AutoNews: Chrysler, Nissan Ready To Share?

[megeebee]

Chrysler, Nissan: How about sharing?

Exchanging vehicles, technology could build powerful team


Lindsay Chappell
and Bradford Wernle

Automotive News | December 24, 2007 - 12:01 am EST


NASHVILLE — Chrysler and Nissan are talking, and it's easy to see why. Just consider the prospects for a product-, platform- and technology-sharing bonanza.

Chrysler needs small cars, and Nissan craves more truck market share. Each could help the other big-time if the two companies decide to cooperate.

What's more, each has ways to supply the other with crucial fuel-saving technology.

Chrysler and Nissan seem like natural partners, a potentially awesome twosome — except that Chrysler has a terrible track record when it comes to working with other automakers. Its tie-up with Daimler-Benz ended in failure this year, and two separate alliances with Mitsubishi never came close to realizing their potential.

Nissan, on the other hand, is pretty good at it.

The two companies are discussing ideas for working together and could reveal plans as early as mid-January, according to an industry source familiar with the talks.

"Every manufacturer has strengths and weaknesses," said the source. "This allows you to get into new segments at a much lower cost than you could by doing it on your own."

So far, Chrysler CEO Bob Nardelli and Nissan boss Carlos Ghosn haven't met up. But the motivations for both sides are obvious: one-ton pickups, commercial vans, heavy-duty vehicle components for Nissan; small, fuel-efficient cars for Chrysler. Alternative-fuel technology for both.

Still, Chrysler's history of cooperation is dismal.

[b]"Chrysler has been in bed with about everybody, and it has not had any healthy offspring," says Christoph Stuermer, an analyst at Global Insight in Frankfurt.[.B]

By contrast, the partnership of Renault and Nissan has worked like a charm. While still separate companies, the two share vehicle architecture and supply chains, and pick and choose from each other's technology.

All of those were equity tie-ups, though, and that's not what Chrysler and Nissan have in mind, sources say.

The two companies could fill big gaps in each other's lineups.

-- From Chrysler, Nissan could solve its hybrid needs quickly and cheaply. Chrysler is one third of the trio that developed both rear- and front-wheel-drive Two Mode hybrid transmissions, along with General Motors and BMW. GM, which produces the transmissions, has been anxious to sell the technology to other automakers and could do so through Chrysler.

In around 2010, Cummins Inc. is scheduled to deliver to Chrysler two all-new diesel engines, a V-6 and a V-8. The V-6 likely will power Chrysler's light-duty pickups and SUVs, while the V-8 goes into the heavy-duty Ram pickup. These engines could power Nissan's light trucks. And there's a bonus: Like the Two Mode transmissions, the price likely will be attractive because they will be built in the dollar zone.

From Nissan, Chrysler would benefit enormously from Renault's European diesel passenger car engines. Nissan also is developing proprietary hybrid drives, as well as electric cars that Ghosn says will show up in America by 2012.

-- Nissan is struggling to gain acceptance of its Titan full-sized pickup. Now in its second generation, the truck will end 2007 selling about 65,000 units — far short of its original annual target and way below the 350,000 Rams that Dodge will sell this year.

Nissan has not ventured into the big-hauling, one-ton territory owned by GM, Ford and Chrysler. Nissan has studied the workhorse truck segment but has slow-walked the idea as the U.S. economy softened. An entry in the segment could cost Nissan $1 billion.

-- Ghosn wants to put Nissan in the global commercial van market — something its U.S. dealers have urged the company to pursue. Chrysler has long been a player in that segment, says Saul Rosen, owner of Rosen Nissan in Milwaukee and incoming chairman of Nissan's national dealer advisory board.

-- Nissan has failed to crack the U.S. minivan market in a big way. Chrysler has dominated that segment for a quarter century.

-- Nissan's U.S. car sales are closing in on Chrysler's, due partly to success of small Nissan cars such as the Versa and Sentra. Nissan is pursuing even smaller entries. Globally, Nissan and Renault have had success selling an inexpensive small car called the Logan, which may be sold in Mexico. This year, Nissan and Renault signed a deal with Mahindra & Mahindra of India to develop an even cheaper car.

Chrysler already has a deal with China's Chery Automobile Co. to produce small cars for world markets, including the United States. A car for U.S. dealerships is due in 2009. But a link with Nissan could provide another source of small cars.

Dave Cole, director for the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Mich., says an alliance with Renault-Nissan shouldn't affect Chrysler's relationship with Chery.

