Completly Restored 1970 Crystler Newport Convertible With 440 Tnt on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Some Jeep Cherokees and Chrysler 200s to get standard stop-start in 2015

Automakers the world over are striving to find ways to make their models more efficient, and Chrysler has a solution for some versions of the 2015 Chrysler 200 and 2015 Jeep Cherokee (2014 model shown). The Tigershark 2.4-liter four-cylinder in the 200 and the 3.2-liter Pentastar V6 in the Cherokee are getting a slight boost later this year thanks to the addition of Chrysler's Engine Stop-Start system as standard equipment. The company predicts modest gains - a three-percent improvement in fuel economy and a three percent reduction in CO2 emissions with the new tech compared to without it. While it's not much, those who sit in traffic a lot may see a difference.
Chrysler's stop/start system uses a high-speed starter motor to restart the vehicle in a claimed a third of a second. It works by detecting when the vehicle comes to a stop and turning off the engine. A more powerful battery maintains all of the model's accessories while it sits. When the driver lets off the brake, the car starts up again to drive away. There is even a button in the cabin to turn the ESS off, if desired.
The Jeep will be the first to receive ESS in the third quarter of this year to coincide with the start of production of the 2015 model-year version. The 200 will follow in the fourth quarter as a rolling change in production.

Audi gets Q2 and Q4 badges in trademark swap with FCA

Audi has swapped trademarks with Fiat Chrysler Automobiles to snare the rights to the Q2 and Q4 badges for upcoming crossover SUVs. Audi CEO Rupert Stadler confirmed at the Detroit Motor Show that the automaker had finally persuaded FCA to release the two names that would let Audi lock up the Q1 to Q9 badges for its growing SUV family. Audi already plans to drop the Q2 name onto its MQB-based city crossover five-door this year, while the Q4 badge will slot onto the rump of a coupe-like version of the next Q3. It will also reserve the Q1 badge for a 2018 baby crossover, based around the architecture of the next A1 hatch. The A1 will share a lot of its engineering with Volkswagen's Polo-based soft-roader, dubbed T-Cross in concept form. The German company has also pounced on the naming rights for SQ versions of all of its Q-cars, along with F-Tron to cover the day when it pushes hydrogen fuel cell cars into production. Stadler insisted that no money had changed hands in order to pry the two badges off FCA, admitting that they had "each found something we needed." "We promised each other we wouldn't disclose what it cost, but it was not something they were willing to sell," Stadler said. "We tried to get it years ago and they said 'No, never,' but there is never 'never' in business. ... This year I went back to them with a proposal and we talked and there were some negotiations and then we agreed to it." Those negotiations are believed to have centered on a trademark swap with a Volkswagen Group name that FCA desperately (evidently) wants to use on a Fiat, Alfa Romeo, Chrysler, Dodge or Maserati. Asked if Audi had given FCA a trademark in return for Q2 and Q4, Stadler replied, "Something very much like that, yes." Audi has used Italian names on past concept cars that FCA could be interested in, such as the 2001 Avantissimo concept and the 2003 Nuvolari coupe. The latter was named after legendary pre-war racer Tazio, who won grands prix for both Alfa Romeo and Audi's forerunner, Auto Union. Both are unlikely trade chips, with laws in Europe preventing the trademarking of the names of actual people. There is always "quattro" (Italian for "four"), but after investing nearly four decades locking it in as an Audi all-wheel-drive name, it's just not anything like trade bait.

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.