2022 Chrysler Pacifica Touring L on 2040-cars
Engine:3.6L V6 24V VVT
Fuel Type:Gasoline
Body Type:4D Passenger Van
Transmission:Automatic
For Sale By:Dealer
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 2C4RC1BG6NR114449
Mileage: 55480
Make: Chrysler
Trim: Touring L
Features: --
Power Options: --
Exterior Color: Gray
Interior Color: Black
Warranty: Unspecified
Model: Pacifica
Chrysler Pacifica for Sale
2024 chrysler pacifica touring l(US $50,090.00)
2022 chrysler pacifica touring l mobility handicap van handicap(US $46,900.00)
2020 chrysler pacifica touring l plus(US $24,923.00)
2018 chrysler pacifica touring l(US $16,900.00)
2022 chrysler pacifica touring l(US $19,744.00)
2024 chrysler pacifica limited(US $53,570.00)
Auto blog
Move over Audi, now Chrysler has a beef with Tesla's claims
Thu, 23 May 2013In 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.
Italian government to lean on Fiat's Marchionne to commit to country
Sun, 26 May 2013With the recent chatter that Fiat is looking to move its global headquarters to the US following a complete merger with Chrysler, the Italian government is voicing its opinion on the matter. Facing the potential job loss from the automaker leaving the country, Italy's industry minister is meeting with Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne in what will likely be a plea to keep the company based in Turin rather than moving to Auburn Hills, MI - if indeed it is able to acquire the additional 41.5 percent of Chrysler currently owned by the United Auto Workers.
According to Bloomberg, Fiat is Italy's biggest private employer and unemployment is already nearing a 20-year high. The non-car side of Fiat, Fiat Industrial, is already planning a move to the UK, so it goes without saying that Fiat moving would be a pretty big blow for the Italian economy. In the article, Fiat says that the headquarters issue is "not on its agenda now," but that statement is far from a denial.
Is it time for American carmakers to give up on dual-clutch transmissions? [w/poll]
Mon, 22 Jul 2013Last 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.