Wrong, there is no legal definition in any country for a minivan. The only
legal definitions are  Car / Truck

Mere technicalities for CAFE regulation.

I despise Zetsche and the Daimler ownership of Chrysler for being
responsible for killing some really good looking concept vehicles 5
years ago in favor of coming out with ones that have more Mercedes
content.

But I can't see where (as claimed above) that the Chrysler unit was in
shambles.

Chrysler was in a sales shambles in 2003 because the new (and hideous)
LX chassis was still a year away from production, and Dodge dealers
were screaming for new car models (yes, I was pointing out then that
Dodge seemed destined to be Truck and maybe mini-van only while the
only cars would wear Chrysler badges).

Yes it was, because quality was falling at Mercedes even on the eve of
the aquisition of Chrysler.

Zetsche's only job at Chrysler was to trash all current new vehicle
designs and start new designs that would incorporate an increasing
amount of Mercedes components.  And that was not his idea - it came
from Daimler.  Chrysler build quality was already at historic highs in
2000 and the gap between north american and japanese makers were
practically non-existant by 2004.

Zetsche has some really bad blunders - like hiring Celine Dione for
sales/marketing, and the Crossfire failure.

Truth is, Chrysler suceeded ->in spite of<- Zetsche.

How ironic.  Chrysler was supposed to be the "volume" brand of the
Daimler-Chrysler pair.  Zetsche admitted exactly this in interviews.

Because Chrysler was never allowed to build models that would or could
directly compete against Mercedes models.  In 1999 and early 2000,
Chrysler had introduced the 300M and was showing the stunning 300N
2-door concept.  Chrysler was in a position to be thought of by the
public has having some premium brands.  Chrysler was in a position to
throw some cars up against Lexus and Infinity in the North American
market.  But Daimler would have non of that.  They myopically thought
that their own Mercedes would compete in that arena.  It turns out it
could only happen if Merc quality fell enough to make them
competitive.

Yea, I've always considered the new 300C to look more like a truck
than a car.

This story was obviously written by a European or German with no real
knowledge of the Daimler/Chrysler merger and subsequent history in
north america.

Chrysler needs to find its niche.  And that is to be the first maker to
reach the fabled 100 mpg for a four passenger car.  Nothing else counts.
GM and Ford are going to bite the dirt.  Chrysler will follow if they don't
go down the road that says, "Nothing beats high mileage other than higher
mileage."  We're in a new age.  Look for $5.00 a gallon, going to $10.00.

I don't think it will be.  What I see these days is a lot of new
cars coming out CLAIMING to be SUV's, thus trucks,
thus escaped from CAFE.  The problem is that they are
getting smaller and smaller!

A SUV to me is something like a Ford Explorer.  It is NOT like
that hideous Outback toy from Subaru.  If you have to use a step
ladder to get into the vehicle it's a SUV.  If you can step into it
from the curb it's a hatchback descendent.

I think the American public is getting sick of the SUV.  The cost
of gas is too high for vehicles with effective MPG of 20.  If
this is Chrysler's strategy it's going to fail.

One of the things that people always miss about the American
car market is that because it includes a far larger slice of middle
class owners than most markets, it works kind of like in reverse.

If you want to see what is going to be a popular new car seller
in 3 years, look at what are the hot used cars now.  People who
are regular used car buyers, since they don't have the kind of money
invested in their vehicles that a new car buyer does, they can move
very quickly to ditch an unpopular vehicle in response to changing
markets.  Thus when the gas prices started rising the first people that
dumped SUV's on the used market were the people who had got
them used to begin with. They could afford to sell a SUV for $5K that
they had bought a few years earlier for $8K simply because that's
not a lot of money.  And what are they buying like candy to replace
them?  Accords and Civics and sh.t like that.  In other words, all
that nice legroom and space in the SUV was just jolly when gas
was 1/2 the cost it is now, a few years ago.  But today, gas has
doubled, the price of the huffing big tires needed for the SUV
has gone up, etc. etc.

The new car owners of course all want the same thing the used car
owners are buying, small cars that are cheap to run.  But they can't
sell out of their existing Explorers and such until these depreciate
enough so the owners won't lose their shirts.  And what the automakers
are bring out today they had on the drawing boards 2 years ago, when
the SUV was still popular.

Ted

The European taxi is the E-Class.  The C is not as widely used.

Product quality is not uniformly bad.  Don't judge the whole range on the
basis of early Ms.

DAS

[...]
 The

[...]

I have seen better cars, but I'll patiently wait out Chrysler's strange
car design experiments, at least while my '95 Concord  continues to give
acceptable service.