2007 Chrysler Town & Country Lx on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Did a US automaker blow the whistle on Hyundai, Kia fuel economy issue?

In all of the most hotly contested mainstream segments of the motoring universe, the difference of one mile per gallon averaged on a widow sticker can mean the difference between a sale and a walk-off - to say nothing of two or three mpg. So, when Hyundai and Kia were forced to reveal that many of their 40-mpg ratings were actually 38s and 37s, well, it made for big news.
It also, conceivably, made for a competitive disadvantage immediately, when the Korean automakers' products were being shopped versus the guys down the block. And it's that disadvantage that makes a recent story from Automotive News so juicy.
AN is reporting that Margo Oge, former head of the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Transportation and Air Quality, got a tip in 2010 that Hyundai/Kia were "cheating" to get its impressive fuel economy numbers. The tip, said Oge (who retired from the EPA this past September), came from a senior vice president from a domestic automaker. The source was credible enough for Oge to launch an audit of the Hyundai figures, which ultimately lead to the debacle that we reported on a few months ago, and that the Korean company has been trying to bounce back from ever since.

Fiat brand chief reassigned then resigns amid flagging sales

Jason Stoicevich was replaced as head of the Fiat brand in North America just the other day. He was immediately reassigned to another job within Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. But according to Automotive News, Stoicevich quit the new job – and the company altogether – the very next day. The development comes amidst flagging sales for the Fiat brand in America. The introduction of the awkward-looking 500L multi-purpose vehicle has been largely regarded as a sales disaster in the US. Despite having just introduced the new 500X into the growing crossover market, and an overall upward trend across FCA group sales, the Fiat brand's figures have been dropping all year. While the Italian brand's volume has fluctuated from month to month compared to last year's sales, the number of cars its dealers sells on an average day has been firmly in decline. Fiat's downward trend reflects a general tendency in the market towards larger vehicles at the expense of smaller ones. However, the powers that be in Auburn Hills evidently felt that a change of leadership was in order, so it placed Dodge chief Tim Kuniskis in charge of all the company's mass-market passenger-car brands – namely Dodge, Chrysler, and Fiat – and moved Stoicevich to running the group's fleet and small-business operations. Stoicevich remained in charge of the company's California Business Center, but it seems as though he was as dissatisfied with the switch as his superiors were with the performance of the brand over which he presided, and so he apparently elected to step down and leave the company.

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.