2007(07) Chrysler Sebring Heated Seats! Beautiful White! Clean! Save Huge!!! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2015 Chrysler 300 First Drive [w/video]

When Chrysler last updated its 300 in 2011, the fullsize sedan market was a very different place than it is today. Ford's redesigned Taurus was in showrooms, sure, but segment stalwarts like the Toyota Avalon and Chevrolet Impala were languishing at the tail end of their model cycles. And still, the second-generation 300 (not counting the "letter series" cars from the 1950s and '60s, of course) failed to recapitulate the booming success of the model reboot in 2004. Something in the combination of the down economy, higher gas prices and great product from front-wheel-drive entries in the class kept the 300 from the six-digit sales numbers it saw in the early 2000s. For the 2015 model year, Chrysler hopes that a more clearly defined purpose for its big sedan, combined with liberal dipping into the corporate tech toy box, will rekindle buyer interest. Considering the mild characters and front-driver dynamics of its mainstream competition, the promise of V8 power and rear-wheel drive should at least turn the heads of those looking for a car with a little edge. I grabbed the keys of the edgiest of the bunch, the sport-intended 300S, and found a big sedan that gives away some practicality to the rest of its segment mates. The trade-off for the dip in pragmatism is an uptick and driving fun and attitude that should make all the difference for the right buyer. Even though the hard-to-miss face of the 300 has come in for another nip and tuck, that attitude is still clearly on display, too. The grille of the 300 is some 33-percent larger than the outgoing model, though it's still far less brutal than the throwback styling of the 2005 "Baby Bentley" car, at least to my eyes. The cheese grater insert is metallic in most trims of the 300, though the 300S you see in my photo set gets the meaner blacked-out treatment. A quick scroll through our gallery will show you that the rest of the 300 has been similarly changed but not reinvented. Light clusters front and rear are revised, the rear clip has been re-forged with less busy styling, and the whole car has been de-chromed to a large extent (this 300S is wearing the least blingy outfit of the bunch). That rear spoiler is S-model specific. I held the existing 300 interior in fairly high regard, and this new car improves on that base.

Fiat and UAW back at negotiating table over Chrysler stake

We knew there'd be no Chrysler IPO before the end of this year, but Fiat is determined to get the best run going into 2014 and is back at the poker table with the UAW. The delay was said to be Chrysler's desire to clean up a tax issue with the IRS; turns out that also bought the carmaker time to try and close a deal for the UAW's 48.5-percent stake in the company before the IPO happens.
Whereas the price Chrysler was willing to pay was once more than $1 billion under the UAW's asking price, the gap has closed to just $800 million of late. A recent valuation of the company at $10 billion - a valuation the UAW has disputed - means Fiat would be looking to pay about $4.2 billion instead of the $5 billion that the UAW seeks. But the UAW needs to hold out for the highest amount it can get because its pension obligations through the Voluntary Employee Benefit Association (VEBA) are $3.1 billion greater than the VEBA's assets, which include the Chrysler stake.
There's a clause in the agreement that Fiat can buy the VEBA shares for $6 billion, but Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne has said that the UAW "should buy a ticket for the lottery" if they even want $5 billion. The UAW, though, has more time to wait; it's Fiat that wants access to Chrysler's $11.9-billion war chest and that would like to avoid the risk of paying the full $6 billion for the UAW share if the float really takes off. With other valuations of Chrysler as high as $19 billion, a hot IPO could make that $6 billion look like a bargain.

Is it time for American carmakers to give up on dual-clutch transmissions? [w/poll]

Last week, in the midst of Detroit's first days seeking relief in Chapter 9 of the bankruptcy code, Automotive News contributor Larry P. Vellequette penned an editorial suggesting that American car companies raise the white flag on dual clutch transmissions and give up on trying to persuade Americans to buy cars fitted with them. Why? Because, Vellequette says, like CVT transmissions, they "just don't sound right or feel right to American drivers." (Note: In the article, it's not clear if Vellequette is arguing against wet-clutch and dry-clutch DCTs or just dry-clutch DCTs, which is what Ford and Chrysler use.) The article goes on to state that Ford and Chrysler have experimented with DCTs and that both consumers and the automotive press haven't exactly given them glowing reviews, despite their quicker shifts and increased fuel efficiency potential compared to torque-converter automatic transmissions.
Autoblog staffers who weighed in on the relevance of DCTs in American cars generally disagreed with the blanket nature of Vellequette's statement that they don't sound or feel right, but admit that their lack of refinement compared to traditional automatics can be an issue for consumers. That's particularly true in workaday cars like the Ford Focus and Dodge Dart, both of which have come in for criticism in reviews and owner surveys. From where we sit, the higher-performance orientation of such transmissions doesn't always meld as well with the marching orders of everyday commuters (particularly if drivers haven't been educated as to the transmission's benefits and tradeoffs), and in models not fitted with paddle shifters, it's particularly hard for drivers to use a DCT to its best advantage.
Finally, we also note that DCT tuning is very much an evolving science. For instance, Autoblog editors who objected to dual-clutch tuning in the Dart have more recently found the technology agreeable in the Fiat 500L. Practice makes perfect - or at least more acceptable.