1986 V8 Fiero 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...

'We're not a hedge fund': Porsche plans to curtail speculators and flippers

A sizable number of speculators view cars as an investment. Rare or unusual models are quickly snapped up and either parked for years or flipped for a profit. Cars from automakers like Porsche and Ferrari are more prone than others, and at least some people behind these models are getting a bit tired of it. While it's difficult to police what goes on after you sell a car, Porsche has some plans that might curtail the problem before it starts. Andreas Preuninger, the head of GT road-car development and the man behind the new 911 GT3, spoke to Car and Driver at a recent event. "I personally like to see my cars being used," he said. "That's what we build them for. They are just too good to be left to stand and collect dust." One recent example of this rampant speculation is the 911 R. While the special manual-only model sold for $185,950 when new, used versions were selling for nearly $1.3 million just months after it went on sale. While the car is a masterpiece and an instant classic, a good number will be parked and simply used as art and not the rolling testaments to the man/machine interface they were intended to be. The concern over valuations has become so fierce that some owners are upset that Porsche is offering the new 911 GT3 with a manual transmission, fearing that it may hurt the value of the 911 R. "When I said we're not a hedge fund, I'm talking to those people who are yelling at us for offering the manual transmission similar to the R," Preuninger said. "But if there are people wanting to buy cars like that, then as a company we should try to fulfill that, to meet that demand." It seems Porsche is keeping a close eye on who is flipping cars. Since there is often far more demand than supply with certain models, the German automaker has a name for every car before it's built. Buyers with bad reputations might not even make the wait list. Related Video:

GM recalling another 2.7 million vehicles in five separate campaigns

The recalls keep rolling in from General Motors, evidently keen to avoid repeating the mistakes of the ignition-switch debacle and clean house. This time they're all coming at once, with five separate recalls announced together covering approximately 2.7 million vehicles.
The largest of the five actions involves over 2.4 million units of the previous-generation Chevrolet Malibu and Malibu Maxx, Pontiac G6 and Saturn Aura in order to fix brake light wiring harness, which have been found to be susceptible to corrosion. The recall is separate from the 56k Aura sedans which GM recently recalled over faulty shift cables, not to mention the previous massive recall of 1.3 million vehicles - some of them the same models - but appears to have resulted from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration investigation that started with the G6 almost a year ago.
The second-largest campaign involves the 2014 Chevy Malibu, specifically those fitted with GM's 2.5-liter engine and stop/start system, approximately 140,000 examples of which has been found to have problematic brakes. The issue does not appear to be connected to the recall of 8k Malibu and Buick LaCrosse sedans (also involving brake woes) which we reported upon last week. Four crashes have been reported in such models, but GM admits it's not yet clear if the problem was a contributing factor in the accidents.