FCA's Detroit Dodge Viper Assembly Plant to Close Indefinitely

by Matt Posky

Published: July 12th, 2017

fca s detroit dodge viper assembly plant to close indefinitely

Fiat Chrysler Automobiles is abandoning Conner Avenue Assembly in Detroit, Michigan. The plant produced Dodge Vipers sporadically for over two decades, but low sales volume eventually led to FCA’s decision to remove the high-performing model from its lineup. In 2016, Dodge only sold 630 Vipers. A final, limited-edition 2017 run sold out in less than a week.

The two-seater doesn’t meet upcoming safety regulations due to its absence of side-curtain airbags. Rather than undergo a costly redesign, FCA chose to let nature take its course and placed the model in hospice care back in 2015. However, the future of the assembly plant and its employees were uncertain at the time.

Conner Assembly houses 87 employees responsible for the Viper and the model’s V10 engine. According to WDIV 4 Detroit, the entirety of the staff will be offered positions at other FCA locations, but the plant will be closed indefinitely. Formerly home to Champion spark plugs, Dodge gained ownership of the factory in 1995 and designated it specifically for Viper production. That lasted until 2010, with the vehicle reentering assembly in 2012.

The plant also built the retro-styled Plymouth Prowler for the duration of its brief, 11,700-unit lifespan.

Viper production is scheduled to end in August (before the safety regulations take hold in September), at which point the plant will be closed. While the snake could return someday, keeping it as a bespoke low-volume model was never in the cards for FCA’s long-term product strategy. Struggling to reach 700 North American deliveries in the very best of years, Viper volume was perpetually eclipsed by its mainstay domestic rival, the Chevrolet Corvette.

General Motors has annually sold 30,000 or more Vettes in the U.S. since 2014.

[Image: FCA]

#AssemblyPlants #ConnerAveAssembly #Detroit #DodgeViper #Factories #Fca #FiatChryslerAutomobiles #Jobs

Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments

Join the conversation

6 of 24 comments

TW5 on Jul 12, 2017

The story of the Dodge Viper is a sad one. The original RT/10 roadster was obscene in a refreshing way. The US car market had turned away from fullsize American V8 boats and sports cars to smart European sedans and fuel-efficient Japanese appliances. But out of nowhere, Dodge dropped the Viper RT/10 on the car market. The Viper was an exercise in pretending the era of American big blocks never disappeared; instead, it continued throughout the 80s, until it spawned the 1st generation Viper. The RT/10 had a huge visual impact. It was as wide as a country lane, with side-pipes, massive tires and giant 3-spoke wheels. The engine was 8.0L of V-10 power, and it made the run to 60 in less than 5 seconds (an amazing feat in the early 90s). It was completely bonkers in the right ways. Unfortunately, Chrysler was seemingly embarrassed by the Viper's boorishness. Worse, the attempts to civilize subsequent generations of the car were executing in all the wrong ways. The visual impact of the vehicle was impaired. The side pipes were eliminated and later hidden. The roadster variant was eliminated. NVH (character) was tuned out of the vehicle, and the cartoonish gauges and instrumentation were eventually dropped. Meanwhile, the unsustainable part of the Viper concept, the engine and awful road manners, were retained, despite changes to Chrysler's engine portfolio and new federal regulations requiring ABS and anti-spin control. Rather than make a few difficult changes to the powertrain, chassis, and suspension, which would have spared the vehicle in the long run, Chrysler decided to keep watering down the visual aesthetic while puffing up a powertrain that was being regulated out of existence. Very sad.

Like Reply
- See 3 previous
- 28-Cars-Later on Jul 12, 2017
  
  This should be an op/ed.
  
  Like
- Jack4x on Jul 12, 2017
  
  The 5th generation Viper (2013-17) still has prominent side pipes. It still has the Viper lines from the Gen 2 GTS. In ACR form it has the biggest, most outrageous wings and carbon fiber splitters available on a street legal vehicle. The tachometer has a giant red snake graphic that lights up as you approach redline for gods sake. If that is not a cartoonish gauge cluster, I'm not sure what is. If your complaint is that the car has awful road manners and an outdated engine, I'd suggest you haven't driven a Gen 5 vs its competiton. If your complaint is that the aesthetics are watered down, I'd say look at an ACR with all the aero equipped, it looks like nothing else on the road and is probably the most visually striking vehicle available for sale today. The 5th gen was designed by a skunkworks team on the cheap, in the dark days of early Fiat ownership. That is why the chassis, suspension, and engine are little changed from the Gen 4. Nevertheless from that baseline, they managed to create a car that has set track records everywhere it has gone. Do I agree with everything the Viper team has done to the car over the years? No, of course not. But given the limited resources, slow sales, multiple ownership changes, etc. I think the product they put out is pretty f'in good. I'm sad that it's leaving too, but at least they stayed true to the end.
  
