2005 Chrysler Crossfire Srt6 Coupe on 2040-cars

Auto blog

China own a Detroit automaker? Would the U.S. let that happen?

The news that several Chinese automakers want to buy Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, and that one has even made an offer, elicits some mixed feelings. On one hand, as some have pointed out, it could be a win-win both for China and for FCA's American workers, ensuring the company's survival and opening new markets. On the other hand, this is China, whose trade relationship with the U.S. is the source of considerable scrutiny from the Trump administration — and whose not-a-friend, not-an-enemy status is particularly difficult to gauge right now during heightened tensions with its client state North Korea. So would such a deal pass regulatory muster? One reason that springs to mind for blocking any sale has to do with national security. Chrysler's role as a military supplier dates back to Dodge trucks used by Gen. Blackjack Pershing to chase Pancho Villa in Mexico, and shortly thereafter by American forces in World War I. The Detroit Three automakers were, of course, mainstays of the Arsenal of Democracy of World War II. Even before U.S. entry into the war in December 1941, America's industrial machinery went into overdrive, and Chrysler was one of the biggest cogs. It engineered and built the M3, Sherman and Pershing tanks and trucks for Gen. George Patton's Redball Express. It helped develop a radar-guided antiaircraft gun that knocked German bombers and V1 rockets out of the sky — on one day, shooting down 97 of 101 V1s headed for London. On D-Day, the radar system helped thwart Luftwaffe counterattacks on the beaches of Normandy, and it later helped Allied forces break out at the Battle of the Bulge. Chrysler redesigned the Wright Cyclone engines used by the Boeing B-29 Superfortress, the plane that firebombed Tokyo and dropped the atomic bombs that ended the war. Chrysler even played a secret role refining uranium in Oak Ridge, Tenn., that was used in the Hiroshima bomb and in the ensuing Cold War arms race. It worked on military missiles and was NASA's prime contractor for the Saturn V rocket that put men on the moon. More recently, Chrysler produced the M1 Abrams tank. And of course Chrysler is the keeper of the flame for Jeep, a 75-plus-years military legacy handed down from Bantam and Willys to Kaiser to AMC to Chrysler. The point of this history lesson is to note that in times of war or national emergency, America's industrial might has been called to serve, and may well be called on again.

Toledo continues fight for Jeep Wrangler production, despite mayor's death

Where will the next-generation Jeep Wrangler be built? That's an open question, but it's one that the city of Toledo, OH desperately wants to be the answer to. The city suffered a major blow, though, with the death of Mayor Michael Collins earlier this month. Collins had been the city's biggest champion during talks with Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, before suffering a fatal heart attack on Feb. 6. But Collins' tragic death isn't dampening the city's desire to carry on as the home of the Wrangler. "The mayor's passing is tragic. But on Monday, when I came to work, I knew exactly what I needed to do and exactly what needed to be done," the city's director of development, Matt Sapara, told the Detroit Free Press. According to the Freep, Sapara said Toledo and the state of Ohio have delivered an outline of a development plan that would give FCA the ability to buy an extra 100 acres to expand the factory. This is to help accommodate FCA's targeted output of 300,000 to 350,000 next-generation Wranglers, up from the 240,000 the factory can make now. "Our target in the proposal is to provide a way to increase the production capacity to a number that allows Fiat Chrysler to meet its business model," Sapara told the Freep, adding that the land could be available later this summer. FCA, meanwhile, has shown a somewhat ambivalent attitude towards Toledo production, with CEO Sergio Marchionne openly discussing the pros and cons of continuing to build the Wrangler south of the Michigan border. "We are going to take a very hard look at this without ignoring what these guys have done," Marchionne told the Free Press at last month's Detroit Auto Show, adding that he'd like to keep production there, provided the cost of retooling is comparable to relocating to another facility. Related Video:

Auto bailout cost the US goverment $9.26B

Depending on your outlook, the US Treasury's bailout of General Motors, Chrysler (now FCA) and their financing divisions under the Troubled Asset Relief Program was either a complete boondoggle or a savvy move to secure the future of some major employers. Regardless of where you fall, the auto industry bailout has officially ended, and the numbers have been tallied. Of the $79.69 billion that the Feds invested to keep the automakers afloat, it recouped $70.43 billion – a net loss of $9.26 billion. The final nail in the coffin for the auto bailout came in December 2014 when the Feds sold its shares in Ally Financial, formerly GMAC. The deal turned out pretty good for the government too because the investment turned a 2.4 billion profit. The actual automakers have long been out of the Treasury's hands, though. The current FCA paid back its loans six years early in 2011, the Treasury sold of the last shares of GM in late 2013. According to The Detroit News, the government's books actually show an official loss on the auto bailouts of $16.56 billion. The difference is because the larger figure does not include the interest or dividends paid by the borrowers on the amount lent. While it's easy to see fault in any red ink on the Feds' massive investment, the number is less than some earlier estimates. At one time, deficits around $44 billion were thought possible, and another put things at a $20.3 billion loss. Outside of just the government losing money, the bailouts might have helped the overall economy. A study from the Center for Automotive Research last year estimated that the program saved 2.6 million jobs and about $284.4 billion in personal wealth. It also indicated that the Feds' reduction in income tax revenue alone from Chrysler and GM going under could have been around $100 billion for just 2009 and 2010, significantly more than any loss in the bailout.