The new FIAT/RAM van

I don't have a problem with front drive motorhomes, I just wouldn't want an ugly one .

novaderrik wrote: good Dog... they are fugly...

that front end on that van looks like the face on a mud skipper. It has the same steep slope down to a mouth designed to suck crud off the dirt

ransom wrote:

mad_machine wrote: once again.. Chrysler proves that the Crossbar grill they have ruins all their designs. the Stock Fiat bumper looks tons better than the chrysler

I think Chrysler has a whole team in the styling department devoted to sending stuff back for not being heavy-handed enough. Chrysler: Cars for people who only use the black and red crayons.

they like to tell themselves that it's "bold" styling... they like to tell themselves a lot of things- like those new Ram commercials that say that Ram is the "fastest growing truck brand".. well, yeah, it's only been it's own "brand" for a couple of years...

regarding the headlights being too high: it's true that they probably aren't any higher than a typical 4X4 pickup, but they are too damn high for the styling of the van.. it would be like if they put the headlights on the next generation Ram pickups up next to the A pillar..

JoeyM wrote:

novaderrik wrote: good Dog... they are fugly...

that front end on that van looks like the face on a mud skipper. It has the same steep slope down to a mouth designed to suck crud off the dirt

Fiat has done some questionable things with lights. Like the Fiat Multipla

I like the headlights up high. Least then they wont be broken when the new hire drives the van into a post parking it.

Now with more underbite:

The Type R variant:

this is just another sign that the USA is a super power in decline- it used to be that everyone else wanted our cars and trucks as a status symbol, now we are importing all of their designs here and/or modifying our designs to conform to their silly safety standards that are meant to protect people in crosswalks that can't be bothered to look both ways before crossing the street..

all that aside, it isn't a worthwhile van unless it looks cool with an airbrushed mural of a naked lady with big hooters holding a sword while riding a dragon on the side of it. and these Eurovans just don't look cool with that mural on the side.

In reply to novaderrik:

Put a viking hat on the woman and it works just fine. Maybe slap some IRN-BRU stickers on it for additional hipster euro street cred.

novaderrik wrote: all that aside, it isn't a worthwhile van unless it looks cool with an airbrushed mural of a naked lady with big hooters holding a sword while riding a dragon on the side of it. and these Eurovans just don't look cool with that mural on the side.

I want to see this on the new Fiat van.

What is up with the fashion police in the recent work van threads... IT'S A WORK VAN! Who cares is it's ugly as f...... Does it get the job done for cheap? It's all that matters.

I could see it working for all those company that require a lot of volume, but not weight capacity. Right now, their only choices are the Ford Transit (a bit on the small size) and the Dodge Grand Caravan (which isn't available as a panel van).

fanfoy wrote: What is up with the fashion police in the recent work van threads... IT'S A WORK VAN! Who cares is it's ugly as f...... Does it get the job done for cheap? It's all that matters. I could see it working for all those company that require a lot of volume, but not weight capacity. Right now, their only choices are the Ford Transit (a bit on the small size) and the Dodge Grand Caravan (which isn't available as a panel van).

Ram CV came out a bit ago right here.<

But its so ugly I would never buy one to haul stuff!

so the ram CV is just a stripped out GC with no windows?

In reply to mad_machine:

Isnt that what a cargo van is?

Gah! First time I saw one of those Multiplas in Europe, I was speechless. Dayum, that's ugly!

Lesley wrote: Gah! First time I saw one of those Multiplas in Europe, I was speechless. Dayum, that's ugly!

If they made one of those into a pope-mobile, we could have a third tier!

mad_machine wrote: Fiat has done some questionable things with lights. Like the Fiat Multipla

It looks like a Neon with a tumor.

It's an alien!

ShadowSix wrote:

Chris_V wrote: Saw hundreds of those Fiat vans as both commercial and RVs when I was in Scotland all last week. Really popular over there (as were Nissan Jukes, suprisingly enough).

I rented an RV very similar to this to drive from Frankfurt, through Paris, to Normandy in the Summer of '09. I was struck by how well it drove, more like a big minivan than the behemoth it was. Also, it was a turbo-diesel 4, and that motor felt fine, though I definitely spent a lot of time deep in the throttle. Being FWD means the floor is low and I think the center of mass is probably admirably low for an RV, this probably helps with the driving dynamics. Somebody said the headlights were too high... I don't think you understand the proportions of these things. The headlights are no higher than the headlights on my stock '80's Toyota 4x4, probably lower. There's not much of a step up into the driver's seat.

This was done in the early 80's IIRC by Renault here in the US. Unfortunately they were saddled with E36 M3ty drivetrains.

fanfoy wrote: I could see it working for all those company that require a lot of volume, but not weight capacity. Right now, their only choices are the Ford Transit (a bit on the small size) and the Dodge Grand Caravan (which isn't available as a panel van).

Slight correction. The only Ford available now is the Transit Connect which is small, a little smaller than the GM Astro vans. The full size Ford Transit has not been released yet and will be the same size as the Dodge/Fiat, Nissan NV and the Sprinter.

Hal wrote: The full size Ford Transit has not been released yet and will be the same size as the Dodge/Fiat, Nissan NV and the Sprinter.

Out of all of those, the NV seems to be the one that would fit my van towing needs the best. I may be wrong though. Ugly or not, function is more important than looks.

mad_machine wrote: so the ram CV is just a stripped out GC with no windows?

Dad just replaced a lot of the company's 1500 - 2500 series vans with the Ram CVs. The guys who drive the Rams love them; they ride a lot more comfortably, which is important when on the road for hours every day, and haul a ton of equipment just as well.

The question worth asking is why have our American suppliers been so out of touch that we are only now getting vans with more space and better fuel economy?

Mitchell wrote: The question worth asking is why have our American suppliers been so out of touch that we are only now getting vans with more space and better fuel economy?

Because, in my opinion, the 'big three' weren't overly concerned with what the consumer actually wanted. Trucks are cheap, that's what they'll sell to us. That's fine for a few decades. When it's no longer fine, you get caught with your pants down. I think Ford was the first to realize this full-scale with the Transit Connect. They released a "too small" work van and....it sells! And they marketed it. Yay Ford! Chrysler/Dodge sold commercial versions of the minivan for years, but you'd never know it.

And for the most part, gas was "cheap" to a business and easy to write off, so the incentive to buy a fuel efficient van wasn't really there. Now if you operate a smaller van, it can give the impression your business service is also "efficient" and therefore good value.

A lot of business marketing is in sending the right submiminal message to potential customers.

Ian F wrote: And for the most part,

...The Econoline/E-series was essentially unchanged from about 1973 until 2013, so any alleged mechanic who knew which end of a hammer to grab could fix one.

When it comes to fleet buyers, they want to know two things how cheap is it to run, and how cheap it is to fix.

If GM keeps making the Express/Savana, I suspect a lot of fraidy-cat fleet buyers will turn to them.