1968 Chrysler Newport, Blue With Metallic Flake, Project Car Needs Finished on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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...

Chrysler recalling 278,222 trucks and SUVs over bad rear axles

Chrysler has issued a recall of 278,222 light trucks and sport utility vehicles here in the United States. The reason: bad rear axles. Specifically, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the rear axle pinion nut may lack a necessary adhesive patch, which could cause the nut to loosen. If this happens, the axle can lock up, which could cause all sorts of havoc on the road.
This is an expansion of the rear axle recall announced in October of last year, where 44,300 Ram 1500 and Dodge Dakota models were being called in. At that time, 12 accidents had been reported due to the faulty axle pinion nut.
Affected vehicles include Ram 1500 trucks from the 2009 to 2012 model years, Dodge Dakota models from the 2009 to 2011 model years, and both the Chrysler Aspen and Dodge Durango SUV twins, both from the 2009 model year only.

Question Of The Day: Most overlooked heroic engine?

All of us know that the small-block Chevrolet V8 was a masterpiece of engineering that made the high-performance overhead-valve V8 affordable to the masses, and that the Mercedes-Benz OM617 diesel is basically immortal, and that the Toyota R engine defined what it means for a vehicle to be considered Warlord Grade. The AMC straight-six. The Model T engine. The Volvo Redblock. Those engines get the respect they deserve. But what about the engines that we don't think much about, the ones that worked hard in their millions and somehow missed attaining legend status? The list of engines beloved by their aficionados but not thought of often by the rest of us goes on and on: the Renault Ventoux, Mitsubishi 4G1, MeMZ-968, and so on. But my vote goes to the Chrysler flathead straight-six. This engine was produced starting in 1929 and was still being made for stationary industrial use in the early 1970s. It powered just about every type of Chrysler vehicle made for decades, hauled supplies for all the major Allied armies in World War II, and was even developed into a five-bank, 30-cylinder tank engine. It was simple and reliable and outlived most of its competition, and you rarely hear much about it these days. What's your choice?