So we have a half-wit suck up to Dr. Z II, it sounds to me like I hit a nerve with this remark. "“It might be difficult psychologically for your average North American customer to downsize to a 4-cylinder engine, even if it has the same performance as a bigger one,” So, I'll give this loser the same treatment.
Dear the hopeless yes man to Dr. Z II,
You further have proven my point. When I hear the quote “It might be difficult psychologically for your average North American customer to downsize to a 4-cylinder engine, even if it has the same performance as a bigger one,” I hear an underlying slam against the consumer's intellectual integrity that we are somehow stupid and lack your great intelligence that you so graciously decide to bless us with as you insult us. The problem with this logic is what you are saying is first of all false, 2ndly it lacks the understanding of the customer's wants, and it 3rdly displays a lack of understanding between the Utopia world fools like you live in and the real world. And here is why your logic is fundamentally flawed.
What is the definition of V8 power? There isn't a set definition because it keeps changing with time. If in fact customers only wanted a certain amount of power and that would be enough, then all customers would be satisfied with the V6 version of the Challenger as it produces more hp than many of the V8s that were offered in the original Challenger. The key difference is the how consistent the power is. You obviously lack an understanding of this since you seem to think all engines are meant to rev like Rotary Engines, but this approach takes too much time, too much fuel, and is inadequate. If Americans were to be satisfied with the approach of a turbo I4, then the Talon/Laser, Daytonas, and Stealth would still be produced in the same forms that they were when they were dropped due to too low demand. It isn't just Chrysler that this is a proven fact. Ford tried the same stupid idea you are toying with in the 80s and the customers didn't go along with it despite the superior acceleration. GM's Solstice/Sky have been failures as well. It doesn't matter how much they have improved, the issue is most prefer the traditional way. If this strategy is so perfect, then explain why Saab has been such an enormous failure while sharing much of the same technology (the Wal-Mart engine) that you are using. Americans like V8s, they tolerate V6s but many hate I4s.
The flaw with you logic can pretty much be summed up in this commercial.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyyii8cypFw What was wrong with this commercial is it underlined the problem with the new product while mocking the fans of the old product. This commercial demonstrates the arrogance that you too suffer from. You think that the previous group in charge are a bunch of mindless sheep and the elements that made the past products successful should be abandoned because you don't like the image. To be successful, you need a diverse product for a diverse customer base. How many manufacturers have affordable I4 models? Just about every player in the market has one. how many players in the market have a distinguishing engine like the Hemi, the closest it gets is GM. The Hemi isn't the reason why Chrysler has been suffering, its the lack of a competitive I4 line and an ignored V6 line, poor quality interior, over used styling cues, and badge engineering unpopular models. These elements are the part that need fixing, the Hemi isn't. If you don't believe me look at the history of sales from the Caliber compared to the Neon when it wasn't long in tooth. Look at the sales of the Stratus/Sebring to the Avenger/Sebring. Then look at the sales of the LH models to the LX. The LX lost the least sales of all, and why, because of the Hemi engine. It made the cars standout. Drive an LH model compared to an LX and you'll see that the primary advantage the LX models have is the Hemi option, because without that, the car is lacking compared to the LH models interior materials, interior styling, space weight. If you remove the Hemi, you can expect this to fail.
Also, let's pull out the math for dummies guide. You claim that you have I4s that produce as much hp as V8s. Well let's see here, from what I can see you're "SUPERIOR" I4 engines many borrowed from GM produce not much more than 200hp. Now unless we are in the 80s, that is not only less than any American V8, but it is far less than the say 90% of V6 models in the market today; nevermind the fact that these never produce the torque of a V8 which is precisely what we seek from our V8s. The only engine that can produce anything close to a V8 power is the World Engine you are inheriting but that only produces about 285hp and despite your flawed math 285 is less than 425 let alone 372.
Also if I4 are equal quality in every way to V8s, then discontinue Fiats V8s in all the Ferrari & Maserati. Remember you said it was just as good, the customers are just too stupid but they'll catch on. Remember the engine size on the 500 is half the displacement of some of the Caliber models and was that 40 mpg US or 40 mpg Imperial?
Furthermore, you are not going to gain many customers from the competition in the fuel economy arena. Most of that segment is located in cities and city people tend to prefer foreign cars, not American. By doing this, you are going to loose a considerable amount of the non-city customers who are an asset to Chrysler as they buy many of the large trucks and gas guzzlers because they have to commute and drive a lot more than the city people do. Think through this.