2006 Chrysler Sebring Base Sedan 4-door 2.4l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2015 Chrysler 200 snags EPA ratings of 18 mpg city and 29 highway

While Chrysler hasn't officially announced fuel economy figures for its new 200 sedan, the information for one model has just leaked out thanks to the US Department of Energy's FuelEconomy.gov website. It certified the 200 with the 295-horsepower and 262-pound-feet 3.6-liter Pentastar V6, nine-speed automatic and all-wheel drive as getting 18-miles-per-gallon city, 29-mpg highway and 22-mpg combined.
Last year's front-wheel drive 200 with a less-powerful version of the Pentastar was rated at 19-mpg city, 29-mpg highway and 22-mpg combined. That means that buyers are getting more power and all-wheel drive traction at almost no loss in economy. However, compared to current, all-wheel drive sedan competitors, the Chrysler comes in the middle. The Ford Fusion with all-wheel drive with the 2.0-liter EcoBoost four-cylinder has 240 hp and 270 lb-ft of torque is somewhat down on power but bests it in economy at 22-mpg city, 31-mpg highway and 25-mpg combined. The current Subaru Legacy 3.6R loses in both metrics with 256 hp and 247 lb-ft and a rating of 18-mpg city, 25-mpg highway and 20-mpg combined. However, Subaru claims the next generation with the same engine will boast 20-mpg city, 28-mpg highway and 23-mpg combined. But these numbers are just estimates from the automaker at the moment, and they haven't yet been certified by the EPA yet.
The numbers for the four-cylinder and front-wheel drive 200 drivetrains are not yet available, but Chrysler has been promising the sedan gets an estimated 35-mpg highway with the 184-hp and 173-lb-ft Tigershark 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine. We won't know for sure until it's certified, but we'll keep you posted.

Four-horse race opens up for next Chrysler-Fiat CEO

There are some companies that could change leadership overnight and still remain more or less the operations that they are. But some have built themselves up around one central figure. Just ask Carlos Tavares, who found he couldn't escape the long shadow of Renault-Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn. Tavares recently left to find his own limelight. But Ghosn isn't the only executive who presides over two disparate automakers on opposite ends of the globe.
Having built up Fiat and Chrysler around himself, we can hardly imagine either automaker getting along without Sergio Marchionne. But the day will come when the famously sweater-clad bigwig will step down. The pressing questions remain when when that day will come, and who will take his place. The only solid clues we have are in the statements made mostly by Marchionne himself, but those statements have been all over the place. When speaking to Automotive News in 2012, he said he would step down "no earlier than 2013, no later than 2015." But a year later, he had already seemingly changed his tune, indicating he could still be at the helm in 2016. Fiat chairman John Elkann seems to think Marchionne, 61, could and should stay on longer.

180,000 new vehicles are sitting, derailed by lack of transport trains

If you're planning on buying a new car in the next month or so, you might want to pick from what's on the lot, because there could be a long wait for new vehicles from the factory. Locomotives continue to be in short supply in North America, and that's causing major delays for automakers trying to move assembled cars.
According to The Detroit News, there are about 180,000 new vehicles waiting to be transported by rail in North America at the moment. In a normal year, it would be about 69,000. The complications have been industry-wide. Toyota, General Motors, Honda and Ford all reported experiencing some delays, and Chrysler recently had hundreds of minivans sitting on the Detroit waterfront waiting to be shipped out.
The problem is twofold for automakers. First, the fracking boom in the Bakken oil field in the Plains and Canada is monopolizing many locomotives. Second, the long, harsh winter is still causing major delays in freight train travel. The bad weather forced trains to slow down and carry less weight, which caused a backup of goods to transport. The auto companies resorted to moving some vehicles by truck, which was a less efficient but necessary option.