Stumbled across this recent video of the production factory in Toluca, Mexico, where Fiat 500 models bound for the U.S. and Canada are manufactured. Thought it might interest some of you! 
General US bound 500's being made!
- Thread starter DraigFlag87
- Start date
Currently reading:
General US bound 500's being made!
shil
New member
I thought it was very cool. Thanks.
Excellent vid. Interesting to see they are building it alongside the Dodge journey which will be sold in Europe as a Fiat. I wonder if production efficiency can meet that at Tychy? Perhaps Fiat may even learn something from Chrysler, however I notice that stamping etc all takes place at the site which isn't always the case in US motor manufacturing.
A little off topic here, but at the moment, Dodge in the U.S. sell a large panel van that is a version of the Mercedes Sprinter with the 2.9(?) litre 5 cylinder diesel. Just wondering if that will be replaced by a version of the FIAT Ducato or IVECO Daily.
Any ideas anyone?
Any ideas anyone?
geeded
New member
The Van you're speaking of is the "Sprinter". I see quite a few around and it is bigger than you would think. As long as it sells well, I'm sure Chrysler will keep selling it. I believe there is room at the smaller end for another vehicle but that may fall to Fiat to provide. On the other hand, Ram is the truck brand, usually sold through Dodge dealers..
I was leery of Fiat combining with Chrysler as neither are world beaters over here in the States. Especially after what Daimler did to Chrysler....I was worried. Two years into the merger now and it appears that they work together well and fill gaps in each others product.
So I hope they continue to thrive.... and that Fiat can get some more dealers up and running. So far, the roll-out has been abominably slow. It's a shame they couldn't have the Abarth ready to go. Right now all they have is one engine which is at the very bottom of power/torque curve sold here. They need a more powerful engine for the standard 500, say 120 hp. That would make a big difference in the way the 500 is presented.
I know that Europe as many engines with less power but here everything has, at a minimum, the power of the current 500, even my motorcycle. The Smart doesn't and it has been an unmitigated disaster after the first few months being on sale.
Fingers crossed.
I was leery of Fiat combining with Chrysler as neither are world beaters over here in the States. Especially after what Daimler did to Chrysler....I was worried. Two years into the merger now and it appears that they work together well and fill gaps in each others product.
So I hope they continue to thrive.... and that Fiat can get some more dealers up and running. So far, the roll-out has been abominably slow. It's a shame they couldn't have the Abarth ready to go. Right now all they have is one engine which is at the very bottom of power/torque curve sold here. They need a more powerful engine for the standard 500, say 120 hp. That would make a big difference in the way the 500 is presented.
I know that Europe as many engines with less power but here everything has, at a minimum, the power of the current 500, even my motorcycle.
The Smart doesn't and it has been an unmitigated disaster after the first few months being on sale.Fingers crossed.
Thanks for your comments geeded.
I was sitting outside a hotel we were staying in a few years ago in Charleston SC when a man rolled up in a Ram pick up. I got talking about it to him about it. It seemed he'd just bought it and had driven all the way from Texas. It had a Cummins B Series diesel which he'd had "chipped". He said it went very well but regretted having ordered the truck with a manual gearbox as it had so much torque that every time he floored it the clutch slipped.
But the very concept of that kind of engine in a pick up eludes most in Europe as the Ford Ranger over here has a 4 cylinder 2.5, now 3.0 litre motor. The Cummins B is normally found in buses and "real" trucks over this side of the pond up to gross weights of around 20 tons. The thought of having a 5.9 litre 6 cylinder diesel in a relatively small vehicle is anathema to us. The reason I mention this is your comment about power.
Is this because of a mentality that says you need more power, just like the '50s and '60s decided we needed bigger fins followed by "wider, longer, heavier" through most of the '70s. In other words do you think the need for more power is marketing driven or do drivers really need more acceleration and higher speed?
My only experience of modern U.S. cars was a few years ago when I used taxis, mainly Crown Victorias which seemed to have V8s (350-ish CID). What I couldn't work out was how slowly they accelerated and couldn't work out why they didn't have a diesel.
There was a quick review of a new Jeep, possibly a Grand Cherokee with a new V6 diesel but an older Mercedes sourced auto-box. The engine got quite a bit of praise as did the vehicle as a whole but there was a lot of criticism when it came to fuel consumption which came nowhere near what was claimed. Whether that was something to do with the 'box or not I don't know.
Perhaps Chrysler need to be giving FIAT some more guidance on North American market and the Italians can do the same with regard to Europe.
By the way, it's always nice to see what people look like but, sorry, that picture does you no favours at all. It makes you look.....well, a bit MAD actually.
I was sitting outside a hotel we were staying in a few years ago in Charleston SC when a man rolled up in a Ram pick up. I got talking about it to him about it. It seemed he'd just bought it and had driven all the way from Texas. It had a Cummins B Series diesel which he'd had "chipped". He said it went very well but regretted having ordered the truck with a manual gearbox as it had so much torque that every time he floored it the clutch slipped.
