2007 Chrysler Pacifica - No Accidents - Clean Carfax - Excellent Condition!! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Toledo continues fight for Jeep Wrangler production, despite mayor's death

Where will the next-generation Jeep Wrangler be built? That's an open question, but it's one that the city of Toledo, OH desperately wants to be the answer to. The city suffered a major blow, though, with the death of Mayor Michael Collins earlier this month. Collins had been the city's biggest champion during talks with Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, before suffering a fatal heart attack on Feb. 6. But Collins' tragic death isn't dampening the city's desire to carry on as the home of the Wrangler. "The mayor's passing is tragic. But on Monday, when I came to work, I knew exactly what I needed to do and exactly what needed to be done," the city's director of development, Matt Sapara, told the Detroit Free Press. According to the Freep, Sapara said Toledo and the state of Ohio have delivered an outline of a development plan that would give FCA the ability to buy an extra 100 acres to expand the factory. This is to help accommodate FCA's targeted output of 300,000 to 350,000 next-generation Wranglers, up from the 240,000 the factory can make now. "Our target in the proposal is to provide a way to increase the production capacity to a number that allows Fiat Chrysler to meet its business model," Sapara told the Freep, adding that the land could be available later this summer. FCA, meanwhile, has shown a somewhat ambivalent attitude towards Toledo production, with CEO Sergio Marchionne openly discussing the pros and cons of continuing to build the Wrangler south of the Michigan border. "We are going to take a very hard look at this without ignoring what these guys have done," Marchionne told the Free Press at last month's Detroit Auto Show, adding that he'd like to keep production there, provided the cost of retooling is comparable to relocating to another facility. Related Video:

Question of the Day: Most heinous act of badge engineering?

Badge engineering, in which one company slaps its emblems on another company's product and sells it, has a long history in the automotive industry. When Sears wanted to sell cars, a deal was made with Kaiser-Frazer and the Sears Allstate was born. Iranians wanted new cars in the 1960s, and the Rootes Group was happy to offer Hillman Hunters for sale as Iran Khodro Paykans. Sometimes, though, certain badge-engineered vehicles made sense only in the 26th hour of negotiations between companies. The Suzuki Equator, say, which was a puzzling rebadge job of the Nissan Frontier. How did that happen? My personal favorite what-the-heck-were-they-thinking example of badge engineering is the 1971-1973 Plymouth Cricket. Chrysler Europe, through its ownership of the Rootes Group, was able to ship over Hillman Avanger subcompacts for sale in the US market. This would have made sense... if Chrysler hadn't already been selling rebadged Mitsubishi Colt Galants (as Dodge Colts) and Simca 1100s as (Simca 1204s) in its American showrooms. Few bought the Cricket, despite its cheery ad campaign. So, what's the badge-engineered car you find most confounding? Chrysler Dodge Automakers Mitsubishi Nissan Suzuki Automotive History question of the day badge engineering question

Hyundai-Kia claims 'greenest' title from Honda, Big Three still big losers

Let's start with the good news. On average, any new car you buy in the US today will be 43 percent cleaner than any average new car in 1998. Here's some more good news, for Korea anyway, Hyundai-Kia has been named the cleanest automaker in the latest study by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), which looked at 2013 model year vehicles sold between October 2012 and September 2013 from the top eight automakers (by volume). The bad news? The big three Detroit automakers are, on average, still making the dirtiest cars in the showroom. The big three Detroit automakers are, on average, still making the dirtiest cars in the showroom. The problem for Ford, General Motors and Chrysler lies in their trucks, which sell well but tend to have pretty bad fuel economy (compared to sedans, at least). The UCS calculates its list by averaging "the per-mile emissions for each light-duty vehicle sold by each automaker" and then factors in "the fuel economy, fuel type, and sales volume of each type of vehicle sold by each automaker" and "the upstream global warming emissions from producing and distributing the fuel used by each vehicle, as well as emissions from the vehicles themselves." That all means that, the more trucks you sell, the worse you're gonna do. Then again, the more trucks you sell with 18 mpg, the more you're helping drivers put CO2 into the air, so the UCS is doing a fair comparison of the things that this study is trying to track. More details on the methodology are available on page six of the study PDF. In case you were wondering (we were), UCS did make sure to use the revised mpg numbers for Hyundai and Kia models that were originally overstated. Hyundai has apologized for and fixed those figures and even with the new, corrected numbers, Hyundai's total emissions are dropping at a rate of about three percent a year, enough for it to take the greenest company title for the first time. In fact, this is the first time that an automaker other than Honda has come out on top in the UCS ranking, which has been released six times now, including the first one in 2000 (which looked at 1998 model year data). In 2010, Honda was almost knocked off the winner's perch by both Hyundai and Toyota, but managed to hold on. Chrysler, on the other hand, came in dead last (again) in the ranking of the top eight automakers, snagging the "dirtiest tailpipe" award once (again). Read the UCS' press release below.