Desperate times call for desperate measures. If you’re struggling, you need to find the quickest way to get you into a better place, even if it might not be the solution you’d choose if you had more time.
It would be an understatement to say that Stellantis could use a sales success these days. If you got a buck every time Matt Hardigee wrote a Morning Dump with a headline like “Stellantis Is In Trouble” you’d have enough to buy a rather nice lunch by now. Other than RAM trucks and Jeep Wranglers, many of their other models are hurting in the marketplace with months of supply of seemingly also-ran products or niche vehicles with limited demand. This isn’t a situation they’re unfamiliar with; they’ve been there before.
Chrysler was in peril back in the dark days of the mid-seventies, and they found a ray of hope by merely dressing up a Dodge Monaco for the then-hot personal luxury coupe segment and having Ricardo Montalban hawking it as the “Cordoba.” Over 150,000 of these things found buyers in the first year (with 165,000 the next), proving that you don’t necessarily need a clean-sheet-of-paper answer to your problems. The Cordoba wasn’t even the best car in its class, but offering something reasonably competitive at a reasonable price was by far better for Chrysler than having nothing at all.
History can repeat itself. What’s the hottest selling car or type of vehicle that Stellantis could attempt to crib with what they have to work with today? It’s actually a Ford product, and it isn’t a car: the Maverick unibody pickup.
Mustang, Taurus… Maverick?
Despite it being attributed to him, there is no evidence that Henry Ford ever said “if you had asked people what they wanted, they would have said ‘faster horses.'” Regardless, it’s a true statement, and Ford has occasionally given us new categories of vehicles over the years that really got buyers to grab their checkbooks. The Blue Oval brought us the “pony” car with the Mustang and gave Euro-style aero cars to the masses with the Taurus (they also brought us the concept of the minivan, but Henry II fired the guys that did it and they took it to Chrysler). Recently, Ford presented the public with the unibody compact truck, a pickup for people who had never considered purchasing a pickup before.
While nobody was looking and with none of the hoopla that surrounded things like that first ‘Stang, Ford has quietly sold the living shit out of the Maverick. Ford sold 74,370 Mavericks in the pickup’s debut year of 2022, with sales climbing to 91,882 in 2023. This year, they’re on pace to sell over 140,000 units. Most “hot” selling cars move off lots well the first year and then sales slowly start to drop as everyone that wanted one essentially already bought one. The Maverick just can’t stop finding new buyers.
With the kind of sales success the Maverick has had, you would think that marketing meetings in every large car company would have big image of this little Ford on screen with higher-ups yelling “where the hell is our competitor for this?”Despite the fact that the Maverick came out three years ago, nobody has anything to answer for it, or at least not really.
Could Stellantis change that on the cheap?
Too Truckish, Not Truckish Enough?
There’s been a lot of talk about the compact truck Stellantis is making for Brazil, somewhat redundantly named the RAM Rampage. It very much looks like a ¾ scale RAM 1500, and it’s caused quite a stir with media and others that think it might be the perfect competitor for the Ford Maverick.
Needless to say, there are some hurdles to this ever happening. First of all, a vehicle made for the South American market likely hasn’t been designed and engineered to the stringent regulations of the NHTSA and EPA; quite possibly they would have to start from the beginning with an American version. The bigger issue might be that the Rampage quite possibly isn’t the answer to Stellantis prayers that many think it is after all.
Why not? Well, people shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that the compact car-like SUV platform the Maverick is built on and its non-aggressive appearance is likely the key to its overwhelming acceptance by the marketplace and those that likely never, ever considered a pickup truck before (or had a spouse that said absolutely-no-trucks). Do you like the Brazilian Rampage’s tough big-rig appearance and overall demeanor? If so, you’ve just proved that it’s a bit too much like a truck to really give the Maverick a run for its money. Honestly, many reports have the Americanized Rampage coming in as a larger mid-sized truck to compete with the likes of a Ford Ranger; this sounds more logical as a path for this truck but it’s missing the cash grab that is the Maverick.
On the other hand, the Hyundai Santa Cruz seems to miss the bogey that is the Maverick for the opposite reason. With a rather small bed and too-swoopy styling, the Subaru Baja-like Santa Cruz has found a niche market but nowhere near the demand that Ford is having trouble keeping up with. It just isn’t truckish enough. Also, it’s too expensive.
