One Owner Like New Cold A/c Front And Rear Stow And Go Seating All Power Service on 2040-cars

Auto blog

SRT pulling Vipers out of Le Mans

Last year, Chrysler campaigned a pair of SRT Viper GTS-Rs in the 24 Hours of Le Mans. It was the first time Auburn Hills had sent a team to the famous French endurance race since 2000, when the Viper ended a three-year winning streak in the GTS class. It finished in 24th and 31st places, woefully behind the Porsche 911 RSR that won the LMGTE Pro category. But this year it won't be back. According to a report from Sportscar365 citing a statement issued by SRT chief Ralph Gilles, the outfit turned down its invitation from the ACO that organizes the race, ending what could have been a multi-year campaign. Instead it's opting to focus on its Stateside campaign in the United SportsCar Championship. SRT sent Autoblog the following statement: "We regretfully and respectfully decline to participate in this year's 24 Hours of Le Mans," said Ralph Gilles, President and CEO of SRT (Street and Racing Technology) Brand and Motorsports, Chrysler Group LLC. "We are honored to once again be invited by the ACO (Automobile Club de l'Ouest) to compete in this historic event, and they were the first to be informed of our decision. We will remain focused on our North American racing program in 2014." In its place, the Ferrari 458 fielded by JMW Motorsport will be invited to fill the last slot in the class, leaving only the Corvette and Dempsey Racing entries to represent the United States in the race this year. "Hopefully, we'll continue to go to Le Mans for many years to come," as SRT's marketing chief Beth Paretta put it when announcing the effort a year ago, "but as a sports-car fan, if you can make the trip even once, it's worth it."

This or That: 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 vs. 1984 Pontiac Fiero

Welcome to another round of This or That, where two Autoblog editors pick a topic, pick a side and pull no punches. Last round pitted yours truly against Associate Editor Brandon Turkus, and my chosen VW Vanagon Syncro narrowly defeated Brandon's 1987 Land Rover. In fact, it was, by far, the closest round we've seen, with 1,907 voters seeing things my way (for 50.8 percent of the vote) versus 1,848 votes for Brandon's Rover (49.2 percent). Sweet, sweet victory! For this latest round of This or That, I've roped Editor Greg Migliore into what I think is a rather fun debate. We've each chosen our favorite terrible cars, setting a price limit of $10,000 to make sure neither of us went too crazy with our automotive atrocities. I think we've both chosen terribly... and I mean that in the best way possible. 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 Jeremy Korzeniewski: Why It's Terrible: Taken in isolation, the Chrysler Crossfire isn't necessarily a terrible car. In fact, it drives pretty darn well, and there's a lot of solid engineering under its slinky shape. Problem is, that engineering was already rather long in the tooth well before Chrysler ever got its hands on it, having come from Mercedes-Benz, which used the basic chassis and drivetrain in a previous version of its SLK coupe and roadster. Granted, the SLK was an okay car, too, but even when new, it hardly set the world on fire with sporty driving dynamics. Chrysler took these decent-but-no-more bits and pieces from the Mercedes parts bin – remember, this car was conceived in the disastrous Merger Of Equals days – and covered them with a rather attractive hard-candy shell. Unfortunately, the super sporty shape wrote checks in the minds of buyers that its well-worn mechanicals were simply unable to cash, though an injection of power courtesy of a supercharged V6 engine in the SRT6 model, as seen here, certainly helped ease some of those woes. In the end, Chrysler was left with a so-called halo car that looked the part but never quite performed the part. It was almost universally panned by critics as an overpriced parts-bin special, which, I must add, was damningly accurate. As a result, sales were very slow, and within the first few months, dealers were clearancing the car at cut-rate prices, just to keep them from taking up too much of the showroom floor. Why It's Not That Terrible, After All: I can speak from personal experience when discussing the Chrysler Crossfire. You see, I owned one. Well, sort of...

Move over Audi, now Chrysler has a beef with Tesla's claims

In the same week that Audi said "not so fast" to some claims from Tesla, Chrysler has responded to a new press release from the California-based EV-maker by saying "not exactly, Tesla." The statement, released through the company's blog, comes in response to Tesla claiming it was "the only American car company to have fully repaid the government." Chrysler notes that it, too, recently paid back Uncle Sam from its 2008 bailout. Similar to Audi's recent press release, which was eventually and mysteriously deleted from the German automaker's site, Chrysler is both right and wrong in its statement.
Tesla specifically said that it had paid back the Department of Energy loans that many automakers received - including Fisker and VPG Autos - while Chrysler's retort argues Tesla is "unmistakably incorrect" since it repaid the government in 2011 a full six years early. Technically, the statements from both automakers are correct, but Tesla's startup loan originated from the DoE, while Chrysler's loan came in bailout form from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). Further, as The Detroit News notes, Chrysler's loan still cost taxpayers well over a billion dollars after all was said and done - those negative assets tied to "old Chrysler" in the bankruptcy did not require repayment.