05 Chrysler Town&country Handicap Van Wheelchair Conversion Entervan No Reserve on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Junkyard Gem: 2004 Chrysler PT Cruiser GT

Many claim to hate the Chrysler PT Cruiser now, though better than a million were sold in the United States during the retro-styled little truck's production run (the NHTSA classified the PT Cruiser as a truck, so that's what we'll call it). I didn't start finding many PT Cruisers in junkyards until about 10 years ago, at which point the Chrysler section in just about every big self-service yard became choked with row upon row of them. While most of these cars trucks were ordinary— if cute-looking— transportation appliances, Chrysler built some with turbocharged 2.4-liter engines and five-speed manual transmissions. Here is one of those rare machines, found in a Northern California self-service yard last month. The PT Cruiser was based on the Neon, meaning that it was no sweat to take any high-performance Neon bits and swap them onto its sibling. The PT Cruiser GT didn't quite get the same running gear as the SRT-4 Neon, but it was a genuine factory hot rod. The heart of the PT Cruiser GT was this turbocharged 2.4-liter engine, rated at 215 horsepower in the 2003-2005 version. The naturally-aspirated 2.4 that went into ordinary PT Cruisers made 150 horses in 2004. While a Getrag five-speed manual transmission was standard equipment (at least at the lower-end trim levels) for all but the final year of the Cruiser's 2001–2010 American sales run, nearly every buyer paid what it took to get the optional four-speed automatic. That didn't happen with this car truck, which has the five-speed. The GT also got better brakes, bigger wheels, a stiffer suspension, a lower ride height, and a louder exhaust. What's not to like? Will we miss the special-edition PT Cruisers when they're all gone? This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Referred to as a "small-car alternative" in this TV commercial.

The mad genius of killing the Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200

Sergio Marchionne isn't crazy. At least not with respect to the recent announcement that Fiat Chrysler Automobiles will cease production of the Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200. Instead of crazy I'd call this CEO ruthlessly pragmatic, and perhaps short-sighted. The latest revisions to FCA's most recent five-year plan tell some truths about the company's finances. In other words, it can't afford to build mainstream sedans. With only 87,392 units sold in 2015, the Dart is an also-ran in the segment. The axe falls easily there - Chrysler hasn't had a compact-car hit since the second-generation Neon. The 200 isn't so cut and dried: Last year sales increased 52 percent, and the 177,889 total for 2015 is more than those for the Subaru Legacy and Kia Optima. But looking at the overall FCA picture the Chrysler 200 has to go, at least from a short-term perspective. The vehicles that make big money – Ram trucks; Jeep's Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and Wrangler – can't be made fast enough. FCA can't afford to idle the 200's Sterling Heights, MI, assembly plant to cut back on inventory when other plants are running flat out. It seems crazy to throw away 265,000 sales, but FCA is leaving money on the table by not building more profitable vehicles. The Wirecutter's Senior Autos Editor (and former Autoblogger) John Neff agrees. "As bold as it looks from the outside, he's really making a safe bet that their money is better spent on designing better and building more crossovers and trucks. He's probably right about that." But according to Jessica Caldwell, Executive Director of Strategic Analytics at Edmunds, "FCA's strategy of eliminating the Dart and 200 might be short-sighted if gas prices were to rise and Americans, once again, flocked to small vehicles. FCA must have plans to expand the lineup of small SUVs and position them as small-car alternatives in terms of price and fuel efficiency for this strategy to make sense." FCA's latest announcement focuses mainly on the profitable brands and nameplates. There's hardly a mention of Chrysler, Dodge, or Fiat. And future planning is where the plot holes appear. This realignment cuts dead weight from the product portfolio, but FCA's latest announcement focuses mainly on the profitable brands and nameplates. There's hardly a mention of Chrysler, Dodge, or Fiat. So what's Sergio up to? David Sullivan of AutoPacific thinks Marchionne is still looking for another CEO to hug.

Detroit and Silicon Valley: When cultures collide

Culture is a subject that rarely, if never, gets discussed when traditional auto companies buy — or hugely invest — in Silicon Valley-based companies. The conversation surrounding the investments is usually about how the tech looks appealing and how it's an appropriate step to move the automakers toward autonomy. Culture — the way things are done, the expectations, and the approaches — is something that is overlooked only at one's peril. The potential cultural gap is almost always evident in the obligatory photos of the participants in these deals, with is essentially a photo op of auto execs with their Silicon Valley counterparts. The former — rocking jeans and no ties — look like parochial school kids playing hooky. Don't worry: The regimental outfits will be back in place once they get back in the Eastern time zone. Consider what happened back in 1998 when Daimler bought Chrysler. First of all, there was a denial in Detroit that it happened. It was positioned as a "merger of equals." Which it wasn't. In any corporate situation, when one has more than 50 percent of the business, it owns the whole thing. And the German company was in the proverbial driver's seat. People who were around Auburn Hills back then kept their heads down and their German Made Simple books at hand. Things did not go well. Daimler had had enough by 2007, when it offloaded Chrysler to Cerberus Capital Management — which brought ex-Home Depot CEO Bob Nardelli into the picture, which is a story onto itself. But when you think about the Daimler-Chrysler situation, realize that these were two car companies (at least the Mercedes part of the Daimler organization), so they had that in common, and the language of engineers is something of an Esperanto based on math, so there was that, too. Yet it simply didn't work. It doesn't take too many viewings of HBO's Silicon Valley to know that the business people in that part of the world are far more aggressive than people who ordinarily head and control car companies in Detroit. About 20 years ago, a book came out about the founder of Oracle titled The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison* - and the asterisk on the book jacket leads to: God Doesn't Think He's Larry Ellison. It would be hard to imagine a book about a Detroit executive, even a book that had the decided bias that the tome about Ellison evinces, that would be quite so searing. Sure, there are egos. But they are still perceived to be, overall, "nice" people.