2004 Chrysler Crossfire Coupe Red on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Question of the Day: Ever consider driving a minivan?

Since I'm supposed to know something about cars, it happens all the time: friends and relatives ask me advice about what kind of vehicle they should get. Very often, the only type of vehicle that can check every item on their wish list (e.g., hauls lots of people and stuff, gets good fuel economy, has great crash-test ratings, can take four Great Danes camping, and so on) is a modern minivan... and, of course, nobody wants to hear this. I'm not a minivan person, they will wail, and so they end up with a cramped, fuel-swilling SUV or a not-so-space-efficient minivan-in-disguise CUV. So, is it worth becoming one of those minivan people in order to get the incredible usefulness of these masterpieces of vehicle engineering, or do you hold your head high and drive something that doesn't quite meet your needs? Related Video: Auto News Design/Style Chrysler Honda Toyota Minivan/Van question of the day questions

Nissan tells Renault it is 'not opposed' to Fiat Chrysler merger plan

TOKYO – Nissan on Wednesday told Renault it wasn't opposed to its partner's potential $35 billion merger with Fiat Chrysler, the Nikkei newspaper said, as the two met to hash out the future of their alliance amid a deal that could upend the auto industry. The leaders of Nissan Motor Co, France's Renault SA and junior partner Mitsubishi Motors Corp gathered at Nissan's headquarters in Yokohama for a scheduled alliance meeting - one overshadowed by Fiat Chrysler's proposal this week for a merger-of-equals with Renault. The plan, which would create the world's third-largest automaker, raises difficult questions about how Nissan would fit into a radically changed alliance. Renault Chairman Jean-Dominique Senard arrived in Japan on Tuesday to discuss the proposed tie-up with Nissan, 43.4% owned by the French automaker. "We are not opposed," the Nikkei quoted an unnamed Nissan source who had attended the meeting as saying. The person also said "many details need to be worked out" before the Japanese automaker solidifies its position on the issue, the Nikkei reported. In a statement, the alliance members confirmed that they had "an open and transparent discussion" on the proposal. The deal looks designed to tackle the costs of far-reaching technological and regulatory changes, including the drive toward electric vehicles. Nissan, which has rebuffed overtures by Renault for a merger of their own despite their 20-year alliance, was blindsided by the discussions, sources have told Reuters, stoking concerns that a deal with Fiat Chrysler could weaken Nissan's relations with Renault. The tie-up also poses an additional challenge for Nissan CEO Hiroto Saikawa, already grappling with poor financial performance and an uneasy relationship with Renault after Nissan led the ousting last year of long-standing alliance chairman Carlos Ghosn. There have long been tensions between Nissan and Renault over the imbalance of power in their alliance. Nissan, the bigger company, holds a 15% non-voting stake in the French automaker, while Renault owns 43.4% of Nissan. Ahead of Wednesday's meeting, Japanese media quoted Saikawa as telling reporters that he would look at the potential opportunities afforded by a Renault-FCA merger. Credit ratings agency Moody's said it was vital for Nissan to stabilize its partnership with Renault to expand operational synergies and improve margins.

Move over Audi, now Chrysler has a beef with Tesla's claims

In the same week that Audi said "not so fast" to some claims from Tesla, Chrysler has responded to a new press release from the California-based EV-maker by saying "not exactly, Tesla." The statement, released through the company's blog, comes in response to Tesla claiming it was "the only American car company to have fully repaid the government." Chrysler notes that it, too, recently paid back Uncle Sam from its 2008 bailout. Similar to Audi's recent press release, which was eventually and mysteriously deleted from the German automaker's site, Chrysler is both right and wrong in its statement.
Tesla specifically said that it had paid back the Department of Energy loans that many automakers received - including Fisker and VPG Autos - while Chrysler's retort argues Tesla is "unmistakably incorrect" since it repaid the government in 2011 a full six years early. Technically, the statements from both automakers are correct, but Tesla's startup loan originated from the DoE, while Chrysler's loan came in bailout form from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). Further, as The Detroit News notes, Chrysler's loan still cost taxpayers well over a billion dollars after all was said and done - those negative assets tied to "old Chrysler" in the bankruptcy did not require repayment.