2005 Sebring Touring Convertible on 2040-cars
Hustisford, Wisconsin, United States
Vehicle Title:Rebuilt, Rebuildable & Reconstructed
Engine:V6
Exterior Color: Silver
Make: Chrysler
Interior Color: Gray
Model: Sebring
Trim: Touring Convertible 2-Door
Options: Leather Seats, CD Player, Convertible
Drive Type: Automatic
Power Options: Air Conditioning, Cruise Control, Power Locks, Power Windows, Power Seats
Mileage: 106,000
Rebuilt salvage title due to a deer hit. Only replaced hood, headlamps and bumper cover. No structure damage.
Chrysler Sebring for Sale
2006 chrysler sebring touring sedan 4-door 2.7l great condition(US $4,000.00)
2004 chrysler sebring touring convertible,6 cyl,power top,look $99.00 no reserve
2002 chrysler sebring lxi convertible 2.7 liter 6 cylinder engine
2010 limited used 2.4l i4 16v fwd sedan
2001 chrysler sebring convertible black with beige leather interior low miles
2002 chrysler sebring limited convertible 2-door 2.7l(US $5,995.00)
Auto Services in Wisconsin
Zinecker`s Auto Repair ★★★★★
Wilson Collision Center ★★★★★
Van Linn`s ★★★★★
Tuff Enuff Auto Body ★★★★★
Scotts Automotive Pewaukee ★★★★★
Schok`s Autobody ★★★★★
Auto blog
Automakers not currently promoting EVs are probably doomed
Mon, Feb 22 2016Okay, let's be honest. The sky isn't falling – gas prices are. In fact, some experts say that prices at the pump will remain depressed for the next decade. Consumers have flocked to SUVs and CUVs, reversing the upward trend in US fuel economy seen over the last several years. A sudden push into electric vehicles seems ridiculous when gas guzzlers are selling so well. Make hay while the sun shines, right? A quick glance at some facts and figures provides evidence that the automakers currently doubling down on internal combustion probably have some rocky years ahead of them. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles is a prime example of a volume manufacturer devoted to incremental gains for existing powertrains. Though FCA will kill off some of its more fuel-efficient models, part of its business plan involves replacing four- and five-speed transmissions with eight- and nine-speed units, yielding a fuel efficiency boost in the vicinity of ten percent over the next few years. Recent developments by battery startups have led some to suggest that efficiency and capacity could increase by over 100 percent in the same time. Research and development budgets paint a grim picture for old guard companies like Fiat Chrysler: In 2014, FCA spent about $1,026 per car sold on R&D, compared with about $24,783 per car sold for Tesla. To be fair, FCA can't be expected to match Tesla's efforts when its entry-level cars list for little more than half that much. But even more so than R&D, the area in which newcomers like Tesla have the industry licked is infrastructure. We often forget that our vehicles are mostly useless metal boxes without access to the network of fueling stations that keep them rolling. While EVs can always be plugged in at home, their proliferation depends on a similar network of charging stations that can allow for prolonged travel. Tesla already has 597 of its 480-volt Superchargers installed worldwide, and that figure will continue to rise. Porsche has also proposed a new 800-volt "Turbo Charging Station" to support the production version of its Mission E concept, and perhaps other VW Auto Group vehicles. As EVs grow in popularity, investment in these proprietary networks will pay off — who would buy a Chevy if the gas stations served only Ford owners? If anyone missed the importance of infrastructure, it's Toyota.
Chrysler defies NHTSA, says it won't recall 2.7M Jeep Grand Cherokee, Liberty models
Wed, 05 Jun 2013Facing a possible recall totaling around 2.7 million of its most popular SUVs, Chrysler remains insistent that the 1993-2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee and 2002-2007 Jeep Liberty are safe vehicles. This comes on the heels of a recall request from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for these two models due to fuel tanks mounted behind the rear axle, which could possibly be ruptured during severe rear-end collisions, leading to an increased risk of fire. In response to the allegations, Chrysler says that it does not agree with NHTSA nor does it plan on recalling either vehicle.
Chrysler said both SUVs "met and exceeded" the requirements for fuel-system integrity, and cooperated fully with NHTSA since the investigation was opened in 2010. While 15 deaths and 46 injuries have been reported from fires caused by rear-end collisions on these models, Chrysler is claiming that the vast majority of incidents cited by NHTSA were "high-energy crashes," including one where a stopped Grand Cherokee was rear-ended by a tractor trailer going 65 miles per hour.
The automaker wraps up by saying "NHTSA seems to be holding Chrysler Group to a new standard for fuel tank integrity that does not exist now and did not exist when the Jeep vehicles were manufactured." Scroll down for Chrysler's official response to NHTSA, but we're pretty sure this isn't the last we've heard on this issue.
Automakers want to stop the EPA's fuel economy rules change, and why that's a shortsighted move
Tue, Dec 6 2016With a Trump Administration looming, the EPA moved quickly after the election to propose finalizing future fuel economy rules last week. The auto industry doesn't like that (surprise), and has started making moves to stop the EPA. Ford CEO Mark Fields said he wanted to lobby Trump to lower the standards, and now the Auto Alliance, a manufacturer group, is saying it will join the fight against cleaner cars. The Alliance represents 12 automakers: BMW, Fiat Chrysler, Ford, GM, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mitsubishi, Porsche, Toyota, VW, and Volvo. Gloria Bergquist, a spokesperson for the Alliance, told Automotive News that the "EPA's sudden and controversial move to propose auto regulations eight months early - even after Congress warned agencies about taking such steps while political appointees were packing their bags - calls out for congressional action to pause this rulemaking until a thoughtful policy review can occur." The EPA was going to consider public comments through April 2017, but then said it would move the deadline to the end of December. That means that it can finalize the rules before President Obama leaves office. The director of public affairs for the Consumer Federation of America, Jack Gillis, said on a conference call with reporters last week when the EPA originally announced its decision that it is unlikely that President Trump will be able to roll back these changes. Gillis also said on the same call that any attempt by the automakers to prevent these changes would be history repeating itself. "These are the same companies that fought airbags, and now promoting the fact that every car has multiple airbags," he said. "These are the same companies that fought the crash-test program, and now are promoting the crash-test ratings published by the government. So, it's clear that they're misperceiving the needs of the American consumer." There are more reasons the Allliance's pushback is flawed. Carol Lee Rawn, the transportation program director for Ceres, said on that call that the automotive industry is a global one, and many automakers are moving to global platforms to help them meet strict fuel economy rules around the world.