No, what is needed is something that takes the Maverick’s middle-of-the-road formula and improves upon it. There might be a shortcut for Stellantis to get this rather quickly.
Why You Hating?
It’s time to play contrarian. I’m almost getting bored from reading bad news about Dodge’s compact crossover, the Dodge Hornet. There must be a silver lining.
The Hornet has been at the top of the list of “slowest-selling vehicles” recently. In September there was a 428-day supply of units in inventory, and only 1,536 had recently left dealerships. Why is this thing so saleproof?
Critics have found the interior tight and cargo space rather limited for its class, as well as somewhat poor interior materials and even NVH issues with some of the powertrain options. The bigger problem might be reported reliability issues that some would say are befitting a car that’s made in Italy as a rebadged Alfa Romeo. Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?
The play actually wasn’t bad. As an Alfa-in-disguise, the Hornet possesses reasonable performance and rather fine road manners that a safer bet like the RAV4 or Nissan Rogue couldn’t match. Styling of the Hornet isn’t horrible either, and there is a hybrid version on offer.
Stellantis has to fix the inherent quality and reliability problems of the Hornet, which will doom even the best-designed car to a market death. That’s a tall order, but even if they do rectify those issues, the cargo space deficiency will remain unless they were to do something radical like throw a cargo bed on the back of the thing.
Wait a minute–is that the answer?
You Want More Cargo Room? I’ll Give You More Cargo Room
Don’t laugh. The Hornet isn’t that far off in size from the Ford Escape on which the hot-selling Maverick is based. Could Stellantis pull off an El Camino-ized unibody pickup successfully from this struggling crossover?
I certainly think so. The Maverick is built on the same platform as the Ford Escape and Bronco Sport, both of which are similar in size and intent to the Dodge Hornet; why not make a pickup version? We’ll call it the RAM Scamp. Here’s a side-by-side comparison if we make these things similar in length and wheelbase:
Surprisingly, the styling seems to hold together on a quick concept rendering which I’ve dubbed the RAM Scamp. The RAM grille in front fits pretty wall, and somehow it works better on the rather blunt nose of the Hornet than the original face. I haven’t even changed the rear door glass, merely added black trim pieces to continue the greenhouse visually.
Here’s an animation to show the changes:
In back, a tailgate naturally replaces the hatch, and step bumper blends nicely into the original shape.
So far, so good, but the Hornet needs that one feature to create true one-upmanship on the Maverick. Currently, Ford’s unibody truck does not offer any form of midgate to complement its rather short bed, though as Jason pointed out recently there’s a patent floating around that indicates Ford is ready to fix that. Still, the midgate in the patent images is quite small; really just a pass-through under that glass for boards or thin objects. I bet Jason’s infamous canoe would be too tall to fit. Also, the midgate in the patent drawings has to fit into a small pit in the bed that is space wasting in an area that could be used for things like additional batteries on hybrid models.
The Scamp’s solution is the liftgate rear. Pull the release and the rear window and back wall of the bed lift up like a hatchback; once fully raised you can extend little struts to lock it in place so that it doesn’t bounce over bumps. Simple to use, and no space wasted in the bed or interior. Also, you’ll have part of the bed covered by the raised hatch like a sunshade.
One would imagine that the Scamp would be rather fun to drive, likely even more so than the rather staid Maverick. They’d need to get the quality and reliability improved over the current Italian-built Hornet. Actually, they’d probably have to build the whole thing here anyway or else this thing might be subject to the “Chicken Tax” or any other import tariffs.
Can You Carry Natty In The Bed Of An Alfa Pickup?
Even if there was a pickup version of the Hornet’s twin, the Alfa Tonale, it would likely need to be made here. Wait, an Alfa pickup? Are you kidding?
Surprisingly, Alfa Romeo trucks and pickups have already been made. From 1954 to 1983 there were commercial vehicles from this brand, and interestingly enough the ones made up to 1966 were called “Alfa Romeo Romeo.” Don’t laugh- Chevrolet had a Chevrolet Chevy Van so that’s just as bad:
So the Tonale-based Alfa Camioncino (Italian for pickup truck) would not be the first one to bear the badge of the serpent.
