Joined
·
73 Posts
With all recalls, the lawsuit and the engine replacements under warranty do you think this engine put FCA at a loss, they break even or did they actually pull a profit from this experiment?
Do you think FCA lost money overall with the ecodiesel?
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
2016 Big Horn 4X4 Engine and Transmission tuned by no longer available (but truck runs good)
Joined
·
320 Posts
you talking in reality or lawyer/accountant talk, and it was probably not the problems with the Eco but across the whole lineup I'm sure to hear them tell it they lose money everyday, Kind of like my business ventures, I lose a little bit on every job so I'm trying to make it up in volume 
Joined
·
609 Posts
According to Elon Musk, All auto manufactures make no significate profit on the sale of new vechicles. Profit is made on the back end and sale of repair parts. Of course he said that in the defense on how come his company wasn't making profits, his cars were so well built that they didn't need that many repair parts.
Joined
·
73 Posts
I have heard this also
The question talks about the Ecodiesel putting the entire Stallantis/FCA company in a financial loss. No. The sale of just the Ecodiesel surely has compromised just that segment of profitability. All the engines, recalls and covered trouble of the many failing parts has to affect that profit line. The rest of the truck line - all the gas 1500's and the HD trucks (gas or Cummins diesel) more than cover the Ecodiesel losses.
You add on the emission issues to the Ecodiesel and it is probably a good thing it is gone. Strangly that is NOT an issue with the Cummins diesels. Emissions equipment there is rarely a problem and long-term usage often means deletes to get those million-mile Cummins to that mark. I personally feel sorry for the troubled Ecodiesel owners, especially those unknowing enough that purchase the used ones available.
Thank this forum in part for the knowledge base available on the topic.
You add on the emission issues to the Ecodiesel and it is probably a good thing it is gone. Strangly that is NOT an issue with the Cummins diesels. Emissions equipment there is rarely a problem and long-term usage often means deletes to get those million-mile Cummins to that mark. I personally feel sorry for the troubled Ecodiesel owners, especially those unknowing enough that purchase the used ones available.
Thank this forum in part for the knowledge base available on the topic.
Joined
·
609 Posts
Well Captainmal, I think I have stumbled across the "NOT" reason with the Cummins. According to EPA MOVES, anything that has a GVWR of 8500 lbs or more is NOT considered light duty and falls under a different EPA standard. Since the ECO has a GVWR under 8500 it has a stricker EPA standard to follow and "for now" the 2500/3500 Cummins does not.
Absolutely not .. Or they would have stopped offering them years ago. Remember the vast majority of these are trouble free and last hundreds of thousands of miles. And are still readily available in the Wrangler. But going electric is putting the hurt on fossil fueled vehicles industry wide. Ransom also made a great point .. Emissions standards are much harder on the Eco then the Cummins
I've heard both arguments for years. The dealership doesn't make money from the new car sales but only from the garage and parts. Or, trucks are the highest profit vehicle on the lots. I guess that's supposed to include the SUVs too. I don't have a clue which is correct. Maybe both have some level of "correctness". All I know is that if the dealer was really not making any money, they wouldn't be in business long.
Given record profits over the last 10 years we may never really know......buy my uneducated guess is NO, they likely did not lose money on the Ecodiesel.
I believe a real example of an obvious money loser was Nissan's use of the 5.0 liter Cummins V8 in their Titan. They only ran that engine for a few years and dropped it almost immediately. When a company drops and engine quickly, it's a dead giveaway.......Like Ford and the 6.4 Powerstroke! The VM Ecodiesel has run nearly 10 years so I'd label that as a somewhat successful lifespan, especially considering it's still being used globally and in the Jeep products.
Joined
·
32 Posts
Would Stelantis loose money on anything? not a chance. The real cost is even half of the retail price you pay at the dealership for the truck. The Manufacturer makes good money on the sale and the dealership on after sale services (oil changes, etc). Dealers markup is $8 grand per used vehicle or more up here in Canada.
Joined
·
104 Posts
I beg to differ. DEALERSHIPS don't make much on a new vehicle and their profits come from service, etc. MANUFACTURERS make a ton on new vehicles since all labor costs go to dealers doing the work. The only service revenue a Mfgr. gets is on parts since they get no labor revenue. A manufacturer could never stay in business on just the parts supply. Never. Lastly, how much money is Elon making in parts for repairs... not enough to buy Twitter! He makes a killing on new vehicles.
2016 Laramie Limited Crew Cab 4x4 with Deleted Air Suspension and GDE Hot Tune. 276,000 KM.
Joined
·
2,347 Posts
They made a ton of money on mine. Never been in for a recall except the tailgate lock issue. Never had warranty service and never had to pay us Canadians the $3075 the Americans claimed.
2016 with 283,000kms and it hasn't cost them a dime.
2016 with 283,000kms and it hasn't cost them a dime.
Tesla hasn't been making profits is an "on paper" problem. There's a bunch of pissed off Tesla owners who's vehicle worth was slashed when Elon dropped the price of some models by $15000. That kind of dollar tag isn't recovered by an improvement of manufacturing or material costs.
The "well built" is also debatable as there has been quite a few design flaws that have been brought to light.
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
