2022 Chrysler Pacifica Touring L on 2040-cars

Auto blog

180,000 new vehicles are sitting, derailed by lack of transport trains

If you're planning on buying a new car in the next month or so, you might want to pick from what's on the lot, because there could be a long wait for new vehicles from the factory. Locomotives continue to be in short supply in North America, and that's causing major delays for automakers trying to move assembled cars.
According to The Detroit News, there are about 180,000 new vehicles waiting to be transported by rail in North America at the moment. In a normal year, it would be about 69,000. The complications have been industry-wide. Toyota, General Motors, Honda and Ford all reported experiencing some delays, and Chrysler recently had hundreds of minivans sitting on the Detroit waterfront waiting to be shipped out.
The problem is twofold for automakers. First, the fracking boom in the Bakken oil field in the Plains and Canada is monopolizing many locomotives. Second, the long, harsh winter is still causing major delays in freight train travel. The bad weather forced trains to slow down and carry less weight, which caused a backup of goods to transport. The auto companies resorted to moving some vehicles by truck, which was a less efficient but necessary option.

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...

FCA earnings improve in first quarter

Following on the recent global financial releases from Ford and from General Motors for the first quarter of 2015, FCA is now putting out its own numbers, and things look quite good for the company. The automaker posted adjusted earnings before taxes and interest of $895 million, a 22-percent jump from Q1 2014, and net profits of $103 million, a $296-million boost from last year. Revenue was also up 19 percent to $30 billion. Despite the favorable figures, actual worldwide shipments fell slightly by 2 percent to 1.1 million vehicles. FCA is giving some credit for these strong Q1 results to the automaker's performance in the NAFTA region. Shipments grew 8 percent to 633,000 vehicles, and net revenue jumped a strong 38 percent to $18.1 billion. Adjusted earnings reached $672 million, compared to $425 million in 2014. The company especially praised the Jeep Renegade, Chrysler 200, and Ram 1500 for helping the bottom line. The numbers could have been even higher, but the corporation admitted that "higher warranty and recall costs" partially drug things down. For the full year in 2015, FCA expects to ship between 4.8 and 5 million vehicles worldwide and post up to $5 billion in adjusted earnings. There should be about $1.3 billion in net profit, as well. FCA CLOSED Q1 WITH NET REVENUES OF ˆ26.4 BILLION, UP 19% AND ADJUSTED EBIT AT ˆ800 MILLION, UP 22% 30/04/15 FCA closed Q1 with net revenues of ˆ26.4 billion, up 19% and adjusted EBIT at ˆ800 million, up 22%. Net industrial debt was ˆ8.6 billion, up ˆ0.9 billion. Full year guidance confirmed. Worldwide shipments were 1.1 million units, 2% lower than Q1 2014, reflecting strong performance in NAFTA and weak market conditions in LATAM. Jeep's positive performance continued with worldwide shipments up 11% and sales up 22%. Net revenues were up 19% to ˆ26.4 billion (+4% at constant exchange rates, or CER). Adjusted EBIT was ˆ800 million, up ˆ145 million from Q1 2014, with all segments except LATAM posting positive results. The positive impact of foreign exchange translation was offset by negative impacts at a transactional level. Net profit was ˆ92 million, up ˆ265 million compared to the net loss of ˆ173 million in Q1 2014. Net industrial debt was ˆ8.6 billion, up ˆ0.9 billion from year-end mainly due to timing of capital expenditures and working capital seasonality. Liquidity remained strong at ˆ25.2 billion. The Group confirms its full-year guidance.