2005 Chrysler Pt Cruiser 2dr Convertible Touring 1-owenr Low Miles on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Future Classic: 1990-2012 Mitsubishi Eclipse

It was meant to be a premiere partnership, pregnant with possibilities: the alliance of a pair of global automotive powerhouses from Japan and America. Eventually the merger gave birth to a trio of highly-regarded sports coupes: the Mitsubishi Eclipse, the Eagle Talon and the Plymouth Laser, cars developed by the company that became Diamond-Star Motors. Although DSM’s beginnings can be traced back to a flirtation in 1970, when Chrysler Corporation took a 15-percent stake in Mitsubishi Motors, the partnership later culminated in a formal pairing in 1985. It was good timing: Chrysler was emerging from near-bankruptcy; the Japanese company just didnÂ’t have anything to please U.S. buyers, and with government-imposed “voluntary” import quotas, its supply lines were broadly restricted. Chrysler, looking to expand its lines, built a plant in Normal, Illinois, but, although Chrysler put up half the $650 million for the facility, it left management to Mitsubishi. And the Japanese facilities provided engines and transmissions. By the end of 1989, production of the Diamond-Star triplets — the Laser, Eclipse and Talon — was in full swing. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Why is the Mitsubishi Eclipse a Future Classic? The Eclipse, supposedly named for an unbeaten 18th-century English racehorse that won 18 races in a row, was the shining star of the line. Because of its long run in series production, the genealogy of the Eclipse is worth discussing. Initially the car, designed at the Mitsubishi Motors North America Design Studio and introduced in 1990, was available in four trim levels: Eclipse, Eclipse GS, Eclipse GS-T (Turbo) and Eclipse GSX. It evolved first as a two-door coupe, later as a convertible or liftback, with front-wheel or all-wheel drive, and with engine choices including naturally aspirated fours, turbocharged fours and V6 options. One really needs a scorecard to chart the generations: 1st Gen (1990-1994), 2nd Gen (1995-1999), 3rd Gen (2000-2005), and 4th Gen (2006-2012). Before the EclipseÂ…well, was eclipsed, buyers of the third and fourth-gen cars could specify a 3.8L V6 engine as well as a four. This swank 2+2 sports car and its nearly identical cousin, the Eagle Talon TSi, emerged as hot rods for the Nineties, and tuners gave them full props for power.

Why Chrysler made the Pacifica Hybrid

There were a number of important details missing from Chrysler's debut of the Pacifica Hybrid yesterday. Pricing and availability, for example. We still don't know those specifics – Chrysler just says it will all be announced closer to launch – but we spent some time with Kevin Mets, the chief engineer for the Pacifica Hybrid, to learn more about the powertrain and why Chrysler decided to offer this vehicle at this time. "This could be a primary electric vehicle for someone." We started with the big question: why build a plug-in minivan at all? "It brings the ability that if you want an electric vehicle, a hybrid, you don't have to compromise size to get there," Mets said. "For instance just a few minutes ago I was talking to someone from Canada and they were saying in the US it's two vehicles per household is kind of the norm. In Canada it's not that way, it's more like a vehicle or even less than a vehicle. There's a lot of people that want an electrical vehicle in Canada but they can't make it their primary vehicle. This is a vehicle that could be a primary electric vehicle for someone in Canada, or anybody else for that matter, who wants a plug-in vehicle, an electric vehicle that doesn't have to compromise in size." So, was the development of the Pacifica PHEV influenced more by customers saying they wanted a plug-in hybrid minivan or was it driven more by green vehicle regulations? "That's a tough one to answer," Mets said. "Certainly you have to meet all the requirements. There's a little bit of everything there. You also can pick what vehicles you want to do it on. You pick which vehicle is the best opportunity and this is the one we chose. It's a little bit of both." As for when the Pacifica Hybrid will reach dealerships, all we know is, "late 2016." But Mets said that the minivan will at some point be available in all 50 states. Initial availability might be limited to places like California, but, "The idea is to sell it nationwide," he said. Chrysler decided on the "Pacifica Hybrid" name instead of the more-accurate "Pacifica Plug-In Hybrid" for simplicity. Anyone who might care that the minivan plugs in will find out that it, indeed, has a plug, the reasoning goes, but when Chrysler talks to the average mass market shopper, "hybrid" tells them everything they need to know. Under the hood (and the floorboards, where the batteries are) there are a lot of new bits.

Appeals court delays 'sensible resolution' meeting between GM, Fiat Chrysler CEOs

DETROIT — Three federal appeals judges have delayed a court-ordered meeting between the CEOs of General Motors and Fiat Chrysler to try to settle a lawsuit over corruption by union leaders. U.S. District Court Judge Paul Borman last week ordered GM CEO Mary Barra and FCA CEO Mike Manley to meet before July 1. But GM on Friday asked the federal appeals court in Cincinnati to overturn the order and remove Borman from the case. In an order issued Monday, three appellate judges delayed Borman's order to provide time to consider legal points raised by GM. GM is suing crosstown rival FCA alleging that it got an advantage by paying off United Auto Workers union leaders to reduce labor costs during contract talks. FCAÂ’s former labor chief, Al Iacobelli, is in prison, although the company denies that it directed any prohibited payments. In his order last week, Borman described the lawsuit as a “nuclear option” that would be a “waste of time and resources” for years if he allows the case to move forward. The judge ordered Barra and Manley to sit down without lawyers by July 1 and reach a “sensible resolution of this huge legal distraction.” Borman wants an update from them on a public video conference that same day. Over the weekend he modified the order to allow lawyers to attend the meeting. In a court filing, GM called BormanÂ’s order a “profound abuse” of power. “The court possesses no authority to order the CEOs of GM and FCA to engage in settlement discussions, reach a resolution and then appear alone at a pretrial conference eight days later, without counsel,” GMÂ’s attorneys said. “Second, the court has no business labeling a properly filed federal lawsuit assigned to the court for impartial adjudication ‘a distractionÂ’ or a ‘nuclear option,’” GM said. Borman canÂ’t be viewed as impartial, company lawyers said. The judge declined to comment. In a court filing Monday, Fiat Chrysler lawyers wrote that GM didn't make a good case to remove Borman because judges routinely direct lawsuit parties to talk about settling. The lawyers wrote that GM originally wanted the case assigned to Borman but now apparently is worried that his tough questions mean he will dismiss GM's claims. “GM should not be permitted now to complain that that judge has turned out to be less hospitable to GMÂ’s claims than GM anticipated. Parties are not permitted to engage in such judge shopping," the filing said.