2017 Ram 2500 Laramie Crew Cab 4x4 6'4" Box on 2040-cars

Auto blog

EPA suspected Fiat Chrysler of using 'defeat device' in 2015

U.S. regulators told Fiat Chrysler Automobiles in November 2015 that they suspected some of the automaker's vehicles were equipped with secret software allowing them to violate emission control standards, according to emails disclosed on Friday. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and California Air Resources Board accused Fiat Chrysler in January of using the software, known as a "defeat device," to illegally allow excess diesel emissions in 104,000 Jeep Grand Cherokees and Dodge Ram 1500 trucks built between 2014 and 2016. Byron Bunker, director of the EPA's Transportation and Air Quality compliance division, said in a January 2016 email to Fiat Chrysler, obtained by Reuters under the Freedom of Information Act, that he was "very concerned about the unacceptably slow pace" of the automaker's efforts to explain high nitrogen oxide emissions from some of its vehicles. Nitrogen oxide is linked to smog formation and respiratory problems. Bunker's email said the EPA had told Fiat Chrysler officials at a November 2015 meeting that at least one auxiliary emissions control device on the car maker's vehicles appeared to violate the agency's regulations. Mike Dahl, head of vehicle safety and regulatory compliance for Fiat Chrysler's U.S. unit, responded in a separate email that the company was working diligently and understood the EPA's concerns. He added that if the EPA identified Fiat Chrysler vehicles as containing defeat devices it would result in "potentially significant regulatory and commercial consequences." The documents redacted the vehicles named, but two officials briefed on the matter said they referred to diesel models. The EPA's November 2015 meeting with Fiat Chrysler came two months after Volkswagen AG, mired in a major tailpipe emissions scandal, admitted to installing secret defeat device software in hundreds of thousands of U.S. diesel cars to make them appear cleaner than they were on the road.

Auto Mergers and Acquisitions: Suicide or salvation?

We love the Moses figure. A savior riding in from stage right with the ideas, the smarts, and the scrappiness to put things right. Alan Mullaly. Carroll Shelby. Lee Iacocca. Andrew Carnegie. Steve Jobs. Elon Musk. Bart Simpson. Sergio Marchionne does not likely view himself with Moses-like optics, but the CEO of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles recently gave a remarkable, perhaps prophetic interview with Automotive News about his interest and the inevitability of merging with a potential automotive partner like General Motors. Marchionne has been overtly public about his notion that GM must merge with FCA. For a bit of context, GM sold 9.9 million vehicles in 2014, posting $2.8 billion in net income, while FCA sold 4.75 million units and earned $2.4 billion in net income, painting a very rosy FCA earnings-to-sales picture. But that's not the entire picture. Most people in the auto industry still remember the trainwreck that was the DaimlerChrysler "merger" written in what turned out to be sand in 1998. It proved to be a master class in how not to fuse two companies, two cultures, two continents, and two management teams. Oh, it worked for the two individuals at both helms pre-merger. They got silly rich. And the industry itself was in a misty romance at the time with mergers and acquisitions. BMW bought Rolls-Royce. Volkswagen Group bought Bentley, Bugatti, and Lamborghini, putting all three brands into their rightful place in both products and positioning. No marriages there, so no false pretense. Finally, Nissan and Renault got married in 1999. A successful marriage requires several rare elements in this atmosphere of gas fumes and power lust. But a successful marriage requires several rare elements in this atmosphere of gas fumes and power lust, the principle part being honesty. Daimler and Chrysler lied to each other. The heads of each unit, the product planners, and finance all presented their then-current and long-range forecasts to each other with less-than-forthright accuracy. Daimler was the far greater equal and no one from the Chrysler side enjoyed that. The cultures were entirely different, too, and little was done to bridge that gap. Which brings me back to the present overtures by Marchionne to GM. "There are varying degrees of hugs," Marchionne stated in the Automotive News piece. "I can hug you nicely, I can hug you tightly, I can hug you like a bear, I can really hug you." Seriously?

This or That: 2005 Dodge Ram SRT-10 vs. 2005 Subaru WRX STI [w/poll]

Some cars, due to ultimate desirability, particular rareness, or spectacular performance/prestige eventually become collectible. It's darn near impossible to know which ones will make it into the rarefied stratosphere of collectibility – why is a late 1960s AMC AMX so affordable these days, whereas prices for late '70s Pontiac Trans Ams are soaring? – but there are some useful indicators to keep tabs on. We're not exactly experts on investing, but we do know cars. As such, we've decided to take our non-expertise on one hand, combine it in the other with our knowledge of all things automotive, wad it up, throw it out and ask for your forgiveness. Or something like that. I've challenged Senior Editor Seyth Miersma to choose a car he thinks will become a future collector's item that's not more than 10 years old, and for no more than $25,000. I've done the same, and we vigorously argued for and against each other's picks. I feel good about my choice, but I don't have the best track record in these contests (I've lost three times, won twice, but they've all been pretty close), so, while I'm not going to beg (please vote for me!), I do hope you find my argument convincing. But first, let's hear from Seyth: Miersma: Ten-years old or newer makes this challenging. At that age most vehicles feel like a plain old used car to me, few hit the "classic" button. But the Subaru WRX STI has always been a special car, and the 2005 cutoff year proves to be very attractive for the parameters of our contest. It's rare; with fewer than 5,000 STI models sold that model year. It's probably the best looking WRX STI ever sold in America; narrowly avoiding the dreadful "horse collar" front fascia. And it's got one of the more die-hard car-geek followings out there. For $25,000, you can also still find examples that have reasonable miles, are in good condition, and haven't all been molested by grown-up Initial D wannabes. With the street racers hacking up collectable examples every day, I like my odds for steep appreciation by way of conservation. I couldn't agree more. It really is difficult to predict what cars will catch the eye of collectors, and the WRX STI seems like a pretty good choice. But I think mine is even better, and I can't let him know that I'd love to park just such an STI in my very own garage. And so goes my argument: Korzeniewski: I like your choice as a driver, Seyth. I'm less convinced of its status as a sure-fire collectible.