2013 Chrysler Town Country, Braun Wheelchair Handicap Van, Only 6k Miles on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Dodge Grand Caravan to live in fleets through 2017

After a hard-working career of hauling around families for decades, the Dodge Grand Caravan name was set to retire in 2016 under FCA's five-year plan for the US. The decision would have put all of the automaker's focus behind the next-generation Chrysler Town & Country, but that original strategy might have changed. Now, Dodge's minivan may have to work just a few more years before it can finally shuffle off. There are set to be 2016 and 2017 model year examples of the current Grand Caravan, according to an internal FCA production document obtained by Automotive News. This report suggests no changes in the minivan between those two years, and there's no mention of the company's intentions deeper into the future. "While we've announced the Grand Caravan will eventually be the minivan that goes away, we're not going into more detail at this time," a Dodge spokesperson said to AN. For the next Town & Country, production would start in Windsor, Ontario, in late February 2016. This document also suggests a brief run of 2016 Chrysler minivans based on the current model from August 2015 until February 2016. Automotive News speculates that the reprieve for the Grand Caravan could allow that model to focus on fleets and the Canadian market while the new Town and Country gets up and running. The latest generation T&C will reportedly debut at the 2016 Detroit Auto Show and will possibly carry a higher price to befit a vehicle with a more modern platform and improved tech.

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.

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