Dodge Nitro Heat 1-owner Unbeatable Price Florida Suv Excellent Condition on 2040-cars

Auto blog

VLF Force 1 V10 is a rebodied Viper priced like a Lamborghini

It would appear that Henrik Fisker is done with hybrids. His latest project, called the Force 1, packs an oversized V10 engine with no electric assist in sight and all the environmental credentials of a herd of flatulent cattle. Alongside the Karma-based, Corvette-powered Destino, the Force 1 is the second product from VLF Automotive. Fisker has taken partnership in the new firm as chief designer alongside chairman Bob Lutz and CEO Gilbert Villarreal. The company isn't saying explicitly what the Force 1 is based on, but it doesn't take a CSI team to trace its roots back to the Dodge Viper. Never mind that it's being built in Auburn Hills – the same Detroit suburb where Chrysler is headquartered – or that it was jointly developed by Fisker and professional Viper racer and dealer Ben Keating. It also happens to be powered by an 8.4-liter V10, and there aren't many of those kicking around the industry. Instead of the Viper's 645 horsepower and 600 pound-feet of torque, the Force 1's ten-cylinder engine is optimized to deliver 745 hp and 638 lb-ft. That, according to VLF, is enough to send the coupe rocketing to 60 in 3.0 seconds flat, covering the quarter-mile in under 11 seconds on its way to a top speed of 218 miles per hour. The power is transmitted to the Pirelli PZero rubber through a six-speed manual, but VLF says it will fit it with an automatic at the customer's request. Around that massive engine and two-seat cockpit, Fisker designed a new shape that, for better or for worse, looks way more aggressive than the Viper's. The Force 1's proportions are tellingly super-snake, but the curves are replaced by some very angry-looking angles and vents. Its head- and taillights are ultra thin, and the deep-dish, split-four-spoke wheels seem to visually split the difference between the three-spoke wheels on the original Viper and the five-spoke alloys it wears today. If you doubted the Force 1's origins before, the interior ought to give it away, with its wide tunnel and familiar surfaces. Only VLF has refinished it in leather, suede, and Alcantara, all diamond stitched with contrasting thread to help position this as a more luxurious prospect than the Dodge. It even fit between the seatbacks place for two champagne bottles that we hope nobody would consider consuming before trying to handle that much power. Of course, none of this will come cheap.

Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat's 707 storming horses can be yours for $60k

We love a good deal on high performance. It's what traditionally makes muscle cars so appealing - you get lots of speed, for not a lot of money. For 2015, Dodge has taken this to its logical extreme, offering its new 707-horsepower, supercharged, V8-powered Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat for just $59,900. For those wondering, that works out to just about $85 per horsepower, which when compared with a typical budget performance car, like the $24,995, 210-hp Volkswagen GTI ($119 per hp), demonstrates the Hellcat's astonishing value.
The information was revealed by a photo (click on the inset image to expand) taken at this week's Portland launch event (our man Seyth Miersma is just now on the ground and will have a full report on the madness that is the Hellcat soon) for the entire 2015 Challenger range, and reveals the Hellcat's price alongside its high-powered competitors from Ford and Chevrolet.
The discontinued 662-hp Mustang GT500 started at $56,000, while the 580-hp Camaro ZL1 starts off at $58K. Indeed, the only muscle car that outprices the Hellcat is the track-focused Camaro Z/28, a car that we're guessing could still wallop the Hellcat on the right piece of track, despite being down over 200 hp.

Fiat Chrysler wins top Total Quality Award for first time

The Strategic Vision Total Quality Awards are 20 years old in 2015, and Chrysler has never topped the awards before. Until now, that is. Fiat Chrysler takes the overall award on the corporate level with six segment leaders from Fiat, Dodge, Jeep, and Ram. The Fiat 500 won Small Multi-Function Car, the 500e won Small Alternative Powertrain, the Dodge Challenger tied at the top in the Specialty Coupe category alongside the very un-coupe Mini Cooper Countryman, the Jeep Wrangler Unlimited took the Entry SUV category, the Dodge Durango won in Mid-Size SUV, and Ram took the overall in Best Non-Luxury Brand. The accolade means FCA has gone from one segment winner in 2010 to overall victory in five years. Cars have gotten so good, says Strategic Vision, that it is harder than ever to win. In fact, says the group, 18 years ago 85 percent of all vehicle brands had more than half a problem per vehicle. This year, no brand has more than half a problem per vehicle. The organization measures "over 155 specific aspects of the customer's experience," and scores are based on input from more than 46,000 customers. Other notables in and near the winner's circle include Volkswagen and General Motors, who tied for second place on the corporate scale, one point behind FCA. The Mini Cooper Roadster scored the highest of any model, the Corvette Stingray Convertible and Coupe scored the second- and third-highest. The Chevrolet Colorado is the first domestic Standard Pickup winner in more than ten years, and the Nissan Titan carried the Full-Size Pickup category. The press release below has all the details on how winners and losers are selected, and the full list of automakers and how they finished. "The Customer's 'Total' Experience Defines Quality, Fiat Chrysler Scores Highest in Total Quality," says Strategic Vision The 2015 Total Quality Awards® SAN DIEGO, Friday, July 17, 2015 — Unknown to many, when some consumer research firms rank a car company's quality performance they often do so by simply "counting problems." In the past, this may have been acceptable, but in today's modern and efficient manufacturing world the difference between the worst brand and best brand is LESS than half-a-problem per vehicle. Thus, any "quality ranking" based on this method is severely lacking in the complete picture of the "Total" Quality experience that customers actually use to judge their product ownership.