2024 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): 2C4RC3BG1RR193594
Mileage: 9
Make: Chrysler
Trim: Touring L
Features: --
Power Options: --
Exterior Color: White
Interior Color: Black
Warranty: Unspecified
Model: Pacifica
Chrysler Pacifica for Sale
2019 chrysler pacifica limited(US $27,550.00)
2022 chrysler pacifica touring l(US $19,790.00)
2023 chrysler pacifica touring l(US $27,673.00)
2022 chrysler pacifica touring l(US $17,252.00)
2022 chrysler pacifica touring l(US $17,594.00)
2022 chrysler pacifica touring l(US $16,894.00)
Auto blog
Jeep hiring 1,000 part-time workers in Toledo on Wrangler, Cherokee demand
Wed, 12 Mar 2014The new Jeep Cherokee has been quite a success for Chrysler, but its factory workers are getting tired. The automaker has agreed to hire up to 1,000 part-time, temporary employees at its Toledo Assembly Complex where the CUV and Wrangler are built. It will allow the company to keep Jeep production moving, while giving laborers a break.
According to plant manager Chuck Padden in the Toledo Blade, full-time workers are regularly taking on 60 hours a week, and it's beginning to wear on them. "To get them more time off is important to us, to make sure they're refreshed, and can work safely," said Padden.
Chrysler has already hired 380 temporary, part-time workers for the plant, and 50 have been converted to full-time employees. The company is in the process of interviewing the rest of the new hires now and plans to have all 1,000 in place by the summer. They will work between 10 and 30 hours a week mostly on weekends for $15.78 per hour with limited benefits. The temporary positions will last "as long as demand continues for the Jeep Wrangler and the Jeep Cherokee," said Jodi Tinson, Chrysler spokesperson for manufacturing and labor communications, to Autoblog in an email.
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.
Labor Day: A look back at the largest UAW strikes in history
Thu, Mar 12 2015American made is almost an anachronism now, but good manufacturing jobs drove America's post-war economic golden age. Fifty years ago, if you held a job on a line, you were most likely a member of a union. And no union was more powerful than the United Auto Workers. Before the slow decline in membership started in the 1970s, the UAW had over 1.5 million members and represented workers from the insurance industry to aerospace and defense. The UAW isn't the powerhouse it once was. Today, just fewer than 400,000 workers hold membership in the UAW. Unions are sometimes blamed for the decline of American manufacturing, as companies have spent the last 30 years outsourcing their needs to countries with cheap labor and fewer requirements for the health and safety of their workers. Unions formed out of a desire to protect workers from dangerous conditions and abject poverty once their physical abilities were used up on the line; woes that manufacturers now outsource to poorer countries, along with the jobs. Striking was the workers' way of demanding humane treatment and a seat at the table with management. Most strikes are and were local affairs, affecting one or two plants and lasting a few days. But some strikes took thousands of workers off the line for months. Some were large enough to change the landscape of America. 1. 1936-1937 Flint Sit-Down Strike In 1936, just a year after the UAW formed and the same year they held their first convention, the union moved to organize workers within a major manufacturer. For extra oomph, they went after the largest in the world – General Motors. UAW Local 174 president Walter Reuther focused on two huge production facilities – one in Flint and one in Cleveland, where GM made all the parts for Buick, Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Chevrolet. Conditions in these plants were hellish. Workers weren't allowed bathroom breaks and often soiled themselves while standing at their stations. Workers were pushed to the limit on 12-14 hour shifts, six days a week. The production speed was nearly impossibly fast and debilitating injuries were common. In July 1936, temperatures inside the Flint plants reached over 100 degrees, yet managers refused to slow the line. Heat exhaustion killed hundreds of workers. Their families could expect no compensation for their deaths. When two brothers were fired in Cleveland when management discovered they were part of the union, a wildcat strike broke out.