2011 Chrysler 200 Limited 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...

Did a US automaker blow the whistle on Hyundai, Kia fuel economy issue?

In all of the most hotly contested mainstream segments of the motoring universe, the difference of one mile per gallon averaged on a widow sticker can mean the difference between a sale and a walk-off - to say nothing of two or three mpg. So, when Hyundai and Kia were forced to reveal that many of their 40-mpg ratings were actually 38s and 37s, well, it made for big news.
It also, conceivably, made for a competitive disadvantage immediately, when the Korean automakers' products were being shopped versus the guys down the block. And it's that disadvantage that makes a recent story from Automotive News so juicy.
AN is reporting that Margo Oge, former head of the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Transportation and Air Quality, got a tip in 2010 that Hyundai/Kia were "cheating" to get its impressive fuel economy numbers. The tip, said Oge (who retired from the EPA this past September), came from a senior vice president from a domestic automaker. The source was credible enough for Oge to launch an audit of the Hyundai figures, which ultimately lead to the debacle that we reported on a few months ago, and that the Korean company has been trying to bounce back from ever since.

2017 Chrysler Pacifica scores near top on minivan mpg

The 2017 Chrysler Pacifica gets 28 miles per gallon fuel economy on the highway, 18 mpg city, and 22 mpg combined, according to the government's newly announced estimates. Those figures compare well to the 2016 Town & Country's EPA rating of 25 mpg highway, 17 mpg city, and 20 mpg combined. They also make the new minivan among the most efficient models in its class, although not quite the king. These fuel economy figures only apply to the 2017 Pacifica with the 3.6-liter V6, which makes 287 horsepower and 262 pound-feet of torque, and the nine-speed automatic. We will have to wait until the second half of the year to find out how the plug-in hybrid performs, but the brand believes at least 80 MPGe is possible. Chrysler also plans to make stop-start available later, which will increase real-world fuel numbers. Compared to the currently on-sale competitors, the 2017 Pacifica is among the top, but there are two clear rivals. The 2016 Honda Odyssey has EPA ratings of 28/19/22. Those figures match the Chrysler on the highway and combined, but beat it by one mpg in the city. The other challenger is the 2016 Nissan Quest at 27/20/23. The Nissan wins by two mpg in the city and one mpg combined, but the Pacifica wins by one on the highway. According to Fueleconomy.gov, the front-wheel drive Toyota Sienna and Kia Sedona match the Pacifica's 18 mpg city rating, but they can't beat its combined or highway numbers. Related Video: All-new Gasoline-powered 2017 Chrysler Pacifica Offers Unsurpassed Fuel Economy, Greener Ownership Experience 28-mpg highway unsurpassed in minivan segment; 12 percent better than model it replaces Combined-cycle rating of 22 mpg is 10 percent better Improved fuel efficiency contributes to nine-percent reduction in Global Warming Potential (GWP) All-new Pacifica's superior performance attributable to engineering enhancements, such as: Upgraded version of award-winning Pentastar V-6 TorqueFlite transmission; world's first minivan application of nine-speed automatic gearbox Best-in-class aerodynamics Aggressive weight-reduction strategies March 8, 2016 , Auburn Hills, Mich. - The all-new 2017 Chrysler Pacifica minivan has earned a highway-cycle fuel-economy rating of 28 miles per gallon (mpg) from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – a benchmark unsurpassed by any minivan on the market. It is also 12 percent better than the vehicle Pacifica replaces.