1964 Chrysler Newport W Push-button Trans on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Auto bailout cost the US goverment $9.26B

Depending on your outlook, the US Treasury's bailout of General Motors, Chrysler (now FCA) and their financing divisions under the Troubled Asset Relief Program was either a complete boondoggle or a savvy move to secure the future of some major employers. Regardless of where you fall, the auto industry bailout has officially ended, and the numbers have been tallied. Of the $79.69 billion that the Feds invested to keep the automakers afloat, it recouped $70.43 billion – a net loss of $9.26 billion. The final nail in the coffin for the auto bailout came in December 2014 when the Feds sold its shares in Ally Financial, formerly GMAC. The deal turned out pretty good for the government too because the investment turned a 2.4 billion profit. The actual automakers have long been out of the Treasury's hands, though. The current FCA paid back its loans six years early in 2011, the Treasury sold of the last shares of GM in late 2013. According to The Detroit News, the government's books actually show an official loss on the auto bailouts of $16.56 billion. The difference is because the larger figure does not include the interest or dividends paid by the borrowers on the amount lent. While it's easy to see fault in any red ink on the Feds' massive investment, the number is less than some earlier estimates. At one time, deficits around $44 billion were thought possible, and another put things at a $20.3 billion loss. Outside of just the government losing money, the bailouts might have helped the overall economy. A study from the Center for Automotive Research last year estimated that the program saved 2.6 million jobs and about $284.4 billion in personal wealth. It also indicated that the Feds' reduction in income tax revenue alone from Chrysler and GM going under could have been around $100 billion for just 2009 and 2010, significantly more than any loss in the bailout.

FCA's SEMA vans: A Ram ProMaster bar and a Mopar'd Pacifica

For this year's SEMA show, FCA created six machines that range from mild to wild, and what we have here are the two mildest examples: a custom Ram ProMaster and an accessorized Chrysler Pacifica. Of the two, the ProMaster is easily the more interesting. It's called the BrewMaster and it's a rolling bar. Get it? View 11 Photos The pub-themed interior has a variety of custom touches, including Mopar neon signs and beer taps with shift-knob handles. The outside gets some conceptual parts as well. The grille loses the crosshair design in favor of a large-font "RAM" badge in the center, similar to the one on the Ram Rebel. It also gets some custom 20-inch wheels and large fender flares to accommodate the wider rubber. The message here: Don't drink and drive, but definitely drive somewhere and drink. The Pacifica has far fewer custom goodies, and, sadly, no Hellcat powertrain, but that means what you see is something you could realistically replicate at a dealer. Called the Pacifica Cadence, this van is a rolling showcase of Mopar accessories. The newest piece is a running board that is designed to look like part of the sheetmetal, as opposed to a tacked-on aftermarket accessory. We'd say it's fairly successful if not super-exciting. View 7 Photos The Pacifica also features loads of other Mopar bits including the roof rack, dog kennel, all-weather floor mats, and wireless charging pad. Aside from the custom wrap and painted wheels, you could outfit your own Pacifica identically using a Mopar catalog. As for the BrewMaster, that might require a bit more custom work. Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Image Credit: FCA, Joel Stocksdale SEMA Show Chrysler RAM Minivan/Van Concept Cars chrysler pacifica ram promaster SEMA 2016

Tier 1 suppliers call GM the worst OEM to work with

Among automakers with a big US presence, General Motors is the worst to work for, according to a new survey from Tier 1 automotive suppliers, conducted by Planning Perspectives, Inc.
The Detroit-based manufacturer, which has been under fire following the ignition switch recall and its accompanying scandal, finished behind six other automakers with big US manufacturing operations. Suppliers had issues with trust and communications, as well as intellectual property protection. GM was also the least likely to allow suppliers to raise their prices in the face of unexpected increases in material cost, all of which contributed to 55 percent of suppliers saying their relationship with GM was "poor to very poor."
GM's cross-town competitors didn't fare much better. Chrysler finished in fifth place, ahead of GM and behind Dearborn-based Ford, which was passed for third place this year by Nissan. Toyota took the top marks, while Honda captured second place.