2013 Dodge Grand Caravan Sxt on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Has Dodge stepped in it again with Scat Pack lawsuit?

Lawsuits are an unfortunate part of doing business in just about any industry, so the latest complaint filed by a California-based aftermarket firm against Chrysler would seem to be nothing more than business as usual. But this isn't the first time the two companies have sparred over this particular issue.
According to a report from Automotive News, the dispute revolves around the Scat Pack name that Chrysler first offered on the Charger, Coronet, Dart and Super Bee starting in 1968. Scat Enterprises, a manufacturer of crankshafts and other components for Dodges and other vehicles, sued Chrysler for using its name. A few years later the Scat Pack disappeared from the Dodge catalog.
Fast forward to August 2013 when Chrysler applied to register the Scat Pack name anew. The US Patent and Trademark Office turned down Chrysler's application, but the automaker proceeded anyway, unveiling new Scat Packs for the Challenger, Charger and Dart at last year's SEMA show.

Chrysler recalls small number of 2013-2014 cars and trucks over engine debris

Chrysler is recalling a small number cars over issues with their 2.4-liter four-cylinder engines. The recall, which affects 522 examples of its 2013 Dodge Avenger and Chrysler 200 models, as well as 2014 Jeep Compass and Patriot CUVs has to do with potential debris in the balance shaft bearings.
The abrasive stuff can cause the oil pressure to drop, which could lead to the engine stalling or outright failure. This situation could at best leave drivers stranded and at worst lead to a crash.
Chrysler will begin notifying owners, who will need to report in to have the balance shaft module replaced. All repairs are naturally free of charge. Scroll down for the bulletin from NHTSA.

Killing the Dart and 200 might lower FCA's fuel economy burden

Killing the Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200 could allow FCA US to take advantage of an intriguing quirk in the next decade's fuel economy regulations. By increasing its ratio of trucks versus cars, the automaker might not need to worry so much about hitting the more stringent efficiency rules. At first thought, it might seem harder for an automaker with a ton of trucks to meet the government's mandated 54.5 mile per gallon corporate average fuel economy for 2025. However, every company doesn't need to hit that lofty figure, according to The Detroit Free Press. The exact target varies by the product mix between trucks and cars. "While passenger car and light truck categories have separate CAFE targets, it's still true that more trucks versus cars in a company lineup means a lower combined CAFE target," Brandon Schoettle, Project Manager Sustainable Worldwide Transportation at the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, told Autoblog. "While passenger car and light truck categories have separate CAFE targets, it's still true that more trucks versus cars in a company lineup means a lower combined CAFE target." FCA US' current product blend has 80 percent pickups and CUVs, which means the company stands to benefit from a lower fuel economy target. It might not seem entirely fair environmentally, but this is a great move from a business perspective. The new CAFE rules aren't set in stone, according to The Detroit Free Press, but potentially taking advantage of the regulation is just one more reason to cut the Dart and 200. Modern crossovers also aren't gas guzzlers like older SUVs, which could make it easier to hit the fuel economy target. "Utilities offer practicality and versatility that cars do not, and now, built on car architectures, they do not penalize consumers on fuel economy as they once did," AutoTrader Senior Analyst Michelle Krebs told Autoblog. Schoettle warns that FCA is still making a gamble by killing the small sedans. "Depending on the previous sales volumes and how much these vehicles might have exceeded their specific CAFE targets, it's possible that these cars helped earn CAFE credits for FCA that they could bank for future use," he said. "Future sales breakdowns [car vs.