Rare Special Edition Sedan 4-door 5.2l V8 Turbo Vinyl Top, Low Milage 1 Owner on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Woman throws coffee at man over handicapped parking spot

A Toronto area busybody started a decidedly un-Canadian altercation over a woman illegally parking in a handicapped parking spot this week. He now regrets his decision to film it. On March 21, Ryan Favro confronted a young woman outside the Tim Hortons in Toronto as she approached her jeep with two cups of iced coffee. The situation quickly escalated, and ended with the woman hurling obscenities and both of her coffees at Favro before driving off. Favro quickly uploaded his video to Facebook where it quickly became viral, garnering more than a million views and spreading as far as New Zealand. Toronto Police caught wind of the video, which clearly shows the woman's face and the license plates of her Jeep, and issued her a warning. "We've cautioned her for assault and parking in a disabled spot, which is really what we can do under the circumstances," said Toronto Police spokesman Mark Pugash. Favro changed his mind about the public shaming by mid-week and, in a futile attempt to put the genie back in the bottle, he removed the video from his Facebook page. "I don't want to grind this woman into the ground," he said. "There has to be a way for her to recover." His attempt to walk back his video and make the situation go away have not been particularly successful, however. Although he took the original video down, it has been copied and posted so often by now that it has become impossible to completely erase it. His attempts to do so, and his post about it on Facebook, have received some mixed feedback. "If the guy was feeling remorse for publishing it [the video], perhaps he should not have posted it online and just go to police," said Facebook user Laura Dixon. Repeated requests by the Toronto Star to interview Favro have gone unanswered News Source: TheStar.com Chrysler Jeep SUV Off-Road Vehicles Videos parking toronto coffee parking lot handicapped parking

Canada bailed out GM, Chrysler without really knowing what they were getting into

The Auditor General of Canada recently issued a report that makes at least one thing clear: it doesn't know how effective Canadian government loans given to General Motors and Chrysler in 2009 were in ensuring the viability of both companies. That year, the Canadian and Ontario governments dished out $10.8 billion CAD ($9.6B US) to GM and $2.9 billion CAD ($2.6B US) to Chrysler, but hadn't yet sorted out precisely how the funds were to be used before disbursing them. This happened in spite of the fact that, according to a piece in Bloomberg, the loans weren't meant to be handed out until authorities were clear on the manufacturers' plans for reorganization. In fact, federal officials hadn't finished establishing the concessions made by all the involved parties, the pension liabilities, nor the long-term soundness of the automakers' financial positions. On top of that, apparently it didn't keep close tabs on the money after loaning it: the report says that $1B CAD should have been applied to GM Canada pension plans but was instead given to GM to use. Chrysler repaid $1.7 billion, while GM handed back $3.8 billion and Bloomberg believes the feds in Ottawa still own 110 million shares of The General, which, at the stock price as of writing, would be good for another $3.9 billion. Those were mad, bad days, though, and we're not sure what point the report serves, other than to say, "Oh, by the way...." News Source: BloombergImage Credit: Bill Pugliano / Getty Images Government/Legal Chrysler GM bailout

Question of the Day: Most heinous act of badge engineering?

Badge engineering, in which one company slaps its emblems on another company's product and sells it, has a long history in the automotive industry. When Sears wanted to sell cars, a deal was made with Kaiser-Frazer and the Sears Allstate was born. Iranians wanted new cars in the 1960s, and the Rootes Group was happy to offer Hillman Hunters for sale as Iran Khodro Paykans. Sometimes, though, certain badge-engineered vehicles made sense only in the 26th hour of negotiations between companies. The Suzuki Equator, say, which was a puzzling rebadge job of the Nissan Frontier. How did that happen? My personal favorite what-the-heck-were-they-thinking example of badge engineering is the 1971-1973 Plymouth Cricket. Chrysler Europe, through its ownership of the Rootes Group, was able to ship over Hillman Avanger subcompacts for sale in the US market. This would have made sense... if Chrysler hadn't already been selling rebadged Mitsubishi Colt Galants (as Dodge Colts) and Simca 1100s as (Simca 1204s) in its American showrooms. Few bought the Cricket, despite its cheery ad campaign. So, what's the badge-engineered car you find most confounding? Chrysler Dodge Automakers Mitsubishi Nissan Suzuki Automotive History question of the day badge engineering question