1993 Chrysler Lebaron Gtc Convertible 2-door 3.0l Turbo Engine on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Detroit Three to lose dominance of North American auto output in 2017

DETROIT — North American vehicle production by the unionized Detroit Three automakers will fall behind the combined North American output of Tesla and automakers from Europe and Asia for the first time this year, IHS Markit forecast on Wednesday. In 2017, the Detroit Three could build 8.6 million vehicles in North America, while Tesla and foreign automakers build 8.7 million, IHS Markit analyst Joe Langley said. By 2024, the gap will widen, with Asian and European automakers and Tesla combining to build about 9.8 million vehicles in North America. General Motors, Ford and the North American operations of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV will combine to build 8.1 million vehicles, down 6 percent from this year. Mexico is on track to increase its share of North American vehicle production, Langley said, moving to 4.5 million vehicles a year by 2024 from about 4 million vehicles currently. The milestone for the growth of Tesla and foreign automakers in North America comes as the Trump administration is pushing to limit imports of vehicles from Mexico in negotiations to overhaul the North American Free Trade Agreement. The declining share of North American vehicle production for the Detroit automakers also challenges U.S. and Canadian unions that represent their workers. Canadian workers are on strike at a GM factory in Ontario to protest the automaker's decision to cut jobs and move to Mexico some production of sport utility models built there. Foreign automakers over the past year have announced plans for a wave of new or expanded plants in North America, while Tesla is ramping up to build as many as 500,000 cars a year at its plant in Fremont, Calif. Often referred to as "transplants," the foreign-owned factories are poised to become the mainstream of the North American auto industry. Automakers are increasingly using factories in China or Mexico to build vehicles that used to be assembled solely in the United States, Langley said. He cited as an example Ford's decision to shift production of the Focus small car for North America to a Chinese assembly plant. Reporting by Joseph WhiteRelated Video: Image Credit: Reuters Plants/Manufacturing Chrysler Ford GM

An early gas-electric hybrid was developed by...Exxon?

We're not sure which aspect of Exxon's 1970s-era efforts to develop advanced and electrified powertrains is the most ironic. There's Exxon, that of the Valdez oil spill infamy, being on the leading edge of hybrids and electric vehicles. There's a boat-like Chrysler Cordova getting 27 miles per gallon. And there's the central role a Volkswagen diesel engine plays in that hybrid development. It's all outlined in an article (linked above) by Inside Climate News, and it's an amusing read. Flush with cash and fearing what it thought was peak oil production in the 1970s, Exxon funded a host of new ventures divisions geared to find alternatives to gas-powered powertrains. In the early 1970s, Exxon lured chemist M. Stanley Whittingham to develop what would become a prototype of a lithium-ion rechargeable battery. Then, in the late 1970s, Exxon pioneered the concept of using an alternating-current (AC) motor as part of a gas-electric hybrid vehicle. The company retrofitted a Chrysler Cordova (yes, that's the model Ricardo Montalban used to hawk) with a powertrain that combined 10 Sears Die-Hard car batteries, an alternating current synthesizer (ACS), a 100-horsepower AC motor, and, yes, a four-cylinder 50-horsepower Volkswagen diesel engine. The result was a rather large two-door sedan that got an impressive 27 mpg. And while US automakers didn't see the potential in the early concept, in 1980 Exxon and Toyota began collaborating on a project that would involve retrofitting a Toyota Cressida with a hybrid engine. That car was completed in 1981, and may have been one of the seeds that eventually helped sprout the concept of the Toyota Prius. Soon after rebuilding the Cressida, Exxon would get out of the advanced-powertrain-development business, as oil prices began to fall in the early 1980s, spurring cost-cutting measures. Cry no tears for the Exxon, though, as what's now known as ExxonMobil is the largest US oil company. Related Video: News Source: Inside Climate NewsImage Credit: Spencer Platt/Getty Images Green Read This Chrysler Toyota Electric Hybrid battery

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...