2004 Chrysler Town & Country Touring Wheelchair Handicap Wheel Chair Vmi on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM, Chrysler bailouts saved 2.6 million jobs

The Center for Automotive Research (CAR) has been studying the effects of the General Motors and Chrysler bailouts in 2009. Now that the US Treasury has officially sold off the rest of its stake in GM (and Chrysler has already paid back its loan), CAR has released its study on the effects of the bailout with this concluding note: "CAR is confident that in the years ahead, this peacetime intervention in the private sector by the US government will be seen as one of the most successful in US economic history."
Big words, for sure, but there's plenty of evidence to back up the claim. Bailing out GM alone saved 1.2-million jobs. If both GM and Chrysler hadn't been bailed out, US employment would have been reduced by 2.631-million jobs in 2009 and another 1.519-million jobs in 2010, according to the study. If both automakers were allowed to fail, personal income in the US would have decreased by $173.5 billion in 2009 and $110.9 billion in 2010. Instead, the study found that $284.4 billion of personal income was saved by the bailouts.

FCA and PSA sign merger agreement

Confirming an earlier rumor, PSA Group and Fiat-Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) signed a binding merger agreement to create the world's fourth-largest automaker. The partners hope to leverage the benefits of economies of scale as they develop new technologies and expand their global presence. The announcement ends FCA's years-long search for a partner, which nearly ended earlier in 2019 when it came close to merging with Renault, PSA's rival. It brings Fiat, Chrysler, Dodge, Ram, Jeep, Alfa Romeo, Maserati, Lancia, Peugeot, Citroen, DS, and Opel/Vauxhall under the same roof. That's a huge portfolio of brands that often overlap, but executives pledged to keep them all open, as well as all their respective factories as a result of the transaction. They're committed to making this big family of automakers work by building on each one's strengths, whether they're technical or regional. FCA and PSA jointly predicted they'll sell about 8.7 million cars annually around the globe, while posting an ˆ11 billion (about $12.2 million) profit. North America, a strong market for FCA, will provide 43% of its revenues, and 46% will be generated in Europe, where Peugeot's brands are doing better than ever. Together, they plan to achieve ˆ3.7 billion (about $4.1 million) in annual run-rate synergies. They'll notably have the purchasing power to negotiate a better price with suppliers, and they'll merge their research and development efforts where it makes sense to do so. Over two thirds of the group's annual volume will be built on two shared platforms. One will underpin about three million small cars annually, and the other will serve as the foundation for approximately three million compact and mid-sized cars. Details about these architectures haven't been made public yet, but a quick look at both companies' product portfolios reveals the small car will very likely come from Peugeot. Recent additions to its range, like the second-generation 208, are built on a new architecture named Common Modular Platform (CMP) developed with electric powertrains in mind. Meanwhile, Fiat is still making the cheeky 500 on an evolution of the platform found under the second-generation Panda released in 2003. The bigger architecture could come from FCA, however. The group's brands will share engines, transmissions, electric powertrains, infotainment systems, various sensors used to power electronic driving aids, and other components like wiring looms, but each one will retain its own identity.

Is it time for American carmakers to give up on dual-clutch transmissions? [w/poll]

Last week, in the midst of Detroit's first days seeking relief in Chapter 9 of the bankruptcy code, Automotive News contributor Larry P. Vellequette penned an editorial suggesting that American car companies raise the white flag on dual clutch transmissions and give up on trying to persuade Americans to buy cars fitted with them. Why? Because, Vellequette says, like CVT transmissions, they "just don't sound right or feel right to American drivers." (Note: In the article, it's not clear if Vellequette is arguing against wet-clutch and dry-clutch DCTs or just dry-clutch DCTs, which is what Ford and Chrysler use.) The article goes on to state that Ford and Chrysler have experimented with DCTs and that both consumers and the automotive press haven't exactly given them glowing reviews, despite their quicker shifts and increased fuel efficiency potential compared to torque-converter automatic transmissions.
Autoblog staffers who weighed in on the relevance of DCTs in American cars generally disagreed with the blanket nature of Vellequette's statement that they don't sound or feel right, but admit that their lack of refinement compared to traditional automatics can be an issue for consumers. That's particularly true in workaday cars like the Ford Focus and Dodge Dart, both of which have come in for criticism in reviews and owner surveys. From where we sit, the higher-performance orientation of such transmissions doesn't always meld as well with the marching orders of everyday commuters (particularly if drivers haven't been educated as to the transmission's benefits and tradeoffs), and in models not fitted with paddle shifters, it's particularly hard for drivers to use a DCT to its best advantage.
Finally, we also note that DCT tuning is very much an evolving science. For instance, Autoblog editors who objected to dual-clutch tuning in the Dart have more recently found the technology agreeable in the Fiat 500L. Practice makes perfect - or at least more acceptable.