2024 Jeep Wrangler Sport S on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Stellantis will give its brands 10 years to prove they deserve to live

Formed by the merger of PSA Peugeot-Citroen and Fiat-Chrysler Automobiles, Stellantis has 14 brands under its roof, a number that makes it one of the largest groups in the industry. Rumors claimed not every brand would survive, with Chrysler often earmarked to get axed, but the firm said it will give them all a chance to shine. "We're giving each (brand) a chance, giving each a time window of 10 years and giving funding for 10 years to do a core model strategy. The CEOs need to be clear in brand promise, customers, targets, and brand communications," announced Stellantis boss Carlos Tavares during the Financial Times' Future of the Car event. His comments confirm Chrysler fans and dealers don't need to worry about the future — at least not yet. And, against all odds, Lancia enthusiasts can breathe a sigh of relief, too. Former FCA head Sergio Marchionne warned of the brand's demise on several occasions. Alfa Romeo is safe for now, too, as is Vauxhall, which are basically just Opels sold in the United Kingdom with a different badge. The engagement made by Tavares also means Stellantis won't divest any of its brands to raise capital until at least 2031. It's now up to each executive team to make a case for the brand they run, an unusual survival-of-the-fittest strategy in an era when cutting costs is more common than spending cash. Diving into the vast Stellantis parts bin should help even the most troubled brands turn their fortunes around on a relatively tight budget. It seems likely that survive Chrysler will need to look beyond the 300 and the Pacifica/Voyager, the only models in its range, and completely reinvent its image, which is currently nebulous at best. Lancia, once the champion of luxury, performance, and innovation, faces the same challenge. It's not starting quite from scratch, it's relatively popular in its home country of Italy, but it will need to think globally and expand outside of the city car segment to survive. Featured Gallery 2020 Chrysler 300 View 24 Photos Chrysler Dodge Fiat Jeep RAM Citroen Lancia Opel Peugeot Vauxhall

2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee pricing leaks out

With our deep dive and auto show coverage of the 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee revealed at the Detroit Auto Show, we brought you as much information as Chrysler would allow us to, but one thing we're still left in the dark about was the pricing. It would seem that Jeep Garage might have the answer for that. The Jeep enthusiast forum claims to have gotten its hands on the ordering and pricing breakdown for the updated Grand Cherokee, and while a Jeep representative has yet to get back to us as to the validity of the site's claim, these preliminary numbers look pretty kosher to us.
In base form, the two-wheel-drive Laredo will reportedly start at $28,795, which is a $1,100 increase over the 2013 model year, and the new Grand Cherokee Summit trim level starts at $47,995 for 4x2 models and $50,995 for the 4x4. Waiting for the new diesel engine? The torquey new 3.0-liter oil-burner will be a $4,500 option on Limited, Overland and Summit 4x4 models, but 4x2 pricing (and availability) are not known. As for the range-topping Grand Cherokee SRT (no longer called the SRT8), this added performance could run you an extra $2,700 with a new starting price of $62,995. More importantly, loaded to the gills with all available options, the 2014 Grand Cherokee SRT will top out at around $72,400 - or around $6,000 more than a fully loaded 2013 GC SRT8.
We'll let you know if the gang over at Jeep get back to us with any confirmation, but until then, head over to Jeep Garage to see the pricing details it has listed.

Auto Mergers and Acquisitions: Suicide or salvation?

We love the Moses figure. A savior riding in from stage right with the ideas, the smarts, and the scrappiness to put things right. Alan Mullaly. Carroll Shelby. Lee Iacocca. Andrew Carnegie. Steve Jobs. Elon Musk. Bart Simpson. Sergio Marchionne does not likely view himself with Moses-like optics, but the CEO of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles recently gave a remarkable, perhaps prophetic interview with Automotive News about his interest and the inevitability of merging with a potential automotive partner like General Motors. Marchionne has been overtly public about his notion that GM must merge with FCA. For a bit of context, GM sold 9.9 million vehicles in 2014, posting $2.8 billion in net income, while FCA sold 4.75 million units and earned $2.4 billion in net income, painting a very rosy FCA earnings-to-sales picture. But that's not the entire picture. Most people in the auto industry still remember the trainwreck that was the DaimlerChrysler "merger" written in what turned out to be sand in 1998. It proved to be a master class in how not to fuse two companies, two cultures, two continents, and two management teams. Oh, it worked for the two individuals at both helms pre-merger. They got silly rich. And the industry itself was in a misty romance at the time with mergers and acquisitions. BMW bought Rolls-Royce. Volkswagen Group bought Bentley, Bugatti, and Lamborghini, putting all three brands into their rightful place in both products and positioning. No marriages there, so no false pretense. Finally, Nissan and Renault got married in 1999. A successful marriage requires several rare elements in this atmosphere of gas fumes and power lust. But a successful marriage requires several rare elements in this atmosphere of gas fumes and power lust, the principle part being honesty. Daimler and Chrysler lied to each other. The heads of each unit, the product planners, and finance all presented their then-current and long-range forecasts to each other with less-than-forthright accuracy. Daimler was the far greater equal and no one from the Chrysler side enjoyed that. The cultures were entirely different, too, and little was done to bridge that gap. Which brings me back to the present overtures by Marchionne to GM. "There are varying degrees of hugs," Marchionne stated in the Automotive News piece. "I can hug you nicely, I can hug you tightly, I can hug you like a bear, I can really hug you." Seriously?