2005 Chrysler 300 Series C on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Fiat shareholders green-light Chrysler merger, end of an Italian era

Fiat has just taken a major step away from its Italian heritage, as shareholders officially approved the company's merger with Chrysler. That move will lead to the formation of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV, a Dutch company based in Great Britain and listed on the New York Stock Exchange, according to Automotive News Europe.
The company captured the two-thirds majority at a special shareholders meeting, although there are still a few situations that could defeat the movement. According to ANE, roughly eight percent of shareholders opposed the merger, which is a group large enough to defeat the plan, should they all exercise their exit rights outlined in the merger conditions.
Meanwhile, Fiat Chairman John Elkann (pictured above, right, with CEO Sergio Marchionne and Ferrari Chairman Luca Cordero di Montezemolo), the great-great-grandson of Fiat founder Giovanni Agnelli, reaffirmed his family's commitment to the company beyond the merger. Exor, the Agnelli family's holding company, still maintains a 30-percent stake in Fiat.

10 cool cars from Peugeot's lineup we'd love to see in the U.S.

FCA and PSA are merging: The mega-alliance will not just bring a desperately needed technology boost to Fiat Chrysler, it will also open up potential U.S. sales venues to brands that have long been absent here. Citroen left in the 1970s, Peugeot deserted us 20 years later; Citroen's DS spinoff is a complete unknown in the States. Moreover, there's Opel, formerly a part of General Motors, with its UK-based Vauxhall attachment. As a brand, Opel was last seen here around 1970, its models sold through the Buick sales channel. Even though Opel is now part of the PSA empire, there is still significant overlap with Buick: The Buick Encore is an Opel Mokka, the Regal is an Insignia, and though this is its last model year in the States, the Cascada had been shared as well. But in Europe, the replacement of GM-shared platforms with PSA-Opel models is well under way, We have assembled 10 of the most interesting cars currently offered under the Citroen, DS, Peugeot and Opel/Vauxhall monikers. Should they be offered in the U.S.? We certainly think they deserve consideration. Citroen C4 Cactus Purist architecture in automotive form: The polarizing C4 Cactus is shaped by geometric lines, although it has recently been toned down and assumed a somewhat crossover-like stance that was absent before the facelift. Also lost is the funky full-width front bench that you could initially choose. Still, the C4 Cactus shuns conventional notions of aggressive and prestige-oriented design, opting for functionality and a product-design-like attitude. Sadly, it won't survive past its current generation. Citroen C5 Aircross Bigger and taller than the C4 Cactus, the C5 Aircross features even more of an SUV look, though it comes with front-wheel drive only. Controls and instruments have a reduced, product-design-like look, and the seat patterns offer a retrofuturistic interpretation of 1970s design. The "Advanced Comfort" chassis emphasizes ride quality, but the C5 Aircross is still surprisingly agile. No wonder, as Citroen has a proud rally heritage.  DS 3 Crossback This compact crossover oozes technology and luxury: Fitted with diesel or gasoline engines or with a fully electric powertrain, the DS 3 Crossback can be specified with a plethora of premium options. The cockpit plays with upscale patterns and materials; some dashboard versions are actually inspired by stucco veneziano. The diesel, our favorite engine option for this vehicle, is incredibly efficient and surprisingly torquey.

Fiat Chrysler will pay $70M to settle safety disclosure suit

FCA US will pay a $70 million civil penalty to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for failing to submit Early Warning Report data going back to 2003. The automaker will also provide any missing data since that time, and an auditor will monitor future compliance. NHTSA says the failures to report this information "stem from problems in FCA's electronic system for monitoring and reporting safety data, including improper coding and failure to account for changes in brand names." There are no allegations of any intentional deception by the automaker. NHTSA will wrap up the latest fine with the previous consent order against FCA US earlier this year for the automaker's handling of 23 recalls. The company will know owe the safety regulator a total of $140 million in cash, and there will be possibility of $35 million more in deferred penalties if FCA doesn't comply with the agency's requests. In a statement about the fine to Autoblog, FCA US said the automaker "accepts these penalties and is revising its processes to ensure regulatory compliance." The company strongly believes that it didn't miss any safety problems over the time with this problem. Early Warning Reports include information on deaths, injuries, crashes, and other potential safety concerns, and NHTSA often uses the data in investigations for possible recalls. In September, the safety agency first announced the automaker failed to submit these documents. At the time, the regulator's administrator Mark Rosekind promised to "take appropriate action after gathering additional information on the scope and causes of this failure." FCA US also released a statement then about the lapse and said the company notified NHTSA immediately after discovering the problem. FCA US is not the first company to run afoul of NHTSA's reporting requirement. The agency fined Triumph Motorcycles and Honda this year for similar lapses. It also punished Ferrari in 2014. U.S. DOT Fines Fiat Chrysler $70 million for Failure to Provide Early Warning Report Data to NHTSA WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has imposed a $70 million civil penalty on Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) for the auto manufacturer's failure to report legally required safety data. The penalty follows FCA's admission in September that it had failed, over several years, to provide Early Warning Report data to NHTSA as required by the TREAD Act of 2000.