2012 Chrysler 300 Limited on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2017 Chrysler Pacifica First Drive

I know this is supposed to be a shameful secret, but I like minivans. I like the way the kids can enter and exit easily with the sliding doors. I like the comfortable ride they provide on road trips. I like the way I can reconfigure the interior seats to haul groceries, furniture, and kids. For decades, the minivan has been maimed by its uncoolness. Sales of the family movers have tapered to about 500,000 units per year while American families have shifted their allegiance to crossovers and SUVs. But America loves a redemption story, and I believe the minivan can be redeemed. Chrysler does too. At a time when the company is shedding vehicles from its lineup – so long, Chrysler 200 and Dodge Dart – its executives aren't paying any attention to whatever conventional wisdom suggests the minivan segment has foundered and reached its end. Instead, Chrysler just spent $2 billion to overhaul the architecture for its minivan. Enter the 2017 Pacifica, an all-new vehicle that immediately replaces the Town & Country and eventually will replace the Dodge Grand Caravan. It couldn't have come at a better time. Consumer Reports recently named the outgoing Town & Country one of its "Ten Worst Picks" among 2016 vehicles, an eyesore for the company that pioneered the minivan segment. Enticed by a slew of standard features and heavy incentives, I happen to own one of those disparaged Town & Country vans. Other than a transmission that always seems to be searching for the right gear, I've got no substantial complaints about the car. While it'd be a reach to say that any minivan is attractive, the new design makes the Pacifica the best of the bunch. But my ownership experience made me curious about how the new Pacifica would fare, whether Chrysler's billions were invested well and mostly, whether the Pacifica would truly feel like an all-new vehicle or whether it had merely been incrementally advanced. Navigating the roads in the rolling hills of Southern California last week, it didn't take long to find out. A revised 3.6-liter Pentastar V6 engine delivered 287 horsepower and 262 pound-feet of torque, making the climbs up California's hills effortless. Likewise, the new nine-speed automatic transmission never strained or felt clunky, like it has in other recent products like our long-term Jeep Cherokee. The harmonious combination of the upgraded engine and transmission felt like the single-biggest differentiator between the old and new minivans.

Labor Day: A look back at the largest UAW strikes in history

American made is almost an anachronism now, but good manufacturing jobs drove America's post-war economic golden age. Fifty years ago, if you held a job on a line, you were most likely a member of a union. And no union was more powerful than the United Auto Workers. Before the slow decline in membership started in the 1970s, the UAW had over 1.5 million members and represented workers from the insurance industry to aerospace and defense. The UAW isn't the powerhouse it once was. Today, just fewer than 400,000 workers hold membership in the UAW. Unions are sometimes blamed for the decline of American manufacturing, as companies have spent the last 30 years outsourcing their needs to countries with cheap labor and fewer requirements for the health and safety of their workers. Unions formed out of a desire to protect workers from dangerous conditions and abject poverty once their physical abilities were used up on the line; woes that manufacturers now outsource to poorer countries, along with the jobs. Striking was the workers' way of demanding humane treatment and a seat at the table with management. Most strikes are and were local affairs, affecting one or two plants and lasting a few days. But some strikes took thousands of workers off the line for months. Some were large enough to change the landscape of America. 1. 1936-1937 Flint Sit-Down Strike In 1936, just a year after the UAW formed and the same year they held their first convention, the union moved to organize workers within a major manufacturer. For extra oomph, they went after the largest in the world – General Motors. UAW Local 174 president Walter Reuther focused on two huge production facilities – one in Flint and one in Cleveland, where GM made all the parts for Buick, Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Chevrolet. Conditions in these plants were hellish. Workers weren't allowed bathroom breaks and often soiled themselves while standing at their stations. Workers were pushed to the limit on 12-14 hour shifts, six days a week. The production speed was nearly impossibly fast and debilitating injuries were common. In July 1936, temperatures inside the Flint plants reached over 100 degrees, yet managers refused to slow the line. Heat exhaustion killed hundreds of workers. Their families could expect no compensation for their deaths. When two brothers were fired in Cleveland when management discovered they were part of the union, a wildcat strike broke out.

Automakers want to stop the EPA's fuel economy rules change, and why that's a shortsighted move

With a Trump Administration looming, the EPA moved quickly after the election to propose finalizing future fuel economy rules last week. The auto industry doesn't like that (surprise), and has started making moves to stop the EPA. Ford CEO Mark Fields said he wanted to lobby Trump to lower the standards, and now the Auto Alliance, a manufacturer group, is saying it will join the fight against cleaner cars. The Alliance represents 12 automakers: BMW, Fiat Chrysler, Ford, GM, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mitsubishi, Porsche, Toyota, VW, and Volvo. Gloria Bergquist, a spokesperson for the Alliance, told Automotive News that the "EPA's sudden and controversial move to propose auto regulations eight months early - even after Congress warned agencies about taking such steps while political appointees were packing their bags - calls out for congressional action to pause this rulemaking until a thoughtful policy review can occur." The EPA was going to consider public comments through April 2017, but then said it would move the deadline to the end of December. That means that it can finalize the rules before President Obama leaves office. The director of public affairs for the Consumer Federation of America, Jack Gillis, said on a conference call with reporters last week when the EPA originally announced its decision that it is unlikely that President Trump will be able to roll back these changes. Gillis also said on the same call that any attempt by the automakers to prevent these changes would be history repeating itself. "These are the same companies that fought airbags, and now promoting the fact that every car has multiple airbags," he said. "These are the same companies that fought the crash-test program, and now are promoting the crash-test ratings published by the government. So, it's clear that they're misperceiving the needs of the American consumer." There are more reasons the Allliance's pushback is flawed. Carol Lee Rawn, the transportation program director for Ceres, said on that call that the automotive industry is a global one, and many automakers are moving to global platforms to help them meet strict fuel economy rules around the world.