Limited 5.7l Hemi Loaded Leather Back Up Camera Aspen Low Miles Clean on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Bob Lutz, UAW rep commend Chrysler for not bowing to NHTSA recall pressure [w/poll]

Bob Lutz, the well-known executive with a range of automakers including both General Motors and Chrysler, says he supports Chrysler for not caving under federal pressure to issue a recall on 2.7 million Jeep vehicles. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is arguing that the plastic fuel tanks positioned behind the axles of certain 1993-2004 Grand Cherokee models and 2002-2007 Liberty models may become punctured in a collision and potentially catch fire, so it has called upon Chrysler to recall the vehicles. 15 deaths and 46 injuries have been attributed to the issue. For its part, Chrysler has maintained that its models "met and exceeded" all safety applicable mandates when they were manufactured, and furthermore, they argue that the government agency's own data proves that the vehicles are no more dangerous than similar SUVs produced by other automakers at the time. As a result, it is taking the unusual step of refusing to recall the vehicles.
According to The Detroit News, Lutz says Chrysler is right to push back when the government is out of line. Lutz also said that he wished he could have done the same when NHTSA urged Chrysler to issue a recall on certain minivans back when he was with the automaker 25 years ago.
Meanwhile, United Auto Workers Vice President General Holiefield also defended Chrysler by saying, "Our legendary Jeeps are crafted with pride by our dedicated UAW American workforce who work tirelessly to ensure the utmost quality of each Jeep that is produced for customers."

FCA inline-six rumored to be real, headed for Jeep Wagoneer

In September, Allpar reported that that clues being dropped at Fiat- Chrysler headquarters, in the carmaker's factories, and on engineer resumes pointed to the development of an inline six-cylinder engine. The site has just proclaimed the rumor is reality, writing that the straight-six, "turbocharged to meet or beat 5.7 Hemi power ratings, with a smoother torque curve, is on the way." The motor's first outing is expected to be either the next-generation Jeep Grand Cherokee, debuting perhaps next year, or the Jeep Wagoneer, debuting in 2020 or 2021. "Tornado" is the purported codename for the power plant said to be just under three liters in displacement, expanding the family begun with the Global Medium Engine 2.0-liter turbo codenamed Hurricane. Engine bay constraints and a long use horizon mean engineers won't simply add two more cylinders to the GME, however. Allpar says the brief is to keep the Tornado GME-T6 — the alphanumeric for "turbocharged six" — no more than three inches longer than the Tigershark 2.4-liter four-cylinder. That means "major design changes" that could include a space-saving head, more closely spaced cylinders, and no cylinder liners. An FCA division called Comau could be called on for its "SmartSpray" plasma lining technology. Allpar muses that the standard version of the engine for Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, and Ram could get a single twin-scroll turbocharger. Performance trims for Alfa Romeo and Maserati could get different heads and maybe twin turbos, an SRT version might also get both those tweaks. History shows that the Italian versions would make changes to the block, as well. Even so, the Tornado would be less expensive than any Ferrari-supplied V6. A straight-six would put FCA in company with current adopters BMW and Mercedes-Benz, future users like Jaguar, and perhaps Aston Martin. The engine would span the widest range of use cases in the U.S. carmaker's portfolio, though. Potential applications include being a base engine for Ram trucks, serving double duty as a base engine and 5.7-liter Hemi replacement for the Dodge Charger and Challenger, working in the high-end Jeeps, and as a properly hot trim — with Ferrari-designed heads — in the luxury Italian sports cars. The Alfa Romeo Giulia begs for just such motivation to fill the gap between the 280-hp, $42,695 Ti Sport RWD and the 505-hp, $73,700 Giulia Quadrifoglio RWD. And a twin-turbo inline-six in a Maserati Alfieri would stack up nicely with the Germans.

Auto bailout cost the US goverment $9.26B

Depending on your outlook, the US Treasury's bailout of General Motors, Chrysler (now FCA) and their financing divisions under the Troubled Asset Relief Program was either a complete boondoggle or a savvy move to secure the future of some major employers. Regardless of where you fall, the auto industry bailout has officially ended, and the numbers have been tallied. Of the $79.69 billion that the Feds invested to keep the automakers afloat, it recouped $70.43 billion – a net loss of $9.26 billion. The final nail in the coffin for the auto bailout came in December 2014 when the Feds sold its shares in Ally Financial, formerly GMAC. The deal turned out pretty good for the government too because the investment turned a 2.4 billion profit. The actual automakers have long been out of the Treasury's hands, though. The current FCA paid back its loans six years early in 2011, the Treasury sold of the last shares of GM in late 2013. According to The Detroit News, the government's books actually show an official loss on the auto bailouts of $16.56 billion. The difference is because the larger figure does not include the interest or dividends paid by the borrowers on the amount lent. While it's easy to see fault in any red ink on the Feds' massive investment, the number is less than some earlier estimates. At one time, deficits around $44 billion were thought possible, and another put things at a $20.3 billion loss. Outside of just the government losing money, the bailouts might have helped the overall economy. A study from the Center for Automotive Research last year estimated that the program saved 2.6 million jobs and about $284.4 billion in personal wealth. It also indicated that the Feds' reduction in income tax revenue alone from Chrysler and GM going under could have been around $100 billion for just 2009 and 2010, significantly more than any loss in the bailout.