It doesn’t look bad, and it would be just as entertaining to run as the Scamp (if not more so). BMW has claimed that they will never make a pickup and I’m sure other high-end European brands have said the same thing at least internally. I say screw them; why not? Honestly, one advantage of having nothing to lose (and, let’s face it, Stellantis is nearly at that point) is taking chances. Nobody raises an eyebrow at a Cayenne now; it has to start somewhere. Wouldn’t it be great to have a sport luxury truck to carry your bales of hay or alfalfa (sorry about that)?
Run What You Brung, Guys
Does the Scamp ignore some of the shortcomings of the Hornet/Tonale to make a quick buck? Some might say that, but a lot can be improved upon in those basic designs. They’re salvageable products and, truth be told, Stellantis can’t realistically start from scratch.
Is the Scamp a bit of a lash-up, as in taking a less-than-stellar competitor in one segment and trying to make it into something else? If it is, it wouldn’t be the first. Ford took the sort of dull and clunky Falcon and turned into the Mustang. General Motors modified a Chevy Nova and built what was then the most expensive Cadillac regular sedan you could buy with the 1975 Seville. Neither of those were perfect, but they could barely make them fast enough. The chin scratchers might scoff at these creations, but sales are far more important than critical acclaim.
Come on, Stellantis. It’s far better to have something than nothing at all.
Maybe People Really Just Hate The ‘Big’ Part Of Big Luxury Trucks – The Autopian
One Year With The Ford Maverick: An Almost Perfect Truck – The Autopian
Patent Suggests Ford May Finally Give The Maverick The One Thing It Truly Needs – The Autopian
Tow a scamp with a scamp https://www.scamptrailers.com/
The key to the maverick is the hybrid and the cost. I suspect if dodge could have brought those to the table they already would have.
Hybrid with 35+ mileage, a semblance of a bed and a price under 30k and you could probably move some units.
In Canada they start the very base model for 36 grand, it just isn’t the deal it was praised to be anymore. I agree this segment of small trucks needs to be priced 25-34,000 to make sense value wise.
in 2022 they started at 20K, but limited production to avoid loosing too much money on those loss leaders. the price has rose each year since, sometimes a couple of times. But the first year hype of selling out or building desire because you could not find one stoked the crowd mentality. these things will likely see sales drops the next few years as the people that still want them get one and then move on.
They haven’t because they don’t want to.
“You WILL drive the 1500. You WILL pay $60,000.”
Wait you made it even uglier.
That wouldn’t sell, to ugly for the mainstream, and not bro truck enough for the average ram buyer. Just let dodge die already
O Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo?
Deny thy father and refuse thy name;
Or, if thou wilt not, be but sworn my love,
And I’ll no longer be a Dodge.
Look, I like it. I just have a hard rule. Never Buy Stellantis
The Santa Cruz styling is more polarizing than the Maverick’s but I don’t think that contributes to the difference in success between the two so much. If you flipped the styling between them but kept everything else the same – pricing, powertrains – I think the one with Ford badges would still be the superior seller.
For Hyundai the SC was almost always going to be a niche player, for Ford the Maverick was always destined for some degree of volume. The fleet market alone makes up a healthy opportunity for them.
The Rampage would potentially have the same success as the Maverick as long as they kept closer to its formula in trims and powertrains. A Rampage Tradesman priced alongside the Maverick XL would give them another sub-$30k model in showrooms, and a competitor in that area of the fleet market, which they have nothing now – closest was the ProMaster City, maybe the 1500 Classic priced out close. The Rampage looking like a 1500 that got shrunk in the wash should potentially only help it on the retail side.
He is not wrong, the Fleet Hybrid littered the fleet lots all the while those who plopped down money for the chance to get one often never did.
