2006 Chrysler Town & Country Touring 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.

Chrysler recalls AWD 300, Charger, Ram 1500 over ZF transmission

What do the Chrysler 300, Dodge Charger and Ram 1500 all have in common? Yes, they're all Chrysler products, and two of them are based on the same platform. And we're sure you could find more similarities between them all, but the common trait we're looking at here is that, while they all come standard in rear-drive form, they're also available with all-wheel drive. And it's the transmission in those models that's the subject of the latest recall notice issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
The output shaft on the eight-speed automatic transmission supplied by ZF to Chrysler for the AWD versions of the 300, Charger and Ram 1500 is apparently prone to fracture. That in the end could leave the vehicle without power and could, according to the NHTSA investigation, increase the chance of a crash. The vehicle could also roll away if even if left in Park without the handbrake applied.
That's why Chrysler is calling in 4,194 examples of those three models from the 2013 model year. Dealers will be responsible for inspecting the transmissions and, where necessary, replace the entire unit. See the full recall notice below for all the details.

The Chrysler brand could be axed under Stellantis management

MILAN — While running NissanÂ’s North American operations from 2009 to 2011, Carlos Tavares had a reputation for closely watching costs with little tolerance for vehicles or ventures that didnÂ’t make money. Experts say that means Tavares, currently the head of PSA Group, is likely to follow that blueprint when he becomes leader of a merged PSA and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. The low-performing Chrysler brand might get the axe as could slow-selling cars, SUVs or trucks that lack potential. Already the companies are talking about consolidating vehicle platforms — the underpinnings and powertrains — to save billions in engineering and manufacturing costs. That could mean job losses in Italy, Germany and Michigan as PSA Peugeot technology is integrated into North American and Italian vehicles. “You canÂ’t be cost efficient if you keep the entire scale of both companies,” said Karl Brauer, executive analyst for the iSeeCars.com auto website. “WeÂ’ve seen this show before, and weÂ’re going to see it again where they economize these platforms across continents, across multiple markets.” Shareholders of both companies are to meet Monday to vote on the merger to form the worldÂ’s fourth-largest automaker, to be called Stellantis. The deal received EU regulatory approval just before Christmas. Tavares, who for years has wanted to sell PSA vehicles in the U.S., wonÂ’t take full control of the merged companies until the end of January at the earliest. He likely will target Europe for consolidation first, because thatÂ’s where Fiat vehicles overlap extensively with PSAÂ’s, said IHS Markit Principal Auto Analyst Stephanie Brinley. Europe has been a money-loser for FCA, and factories in Italy are operating way below capacity — a concern for unions, given FiatÂ’s role as the largest private sector employer in the country. “We are at a crossroads,Â’Â’ said Michele De Palma of the FIOM CGIL metalworkersÂ’ union. “Either there is a relaunch, or there is a slow agonizing closure of industry, in particular the auto industry, in Italy.” ItalyÂ’s hopes lie with the luxury Maserati and sporty Alfa Romeo brands, but De Palma said investments are needed to bring hybrid and electric technology up to speed. FiatÂ’s Italian capacity stands at 1.5 million vehicles, but only a few hundred thousand are being produced each year. Most factories were on rolling short-term layoffs due to lack of demand, even before the pandemic.