12 Stow & Go Heated Seats Heated Steering Wheel Keyless Dvd Back Up Camera Tint on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Undersized grille was #1 complaint of 2011-2014 Chrysler 300 owners

Not only did the 2005-2011 Chrysler 300 have a big ol' grille, it jutted ahead of the car. The grille was the metaphorical figurehead for the USS 300, and it did its job, making the sedan the Central Casting submission for "in-your-face styling" that rolled down the street winning the game of "Made You Look." The one-billion-dollar redesign for 2011 (pictured above) aimed for more upscale and less aggression - "a more grown-up look" - so the grille shrunk. And Chrysler 300 buyers hated that. So said Chrysler brand president Al Gardner to Edmunds, relating that the smaller grille was "the No. 1 issue" on the list of customer complaints about the model years from 2011 to 2014. It doesn't appear to have been much loved in-house, either, with Ralph Gilles having said of it, "Our previous generation of leaders didn't understand the car very well, and kind of forced this front end on us." That's why the grille on the 2015 model (pictured in 300S trim, inset) was aggrandized by 33 percent, although it's still not as large as on the first generation, and the more fluid design of the current car doesn't let it stand out as before. Gardner went on to say that designers "spent more time on the front end than on anything else," in search of, as Gilles put it, "the attitude it deserves." We'll soon find out if that increases the number of buyers it deserves as well. Related Gallery 2015 Chrysler 300: First Drive View 40 Photos News Source: EdmundsImage Credit: Copyright 2014 AOL Design/Style Chrysler Sedan

Toyota, Ford not interested in FCA merger

Sergio Marchionne will preach the benefits of mergers to anyone who'll listen, but his calls for industry consolidation may be falling on deaf ears. At least, that is, the ears of those who the Fiat Chrysler chief would most like to bend. Not only is General Motors uninterested, but according to The Detroit News, neither are Toyota or Ford. "It's something we would not be interested in," said Toyota's North American chief Jim Lentz, at the groundbreaking ceremony for the new Toyota Technical Center. "At 10 million (vehicles) we have enough scale right now to do what we need to do. There really would be no advantage for us." Toyota isn't the only one unenthused by the prospect of merging with Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. The Detroit News also reports that Ford, though it may yet to have been approached by Marchionne, wouldn't be interested either. "We're not a suitor for FCA," said Ford CFO Bob Shanks. "We don't see that type of opportunity as one that applies to us." With GM, Toyota, and Ford expressing disinterest in Marchionne's merger idea, the FCA chief will likely start looking elsewhere – or look for other ways to compel his primary candidate to reconsider. He may eventually find a partner – more likely in the Far East or within Europe – but it may not take the form of the major player Sergio has hoped for. News Source: The Detroit NewsImage Credit: Bill Pugliano/Getty Chrysler Fiat Ford Toyota Sergio Marchionne FCA merger fiat chrysler automobiles

Question Of The Day: Most overlooked heroic engine?

All of us know that the small-block Chevrolet V8 was a masterpiece of engineering that made the high-performance overhead-valve V8 affordable to the masses, and that the Mercedes-Benz OM617 diesel is basically immortal, and that the Toyota R engine defined what it means for a vehicle to be considered Warlord Grade. The AMC straight-six. The Model T engine. The Volvo Redblock. Those engines get the respect they deserve. But what about the engines that we don't think much about, the ones that worked hard in their millions and somehow missed attaining legend status? The list of engines beloved by their aficionados but not thought of often by the rest of us goes on and on: the Renault Ventoux, Mitsubishi 4G1, MeMZ-968, and so on. But my vote goes to the Chrysler flathead straight-six. This engine was produced starting in 1929 and was still being made for stationary industrial use in the early 1970s. It powered just about every type of Chrysler vehicle made for decades, hauled supplies for all the major Allied armies in World War II, and was even developed into a five-bank, 30-cylinder tank engine. It was simple and reliable and outlived most of its competition, and you rarely hear much about it these days. What's your choice?