Even the Ecoboost isn’t a bad choice depending on the use case and what it’s up against. Just a cheap utility – the price remains a couple grand under an Escape or Equinox as far as domestics go. Against smaller trucks – thousands under a base Ranger/Tacoma/Colorado, and better rated MPG, which I’d think looks pretty good on a spreadsheet for figuring out the running costs. Exterminator companies seemed like a perfect candidate, they always seemed to just like the cheapest vehicles with room they could get, regular cab small pickups that they threw caps on, or small vans like the Transit Connect.
utility groups that previously used Nissan’s seemed to switch over for the fuel economy. though many wanted those back two seat for more junk to haul around and there is not really an organizer to make the space useful if the seat are removed. Still, quite a few are out there now with hot sticks and Cargo Nets in the back seat area.
Both the name “Scamp” and the emblem have a very 90’s vibe to them. I love it.
Actually taken right out of Mopar history. That logo was used on a Plymouth version of the two door Dart Swinger in the early seventies as well as on a Plymouth version of the Horizon based Rampage in the early eighties.
I don’t know if the design would sell. It looks to close on the Santa Cruze side of the equation with me.
Building a Hornet-based compact pick-up truck sounds familiar.
Probably because the Small-Wide 4X4 LWB chassis the Hornet is built on is… the exact same chassis as the Rampage, all of which started as the Compass.
So, it shouldn’t be that difficult. Costly, yes, but not too difficult. It’s just something they decided not to do, like a 4XE Compass for North America when the EU and other markets get it but that’s the status-quo for these guys.
I’ve never understood their decision making for who gets what. The profit margins would be bigger in the U.S. compared to Europe where there’s multiple tax brackets for EU market vehicles that control the cost somewhat.
Much of it was lazy yes men in Auburn Hills. It seems like the normal talking point, particularly in years past, is that the American divisions are constantly given much more freedom to do what they want to, but it seems that being told about margins means they’d rather not try to pull anything new out that isn’t going to make those margins immediately.
They need to understand that not everything can be a big profit maker, and that making less profits turns into more when you aren’t throwing billions to another car company to offset the potential fines of the governments you deal with.
This is a great idea. But instead of the turbo 4, give it some sort of hybrid powertrain as standard, available in volume and either match or undercut the Maverick hybrid in price and they’ll turn around the Dodge Horny sales in no time.
The PHEV powertrain offered on the Hornet would work fine.
Not sure how much I trust Stellantis’ PHEV system to actually work. The Gladiator PHEV is looking a little “toasty” right now.
My Pacifica PHEV has definitely had some spooky recalls, but it absolutely works.
My neighbours, very much the type who would buy a hybrid, purposely avoided the hybrid version when they got a new Pacifica.
Why the Pacifica over the others? Their 15 year old grand caravan has been amazingly reliable for them. It spends a good portion of its life being used as a cargo van and has had three kids learn to drive in it and still works with minimal repairs.
Ehh. It has issues but they have all been covered under warranty. In contrast a lot of gas Pacifica owners have had to replace engines out of pocket.
I was mostly tongue-in-cheek about the Gladiator PHEV’s fire hazard recall. Unlike the Jeep, I’ve met and talked with Pacifica PHEV owners, who are pretty happy with their vehicles. It just comes down to my overall lack of confidence in Stellantis making reliable products with newer technologies. Especially considering the once promising Hornet’s reputation might now be damaged beyond repair.
I would agree, I got stuck with a Grand Cherokee 4xe in Richmond, VA last month when my Alamo Audi blew out a tire on a trip. The hybrid system in that thing was the worst hybrid system I have every driven. The computer couldn’t figure out when to engage the engine or the motor, it would out of the clear blue sky turn on the engine and rev it to 4000 rpm when driving at < 10mph. It was horrible. The basic design of the vehicle was nice but the execution was terrible. Even little things like the fonts and graphic design of the dashboard screens looked like a 12 year old did them (no offence to 12 year olds). Just comparing them to the screens on my 24 Colorado it’s no comparison.
Although the Hornet’s fascia with a RAM-eaque grille could work well without looking overly aggressive, I’m of the opinion that the design needs to be boxier. But as mentioned earlier, I don’t think saddling it with the current powertrain would equate to more sales.
Semi related: if utes and the LX platform were still things in the US, a ute based on the Challenger would be pretty cash money.
Just ask Mark Smith! His Charger ute kits are HOT
As a very happy Maverick owner, I want to tell you the main reason I chose it over all the other pickups: It was at least ten inches shorter than all the other new pickups available. I wanted it to fit in my garage, but I also wanted other stuff to fit in my garage too.
