2000 Chrysler Concorde Lx on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Moon landing anniversary: How Detroit automakers won the space race

America's industrial might — automakers included — determined the outcome of the 20th centuryÂ’s biggest events. The “Arsenal of Democracy” won World War II, and then the Cold War. And our factories flew us to the moon. Apollo was a Cold War program. You can draw a direct line from Nazi V-2 rockets to ICBMs to the Saturn V. The space race was a proxy war — which beats a real war. It was a healthy outlet for technology and testosterone that would otherwise be used for darker purposes. (People protested, and still do, that money for space should go to problems here on Earth, but more likely the military-industrial complex would've just bought more bombs with it.) As long as we and the Soviet Union were launching rockets into space, we were not lobbing them at each other. JFKÂ’s challenge to “go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard,” put American industry back on a war footing. We were galvanized to beat the Russians, to demonstrate technological dominance. (A lack of similar unifying purpose is why we havenÂ’t been to the moon since, or Mars.) NASA says more than 400,000 Americans, from scientists to seamstresses, toiled on the moon program, working for government or for 20,000 contractors. Antagonism was diverted into something inspirational. The Big Three automakers were some of the biggest companies in the moon program, which might surprise a lot of people today. Note to a new generation who marveled when SpaceX launched a Tesla Roadster out into the solar system: Sure, that was neat, but just know that Detroit beat Elon Musk to space by more than half a century. This high point in human history was brought to you by Ford ItÂ’s hard to imagine in this era of Sony-LG-Samsung, but Ford used to make TVs. And other consumer appliances. Or rather Philco, the radio, TV and transistor pioneer that Ford bought in 1961 — the year Gagarin and Alan Shepard flew in space. Ted Ryan, FordÂ’s archives and heritage brand manager, just wrote a Medium article on the central role Philco-Ford played in manned spaceflight. And nothingÂ’s more central than Mission Control in Houston, the famous console-filled room we all know from TV and movies. What we didn't know was, that was Ford. Ford built that. In 1953, Ryan notes, Philco invented a transistor that was key to the development of (what were then regarded as) high-speed computers, so naturally Philco became a contractor for NASA and the military.

Question Of The Day: Most overlooked heroic engine?

All of us know that the small-block Chevrolet V8 was a masterpiece of engineering that made the high-performance overhead-valve V8 affordable to the masses, and that the Mercedes-Benz OM617 diesel is basically immortal, and that the Toyota R engine defined what it means for a vehicle to be considered Warlord Grade. The AMC straight-six. The Model T engine. The Volvo Redblock. Those engines get the respect they deserve. But what about the engines that we don't think much about, the ones that worked hard in their millions and somehow missed attaining legend status? The list of engines beloved by their aficionados but not thought of often by the rest of us goes on and on: the Renault Ventoux, Mitsubishi 4G1, MeMZ-968, and so on. But my vote goes to the Chrysler flathead straight-six. This engine was produced starting in 1929 and was still being made for stationary industrial use in the early 1970s. It powered just about every type of Chrysler vehicle made for decades, hauled supplies for all the major Allied armies in World War II, and was even developed into a five-bank, 30-cylinder tank engine. It was simple and reliable and outlived most of its competition, and you rarely hear much about it these days. What's your choice?

Final Toledo Jeep decision may have nothing to do with city's efforts

Toledo, OH is doing all that it can to keep production of the Jeep Wrangler in its boundaries, but the biggest issue facing the plant may be insurmountable, no matter how desperately the city wants to keep the Wrangler local. The Wrangler is built in a rather interesting manner at the Toledo Supplier Park: Fiat Chrysler only handles the very final assembly of each vehicle, while two other companies, Kuka, a German firm, and Hyundai-Mobis, a member of the sprawling Hyundai empire, produce the body and chassis, respectively. The vehicles are then transferred over to the FCA part of the park, where they're painted and completed. This was, as The Detroit News explains, a convenient arrangement back in 2006 when the supplier park opened. Chrysler, which was still owned by Daimler at the time, arranged for Kuka and Mobis to handle production, saving it a huge sum of money. Both suppliers own their own machinery and buildings and employ their own workers. Now that FCA is a relatively healthy entity, though, there's not a lot of need to be sharing profits with two other companies. "What [FCA boss Sergio Marchionne] would like is to have the advantages of high-capacity utilization, owning that capacity and taking advantage of that for himself versus having a supplier doing some of the things his competitors do internally," David Cole, chairman emeritus at the Ann Arbor, MI-based Center for Automotive Research, told The News. "It really adds another level of complexity to the situation." While Sergio Marchionne is a man that generally gets what he wants, it seems unlikely that either Mobis or Kuka would give up their role quietly. According to Jon Zapf, Mobis North America's chairperson for UAW Local 12, the company "definitely wants to maintain their part of this production process." According to The News, Jeep is likely to announce the location of next-generation Wrangler production in June. Expect to hear much more on this one in the coming months.