So Very Rare Cross Ram Induction 1964 Chrysler 300 K,a/c ,p.s ,p.b,bucket's Mint on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Dodge Viper production to end after 2017

We can't say we're surprised, but we're still saddened to report that the Dodge Viper will not live on past the 2017 model year. It's had a solid 25-year run, though, and that's worth celebrating. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles does just that for the Viper's final model year, with five special editions (some of which seem less special than others, admittedly): The 1:28 Edition ACR, GTS-R Commemorative Edition ACR, VoooDoo II Edition ACR, Snakeskin Edition GTC, and Dodge Dealer Edition ACR. Instead of running through what makes each of these 2017 Vipers special, we'll direct your attention to the press release below and the images above. All but the Dodge Dealer Edition commemorate memorable Viper models of the past 25 years, and the GTS-R is probably the pick of the litter with its classic blue-on-white paint scheme. Unless you prefer to err on the side of gaudy, in which case Dodge has you (and your car) covered with Snakeskin Green. If none of these special-edition Viper models strikes your fancy but you'd still like to park a 2017 Viper in your garage, fret not. Dodge is still offering its "1 of 1" customization program for the Viper's final year of production. Finally, instead of dwelling on the past, even when that past is as exciting as the Viper's, let's choose to look to the future with the only logical question left unanswered: What's next? Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.

Harsh words from senators over Chrysler's delay in reporting hack

The federal agency charged with protecting American motorists wants to know more about how hackers remotely commandeered and controlled a Jeep Cherokee. Hours after Fiat Chrysler Automobiles recalled 1.4 million cars affected by a flaw in their cellular connections, officials with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said Friday they'll further probe the defect by conducting a formal recall query investigation. "Opening this investigation will allow NHTSA to better assess the effectiveness of the remedy proposed," the agency said in a written statement. The remedy works, said Chris Valasek, one of the researchers who first discovered the security flaw. After testing for the vulnerability again Friday, he wrote on Twitter: "Looks like I can't get to @0xcharlie's Jeep from my house via my phone. Good job FCA/Sprint!" From his Pittsburgh home, Valasek had previously accessed and controlled co-worker Charlie Miller's Jeep along a St. Louis highway. Researchers have demonstrated remote hacks before, but the scope and severity of the Jeep vulnerability was unprecedented. The recall for a cyber threat was the first of its kind. Although a software patch and changes made by cellular provider Sprint appeared to fix the problem, news of the exploit and Chrysler's response brought a fresh round of consternation on Capitol Hill, where federal lawmakers had already expressed concerns about automotive cyber security. The Jeep hack elevated their concerns to a new level. "Cyber threats in cars are real and urgent, no figment of the imagination, as this huge recall demonstrates," said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT). "Incredibly, Chrysler delayed disclosing this chilling cyber-security danger egregiously and inexcusably, and strong sanctions are appropriate to send a message that other auto manufacturers will heed." Chrysler had known about the security gap since October, and Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) wondered why it took the company so long to let customers know they were at risk. "Despite knowing about this security gap for nearly nine months, Chrysler is only now recalling 1.4 million vehicles to fix this vulnerability," he said. That's a potential pitfall for Chrysler, and something NHTSA will likely address in its investigation. Automakers are supposed to report safety-related defects to the agency within five days of discovery. But according to a chronology of events Chrysler submitted in its recall paperwork, it didn't inform NHTSA until July 15.

Detroit and Silicon Valley: When cultures collide

Culture is a subject that rarely, if never, gets discussed when traditional auto companies buy — or hugely invest — in Silicon Valley-based companies. The conversation surrounding the investments is usually about how the tech looks appealing and how it's an appropriate step to move the automakers toward autonomy. Culture — the way things are done, the expectations, and the approaches — is something that is overlooked only at one's peril. The potential cultural gap is almost always evident in the obligatory photos of the participants in these deals, with is essentially a photo op of auto execs with their Silicon Valley counterparts. The former — rocking jeans and no ties — look like parochial school kids playing hooky. Don't worry: The regimental outfits will be back in place once they get back in the Eastern time zone. Consider what happened back in 1998 when Daimler bought Chrysler. First of all, there was a denial in Detroit that it happened. It was positioned as a "merger of equals." Which it wasn't. In any corporate situation, when one has more than 50 percent of the business, it owns the whole thing. And the German company was in the proverbial driver's seat. People who were around Auburn Hills back then kept their heads down and their German Made Simple books at hand. Things did not go well. Daimler had had enough by 2007, when it offloaded Chrysler to Cerberus Capital Management — which brought ex-Home Depot CEO Bob Nardelli into the picture, which is a story onto itself. But when you think about the Daimler-Chrysler situation, realize that these were two car companies (at least the Mercedes part of the Daimler organization), so they had that in common, and the language of engineers is something of an Esperanto based on math, so there was that, too. Yet it simply didn't work. It doesn't take too many viewings of HBO's Silicon Valley to know that the business people in that part of the world are far more aggressive than people who ordinarily head and control car companies in Detroit. About 20 years ago, a book came out about the founder of Oracle titled The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison* - and the asterisk on the book jacket leads to: God Doesn't Think He's Larry Ellison. It would be hard to imagine a book about a Detroit executive, even a book that had the decided bias that the tome about Ellison evinces, that would be quite so searing. Sure, there are egos. But they are still perceived to be, overall, "nice" people.