2005 Chrysler Pt Cruiser Base on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Stellantis aims to eliminate separate inverter, charger to improve EV efficiency

Stellantis has announced that, in collaboration with French battery company Saft and French National Center for Scientific Research, has made significant progress in eliminating two major components of an electric vehicle powertrain: the on-board charger and the power inverter for the motor. The company claims that doing this will allow for better space use in vehicles, as well as improvements in efficiency, cost and reliability of components. As a quick primer, also explained in the below video, the on-board charger and power inverter are sort of translators to get the right current to different parts of the electric powertrain. The on-board charger takes AC power from the grid and converts it to DC to charge the batteries. Then when power goes from the batteries to the electric motor, the power inverter converts that DC power back to AC. These components aren't exactly small. Frequently you'll find them packaged somewhere under the hood. What Stellantis and its cohorts have developed, and have been using on a test vehicle since last summer, are small power inverter boards that can be mounted very closely to the battery packs. They can handle both conversion needs, for charging and discharging, instead of needing two separate devices. The most obvious perk to this is that you can do away with those traditional components and free up more space, either for making smaller vehicles without losing interior volume, or adding space to a vehicle that wouldn't have had it otherwise. There's the additional benefit of reduced weight, something that EVs struggle with. Stellantis also claims improvements in efficiency, reliability, and cost, however, it didn't go into detail as to how this setup would do that exactly. We'll try to get in touch with representatives from Stellantis in order to get more information. We're still a ways out from seeing this technology in production Stellantis vehicles. The company said it aims to apply it to vehicles by the end of the decade. Saft is also looking at using it on stationary battery systems as well. So maybe we'll see it on a 2029 Ram 1500 REV, but for now, we'll be living with traditional chargers and inverters. Related Video: Green Alfa Romeo Chrysler Dodge Fiat RAM Technology Electric

This or That: 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 vs. 1984 Pontiac Fiero

Welcome to another round of This or That, where two Autoblog editors pick a topic, pick a side and pull no punches. Last round pitted yours truly against Associate Editor Brandon Turkus, and my chosen VW Vanagon Syncro narrowly defeated Brandon's 1987 Land Rover. In fact, it was, by far, the closest round we've seen, with 1,907 voters seeing things my way (for 50.8 percent of the vote) versus 1,848 votes for Brandon's Rover (49.2 percent). Sweet, sweet victory! For this latest round of This or That, I've roped Editor Greg Migliore into what I think is a rather fun debate. We've each chosen our favorite terrible cars, setting a price limit of $10,000 to make sure neither of us went too crazy with our automotive atrocities. I think we've both chosen terribly... and I mean that in the best way possible. 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 Jeremy Korzeniewski: Why It's Terrible: Taken in isolation, the Chrysler Crossfire isn't necessarily a terrible car. In fact, it drives pretty darn well, and there's a lot of solid engineering under its slinky shape. Problem is, that engineering was already rather long in the tooth well before Chrysler ever got its hands on it, having come from Mercedes-Benz, which used the basic chassis and drivetrain in a previous version of its SLK coupe and roadster. Granted, the SLK was an okay car, too, but even when new, it hardly set the world on fire with sporty driving dynamics. Chrysler took these decent-but-no-more bits and pieces from the Mercedes parts bin – remember, this car was conceived in the disastrous Merger Of Equals days – and covered them with a rather attractive hard-candy shell. Unfortunately, the super sporty shape wrote checks in the minds of buyers that its well-worn mechanicals were simply unable to cash, though an injection of power courtesy of a supercharged V6 engine in the SRT6 model, as seen here, certainly helped ease some of those woes. In the end, Chrysler was left with a so-called halo car that looked the part but never quite performed the part. It was almost universally panned by critics as an overpriced parts-bin special, which, I must add, was damningly accurate. As a result, sales were very slow, and within the first few months, dealers were clearancing the car at cut-rate prices, just to keep them from taking up too much of the showroom floor. Why It's Not That Terrible, After All: I can speak from personal experience when discussing the Chrysler Crossfire. You see, I owned one. Well, sort of...

Marchionne's pay as Fiat CEO falls to $5M

Sergio Marchionne will be buying fewer of his iconic sweaters, as his 2013 pay from Fiat took a dip from $6.24 million to an even $5 million. Marchionne, who was also CEO of Chrysler, made $307,989 thanks to some stocks and benefits from the American company, although he didn't take a salary. Of that $5 million paid by Fiat, $3.19 million came from Marchionne's fixed salary while the remaining $1.8 million was paid for hitting unspecified performance targets.
The news comes from Fiat's compensation reports, which also showed that the 61-year-old, who already owned three million shares in Fiat at the end of 2013, was able to receive an additional 2.3 million shares through a stock incentive program. According to Automotive News Europe, the additional shares would be worth about $25 million at today's prices, although so far, Marchionne has declined to claim the extra shares.
According to ANE, Fiat reported a 2013 trading profit of $4.7 billion.