2022 Chrysler Pacifica Limited on 2040-cars

Auto blog

We aren't the only ones who want a Chrysler Pacifica Hellcat

Yes, you read that correctly: Chrysler. Pacifica. Hellcat. We want one. It's definitely not happening. But that doesn't mean we – and the FCA designers – can't dream, right? That's what led to this sketch, posted on Instagram by Fiat-Chrysler design boss Ralph Gilles. It looks pretty sweet, including that hella important wing for maximum downforce, yo. As long as we're dreaming, we've got a few other requests. Let's put that 707-horsepower, 6.2-liter, supercharged V8 in the middle of the van. Screw the Stow 'N Go seats – let's get that engine mounted as low in the car's midsection as possible. And while we're at it, let's go for rear-wheel drive. And a six-speed manual transmission. And a third row of seats behind the engine, but rear-facing, so we can make our friends puke. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. In all seriousness, we're looking forward to driving the regular Pacifica when it launches this Spring. To refresh your memory, it's a totally new van, and will even be offered in Hybrid spec with an 80-mile-per-gallon-equivalent rating. Sounds impressive. Oh, heck. Hellcats > Hybrids. Ralph, we urge you to make this one a reality. Related Video:

FCA explains, updates sales reporting in wake of investigation

Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) is currently under investigation by the Department of Justice (DoJ) and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for possible misappropriation of monthly sales. Not only that but a dealer group filed a lawsuit against the auto company for allegedly bribing dealers to falsify sales reports. In the wake of these mounting pressures, FCA released a report explaining their old sales reporting methods, as well as introducing the method they will use now. The report explains that sales will break down into three main categories. The first category is simply sales made by dealers in the United States that were purchased by your typical consumer. The second group is fleet sales that were purchased directly from FCA. The final group is a mix of various sales including sales by Puerto Rican dealers, cars used for marketing, and vehicles delivered to FCA employees and retirees. The original method of recording these sales relied mainly on the New Vehicle Delivery Report (NVDR). This system allowed dealers to report new car sales at the time of sale. These sales were used to create and report a total at the end of each month. Dealers also had the ability to "unwind" sales. What this means is that a dealer could cancel the sale of a car that was reported as sold in the event that a customer couldn't purchase the car or wanted a different vehicle. This would also return factory incentives to Chrysler and end the warranty period. Fleet and other sales were not recorded through this system, and were rather included in a separate "reserve" of vehicles. FCA explained that it did not know why this was the case, but the company speculated the reason may have been to avoid reporting vehicles that hadn't made it to road use yet. FCA also emphasized that their retail sales reports do not reflect quarterly earnings. The company explained that those earnings are based on vehicles purchased from FCA, which includes sales like the cars dealers buy for their local inventories. The new method also shows FCA's long run of sales increases wasn't as long as first thought. FCA has adopted a new system for calculating sales in light of concerns and confusion. This system retains the categories listed above, but changes how it counts them. The dealer reported numbers will now only include sold vehicles and will deduct sales of unwound vehicles that month.

Fiat Chrysler wins top Total Quality Award for first time

The Strategic Vision Total Quality Awards are 20 years old in 2015, and Chrysler has never topped the awards before. Until now, that is. Fiat Chrysler takes the overall award on the corporate level with six segment leaders from Fiat, Dodge, Jeep, and Ram. The Fiat 500 won Small Multi-Function Car, the 500e won Small Alternative Powertrain, the Dodge Challenger tied at the top in the Specialty Coupe category alongside the very un-coupe Mini Cooper Countryman, the Jeep Wrangler Unlimited took the Entry SUV category, the Dodge Durango won in Mid-Size SUV, and Ram took the overall in Best Non-Luxury Brand. The accolade means FCA has gone from one segment winner in 2010 to overall victory in five years. Cars have gotten so good, says Strategic Vision, that it is harder than ever to win. In fact, says the group, 18 years ago 85 percent of all vehicle brands had more than half a problem per vehicle. This year, no brand has more than half a problem per vehicle. The organization measures "over 155 specific aspects of the customer's experience," and scores are based on input from more than 46,000 customers. Other notables in and near the winner's circle include Volkswagen and General Motors, who tied for second place on the corporate scale, one point behind FCA. The Mini Cooper Roadster scored the highest of any model, the Corvette Stingray Convertible and Coupe scored the second- and third-highest. The Chevrolet Colorado is the first domestic Standard Pickup winner in more than ten years, and the Nissan Titan carried the Full-Size Pickup category. The press release below has all the details on how winners and losers are selected, and the full list of automakers and how they finished. "The Customer's 'Total' Experience Defines Quality, Fiat Chrysler Scores Highest in Total Quality," says Strategic Vision The 2015 Total Quality Awards® SAN DIEGO, Friday, July 17, 2015 — Unknown to many, when some consumer research firms rank a car company's quality performance they often do so by simply "counting problems." In the past, this may have been acceptable, but in today's modern and efficient manufacturing world the difference between the worst brand and best brand is LESS than half-a-problem per vehicle. Thus, any "quality ranking" based on this method is severely lacking in the complete picture of the "Total" Quality experience that customers actually use to judge their product ownership.