5HO version for his wife next month.

Lloyd, the article MAKES my point. In a retreating market, the Dodge/Cummins diesel will be the strongest survivor BECAUSE it has

80-90% market penetration and a solid reputation as the article says, the Duramax will be the first to die followed closely by the Navistar. Ford should have left the Navistar/Powerstroke at 7.2 Liters when it was almost as bulletproof as the Cummins instead of trying to shrink it and compensate with a complicated dual turbo system. Cummins even enlarged the ISB engine so that they could run it cleaner without losing power or economy, Ford went the other way and screwed up badly. Duramax never had a chance.

Actually the Armada is faster than the hemi Durango, as is the Sequoia with the 5.7 L V8.

Yes really. Look at the sales data -- not only are pickup sales down, but diesel sales as a % of pickup sales are down.

And yes, contractors are going out of business. Look at the bankruptcies, often by developers and the like these days.

No, it's Grand Cherokee size -- 192 in long. Again, you're thinking of the Armada.

If it were real. And hybrids only get better mileage in the city, not on the highway. And if you do a lot of acceleration, you exhaust the batteries and then no improvement in the city either (and you're hauling around the weight of the batteries).

No, the GM models are newer.

"General Motors replaced the Tahoe and Yukon on the new GMT900 platform in late 2005 as a 2007."

It doesn't even offer awd in most models!

Disagree. Lately, with the M winning all kinds of awards, and the G a legit BMW 3-series competitor, Infiniti has bragging rights.

The Chrysler name has been brought down by too many low-end models in the past 30 years.

Which diesel pickup sells most?

No, the Armada is Excursion sized. I don't care what the wheelbase of the Pathfinder is, the truck is physically bigger than a first-gen Durango. My neighbors own two Pathfinders, one from the previous generation- Grand Cherokee sized, and one of the current generation. OK, maybe its not Suburban sized, but its at least as big as a Commander.

Exactly. The Chrysler/GM/BMW hybrid SUV drivetrain gives you good on-highway trailer towing/load hauling ability, and still gives you 20 mpg for your daily commute.

Yeah, right. Look UNDER one. GM does a lot of "platform changes" that don't amount to much. The Durango/Aspen shares no suspension parts with any other Dodge truck, especially in the critical rear suspension. Its completely divorced from the Dakota now. And you're always railing against the alleged horrors of leaf springs... well, the Durango doesn't have 'em anymore.

Ford is my guess, counting all the fleet sales they do. What I can tell you for sure is that Duramax sells the LEAST, and we're talking about why GM (who is currently stuck with the Duramax) would WANT to keep Dodge around. One reason: To get the Cummins, a new advanced truck platform, and finally beat Ford.

If you primarily drive on the pavement or plowed roads perhaps. Compass, Patriot, Liberty are worthless. The Commander is better but still better suited for pavement.

The Cherokee years ago was 4x4 of the year by many votes for its off roading abilities. Todays Grand version is a far cry from those years.

The Wrangler and Rubicon can be made into decent rock crawlers if you're willing to put the money into them. Prior to Chrysler one could buy a stock Jeep and take it off road without killing it. Suspensions, Engines, Trannies, drive train and so on were heavy built. Not cheap light weight crap of today.

No comparison to the old CJ's vs. the new Wranglers. My favorite rock crawler of yesteryear was the Toyota Land Cruiser. One tough 4x4.