Bank Repo/no Reserve/below Wholesale on 2040-cars
North Dartmouth, Massachusetts, United States
Body Type:Hatchback
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:2.4L 2429CC 148Cu. In. l4 GAS DOHC Naturally Aspirated
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Private Seller
Make: Chrysler
Model: PT Cruiser
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Trim: Touring Wagon 4-Door
Options: CD Player
Drive Type: FWD
Safety Features: Driver Airbag
Mileage: 83,494
Power Options: Air Conditioning, Power Locks, Power Windows
Exterior Color: Burgundy
Interior Color: Gray
Number of Cylinders: 4
Chrysler PT Cruiser for Sale
2005 pt cruiser gt turbo convertible(US $5,500.00)
2006 chrysler pt cruiser touring convertible 2-door 2.4l(US $6,000.00)
2006 chrysler pt cruiser convertible loaded 5 speed gt turbo 2.4 57k chromes $$$(US $7,888.00)
Limited edition
2007 pt cruiser black 4dr only 46kmi,very clean,automatic,cold air(US $4,900.00)
Touring edition / pearl white / auto/air / 107000 miles(US $6,200.00)
Auto Services in Massachusetts
Westgate Tire & Auto Center ★★★★★
Stewie`s Tire & Auto Repair ★★★★★
School Street Garage ★★★★★
Saugus Auto-Craft ★★★★★
Raffia Road Service Center ★★★★★
Quality Auto Care ★★★★★
Auto blog
Bring back the Bronco! Trademarks we hope are actually (someday) future car names
Tue, Mar 17 2015Trademark 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.
GM seeks appeals court ruling to continue legal fight with Fiat Chrysler
Sun, Jun 28 2020DETROIT — General Motors on Friday asked a U.S. appeals court to allow it to continue pursuing its civil racketeering suit against rival Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, rejecting a lower court judge's belittling of the complaint. The automaker's filing with the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals comes less than a week after U.S. District Court Judge Paul Borman called GM's suit against Fiat Chrysler a "waste of time and resources" at a time when both automakers should be focused on surviving the coronavirus pandemic. Borman ordered GM Chief Executive Mary Barra and Fiat Chrysler CEO Mike Manley to meet by July 1 to negotiate a resolution. "As we have said from the date this lawsuit was filed, it is meritless," FCA said on Friday. "FCA will continue to defend itself vigorously and pursue all available remedies in response to GM's groundless lawsuit. We stand ready to comply with Judge Borman's order," it added. In its motion, GM asked the appeals court to throw out Borman's order and reassign the case to a different district court judge. It called Borman's order "unprecedented" and "a profound abuse" of judicial power. GM sued Fiat Chrysler last year, accusing the Italian-American company's executives of bribing United Auto Workers union officials to secure labor agreements that put GM at a disadvantage. Fiat Chrysler is under investigation by the U.S. Justice Department as part of a wide-ranging probe of UAW corruption. GM's accusations came as Fiat Chrysler and French automaker Peugeot were in the early stages of preparing for a merger. Fiat Chrysler has said the suit was aimed at disrupting that deal. GM has said the suit has nothing to do with the merger. In a statement, GM rejected Borman's characterization of the suit as a "distraction" and defended its decision to press the case. "We filed a lawsuit against FCA for the same reason the U.S. Department of Justice continues to investigate the company: former FCA executives admitted they conspired to use bribes to gain labor benefits, concessions and advantages. Based on the direct harm to GM these actions caused, we believe FCA must be held accountable." Related Video: Government/Legal UAW/Unions Chrysler Fiat GM
Waymo self-driving taxis in Arizona are now carrying paying passengers
Wed, Dec 5 2018CHANDLER, Ariz. — Alphabet's Waymo on Wednesday launched a significant development in its costly, decade-long quest for autonomous transportation: Its self-driving taxis are now actually generating fares. With little fanfare, the company has begun charging passengers to use its driverless vehicles in a roughly 100-mile (160 km) zone in four Phoenix suburbs — Chandler, Tempe, Mesa and Gilbert — where it has been testing its technology since 2016. Producing revenue is a strategic milestone, putting Waymo ahead of U.S. rivals, primarily General Motors' Cruise Automation and Uber Technologies, which have yet to launch their own paid self-driving services. All are racing to win customers and recoup billions spent developing the technology. To use Waymo's service, dubbed Waymo One, riders must download an app and provide a credit card number, similar to ride-sharing services Uber and Lyft. A human driver will be behind the wheel, but only to intervene in case of emergency. Major challenges remain, starting with technical hurdles. A Waymo One taxi tested by Reuters last week proved slow and jerky at times. Whether customers will continue using the service once the novelty wears off remains to be seen. Regulations governing the industry across the country are an incoherent patchwork, a significant hurdle to fast expansion. Waymo would not say exactly how many of its cars would be on the road in Arizona. It said its around-the-clock service initially would be limited to "hundreds" of people invited to sign up last year. For now, pricing is roughly in line with that of Uber and Lyft. A 15-minute, 3-mile (4.8 km) drive taken by Reuters last week cost $7.59, just above the $7.22 offered by Lyft. "Over time, we hope to make Waymo One available to even more members of the public," Chief Executive John Krafcik wrote in a blog on Wednesday. "Self-driving technology is new to many, so we're proceeding carefully." 10 million miles, $1 billion The company has been testing its driverless cars for a decade. Its fleet, now numbering 600 vehicles, has logged more than 10 million miles on public roads in and around 25 U.S. cities. Alphabet does not disclose its total investment, but industry experts put that sum at well over $1 billion. Monetizing driverless technology has been slow going.