"No matter who is in the game, there's a potential role for Chery."

But Cole says Chrysler also needs "a very significant global player."

"They have to develop a relationship with a strategic partner that will keep them in the game," he says. "There are players that want to play badly and that need them, one of which is Renault-Nissan."



SOURCE: http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dl...plate=printart
SUBSCRIPTION

[Stéphane Dumas]

-- Nissan has failed to crack the U.S. minivan market in a big way. Chrysler has dominated that segment for a quarter century.

Do they studied the possibility of bringing the Renault Master/Trafic and sold them as Nissan in Canada and the US?

-- Nissan's U.S. car sales are closing in on Chrysler's, due partly to success of small Nissan cars such as the Versa and Sentra. Nissan is pursuing even smaller entries. Globally, Nissan and Renault have had success selling an inexpensive small car called the Logan, which may be sold in Mexico. This year, Nissan and Renault signed a deal with Mahindra & Mahindra of India to develop an even cheaper car.

Chrysler already has a deal with China's Chery Automobile Co. to produce small cars for world markets, including the United States. A car for U.S. dealerships is due in 2009. But a link with Nissan could provide another source of small cars.

And a more safer source, as the old proverb said, don't throw all your eggs in the same basket.

Also, the "big" Renault Laguna and Vel Satis as well as the current Maxima could span a LH-successor derivative platform

[CobaltSScrazy]

sounds like a great way for Nissan to RAVAGE LLC! Nissan gets vehicle technology/platforms that are high profit AND high sales yielding, and Chrysler gets some mid volume negligible profit vehicles...great (eyeroll)

Now if Chrysler paired up with Honda and got the Civic / Accord to rebadge and gave them a real truck entry instead of a unibody crossover with bed included Fridgeline...then it'd be a 'fair' tradeoff/collaboration!

CobaltSScrazy

[crooner214]

Originally Posted by CobaltSScrazy

Now if Chrysler paired up with Honda and got the Civic / Accord to rebadge and gave them a real truck entry instead of a unibody crossover with bed included Fridgeline...then it'd be a 'fair' tradeoff/collaboration!

CobaltSScrazy

This would never happen. Honda actually knows how to manage themselves and does not need a tie-up with any of the other global players. I do agree with the fRidgeline comments, though...

[CobaltSScrazy]

Originally Posted by crooner214

This would never happen. Honda actually knows how to manage themselves and does not need a tie-up with any of the other global players. I do agree with the fRidgeline comments, though...

I agree, I don't think it would either, but never say never!

The point I'm trying to make is a matchup with Honda would better serve LLC compared to this matchup, whereas a Nissan/LLC collaboration would better suit Nissan, not LLC.

Why do you think GM didn't matchup with Nissan/Renault? Because its bad business and much less benefit for GM out of it, than for Nissan. If it was 'worth it' to GM, they would have done it.

Same goes for LLC, 'nuff said

CobaltSScrazy

[chevydlrmn]

Chrysler is such a whore. I think this would only help Nissan, with the trucks and two mode hybrid. I dont think GM should share this with Asian companies.

[DuSpinnst]

Originally Posted by chevydlrmn

Chrysler is such a whore. I think this would only help Nissan, with the trucks and two mode hybrid. I dont think GM should share this with Asian companies.

GM doesn't care who buys two-mode, because they keep a specific part of it.

Like I said before the two mode system is very complex and only part of the software side of the system is shared. Chrysler/Daimler/BMW have a different subset of software from GM (BMW buys from Daimler basically).

For example Hybrid Operating Strategy is 100% different at Chrysler/Daimler/BMW from GM. But Chrysler and GM use the exact same transmission and other hybrid related hardware (except the brakes, those are company independent). BMW and Daimler build a similar transmission and hybrid components in Europe (parts sharing, not including the battery is over 90% with the GM/Chrysler system).

Then of course each maker (even Chrysler, BMW, and Daimler) have a different Engine Controller to Hybrid Controller interface.

Believe me when I say, GM still has an advantage with the system since it integrates MUCH better into their cars.

[wescoent]

From a product standpoint, these two seem ripe for product range merger.

Let Chrysler engineer the large RWD sedans, trucks, and SUVs/crossovers/minivans, and V8 engines.

Let Nissan engineer the small and midsized FWD cars, as well as the I4/V6 engines.

In turn, reskin both Dodge, Nissan, Chrysler, and Jeep versions of all the vehicles engineered.

[tundrakiller]

the hell with nissan!!!if they cant make a damn truck...... then leave them for the ****ing sharks!!!!the hell with helping them with anything..

