2007 Great Vehicle For Transport! 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.

Next-gen Jeep Wrangler to pack 300-hp Hurricane turbo four

Fiat Chrysler has been working for some time now on a new turbocharged four-cylinder engine. Dubbed "Hurricane," the engine is now said to produce nearly 300 horsepower. And its first application could be in the next-generation Jeep Wrangler. With that much power coming from such a small engine, the Hurricane would offer an even higher level of specific output than the 1.75-liter engine in the Alfa Romeo 4C – one of FCA's highest-stressed engines – far eclipsing the 4C's 120 horsepower per liter with 150 hp/l. By way of comparison, the latest 2.0-liter, four-cylinder version of Ford's EcoBoost engine produces "only" 245 hp (122.5 hp/l). The 2.0-liter turbo four in the latest Mercedes-AMG CLA45 and GLA45, however, produces 375 hp. To get so much out of so little an engine, FCA will utilize a twin-scroll turbocharger and variable valve timing. That could make it ideally suited towards a compact performance model, but according to Automotive News, its first application could be in the new the Wrangler. The larger 3.6-liter Pentastar V6 produces 285 hp, nearly as much as the Hurricane will. But with a smaller engine, an eight-speed transmission, and aluminum construction, the new Jeep will likely benefit from dramatically-improved fuel consumption. Related Video:

Fiat Chrysler will pay $70M to settle safety disclosure suit

FCA US will pay a $70 million civil penalty to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for failing to submit Early Warning Report data going back to 2003. The automaker will also provide any missing data since that time, and an auditor will monitor future compliance. NHTSA says the failures to report this information "stem from problems in FCA's electronic system for monitoring and reporting safety data, including improper coding and failure to account for changes in brand names." There are no allegations of any intentional deception by the automaker. NHTSA will wrap up the latest fine with the previous consent order against FCA US earlier this year for the automaker's handling of 23 recalls. The company will know owe the safety regulator a total of $140 million in cash, and there will be possibility of $35 million more in deferred penalties if FCA doesn't comply with the agency's requests. In a statement about the fine to Autoblog, FCA US said the automaker "accepts these penalties and is revising its processes to ensure regulatory compliance." The company strongly believes that it didn't miss any safety problems over the time with this problem. Early Warning Reports include information on deaths, injuries, crashes, and other potential safety concerns, and NHTSA often uses the data in investigations for possible recalls. In September, the safety agency first announced the automaker failed to submit these documents. At the time, the regulator's administrator Mark Rosekind promised to "take appropriate action after gathering additional information on the scope and causes of this failure." FCA US also released a statement then about the lapse and said the company notified NHTSA immediately after discovering the problem. FCA US is not the first company to run afoul of NHTSA's reporting requirement. The agency fined Triumph Motorcycles and Honda this year for similar lapses. It also punished Ferrari in 2014. U.S. DOT Fines Fiat Chrysler $70 million for Failure to Provide Early Warning Report Data to NHTSA WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has imposed a $70 million civil penalty on Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) for the auto manufacturer's failure to report legally required safety data. The penalty follows FCA's admission in September that it had failed, over several years, to provide Early Warning Report data to NHTSA as required by the TREAD Act of 2000.