2006 Chrysler Pt Cruiser Touring Wagon 4-door 2.4l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

China own a Detroit automaker? Would the U.S. let that happen?

The news that several Chinese automakers want to buy Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, and that one has even made an offer, elicits some mixed feelings. On one hand, as some have pointed out, it could be a win-win both for China and for FCA's American workers, ensuring the company's survival and opening new markets. On the other hand, this is China, whose trade relationship with the U.S. is the source of considerable scrutiny from the Trump administration — and whose not-a-friend, not-an-enemy status is particularly difficult to gauge right now during heightened tensions with its client state North Korea. So would such a deal pass regulatory muster? One reason that springs to mind for blocking any sale has to do with national security. Chrysler's role as a military supplier dates back to Dodge trucks used by Gen. Blackjack Pershing to chase Pancho Villa in Mexico, and shortly thereafter by American forces in World War I. The Detroit Three automakers were, of course, mainstays of the Arsenal of Democracy of World War II. Even before U.S. entry into the war in December 1941, America's industrial machinery went into overdrive, and Chrysler was one of the biggest cogs. It engineered and built the M3, Sherman and Pershing tanks and trucks for Gen. George Patton's Redball Express. It helped develop a radar-guided antiaircraft gun that knocked German bombers and V1 rockets out of the sky — on one day, shooting down 97 of 101 V1s headed for London. On D-Day, the radar system helped thwart Luftwaffe counterattacks on the beaches of Normandy, and it later helped Allied forces break out at the Battle of the Bulge. Chrysler redesigned the Wright Cyclone engines used by the Boeing B-29 Superfortress, the plane that firebombed Tokyo and dropped the atomic bombs that ended the war. Chrysler even played a secret role refining uranium in Oak Ridge, Tenn., that was used in the Hiroshima bomb and in the ensuing Cold War arms race. It worked on military missiles and was NASA's prime contractor for the Saturn V rocket that put men on the moon. More recently, Chrysler produced the M1 Abrams tank. And of course Chrysler is the keeper of the flame for Jeep, a 75-plus-years military legacy handed down from Bantam and Willys to Kaiser to AMC to Chrysler. The point of this history lesson is to note that in times of war or national emergency, America's industrial might has been called to serve, and may well be called on again.

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...

Marchionne says no offers are on the table for Fiat Chrysler

MONZA, Italy (Reuters) - Fiat Chrysler (FCA) has not received any offer for the company nor is the world's seventh-largest carmaker working on any "big deal", Chief Executive Sergio Marchionne said on Saturday. Speaking on the sidelines of the Italian Formula One Grand Prix, Marchionne said the focus remained on executing the company's business plan to 2018. Asked whether FCA had been approached by someone or whether there was an offer on the table, he simply said: "No." The company's share price jumped to record highs last month after reports of interest for the group or some of its brands from China. China's Great Wall Motor Co Ltd openly said it was interested in FCA, but had not held talks or signed a deal with executives at the Italian-American automaker. The stock move was also helped by expectations that the company might separate from some of its units. Marchionne reiterated on Saturday that FCA was working on a plan to "purify" its portfolio and that units, such as the components businesses, would be separated from the group. He hopes to complete that process by the end of 2018. "There are activities within the group that do not belong to a car manufacturer, for example the components businesses. The group needs to be cleared of those things," he told journalists. Asked whether an announcement could come this year, Marchionne said it was up to the board to decide and that it would next meet at the end of September. He said the time was not right for a spin-off of luxury brand Maserati and premium Alfa Romeo and the two brands needed to become self-sustainable entities first and "have the muscle to stand on their feet, make sufficient cash". "The way we see it now, it's almost impossible, if not impossible, to see a spin-off of Alfa Romeo/Maserati, these are two entities that are immature and in a development phase," he said. "It's the wrong moment, we are not in a condition to do it." He said the concept of separating the two brands from FCA's mass market business made sense and did not rule out this happening in future, but not under his tenure, which lasts until April 2019. "If there is an opportunity in future, it would certainly happen after I'm gone. It won't happen while Marchionne is around," he said.