Touring Edition - Quad Seating - Dual Power Sliding Doors - *stow-n-go* - on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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...

Treasury says auto bailout tally drops to $20.3 billion

In December, the US Treasury announced that it was going to sell all of its shares in General Motors within 12 to 15 months. The first tranche of the 500-million total shares was purchased by GM, which took 200 million of them at $27.50 per share. That price represents an eight-percent premium over the market price at the time. The remaining 300 million shares will be sold "through various means in an orderly fashion."
Of the $418 billion disbursed through the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), a report in Automotive News indicates that "about 93 percent" has been paid back, and the latest figures put Treasury's loss from the program overall at $55.58 billion. That's a $4.1 billion improvement on the last figure, when the expected red ink added up to $59.68 billion. The auto industry's portion of that loss is estimated to be $20.3 billion, a 16-percent drop from the earlier estimate of $24.3 billion.
The Treasury now owns 19 percent of GM, but if all goes well, there will be no more cause for anyone to utter "Government Motors" by the end of Q1 next year. A loss of some kind is still expected, however. Although GM's stock price is close to $29 at the time of this writing, that's still $4 below its IPO price and well below the $72 share price necessary for the government to come out even on its GM investment. On second thought, maybe the ribbing will continue.

2013 Chrysler 300C John Varvatos Limited Edition

Who is John Varvatos? If you're like me, that's the question you were asking after seeing commercials that advertised a limited-edition model of the Chrysler 300 with this mystery man's name attached. If you're not like me and consider yourself a fashionista even in the slightest, then you probably already know that John Varvatos is a successful menswear designer who cut his teeth in the fashion houses of Ralph Lauren's Polo and Calvin Klein. He's also a native of Detroit, which makes the joining of his brand and that of Chrysler's more intelligible, what with the Auburn Hills-based automaker still eking efficacy from its nearly three-year-old "Imported from Detroit" tagline.
Whenever one of these co-branded vehicles crosses my path, I try to judge them according to some simple questions. The first is, does the co-branding make sense for the target audience? And the second is, do the changes improve or diminish the experience of the standard vehicle? With this partnership, both brands are clearly aiming at the same target, or perhaps Chrysler hopes its aim will improve by partnering with the JV set, bringing it closer to that bullseye of style-conscious trendsetters.
The second question, meanwhile, can be answered with your eyes alone, as no mechanical changes are included among the Varvatos upgrades. Despite that, the 300C John Varvatos Edition is priced above - well above - all other 300 sedans save the 300 SRT8, suggesting that cool is not sold by the barrel (was it ever?) and Mr. Varvatos is a dealer in the stuff. Yet while I couldn't actually tell you if John Varvatos was a designer or a ditch digger before Chrysler introduced us, I do like his style, and the man knows how to dress a car.