But the very concept of that kind of engine in a pick up eludes most in Europe as the Ford Ranger over here has a 4 cylinder 2.5, now 3.0 litre motor. The Cummins B is normally found in buses and "real" trucks over this side of the pond up to gross weights of around 20 tons. The thought of having a 5.9 litre 6 cylinder diesel in a relatively small vehicle is anathema to us. The reason I mention this is your comment about power.
Is this because of a mentality that says you need more power, just like the '50s and '60s decided we needed bigger fins followed by "wider, longer, heavier" through most of the '70s. In other words do you think the need for more power is marketing driven or do drivers really need more acceleration and higher speed?
My only experience of modern U.S. cars was a few years ago when I used taxis, mainly Crown Victorias which seemed to have V8s (350-ish CID). What I couldn't work out was how slowly they accelerated and couldn't work out why they didn't have a diesel.
There was a quick review of a new Jeep, possibly a Grand Cherokee with a new V6 diesel but an older Mercedes sourced auto-box. The engine got quite a bit of praise as did the vehicle as a whole but there was a lot of criticism when it came to fuel consumption which came nowhere near what was claimed. Whether that was something to do with the 'box or not I don't know.
Perhaps Chrysler need to be giving FIAT some more guidance on North American market and the Italians can do the same with regard to Europe.
By the way, it's always nice to see what people look like but, sorry, that picture does you no favours at all. It makes you look.....well, a bit MAD actually.
Last edited:
geeded
New member
I realize that the picture does me no favors but I've always cultivated a "What, me worry?" attitude.
I won't try and rationalize American "need" for size and power in our vehicles. The diesel Ram pickup you mentioned was more than likely used by that Texan for lugging multi-horse trailers and for bragging rights. They don't call them "Cowboy Cadillacs" for nothing. That Cummings diesel is at least a $6k option. Buying it with a manual was an, uh, "interesting" choice.
Our cars have always been large and the distances here are vast. That, however, doesn't excuse all the soccer moms driving around in 40 different models of SUV's, usually by themselves. We do, however, tend to spend an inordinate amount of time in our cars, making them a "home" away from home. Thus the cup holders, room, satellite radio, etc.
When Europe sent over the original Mini's, the Renault Dauphines, etc back in the late 50's early 60's, they were accompanied by underfunded dealers, few parts, and cars that were NOT designed to run at 70 mph for hours at a time AND left a sad trail of oil and pistons in their wake. Fiat lasted here longer than most but it's reputation was wrecked by the time it left. What we learned from this debacle was that big, under-stressed drivetrains, tooling around at 2k rpms sucking down cheap gas beat the heck out of a dauphine in the slow lane at 60 mph, shedding parts as it trundled along. Not that the dauphine was a dog (it was), but it was not designed for the USA. That was the status quo for many a year.
Other than the original Beetle, small foreign cars were shunned. The Japanese won us back over the decades but European cars are still considered "warranty" cars: i.e. sell it before the warranty is out because it's going to cost you a bundle for repairs. MINI has managed to grow and thrive in this culture even though they rate LAST of all cars sold here in reliability (even behind the Range Rover). How they did that has probably been the title of many a Master's thesis.
We are slowly changing to smaller versions of our trucks & cars but a Fiat 500 is, let's face it, an oddity here. Once you've seen one next to a standard F-150 pickup, you have to be a brave soul to drive a 500 (physics is a bit*h). That is also the reason they are being sold in "studios" near metropolitan areas as strictly city cars & fashion accessories. If you tell the average American that that 500 is a family car in Europe, they'd look at you like you've slipped a cog. People such as myself, who have lived overseas and understand that they not only have a place but are actually fun, are in a very distinct minority.
As Chief Dan George said in "The Outlaw Jose Wales", we shall 'Endeavor to Persevere".
Cheers
I won't try and rationalize American "need" for size and power in our vehicles. The diesel Ram pickup you mentioned was more than likely used by that Texan for lugging multi-horse trailers and for bragging rights. They don't call them "Cowboy Cadillacs" for nothing. That Cummings diesel is at least a $6k option. Buying it with a manual was an, uh, "interesting" choice.
Our cars have always been large and the distances here are vast. That, however, doesn't excuse all the soccer moms driving around in 40 different models of SUV's, usually by themselves. We do, however, tend to spend an inordinate amount of time in our cars, making them a "home" away from home. Thus the cup holders, room, satellite radio, etc.
When Europe sent over the original Mini's, the Renault Dauphines, etc back in the late 50's early 60's, they were accompanied by underfunded dealers, few parts, and cars that were NOT designed to run at 70 mph for hours at a time AND left a sad trail of oil and pistons in their wake. Fiat lasted here longer than most but it's reputation was wrecked by the time it left. What we learned from this debacle was that big, under-stressed drivetrains, tooling around at 2k rpms sucking down cheap gas beat the heck out of a dauphine in the slow lane at 60 mph, shedding parts as it trundled along. Not that the dauphine was a dog (it was), but it was not designed for the USA. That was the status quo for many a year.