The Maverick is all about practical compromises, and that’s why people love it. If other companies want to create a competitor to it, they need to keep that in mind.
Also they need to include cool colors like Cyber Orange (aka Metallic School Bus Yellow). I got it and that color is sweet.
As a Maverick owner, you nailed it! It’s a multitool of a truck. Do multitools do any one thing well? Not really. Do they do many things pretty decently, while being compact and supremely useful? Yup!
I love it just b/c it’s a fun-looking vehicle, right down the badge font. The effect is right out of the ’90s, when people were enjoying things and were much more secure in who they were. Which is why Dodge would never go there now.
Too good an idea, so Stellantis won’t do it.
Exactly. Stellantis isn’t about good ideas, otherwise they wouldn’t have made a compact CUV that is both overpriced and unable to compete in a market that values CUVs above nearly all else (the exception being fullsize trucks).
“First of all, a vehicle made for the South American market likely hasn’t been designed and engineered to the stringent regulations of the NHTSA and EPA; quite possibly they would have to start from the beginning with an American version.”
This will all become moot in a few months, when both of those agencies are dissolved by the new regime. However, 200% tariffs on imported cars will price this out of the market.
I can use the Alfa ute to haul the parts that I need to fix my Alfa- hmm I think I see a circular problem here
That’s why, for just $450, you can option for the manual operated supplemental carry system that fits into the bed. An Alfa branded wheelbarrow.
Only if it is delivered full of shrimp.
They might have to rename it the Marlin then.
I’d rather get the Superleggera wheelbarrow for $700
The Alcantara handle covers are nice.
KAAAAAAHHHHHHN!!!!!!
You’ve managed to kill just about everyone else, but like a poor marksman, you keep missing the target.
I’ve hurt you, and I wish to go on hurting you.
I think a couple of things make the Maverick popular (from a Maverick owner):
1: It really looks like a Ford Truck. Ford trucks are it’s bread and butter, and they do trucks well. A lot of the clever things that make Ford trucks great trickled down to the Maverick (pro-power, trailer back up assist, the Tremor trim, etc.) It’s also square, like a Ford truck is.
2) It doesn’t have a noticeable sail panel. Sail panels make trucks look…less truck-like. Baja, Avalanche, Santa Cruz, first gen Ridgeline. These all don’t look like traditional trucks, and lost a big market share because of that.
3) Relatively tried and true powertrains. The 2.0 has been around for a long time and has many of the bugs worked out. The 2.5 hybrid was used in taxi service for years and has Toyota’s E-CVT that doesn’t break. Hyundai engines are known to grenade, and I doubt anyone trusts the longevity of the dual clutch on the turbo models.
At the end of the day, I doubt this Hornet Trucklet would sell well because it doesn’t really look like a traditional pickup, the drivetrains are unreliable, and it doesn’t really cash in on the Ram brand styling. I’d argue that the Brazilian Rampage would sell well in the US, if they could make it here. They also need a Dakota REAL bad at this point.
This is the correct answer.
I hate sail panels on trucks.
Side comment: Thank goodness both the Maverick and the Santa Cruz both learned from the Baja in styling…for what not to do. The Baja broke the cardinal rule for American-Market trucks… DO NOT have the rear door cut into the rear wheel well. Doing so makes it look decisively less American-Market and makes the bed look like an afterthought. At least both trucklet’s had the forethought to extend the chassis to push the rear wheels back.
Is there seriously no one working at Stellantis who sees the opportunity you blatantly designed for them already? If they aren’t offering to let you lead the design, they should at least pay you a consulting fee and then run as fast as they can with that design to their superiors.
Separately, I imagine this instantly becoming nicknamed the ScRAMp, and if they failed to fix the issues, just referred to as Krampus instead.
I’d rather see them make a VW T3 Doka style truck out of the Pacifica.
Hell, the ID Buzz should be made into one, with a range extender.
That would just be way too much fun.
Sell it under the Jeep brand, it’s the new Jeep FC! David Tracy will buy 10 of them.
So… this would have even less-trucky styling than the not-trucky-enough Santa Fe, with the high-cost bones of a premium crossover, a badge associated with anti-social hooligans, and the reliability of an Alfa Romeo.
