2013 Chrysler 300 S on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2015 Chrysler 200 gets 36 mpg with Tigershark four-cylinder

Chrysler has come out with the official fuel economy information on the new 200 following the info that was leaked from the EPA earlier this week. It turns out that our initial report of 18 miles per gallon in the city and 29 mpg on the highway for the all-wheel-drive V6 was correct.
What we didn't know at the time, though, was what sort of economy the 200's other powertrain options managed. Outfitted with the 2.4-liter four-pot, Chrysler is promising 23 mpg in the city and 36 mpg on the highway, with a combined rating of 28 mpg. Those figures are fairly impressive; besting figures of the 2.5-liter Ford Fusion and tying the 1.5-liter, EcoBoost, non-start-stop model. It's also beats the four-cylinder Toyota Camry's 35-mpg highway figure while tying its combined efficiency.
Stepping up to the 295-horsepower Pentastar V6 pushes the economy down to 19 mpg in the city, while the highway figure is a respectable 32 mpg for the front-driver. The combined rating for the FWD V6 is 23 mpg. Those figures can't quite match the 270-horsepower 2.0-liter, EcoBoost four of the Fusion, which nets 22 city and 33 highway. In fact, the V6 200 has trouble besting even the 3.5-liter V6 of the Camry, which returns 21 mpg city and 31 mpg highway. Again, though, the 200 is noticeably more powerful.

Labor Day: A look back at the largest UAW strikes in history

American made is almost an anachronism now, but good manufacturing jobs drove America's post-war economic golden age. Fifty years ago, if you held a job on a line, you were most likely a member of a union. And no union was more powerful than the United Auto Workers. Before the slow decline in membership started in the 1970s, the UAW had over 1.5 million members and represented workers from the insurance industry to aerospace and defense. The UAW isn't the powerhouse it once was. Today, just fewer than 400,000 workers hold membership in the UAW. Unions are sometimes blamed for the decline of American manufacturing, as companies have spent the last 30 years outsourcing their needs to countries with cheap labor and fewer requirements for the health and safety of their workers. Unions formed out of a desire to protect workers from dangerous conditions and abject poverty once their physical abilities were used up on the line; woes that manufacturers now outsource to poorer countries, along with the jobs. Striking was the workers' way of demanding humane treatment and a seat at the table with management. Most strikes are and were local affairs, affecting one or two plants and lasting a few days. But some strikes took thousands of workers off the line for months. Some were large enough to change the landscape of America. 1. 1936-1937 Flint Sit-Down Strike In 1936, just a year after the UAW formed and the same year they held their first convention, the union moved to organize workers within a major manufacturer. For extra oomph, they went after the largest in the world – General Motors. UAW Local 174 president Walter Reuther focused on two huge production facilities – one in Flint and one in Cleveland, where GM made all the parts for Buick, Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Chevrolet. Conditions in these plants were hellish. Workers weren't allowed bathroom breaks and often soiled themselves while standing at their stations. Workers were pushed to the limit on 12-14 hour shifts, six days a week. The production speed was nearly impossibly fast and debilitating injuries were common. In July 1936, temperatures inside the Flint plants reached over 100 degrees, yet managers refused to slow the line. Heat exhaustion killed hundreds of workers. Their families could expect no compensation for their deaths. When two brothers were fired in Cleveland when management discovered they were part of the union, a wildcat strike broke out.

Marchionne hopes Apple will partner with Fiat

Apple wants to make a car. Fiat already makes cars. Therefore, Apple and Fiat should partner to make an Apple Car. Makes sense, right? Clearly, it's not quite that easy, but FCA chief Sergio Marchionne hopes that Cupertino will consider Fiat a worthy candidate for partnership, assuming, of course, that Apple follows through with its overtures into the automobile industry. Marchionne is, according to Bloomberg, a self-proclaimed "Apple freak" who owns every kind of product Apple makes. He suggests that he understands the tech company's needs and wants. "Apple has a language, and you have to be able to speak that language," said Marchionne. "Usually the industry comes into that dialogue with a high degree of arrogance as we know how to make cars. That's not very helpful as their syntax is worth more than our ability to build cars." By "syntax," we assume Marchionne means Apple's sleek and modern design language more than the code behind its software. It's interesting to note that the FCA CEO seems to indicate that Apple would bring more to any partnership than the automaker would. Fair or not, we'd wager that more buyers would care about a potential Apple Car's design and branding than would be concerned with which automaker helped assembled it. A partnership with Apple may be exactly the kind of cure that the FCA CEO believes ails the auto industry. After finding it impossible to further pursue industry consolidation, a tie-up with the massive tech industry, particularly Apple, could generate some much-needed positive cash flow. At present, though, it's all just conjecture – Apple hasn't offered any hints as to the true nature of its so-called Project Titan automotive project, and doesn't seem likely to anytime soon. Related Video: