2006 Chrysler 300c Hemi V8 Only 12,427 Original Miles!! Silver Steel Metallic on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Will the Chrysler 300 go front-wheel drive?

FCA chief executive Sergio Marchionne hinted last week that the strapping rear-wheel-drive Chrysler 300 sedan could go front-wheel drive for its next generation using the underpinnings from the Chrysler Pacifica minivan. Speaking at the Pacifica's production launch in Windsor, ON, Marchionne said, "this plant and this architecture is capable of making the 300 successor, the front-wheel, all-wheel-drive successor," Reuters reported. Perhaps realizing he appeared to be announcing a dramatic shift in product strategy, Marchionne backpedaled in response to a follow-up question, noting only that the Ontario factory is "capable" of making the sedan. "It's capable. It's not a commitment," he said, according to Reuters. The 300 is currently built in Brampton, ON, alongside the mechanically similar Dodge Charger and Challenger. The platform, known as LX in enthusiast circles, is an evolution of Mercedes-based chassis pieces that date to the DaimlerChrysler era. Marchionne's comments didn't cover the Dodges and left a lot open to interpretation. The 300 could switch to front- and all-wheel-drive and focus on a more civilized, elegant ride character, leaving the Charger and two-door Challenger as traditional rear-wheel-drive muscle cars. That strategy would further differentiate the Chrysler and Dodge car lines. Additionally, the Charger's RWD platform makes it a popular police vehicle, and both Dodges are offered in top trim as 707-horsepower Hellcats. Switching to front-wheel drive would seemingly complicate both of those endeavors. Rumors have also swirled that Alfa Romeo could contribute RWD underpinnings for Dodge. Related Video: Featured Gallery 2015 Chrysler 300 View 92 Photos Design/Style Chrysler Dodge Off-Road Vehicles Performance Sedan chrysler pacifica

UAW reveals more details for tentative FCA deal

Around 40,000 union workers employed by Fiat Chrysler Automobiles have a new proposed contract to vote for or against just about a week after soundly rejecting a previous proposal. Like the contract that was rejected, this new proposal was negotiated between union leadership and management at FCA. If workers vote this time to accept the contract, negotiations are likely to begin in earnest with the other two big American automakers, Ford and General Motors. The biggest sticking points that kept the previous contract proposal from being ratified revolved around so-called second-tier UAW workers. Under the rejected contract, there wasn't a clear path in place that would bring these newer hires into wage parity with first-tier workers. The newly proposed contract, however, would have second-tier employees earning around $29 per hour – the same as first-tier workers – after eight years of employment. A slightly revised profit-sharing plan is also included, as is a larger signing bonus for first-tier workers. Gone from the new contract proposal is a health-care cooperative that would combine workers from all three Detroit-based automakers into one pool. While this action had the potential to lower health-care costs for UAW members, it wasn't universally understood by rank-and-file workers, said UAW President Dennis Williams. "I was a little naive," he said. "I really thought everyone understood it. It is my fault. I should have educated people more on it. And so we did take it out of the agreement." If ratified, this new contract will go into effect immediately and will cover a four-year period. Over that course of time, the UAW expects FCA to increase its employment figures by a little more than 100 workers, according to reports. Additional details on the contract can be seen on the UAW's website here. News Source: The Detroit News, The Detroit Free Press, United Auto Workers (PDF)Image Credit: Jeff Kowalsky/Bloomberg via Getty Earnings/Financials Hirings/Firings/Layoffs UAW/Unions Chrysler Fiat FCA

Detroit and Silicon Valley: When cultures collide

Culture is a subject that rarely, if never, gets discussed when traditional auto companies buy — or hugely invest — in Silicon Valley-based companies. The conversation surrounding the investments is usually about how the tech looks appealing and how it's an appropriate step to move the automakers toward autonomy. Culture — the way things are done, the expectations, and the approaches — is something that is overlooked only at one's peril. The potential cultural gap is almost always evident in the obligatory photos of the participants in these deals, with is essentially a photo op of auto execs with their Silicon Valley counterparts. The former — rocking jeans and no ties — look like parochial school kids playing hooky. Don't worry: The regimental outfits will be back in place once they get back in the Eastern time zone. Consider what happened back in 1998 when Daimler bought Chrysler. First of all, there was a denial in Detroit that it happened. It was positioned as a "merger of equals." Which it wasn't. In any corporate situation, when one has more than 50 percent of the business, it owns the whole thing. And the German company was in the proverbial driver's seat. People who were around Auburn Hills back then kept their heads down and their German Made Simple books at hand. Things did not go well. Daimler had had enough by 2007, when it offloaded Chrysler to Cerberus Capital Management — which brought ex-Home Depot CEO Bob Nardelli into the picture, which is a story onto itself. But when you think about the Daimler-Chrysler situation, realize that these were two car companies (at least the Mercedes part of the Daimler organization), so they had that in common, and the language of engineers is something of an Esperanto based on math, so there was that, too. Yet it simply didn't work. It doesn't take too many viewings of HBO's Silicon Valley to know that the business people in that part of the world are far more aggressive than people who ordinarily head and control car companies in Detroit. About 20 years ago, a book came out about the founder of Oracle titled The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison* - and the asterisk on the book jacket leads to: God Doesn't Think He's Larry Ellison. It would be hard to imagine a book about a Detroit executive, even a book that had the decided bias that the tome about Ellison evinces, that would be quite so searing. Sure, there are egos. But they are still perceived to be, overall, "nice" people.