2014 Chrysler Town & Country Touring-l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Is your new-car warranty good at the race track?

We've all heard the horror stories. Your buddy knows a girl that was dating a guy whose best friend's brother once broke his brand-new, recently purchased performance car while making runs at a drag strip or laps at a track day, and the manufacturer wouldn't cover the repair under warranty. True story? Urban legend? Complete crap? Yes, no, maybe. One thing's for sure: Automotive warranties have always come with caveats. In 1908, an ad in the Trenton Evening Times clearly stated: "All Ford Cars Guaranteed for One Year." Although it changed over time, by 1925 the Ford New Car Guarantee only covered 90 days on material and 30 days on labor, and it clearly stated that that there was "No guarantee whatever on Fan Belts, Glass, Bulbs, Wiring, Transmission, Bands, Hose Connections, Commutator Shells, Rollers, Spark Plugs or Gaskets." Whether or not Ol' Henry would pay to fix your Model T if you broke it shaving a tenth off your lap time at the local board track seems to be lost to history. We're guessing no. But what about today? Do new-car warranties in 2017 cover cars when they are driven on race tracks? We researched the warranties of 14 auto brands to find out, and the answer is yes, no, maybe, depending on the brand, in some cases the model, and whether or not your car is modified from stock. Acura has been out of the high-performance car game for a number of years, but jumps back into the party in 2017 with its hybrid-powered $173,000 NSX supercar. And Acura's warranty, as well as Honda's, clearly states that it does not cover "the use of the vehicle in competition or racing events." View 33 Photos So we asked Sage Marie, Senior Manager of Public Relations for Honda and Acura. "If the car is stock, the warranty covers it on a track just as it does on the street. No question," he told us. "However, if the car is modified, say with slick tires or other components that would put higher stresses on the vehicle's parts and systems, then we would have to investigate the circumstances further." Marie went on to say the same would be true for any Acura model or Honda vehicle, including the new 2017 Honda Civic Si. This became a common theme. Chevrolet actually started this practice with the fifth-generation Camaro on the high-performance ZL1 and Z/28 models.

2017 Chrysler Pacifica First Drive

I know this is supposed to be a shameful secret, but I like minivans. I like the way the kids can enter and exit easily with the sliding doors. I like the comfortable ride they provide on road trips. I like the way I can reconfigure the interior seats to haul groceries, furniture, and kids. For decades, the minivan has been maimed by its uncoolness. Sales of the family movers have tapered to about 500,000 units per year while American families have shifted their allegiance to crossovers and SUVs. But America loves a redemption story, and I believe the minivan can be redeemed. Chrysler does too. At a time when the company is shedding vehicles from its lineup – so long, Chrysler 200 and Dodge Dart – its executives aren't paying any attention to whatever conventional wisdom suggests the minivan segment has foundered and reached its end. Instead, Chrysler just spent $2 billion to overhaul the architecture for its minivan. Enter the 2017 Pacifica, an all-new vehicle that immediately replaces the Town & Country and eventually will replace the Dodge Grand Caravan. It couldn't have come at a better time. Consumer Reports recently named the outgoing Town & Country one of its "Ten Worst Picks" among 2016 vehicles, an eyesore for the company that pioneered the minivan segment. Enticed by a slew of standard features and heavy incentives, I happen to own one of those disparaged Town & Country vans. Other than a transmission that always seems to be searching for the right gear, I've got no substantial complaints about the car. While it'd be a reach to say that any minivan is attractive, the new design makes the Pacifica the best of the bunch. But my ownership experience made me curious about how the new Pacifica would fare, whether Chrysler's billions were invested well and mostly, whether the Pacifica would truly feel like an all-new vehicle or whether it had merely been incrementally advanced. Navigating the roads in the rolling hills of Southern California last week, it didn't take long to find out. A revised 3.6-liter Pentastar V6 engine delivered 287 horsepower and 262 pound-feet of torque, making the climbs up California's hills effortless. Likewise, the new nine-speed automatic transmission never strained or felt clunky, like it has in other recent products like our long-term Jeep Cherokee. The harmonious combination of the upgraded engine and transmission felt like the single-biggest differentiator between the old and new minivans.

This or That: 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 vs. 1984 Pontiac Fiero

Welcome to another round of This or That, where two Autoblog editors pick a topic, pick a side and pull no punches. Last round pitted yours truly against Associate Editor Brandon Turkus, and my chosen VW Vanagon Syncro narrowly defeated Brandon's 1987 Land Rover. In fact, it was, by far, the closest round we've seen, with 1,907 voters seeing things my way (for 50.8 percent of the vote) versus 1,848 votes for Brandon's Rover (49.2 percent). Sweet, sweet victory! For this latest round of This or That, I've roped Editor Greg Migliore into what I think is a rather fun debate. We've each chosen our favorite terrible cars, setting a price limit of $10,000 to make sure neither of us went too crazy with our automotive atrocities. I think we've both chosen terribly... and I mean that in the best way possible. 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 Jeremy Korzeniewski: Why It's Terrible: Taken in isolation, the Chrysler Crossfire isn't necessarily a terrible car. In fact, it drives pretty darn well, and there's a lot of solid engineering under its slinky shape. Problem is, that engineering was already rather long in the tooth well before Chrysler ever got its hands on it, having come from Mercedes-Benz, which used the basic chassis and drivetrain in a previous version of its SLK coupe and roadster. Granted, the SLK was an okay car, too, but even when new, it hardly set the world on fire with sporty driving dynamics. Chrysler took these decent-but-no-more bits and pieces from the Mercedes parts bin – remember, this car was conceived in the disastrous Merger Of Equals days – and covered them with a rather attractive hard-candy shell. Unfortunately, the super sporty shape wrote checks in the minds of buyers that its well-worn mechanicals were simply unable to cash, though an injection of power courtesy of a supercharged V6 engine in the SRT6 model, as seen here, certainly helped ease some of those woes. In the end, Chrysler was left with a so-called halo car that looked the part but never quite performed the part. It was almost universally panned by critics as an overpriced parts-bin special, which, I must add, was damningly accurate. As a result, sales were very slow, and within the first few months, dealers were clearancing the car at cut-rate prices, just to keep them from taking up too much of the showroom floor. Why It's Not That Terrible, After All: I can speak from personal experience when discussing the Chrysler Crossfire. You see, I owned one. Well, sort of...