1988 Chrysler Lebaron Base Convertible 2-door 2.5l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Almost 70 percent of FCA-PSA Groupe models to ride on two PSA platforms

With the merger between PSA Groupe and Fiat Chrysler having been officially announced this week, we still don't know where everything will settle once the process concludes. We covered the catalog of models herded by the combined company's 12 brands, all of which will remain for now. Profound changes must be afoot somewhere, though, else there'd be no reason for the tie-up. Automotive News has a report on one of the big moves, writing that "more than two-thirds of [PSA-FCA] production would be concentrated on just two platforms." Around 2.6 million cars built by the combined company would sit on PSA's Common Modular Platform, also known as the EMP1, for B-segment city cars, entry-level and mid-range C-segment sedans, and compact crossovers. Three million vehicles would ride on the EMP2 architecture intended for C- and D-segment cars and higher-end crossovers. Those figures account for around 5.6 of the 8.7 million vehicles the combined company expects to sell annually. AN didn't mention the Giorgio platform that's already spread throughout the FCA kingdom to support numerous current and future offerings like the next-gen Jeep Grand Cherokee, but did write that "larger Jeep models will continue to use FCA underpinnings." The body-on-frame chassis' under Ram trucks and the Jeep Wrangler and Gladiator should hold pat. We'll wait for word on the fate of the Compact U.S. Wide platform carrying the Chrysler Voyager and Pacifica and Jeep Cherokee. Dodge products with questionable futures are anyone's guess; we've heard the Dodge Durango, still built on a Mercedes-derived platform it shares with the current Grand Cherokee, could go body-on-frame for the next generation, or die and have the Giorgio-based, three-row Jeep Grand Cherokee take its place. More mystery comes with the long-lived LA and LD platforms in the big sedan and coupe trio Chrysler and Dodge still milk quite successfully. And if there were ever a time for the Dodge Journey – last reported as a Giorgio recipient – to modernize or die, we don't know when that time is. Although FCA platforms have been designed with alternative powertrains in mind, AN says the PSA Groupe architectures "are more modern than FCA's equivalent platforms." After PSA acquired GM's Opel/Vauxhall division, the French company didn't waste time moving the Anglo-German products to in-house platforms, helping to put the formerly money-losing operations into the black in just 18 months.

This or That: 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 vs. 1984 Pontiac Fiero

Welcome to another round of This or That, where two Autoblog editors pick a topic, pick a side and pull no punches. Last round pitted yours truly against Associate Editor Brandon Turkus, and my chosen VW Vanagon Syncro narrowly defeated Brandon's 1987 Land Rover. In fact, it was, by far, the closest round we've seen, with 1,907 voters seeing things my way (for 50.8 percent of the vote) versus 1,848 votes for Brandon's Rover (49.2 percent). Sweet, sweet victory! For this latest round of This or That, I've roped Editor Greg Migliore into what I think is a rather fun debate. We've each chosen our favorite terrible cars, setting a price limit of $10,000 to make sure neither of us went too crazy with our automotive atrocities. I think we've both chosen terribly... and I mean that in the best way possible. 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 Jeremy Korzeniewski: Why It's Terrible: Taken in isolation, the Chrysler Crossfire isn't necessarily a terrible car. In fact, it drives pretty darn well, and there's a lot of solid engineering under its slinky shape. Problem is, that engineering was already rather long in the tooth well before Chrysler ever got its hands on it, having come from Mercedes-Benz, which used the basic chassis and drivetrain in a previous version of its SLK coupe and roadster. Granted, the SLK was an okay car, too, but even when new, it hardly set the world on fire with sporty driving dynamics. Chrysler took these decent-but-no-more bits and pieces from the Mercedes parts bin – remember, this car was conceived in the disastrous Merger Of Equals days – and covered them with a rather attractive hard-candy shell. Unfortunately, the super sporty shape wrote checks in the minds of buyers that its well-worn mechanicals were simply unable to cash, though an injection of power courtesy of a supercharged V6 engine in the SRT6 model, as seen here, certainly helped ease some of those woes. In the end, Chrysler was left with a so-called halo car that looked the part but never quite performed the part. It was almost universally panned by critics as an overpriced parts-bin special, which, I must add, was damningly accurate. As a result, sales were very slow, and within the first few months, dealers were clearancing the car at cut-rate prices, just to keep them from taking up too much of the showroom floor. Why It's Not That Terrible, After All: I can speak from personal experience when discussing the Chrysler Crossfire. You see, I owned one. Well, sort of...

Bring back the Bronco! Trademarks we hope are actually (someday) future car names

Trademark filings are the tea leaves of the auto industry. Read them carefully – and interpret them correctly – and you might be previewing an automaker's future product plans. Yes, they're routinely filed to maintain the rights to an iconic name. And sometimes they're only for toys and clothing. But not always. Sometimes, the truth is right in front of us. The trademark is required because a company actually wants to use the name on a new car. With that in mind, here's a list of intriguing trademark filings we want to see go from paperwork to production reality. Trademark: Bronco Company: Ford Previous Use: The Bronco was a long-running SUV that lived from 1966-1996. It's one of America's original SUVs and was responsible for the increased popularity of the segment. Still, it's best known as O.J. Simpson's would-be getaway car. We think: The Bronco was an icon. Everyone seems to want a Wrangler-fighter – Ford used to have a good one. Enough time has passed that the O.J. police chase isn't the immediate image conjured by the Bronco anymore. Even if we're doing a wish list in no particular order, the Bronco still finds its way to the top. For now (unfortunately), it's just federal paperwork. Rumors on this one can get especially heated. The official word from a Ford spokesman is: "Companies renew trademark filings to maintain ownership and control of the mark, even if it is not currently used. Ford values the iconic Bronco name and history." Trademarks: Aviator, AV8R Company: Ford Previous Use: The Aviator was one of the shortest-run Lincolns ever, lasting for the 2003-2005 model years. It never found the sales success of the Ford Explorer, with which it shared a platform. We Think: The Aviator name no longer fits with Lincoln's naming nomenclature. Too bad, it's better than any other name Lincoln currently uses, save for its former big brother, the Navigator. Perhaps we're barking up the wrong tree, though. Ford has made several customized, aviation themed-Mustangs in the past, including one called the Mustang AV8R in 2008, which had cues from the US Air Force's F-22 Raptor fighter jet. It sold for $500,000 at auction, and the glass roof – which is reminiscent of a fighter jet cockpit – helped Ford popularize the feature. Trademark: EcoBeast Company: Ford Previous Use: None by major carmakers.