Chrysler ponders PT Cruiser Version 2.0

[robinjoe]

Here is an intersting article from Money Magazine:
http://money.cnn.com/2006/06/20/Autos/pt_cruiser/

[bobs turbo pt]

a v 6 would be nice along with a 5 speed !!

[pt_tom]

My take would be similar to Zatz, DC already has a good idea what they're planning, but keeping eveyone guessing. [:I]

Don't want to the excitement to peak too early!

[quicksilverdon]

I don't see why they couldn't open the engine bay in a redesign and make a V-6 optional, but keep 4s and turbo 4s in the lineup. Other cars do.
Broaden the appeal.[:I]

[strangelove]

If Chrysler bases the PT on a 300M platform or takes styling cues from the Caliber you can kiss the heart of the PT goodbye. Sure it's nice to think more HP in a V6 would be nice, but look at the demographic of who buys PT's. The size, styling, power range is perfect, that's what makes the PT the perfect crossover vehicle that it is. It's compact enough for city driving, yet big enough to act like a pint size SUV. Change those characteristics and DC is cruizing for a bruizing. Sorry, but a bigger more gas guzzling version of a PT Cruiser is something that I would pass on.

[robinjoe]

What's the appeal of a V-6 when the Turbo PT has 230 HP? Granted they *may* give you another 20-30 HP, but isn't that overkill for a PT? Unless you're racing, of course.

Some V6s aren't even as powerful as the turbo 4. Like:
Pontiac G6 3.5L V6 (201 HP @ 5600 RPM)
Chevrolet Uplander Cargo Minivan 3.5L V6 (201 hp @ 5600 rpm)
Mercedes 3.0L V6 (228 HP @ 6000 RPM)
Ford Explorer 4.0L V6 (210 hp @ 5100 rpm)
Jeep Grand Cherokee 3.7L 6cyl (210 hp @ 5200 rpm)
Mazda 6 3.0L V6 (215 HP @6000 RPM)
Audi A4 3.0L V6 (220 HP @ 6300 RPM)
BMW 3-Series 3.0L V6 (220 HP @ 6300 RPM)
Jaguar S-Type 3.0L V6 (235 HP @ 6800 RPM -
but torque is only 216 ft-lb)
Porsche Boxter 2.7L V6 (240 HP @ 6400 RPM -
but torque is only 199 ft-lb)
Ford F-150 4.6L V8 (231 HP @ 4750 RPM)
sure it has 1 more HP, but thats a V8

I guess the appeal is attracting customers who are looking for a "V6".

Joe

(data from edmunds.com)

quote:Originally posted by quicksilverdon

I don't see why they couldn't open the engine bay in a redesign and make a V-6 optional, but keep 4s and turbo 4s in the lineup. Other cars do.
Broaden the appeal.[:I]

[scottscars]

Funny.. I thought that GM is trying that path with "their" PT rip-off and it still not out selling the PT, and as mush as we would like to think they care about what "WE" want... Sales and the bottom line is! I don't have a answer..

[strangelove]

GM's is a total rip off of the PT, and the problem the HHR has is bad fuel economy and less cargo space. Yet again GM and DC are missing the mark with their crossovers. For the American market the old, "Bigger is Better" attitude keeps vehicles from actually being better and the German habit of creating more deisel engines for their fuel efficiency standards. Both are flawed paths if you ask me. Sure car enthusiasts would love a beefier V6 in a PT, but like Robinjoe mentioned earlier that's why you would pick a PT GT, a four cylider vehicle that has more HP than many V6 vehicles on the road.

What they need to start doing is stop messing with the asthetics of the PT and start improving the the engineering and performance of the PT. Keep the size and form factor the same yet increase fuel effeciency. Add all wheel drive, add a hybrid to the lineup. Let the Caliber be the bigger beefier car and keep the PT the size it is. A good example of this is the VW Bettle which stayed in production for many many years. Engine modifications and driving characteristics improved while the exterior basically stayed the same. The styling of the PT is iconic and needs no improvement. A V6 engine is not needed since DC would need to redesign the engine compartment to accomodate the bigger engine, which would mean that the exterior would need to change, the whole vehicle would need to be bigger and who wants that. A bigger PT with a V6 would probably not increase the power to weight ratio that much anyways.

If you ask me DC is on pace to ruin the PT to make room for its more "Luxery" models like their Pacifica and 300M to condition consumers up to their Mercedes line. Personally I think the PT should be moved to the Dodge line so that it can exist in an appropriate demographic and DC can stop screwing up a good thing. How does a Dodge PT Cruiser sound to y'all. Then I think the PT could get the R&D that SRT has been churning out.

[robinjoe]

For those who may not know,
The PT Cruiser GT has 230 hp @5100 RPM,
and 245 ft-lb of torque at only 2800 RPM

The Porsche Boxter 2.7L V6
has to rev to 6400 RPM before it gets 240 HP and
it has to go to 4700 RPM to get 199 ft-lb of torque

The PT GT has tremendous power at low RPM

BTW, the Porsche costs about twice as much.

[andym]

One change to the PT styling that I would like to see.... change the rear doors to suicide doors. I also agree with "Strangelove" especially with regards to improving overall quality, reliability, safety, and so on.

I have always felt like the PT was more akin to a Dodge than a Chrysler. Maybe therein lies the key to the PT future: split it off and offer a Chrysler PT that has a luxury flavor (with performance options), and have a Dodge PT that has more of a Performance and Utility flavor (with luxury options).

Other thoughts: a 2 door coupe model (wouldn't a rumble seat be cool); a "grande touring" model with a trunk that extends a foot or so out past the rear window; and a pickup.