[throwback]

Chrysler is in desperate straight, they are not swimming in cash and their current cars are mediocre at best. Their small cars are non-existent, the Caliber is not a small car. Has anyone driven the new Sebring or Avenger? They are truly awful compared to the competition. Chrysler needs small engines and cars more than ever. The new CAFE requirements mean they have to get more fuel efficient cars in their line up to off-set their truck/van sales. The fact is Chrysler can't survive on it's own, I suspect Cerberus is already executing their exit strategy.

[1G6]

Originally Posted by tundrakiller

the hell with nissan!!!if they cant make a damn truck...... then leave them for the ****ing sharks!!!!the hell with helping them with anything..

Amen to that.

[Bravada]

and two separate alliances with Mitsubishi never came close to realizing their potential.

I really don't know what issues they have with the Mitsu tie-ups. The alliance supplied Chrysler with many products that sold rather well, and half of their current lineup stems from the last round of cooperation. Sure they aren't stellar (thanks to Chrysler rather than Mitsu, IMHO), but without it, there would be no product at all.

By contrast, the partnership of Renault and Nissan has worked like a charm. While still separate companies, the two share vehicle architecture and supply chains, and pick and choose from each other's technology.

They are essentially operating as a single company, the bs-level of this article is putting a strain on the gauge...

-- Ghosn wants to put Nissan in the global commercial van market — something its U.S. dealers have urged the company to pursue. Chrysler has long been a player in that segment, says Saul Rosen, owner of Rosen Nissan in Milwaukee and incoming chairman of Nissan's national dealer advisory board.

Chrysler's commercial van is the Sprinter, so the decision to share is not on Chrysler's side. Daimler still remains an important shareholder of Chrysler and has stated they will continue to be involved with the company (and protect their interests). PERHAPS Daimler would want to move Sprinter production to North America (if they can get past German unions), or just start a production for the local market there, in which case added volume from Nissan COULD help the business case, but this is all pie-in-the-sky and more of Daimler-R/N than Chrysler-R/N.

Renault's (and, for that matter, Nissan's) LCVs are shared with Opel, so I believe GM wouldn't be overjoyed if Renault shared them with Chrysler. OTOH, it could open the door to a three-way sharing scenario in which America finally gets the Vivaro and/or Movano as the new Chevrolet Astro and an Express replacement/compliment.

-- Nissan has failed to crack the U.S. minivan market in a big way.

If it was a "big way", the Quest would've been cancelled rather than given three generations. Mazda, for instance, gave up and replaced the MPV with a large crossover, and so did GM and Ford.

sounds like a great way for Nissan to RAVAGE LLC! Nissan gets vehicle technology/platforms that are high profit AND high sales yielding, and Chrysler gets some mid volume negligible profit vehicles...great (eyeroll)

With oil prices and CAFE, it will become more and more complicated and costly to keep a big pickup platform up with market and legal requirements, while I believe sales will eventually go down (not every pickup buyer is an Ewing and owns an oil field). OTOH, a small car built on existing technology and platform (or even an outright rebadge), can be a very cheap way to crack an ever-growing market. American automakers have been losing ground for decades due to the "small car-small profits" mentality - time to change that.

Small cars will also be crucial not only for the bottom line, but the survival of an American automaker in the 35-mpg-CAFE 5-dollar-a-barrel world. Chrysler is even actually selling Dodge-badge Hyundai Atoz and Accent and the H100 minitruck in Mexico, where this market is too large to neglect.

[ohmywrd8]

Both Chrysler and Nissan are good at design, but they both have questionable build quality. Even new Nissans feel cheap. Eh, I don't think this solves everything but they can help eachother out when it comes to build quality I guess.

[skylark68]

Originally Posted by crooner214

This would never happen. Honda actually knows how to manage themselves and does not need a tie-up with any of the other global players. I do agree with the fRidgeline comments, though...

Don't forget that Honda had the Passport, which was nothing more than an Isuzu... Honda has been known to rebadge vehicles.

As for Nissan/Chrysler...

[Stéphane Dumas]

Originally Posted by skylark68

Don't forget that Honda had the Passport, which was nothing more than an Isuzu... Honda has been known to rebadge vehicles.

As for Nissan/Chrysler...

Also, when Honda had 20% stake of Rover until BMW kickem out, there was a Rover and Land Rover models sold in Japan as rebadged Hondas, the Concerto and the Land Rover Discovery
http://www.austin-rover.co.uk/akaothersf.htm