"Stage Turbo Forums" Killed by Mopar

[hyracer]

In an effort to kill the popularity of the PT Cruiser and keep the "cute" little grocery getter from getting a reputation as a "Muscle Car" Mopar dropped production of Stage II.

When Chrysler was asked why they would risk losing a segment of their loyal customer base it was whispered that they could "make much more money by selling $35,000 Hemi powered vehicles than selling a $1,000 Stage kit." "Why would anyone want to stand in line and buy our new muscled line-up when they could get their doors blown off by a Stage 2 or Stage 3 Turboed Cruiser"? "We have spent millions in advertising on how many positions the seats will fold and how cool the Crusier looks as it drives buy, not on it's power potential. Those are the customers we want to reach. Our customer base are the little old ladies who want to be able to carry an extra bag or two of groceries and are afraid to drive a large SUV."

Even the internet Cruiser sites are now being affected. Where once many a question was asked on power potential, anticipation of Stage 1 and 2 arrival, answers from a Mopar engineer named 3BarBoost, new Crusier owners boasting of Mopar/Chrysler loyalty, now only tired repetitive questions are being asked. Questons like "will Stage 1 kill my warranty" or "I just got through spending $23,000 on a GT, got a Stage 1 kit, spent another $2,000 on mods and want to know if I can run on regular fuel since I'm so cheap". Long gone are the original belivers in the potential of the PT Cruiser, some banned to other sites, some selling their beloved Cruisers as Chrysler dropped it's loyalty base.
"We're getting the job done" a high-up insider recently said. "The Stage forums have been reduced to Noobies asking the same old tired questions and customers are now standing in line to plunk down $35,000 on Hemis. We think we will be able to kill off the PT completely when we get to restyle it sometime in the 2006 to 2008 model, just like when we kill the SRT4 next year. We don't want our customer base to get excited about high tech turboed cars when we can sell them old fashioned low-tech V-8's that get 17 MPG with a high profit margin."

Deen

[Culprat]

Interesting,take on why the power has been cut off.

[Mean Green]

Chrysler will get theirs for producing gas guzzling V8's because the price of gas is continually going up. SUV sales are already suffering because of it and Chrysler's timing, as usual, is bad. They can't bring back the day of high powered V8's to the masses. Nostalga is one thing, being practical is another. Other manufacturers must be laughing. They are producing 4&6 cylinder high powered cars that get better gas mileage than the V8's. Chrysler is going to take it in the shorts for their short sighted visions.

[2step]

They are intrested enough to check out the forums but seem to be just doing it to try and find reasons to back up what they have already made up their minds to do. So typical of the little minds in big business.

Well they're a bit late because we have already figured out how to go beyond what stage 2 or Stage 3 would have done anyway. The performance car industry is alive and well and living in America. "Viva la Cruiser!" [?]

[Cal Cruzer]

Many people like my self keep our cars for a long time. While the fear of loosing some warranty coverage will deter us for a while, it won't get me back into the dealership sooner and it certainly won't foster any loyalty to the brand. If they want to sell me something, they need to offer me something for my PT. As my car gets older with more miles the warranty issue goes away too. I am not going to buy a gas guzzler in these days of rising gas prices. I can only imaging what the price will be in a few years when I might be back in the market for another car.

[quicksilverdon]

quote:Originally posted by Mean Green

Chrysler will get theirs for producing gas guzzling V8's because the price of gas is continually going up. SUV sales are already suffering because of it and Chrysler's timing, as usual, is bad. They can't bring back the day of high powered V8's to the masses. Nostalga is one thing, being practical is another. Other manufacturers must be laughing. They are producing 4&6 cylinder high powered cars that get better gas mileage than the V8's. Chrysler is going to take it in the shorts for their short sighted visions.

You are absolutely right. I went thru the 2 "gas crises", and never forgot them. I have only had 4-cyl cars except for wife's van with a V-6, and I haven't felt my manhood threatened...

[SteelBlueGT]

I was jazzed enough to lease mine for 5 years and I am jazzed enough to keep it for a while, but eventually we all look at new again. If I don't want a big V8 then I guess I will look elsewhere if I dont want the Neon which I think is for kids!![8)]

[MichaelDay]

While some are hemi bashing take a look at the EPA comparison:
PT Turbo
19 City
25 Highway
21 combined
$1599 per year fuel cost @ $2.24/gallon (premium)- their default
$1921 per year fuel cost @ $2.69/gallon (premium)
Hemi 300C AWD
17 City
24 Highway
20 combined
$1545 per year fuel cost @ $2.06/gallon (regular)- their default
$1868 per year fuel cost @ $2.49/gallon (regular)

The hemi is bigger, faster and according to the EPA should be cheaper to buy fuel for on an annual basis. Not knocking my great little PT-GT but I have to admit that the fuel mileage isn't very good for the power it turns out. Incidentally, I doubt that the Hemi 300 C would actually get the EPA rated mpg because 17.1 mpg is the average on my PT-GT over the past 30,000 miles.

[SuGamer]

Those numbers are false, unless you drive like a 90 year old greatgrandmother. I know someone who brought a 300C and he fills up more than I do, and my GT is no gas miser! The 300C's hemi is more powerful for sure, but the car is heavier too. Plus, you can't just mod it out and squeeze a good amount of more horses. Both have their pros and cons, but I saw a couple 300 stuck in the snow this winter, while I had no problem what so ever with Junior. Don't get me wrong, I really like the 300 too, but DC pisses me off as it seems to be abandoning PT and SRT-4 owners in favor of big, older tech, RWD V8's.

[MichaelDay]

You will notice that a number of auto makers are going to RWD again. Traction can be better with a FWD car since the weight is on the driving wheels but FWD cars typically don't handle as well as a RWD car.

No question that most folks don't get the EPA posted mileage. That's why I commented that my avg mpg is about 3 less than EPA claims for the PT-GT. They don't claim that the 300 will get as good mileage but the cheaper gasoline makes the difference in cost.