  Like
- TW5 on Jul 12, 2017
  
  @jack4x You're right. There were signs that Dodge realized an impending existential crisis for the Viper, and they took some steps to bolster the Viper's image; however, most of it was contrived. As you point out, Dodge maintained the cartoonish image with bolt-on aerodynamic pieces and flashing lights, neither of which have anything to do with the original design. I suppose you could argue that the entire Viper concept was a contrived engineering exercise, but the uncompromising steps taken by engineers and the passionate response from drivers indicated the RT/10 was more than just a contrived vehicle concept. My point about the powertrain is that it was meant to be ridiculous. The Phase-1 and Phase-2 vehicles could easily break the rear wheels loose under heavy throttle, despite the engine being aggressively detuned to 50hp/liter. Unfortunately for Chrysler, the government basically outlawed this sort of driving dynamic, and CAFE 2016 and 2025 were essentially going to outlaw the Viper's V10 powerplant. Rather than accept the prohibition of Viper's powertrain formula and driving dynamics, they actually doubled down. By the time they realized the problem, Chrysler was awaiting government bailout. The Viper project was badly mismanaged before and after the FCA merger. Sales tanked during the Great Recession, but they never recovered. FCA's decision to put a luxury interior in the vehicle, rather than returning the car to its conceptual roots was folly to say the least.
  
  Like
- Jack4x on Jul 12, 2017
  
  @TW5 I agree that the final product has strayed pretty far from the original Bob Lutz/modern Cobra ethos that was so sensational when the concept was first shown. But then again, so has the entire supercar landscape. The Viper was the most engine focused, comfort compromised, oldest school, least gimmicky supercar available in 1992, and it is arguably still that in 2017. Naturally aspirated, manual only, fewest driving aids required by law, etc. The luxury interior is optional, although I'm glad mine has it :) Ultimately, I'm not sure if the 1992 concept would sell any better now than the actual Gen 5. Every trend in fast cars is toward easy to drive, luxury, AWD, automatic transmissions, and electric. We as enthusiasts may not like it, but the market has spoken. I intend to save my Viper for my son, knowing he will never have the opportunity to purchase anything like it. I do think if FCA could have a do over back to 2011-12, they would not have released the Gen 5 as is. It would either have been a Corvette competitor with the Hemi standard and an auto option, maybe the V10 available in a top trim, or it would have been left to die in 2010. Since there wasn't money for Option 1, and too much love and passion to settle for Option 2, we got the compromise that was Gen 5. The move upmarket was an attempt to attract a new type of customer, but by then those people had written off the Viper and cars like it in favor of modern no-compromise supercars in the >$100k market. The traditional Viper buyer balked at the large price increase and the rest is history. Ironically, now the ACR is attracting tons of (deserved) attention but it's too late. They must have known since the beginning that the car would never make it more than a few years before safety or MPG standards killed it but by god did they go out with a bang.
  
  Like
EBFlex on Jul 13, 2017

Nice to see senseless government meddling cost us another awesome automobile.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

GregLocock Car companies can only really sell cars that people who are new car buyers will pay a profitable price for. As it turns out fewer and fewer new car buyers want sedans. Large sedans can be nice to drive, certainly, but the number of new car buyers (the only ones that matter in this discussion) are prepared to sacrifice steering and handling for more obvious things like passenger and cargo space, or even some attempt at off roading. We know US new car buyers don't really care about handling because they fell for FWD in large cars.
Slavuta Why is everybody sweating? Like sedans? - go buy one. Better - 2. Let CRV/RAV rust on the dealer lot. I have 3 sedans on the driveway. My neighbor - 2. Neighbors on each of our other side - 8 SUVs.
Theflyersfan With sedans, especially, I wonder how many of those sales are to rental fleets. With the exception of the Civic and Accord, there are still rows of sedans mixed in with the RAV4s at every airport rental lot. I doubt the breakdown in sales is publicly published, so who knows... GM isn't out of the sedan business - Cadillac exists and I can't believe I'm typing this but they are actually decent - and I think they are making a huge mistake, especially if there's an extended oil price hike (cough...Iran...cough) and people want smaller and hybrids. But if one is only tied to the quarterly shareholder reports and not trends and the big picture, bad decisions like this get made.
Wjtinfwb Not proud of what Stellantis is rolling out?
Wjtinfwb Absolutely. But not incredibly high-tech, AWD, mega performance sedans with amazing styling and outrageous price tags. GM needs a new Impala and LeSabre. 6 passenger, comfortable, conservative, dead nuts reliable and inexpensive enough for a family guy making 70k a year or less to be able to afford. Ford should bring back the Fusion, modernized, maybe a bit bigger and give us that Hybrid option again. An updated Taurus, harkening back to the Gen 1 and updated version that easily hold 6, offer a huge trunk, elevated handling and ride and modest power that offers great fuel economy. Like the GM have a version that a working mom can afford. The last decade car makers have focused on building cars that American's want, but eliminated what they need. When a Ford Escape of Chevy Blazer can be optioned up to 50k, you've lost the plot.