Where do I not sign up?
On the list of “The Bishop Concepts That Could Actually Happen”, this is pretty close to the top.
Why not? I remember back in the day when Chrysler took a nice Reliant automobile, and turned it into a minivan, a hatch, a “sporty” coupe, a limousine and more. Hyundai’s Santa Cruz is just a rebodied Santa Fe isn’t it?
Also, I for one think that your renderings make it look quite handsome.
I think the Santa Cruz is Tuscon based. It’s easy to get all of those Hyundai southwest locations mixed up.
I agree though, I miss the days (somehow) where automakers were willing to throw all sorts of bodies onto one platform to give you a ton of options. Now it’s “What size crossover would you like sir, small, medium, large or extra large?”
Now it’s “What size crossover would you like sir, small, medium, large or extra large?”
Except for the Seinfeld-ian “well, the small is actually a medium, the medium is large…”
“Nice Reliant automobile” said no one, ever.
..well, these guys did:
https://youtu.be/aynCgnbbgbM
Thank you Bishop, I’m glad someone got my reference!!
Great song. I absolutely love Bare Naked Ladies! Woah woah woah! I’m talking about the band y’all! Get your minds out of the gutter
Oops. Replied to the wrong person below, but great song. Cue the Captain America “I understood that reference” meme
Hasn’t the Italian government, or maybe it was just bi wigs at Alfa, but I’m 90% sure there’s a decree out there that all Alfas have to be made in Italy. That’s why we got the Fiata as a Fiat instead of an Alfa as was originally planned.
There was a model Alfa planned to name “Milano” that the Italian government wouldn’t sign off on because it is built in Poland rather than Italy, let alone in greater Milan. They said the name would confuse the public, IIRC.
And, frankly, I don’t see how the sexual orientations of any of Alfa’s wigs of any size are relevant to this topic.
As long as I still get my Milano cookies, all is good.
Yeah it was a statement by Marchionne, he wouldn’t sign off on the 124 being an Alfa because he wanted all Alfas to be made in Italy, but even when he said that it wasn’t the case. It was something he was aiming to make happen but it never did.
Such decrees can and will change if there’s money to be made, especially when many if not most buyers don’t know or even give a shit where their car is actually made.
Yeah I looked it up, it was a Marchionne decree and was aspirational even then because when he said that they already had Alfas being made elsewhere. So I don’t think it would matter anymore.
Well, they could and do make Alfa Romeos outside Italy, the Italian government’s issue is using Italian cities/geographic locations in their names and Italian flags and symbols in badging and marketing on vehicles not made in Italy
The pickup would have to be built in the US, there’s no way around that due to the Chicken Tax, any extra Alfa Romeo sales in Italy would be incremental anyway. I would also suspect tooling up a plant in the US would bring down the per unit production cost of the Hornet and maybe slightly improve quality, or at least not be worse. However, that would all be strongly opposed by Italian labor unions and the government, and it doesn’t make sense to do a whole separate production line just for the pickup
Maybe they could do it by supporting the bed on a subframe welded to the front unibody cab section, making it a semi-BOF. Build in Italy to keep the Italians happy and that factory occupied, import as an unfinished vehicle, make the beds here and bolt them on at the port in Baltimore
I love the idea but give it another 1-2 ft in bed length and make it cheaper than a Maverick.
Maybe, but the idea is to keep it as short as possible for the 98 percent of the time you don’t need the space. A fold-up cargo “fence” around the open tailgate plus that open hatch gate would give you a very long space for those few times most people would need area that big.
Truck beds are too small. Yes the opening helps but not for messy stuff in bad weather. Then again my 2% of the time truck bed is a utility trailer. If we want them as short as possible why not just finish the trend and make all truck boxes 1 ft long?
Maybe a little longer than one foot. But certainly with a standard rigid tonneau cover that’s hinged at the forward edge behind the cab for easy access, giving access to a “payload area” (that serves for now because “bed” doesn’t sound like the right descriptor anymore. but it will need something that uses a single word to metaphorically imply a closed, transportable cargo hold) that’s sealed and secure from both inclement weather and crime.
“Trunk”
“Boot”