2013 Dodge Charger Daytona R/t on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Fiat Chrysler and Peugeot boards meet to finalize merger

MILAN/PARIS — The boards of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles and Peugeot will meet separately on Tuesday to discuss finalizing an initial agreement for a $50 billion merger to create the world's number four carmaker, sources said. A source close to FCA said the two companies could announce the signing of a binding memorandum early on Wednesday, followed by a conference call to explain further details later in the day. The two mid-sized carmakers announced plans six weeks ago for a tie-up to help them deal with big challenges in the industry, including a global demand downturn and the need to develop costly cleaner cars to meet looming anti-pollution rules. Ahead of the meetings, entities representing the Peugeot family, Etablissements Peugeot Freres (EPF) and FFP, unanimously approved a proposed memorandum of understanding for the planned merger, a source familiar with the situation said. FCA and PSA have said they would seek to finalize a deal by year-end to create a group with 8.7 million in annual vehicle sales. That would put it fourth globally behind Volkswagen, Toyota and the Renault-Nissan alliance. PSA's Carlos Tavares will be chief executive and FCA's John Elkann — the scion of Italy's Agnelli family, which controls FCA through their holding company Exor — chairman of the combined company. The group will include the Fiat, Jeep, Dodge, Ram, Chrysler, Alfa Romeo, Maserati, Peugeot, DS, Opel and Vauxhall brands, allowing it to serve mass and premium passenger car markets as well as those for trucks and light commercial vehicles. Related Video:       Chrysler Dodge Fiat Jeep RAM Citroen Peugeot

Question of the Day: Most heinous act of badge engineering?

Badge engineering, in which one company slaps its emblems on another company's product and sells it, has a long history in the automotive industry. When Sears wanted to sell cars, a deal was made with Kaiser-Frazer and the Sears Allstate was born. Iranians wanted new cars in the 1960s, and the Rootes Group was happy to offer Hillman Hunters for sale as Iran Khodro Paykans. Sometimes, though, certain badge-engineered vehicles made sense only in the 26th hour of negotiations between companies. The Suzuki Equator, say, which was a puzzling rebadge job of the Nissan Frontier. How did that happen? My personal favorite what-the-heck-were-they-thinking example of badge engineering is the 1971-1973 Plymouth Cricket. Chrysler Europe, through its ownership of the Rootes Group, was able to ship over Hillman Avanger subcompacts for sale in the US market. This would have made sense... if Chrysler hadn't already been selling rebadged Mitsubishi Colt Galants (as Dodge Colts) and Simca 1100s as (Simca 1204s) in its American showrooms. Few bought the Cricket, despite its cheery ad campaign. So, what's the badge-engineered car you find most confounding? Chrysler Dodge Automakers Mitsubishi Nissan Suzuki Automotive History question of the day badge engineering question

1979 Dodge Li'l Red Express in Generation Gap showdown with 1933 Ford Pickup

Auto enthusiasts love a good debate, whether it's Mustang versus Camaro or Ferrari against Lamborghini. But how about a battle between two very different vintages of classic pickup trucks? In this case, the fight is between a 1979 Dodge Li'l Red Express and a 1933 Ford Model 46 truck with a flathead V8.
The shootout comes courtesy of the internet series Generation Gap, and its concept is super-simple. One guy prefers classics, and the other likes newer rides. They choose a category, pick two vehicles and put them head to head. In this case, neither is exactly modern, though. The Ford is more than old enough to receive Social Security checks, and the Dodge is hardly a young whippersnapper.
Other than both being pickups, these two models were made to serve very different functions. The Li'l Red Express was basically the progenitor of today's muscle trucks, with a big V8 that made it one of the quickest new models in its day (admittedly, 1979 was a rough time for automotive performance). On the other hand, the '33 Ford was just meant to work, with little pretense for anything else. One of the hosts describes it as "the simplest, most difficult" vehicle he's driven because of the tricky double clutchwork necessary to shift gears. Scroll down to watch the video and try to decide which of these two American classics you would rather have in your garage.