2001 Chrysler Pt Cruiser Wagon 4-door 2.4l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

FCA explains, updates sales reporting in wake of investigation

Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) is currently under investigation by the Department of Justice (DoJ) and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for possible misappropriation of monthly sales. Not only that but a dealer group filed a lawsuit against the auto company for allegedly bribing dealers to falsify sales reports. In the wake of these mounting pressures, FCA released a report explaining their old sales reporting methods, as well as introducing the method they will use now. The report explains that sales will break down into three main categories. The first category is simply sales made by dealers in the United States that were purchased by your typical consumer. The second group is fleet sales that were purchased directly from FCA. The final group is a mix of various sales including sales by Puerto Rican dealers, cars used for marketing, and vehicles delivered to FCA employees and retirees. The original method of recording these sales relied mainly on the New Vehicle Delivery Report (NVDR). This system allowed dealers to report new car sales at the time of sale. These sales were used to create and report a total at the end of each month. Dealers also had the ability to "unwind" sales. What this means is that a dealer could cancel the sale of a car that was reported as sold in the event that a customer couldn't purchase the car or wanted a different vehicle. This would also return factory incentives to Chrysler and end the warranty period. Fleet and other sales were not recorded through this system, and were rather included in a separate "reserve" of vehicles. FCA explained that it did not know why this was the case, but the company speculated the reason may have been to avoid reporting vehicles that hadn't made it to road use yet. FCA also emphasized that their retail sales reports do not reflect quarterly earnings. The company explained that those earnings are based on vehicles purchased from FCA, which includes sales like the cars dealers buy for their local inventories. The new method also shows FCA's long run of sales increases wasn't as long as first thought. FCA has adopted a new system for calculating sales in light of concerns and confusion. This system retains the categories listed above, but changes how it counts them. The dealer reported numbers will now only include sold vehicles and will deduct sales of unwound vehicles that month.

Why the Detroit Three should merge their engine operations

GM and FCA should consider a smaller merger that could still save them billions of dollars, and maybe lure Ford into the deal. Fiat-Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne would love to see his company merge with General Motors. But GM's board of directors essentially told him to go pound sand. So now what? The boardroom battle started when Mr. Marchionne published a study called Confessions of a Capital Junkie. In it, Sergio detailed the amount of capital the auto industry wastes every year with duplicate investments. And he documented how other industries provide superior returns. He's right, of course. Other industries earn much better returns on their invested capital. And there's a danger that one day the investors will turn their backs on the auto industry and look to other business sectors where they can make more money. But even with powerful arguments Marchionne couldn't convince GM to take over FCA. And while that fight may now be over, GM and FCA should consider a smaller merger that could still save them billions of dollars, and maybe lure Ford into the deal. No doubt this suggestion will send purists into convulsions, but so be it. The Detroit Three should seriously consider merging their powertrain operations, even though that's a sacrilege in an industry that still considers the engine the "heart" of the car. These automakers have built up considerable brand equity in some of their engines. But the vast majority of American car buyers could not tell you what kind of engine they have under the hood. More importantly, most car buyers really don't care what kind of engine or transmission they have as long as it's reliable, durable, and efficient. Combining that production would give the Detroit Three the kind of scale that no one else could match. There are exceptions, of course. Hardcore enthusiasts care deeply about the powertrains in their cars. So do most diesel, plug-in, and hybrid owners. But all of them account for maybe 15 percent of the car-buying public. So that means about 85 percent of car buyers don't care where their engine and transmission came from, just as they don't know or care who supplied the steel, who made the headlamps, or who delivered the seats on a just-in-time basis. It's immaterial to them. And that presents the automakers with an opportunity to achieve a staggering level of manufacturing scale. In the NAFTA market alone, GM, Ford, and FCA will build nearly nine million engines and nine million transmissions this year.

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...