The new FIAT/RAM van

mad_machine wrote: considering the use most cargo vans get.. I think those big bumpers are a good thing. Having beein in and out of NYC, Philly, and DC in a Ford van, I cannot remember how many times I got bumped in traffic or by people trying to park. Big bumpers is better than bent sheetmetal

I wonder if those big bumpers have anything to do with European pedestrian safety standards?

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).

So apparently they are only going to sell these with a Pentastar V6 an possibly a 4-Cyl Iveco Diesel. As Lesley stated its also FWD which should be interesting.

They are not planning on selling the Chassis Cab, which means no tow trucks.

Vans aren't known for their aesthetics. This one isn't too bad. Paint out the Homer Simpson bumper and I'd call it good.

SyntheticBlinkerFluid wrote: So apparently they are only going to sell these with a Pentastar V6 an possibly a 4-Cyl Iveco Diesel. As Lesley stated its also FWD which should be interesting. They are not planning on selling the Chassis Cab, which means no tow trucks.

I want one.

SyntheticBlinkerFluid wrote: They are not planning on selling the Chassis Cab, which means no tow trucks.

You might want to check your sources. Unless Chrysler doesn't know what they are doing.

http://media.chrysler.com/newsrelease.do?id=13950&mid=358

"Chrysler Group LLC today announced pricing for the all-new 2014 Ram ProMaster Cutaway, Chassis Cab and Cargo Van models. Prices start at $26,030, $26,530 and $28,630, respectively, not including $995 destination. Ram ProMaster vans have a targeted list of best-in-class claims and the best powertrain warranty in the industry: 5 years/100,000 miles. "

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.

In reply to DrBoost:

Well my source was Wikipedia, so somebody better update them.

The documentation also says they have an extended body chassis cab......so does that mean that I can get one that will seat my kids and have that super bitchin' low deck car hauler thingy? Cause that would rock. Probably not worth getting divorced over, but it would rock.

In reply to ShadowSix:

I'm the one who was talking about the headlights. I have to see one in person, because those are right under the windshield. They look like they're almost 6 inches higher than the ones on my Savanna.

They probably are a regular height, the pictures make them look higher than they are.

Why do I like this?

In reply to Grizz:

I don't know; I can't see it (image tag not working)...

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

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.

ransom wrote: In reply to Grizz: I don't know; I can't see it (image tag not working)...

http://www.gotbroken.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/2006-fiat-ducato-truckster-show-van-front-side-view-588x441.jpg

stanger_missle wrote:

Maybe that site doesn't allow hotlinking? Here you go (this is what you were trying to show, right?)

OK, that's odd. Once I uploaded it to photobucket and linked here, all the links worked.

I thought "Haha! I'll fix this!" but looks like I failed too

Still, it looks like a Hotwheels creation from the '90s, which means it's awesome!

In reply to DrBoost:

That is odd... All except yours appear broken to me.

And in its own bent way, that is pretty rad.

I'm still waiting for the Doblo Trucklet

In reply to Curmudgeon:

What is that thing? The Bob Costas bat?

ransom wrote: In reply to DrBoost: That is odd... All except yours appear broken to me. And in its own bent way, that is pretty rad.

I posted that on my computer and all is well. I'm on my iphone and all links but mine are broken. My head hurts trying to figure it out. I'm goong to make a margarita and forget it all

Appleseed wrote: Vans aren't known for their aesthetics. This one isn't too bad. Paint out the Homer Simpson bumper and I'd call it good.

• a gajillion...vans are about practicality not looks. Seems more functional than a classic Ford or Chevy cargo van (except possibly towing capacity).