2006 Chrysler Pacifica Base Sport Utility 4-door 3.5l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Dodge Grand Caravan to live in fleets through 2017

After a hard-working career of hauling around families for decades, the Dodge Grand Caravan name was set to retire in 2016 under FCA's five-year plan for the US. The decision would have put all of the automaker's focus behind the next-generation Chrysler Town & Country, but that original strategy might have changed. Now, Dodge's minivan may have to work just a few more years before it can finally shuffle off. There are set to be 2016 and 2017 model year examples of the current Grand Caravan, according to an internal FCA production document obtained by Automotive News. This report suggests no changes in the minivan between those two years, and there's no mention of the company's intentions deeper into the future. "While we've announced the Grand Caravan will eventually be the minivan that goes away, we're not going into more detail at this time," a Dodge spokesperson said to AN. For the next Town & Country, production would start in Windsor, Ontario, in late February 2016. This document also suggests a brief run of 2016 Chrysler minivans based on the current model from August 2015 until February 2016. Automotive News speculates that the reprieve for the Grand Caravan could allow that model to focus on fleets and the Canadian market while the new Town and Country gets up and running. The latest generation T&C will reportedly debut at the 2016 Detroit Auto Show and will possibly carry a higher price to befit a vehicle with a more modern platform and improved tech.

Killing the Dart and 200 might lower FCA's fuel economy burden

Killing the Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200 could allow FCA US to take advantage of an intriguing quirk in the next decade's fuel economy regulations. By increasing its ratio of trucks versus cars, the automaker might not need to worry so much about hitting the more stringent efficiency rules. At first thought, it might seem harder for an automaker with a ton of trucks to meet the government's mandated 54.5 mile per gallon corporate average fuel economy for 2025. However, every company doesn't need to hit that lofty figure, according to The Detroit Free Press. The exact target varies by the product mix between trucks and cars. "While passenger car and light truck categories have separate CAFE targets, it's still true that more trucks versus cars in a company lineup means a lower combined CAFE target," Brandon Schoettle, Project Manager Sustainable Worldwide Transportation at the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, told Autoblog. "While passenger car and light truck categories have separate CAFE targets, it's still true that more trucks versus cars in a company lineup means a lower combined CAFE target." FCA US' current product blend has 80 percent pickups and CUVs, which means the company stands to benefit from a lower fuel economy target. It might not seem entirely fair environmentally, but this is a great move from a business perspective. The new CAFE rules aren't set in stone, according to The Detroit Free Press, but potentially taking advantage of the regulation is just one more reason to cut the Dart and 200. Modern crossovers also aren't gas guzzlers like older SUVs, which could make it easier to hit the fuel economy target. "Utilities offer practicality and versatility that cars do not, and now, built on car architectures, they do not penalize consumers on fuel economy as they once did," AutoTrader Senior Analyst Michelle Krebs told Autoblog. Schoettle warns that FCA is still making a gamble by killing the small sedans. "Depending on the previous sales volumes and how much these vehicles might have exceeded their specific CAFE targets, it's possible that these cars helped earn CAFE credits for FCA that they could bank for future use," he said. "Future sales breakdowns [car vs.

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.