Other than the original Beetle, small foreign cars were shunned. The Japanese won us back over the decades but European cars are still considered "warranty" cars: i.e. sell it before the warranty is out because it's going to cost you a bundle for repairs. MINI has managed to grow and thrive in this culture even though they rate LAST of all cars sold here in reliability (even behind the Range Rover). How they did that has probably been the title of many a Master's thesis.
We are slowly changing to smaller versions of our trucks & cars but a Fiat 500 is, let's face it, an oddity here. Once you've seen one next to a standard F-150 pickup, you have to be a brave soul to drive a 500 (physics is a bit*h).
That is also the reason they are being sold in "studios" near metropolitan areas as strictly city cars & fashion accessories. If you tell the average American that that 500 is a family car in Europe, they'd look at you like you've slipped a cog. People such as myself, who have lived overseas and understand that they not only have a place but are actually fun, are in a very distinct minority.As Chief Dan George said in "The Outlaw Jose Wales", we shall 'Endeavor to Persevere".
Cheers
Last edited:
Hi geeded. I knew quite a lot of you said already and can understand why if you are going to take a family of 5, plus dog while pulling a boat for a 2,000 mile round trip for the summer holiday, sorry, vacation, you would want a big comfortable car.
What has amazed me over the years though is how many U.S. cars are, or at least were, innefficient in terms of size and packaging. A friend of mine who is the transport manager for a very large company was tasked to find a large car for meeting important visitors at airports and stations. He started looking for something a little different and was quite taken with a Buick. I can't remember what the model was but it was the full size model that was shared with Chevrolet, you know the one, the Chevy version was used as taxis and Cop cars and is no longer made. He liked the car but was amazed that although the boot/trunk was very long, it was also very shallow with the spare wheel protruding up through the carpet. He ended up with a Mercedes S-Class.
I always used to love "Yank Tanks" and as a kid was always a fan of GM models such as the Camaro, Chevelle, 'Vette, Firebird, GTO, GT37 and similar cars of the same vintage. Even the Mustang, Cougar XR7, Charger and Challenger. They seemed exotic while most European cars seemed pokey and boring. U.S. cars of the same era shouted Hollywood and glamour.
The late '70s and into the '80s I think were a disaster period for Ford, GM, Chrysler and AMC. They tried to do European and failed. Perhaps they need to develop their own identity again.
The Chrysler 300 and recent Cadillacs can do this, and the 300 has met with some success in the UK and Europe. The Caddys look great but the underpinnings are a bit mediocre, they deserve better. The Italians still have their own identity as do Renault, Peugeot and Citroen. Likewise VW/Audi, Mercedes and BMW. So do the Japanese.
The retro (tektro?) Mustang, Camaro and Charger (I think) along with the Ford GT have sparked a lot of interest let's hope FIAT can bring in some more up to date technical features to give Chrysler a boost yet allow it to carry on being American. The motoring world will be a better place.
What has amazed me over the years though is how many U.S. cars are, or at least were, innefficient in terms of size and packaging. A friend of mine who is the transport manager for a very large company was tasked to find a large car for meeting important visitors at airports and stations. He started looking for something a little different and was quite taken with a Buick. I can't remember what the model was but it was the full size model that was shared with Chevrolet, you know the one, the Chevy version was used as taxis and Cop cars and is no longer made. He liked the car but was amazed that although the boot/trunk was very long, it was also very shallow with the spare wheel protruding up through the carpet. He ended up with a Mercedes S-Class.
I always used to love "Yank Tanks" and as a kid was always a fan of GM models such as the Camaro, Chevelle, 'Vette, Firebird, GTO, GT37 and similar cars of the same vintage. Even the Mustang, Cougar XR7, Charger and Challenger. They seemed exotic while most European cars seemed pokey and boring. U.S. cars of the same era shouted Hollywood and glamour.
The late '70s and into the '80s I think were a disaster period for Ford, GM, Chrysler and AMC. They tried to do European and failed. Perhaps they need to develop their own identity again.
The Chrysler 300 and recent Cadillacs can do this, and the 300 has met with some success in the UK and Europe. The Caddys look great but the underpinnings are a bit mediocre, they deserve better. The Italians still have their own identity as do Renault, Peugeot and Citroen. Likewise VW/Audi, Mercedes and BMW. So do the Japanese.
The retro (tektro?) Mustang, Camaro and Charger (I think) along with the Ford GT have sparked a lot of interest let's hope FIAT can bring in some more up to date technical features to give Chrysler a boost yet allow it to carry on being American. The motoring world will be a better place.
