1954 Chrysler New Yorker Hemi on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Undersized grille was #1 complaint of 2011-2014 Chrysler 300 owners

Not only did the 2005-2011 Chrysler 300 have a big ol' grille, it jutted ahead of the car. The grille was the metaphorical figurehead for the USS 300, and it did its job, making the sedan the Central Casting submission for "in-your-face styling" that rolled down the street winning the game of "Made You Look." The one-billion-dollar redesign for 2011 (pictured above) aimed for more upscale and less aggression - "a more grown-up look" - so the grille shrunk. And Chrysler 300 buyers hated that. So said Chrysler brand president Al Gardner to Edmunds, relating that the smaller grille was "the No. 1 issue" on the list of customer complaints about the model years from 2011 to 2014. It doesn't appear to have been much loved in-house, either, with Ralph Gilles having said of it, "Our previous generation of leaders didn't understand the car very well, and kind of forced this front end on us." That's why the grille on the 2015 model (pictured in 300S trim, inset) was aggrandized by 33 percent, although it's still not as large as on the first generation, and the more fluid design of the current car doesn't let it stand out as before. Gardner went on to say that designers "spent more time on the front end than on anything else," in search of, as Gilles put it, "the attitude it deserves." We'll soon find out if that increases the number of buyers it deserves as well. Related Gallery 2015 Chrysler 300: First Drive View 40 Photos News Source: EdmundsImage Credit: Copyright 2014 AOL Design/Style Chrysler Sedan

FCA's shifter fiasco proves novel gear selectors are a bad idea

What's wrong with PRNDL? Why are automakers trying to overly complicate the simple task of selecting gears? If there's any lesson to learn from the recent news that NHTSA is investigating 853,000 Fiat Chrysler vehicles over its problematic gear selectors, it's that the trend of fancy shifters needs to stop. Now. Last year, NHTSA opened an investigation into Jeep Grand Cherokee models, and has now expanded this probe to include the 2012-14 Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger. The problem? The shifter – assembled by ZF – is confusing for many drivers. "Testing ... indicates that operation of the (electronic) shifter is not intuitive and provides poor tactile and visual feedback to the driver, increasing the potential for unintended gear selection," a NHTSA document states. More than 100 crashes and over a dozen injuries are linked to this problem, according to The Detroit Free Press. To us, the problem isn't just limited to FCA. These unnecessarily novel gear selectors are spreading like wildfire across the industry. Honda and Acura use a weird pushbutton setup. Lincolns have buttons on the dashboard. Jaguar's shifter electronically raises out of the center console. Mercedes uses a stalk with up-for-Reverse, down-for-Drive, push-for-Neutral arrangement. And what the hell is BMW thinking with its M cars? FCA has since abandoned the confusing shifters in question. The 300, Charger, and Grand Cherokee now use the rotary shift dial that's quickly proliferating across the company's brands. Simplistic gear selectors might not be sexy, but no one ever complained about not being able to find the right gear in a Hyundai Sonata. What's most interesting is that this NHTSA investigation could push FCA – and possibly other automakers – to redesign vehicle functions that otherwise operate as designed. Just because most people will never have a problem putting a Dodge Charger in Reverse doesn't mean there isn't a flaw with the design. But perhaps a more simplistic solution – good ol' PRNDL – would have prevented these issues from the start. Related Video: News Source: The Detroit Free PressImage Credit: Copyright 2016 AOL Government/Legal Chrysler Dodge Jeep FCA shifters

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.