Chrysler Pacifica Limited Awd 4.0 V6 Navigtion Leather 6 Pasanger 1 Owner 52k on 2040-cars

Auto blog

More 2015 Chrysler 200 photos surface

Just 24 hours after the first official 2015 Chrysler 200 shot made its way onto the web, a whole smattering of images have surfaced, courtesy of the folks at Motorward. Here, we can see the new Chrysler family sedan from every angle, including the interior, and might we say, she's pretty.
As we told you yesterday, the new 200 will be offered with either a 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine with 184 horsepower and 173 pound-feet of torque or a 3.6-liter Pentastar V6 with 295 hp and 262 lb-ft. A nine-speed automatic transmission accessed through Chrysler's rotary shifter (mounted on a Volvo-style floating center console) will direct power to the wheels. We've heard that both front- and all-wheel drive will be available, and what's more, it's been said that the new 200 will be able to achieve at least 35 miles per gallon on the highway.
An on-sale date has yet to be announced, but the new 200 will reportedly be priced at $21,700, not including $995 for destination. Have a look at the new round of photos in the gallery above - the striking blue model above looks to be the sportier 200S - and stay tuned for the officially official stuff early next week... if not sooner.

Fiat Chrysler working on an inline-six to replace the Pentastar V6?

Get out your Skeptics Hat for this one and keep it close by. Allpar cites "reliable sources" to write that Fiat Chrysler appears to be working on a new inline-six engine to be slotted into company products around the globe. The purported engine would be based on the 2.0-liter Global Medium Engine inline-four. Allpar first reported on the potential development in February 2017 and has filed a few updates since then, one citing "internal communications referring to a GME T6" — the "T" meaning turbocharged. It's said that some engineers have changed their online resumes to reflect their focus on the new motor. Apparently, FCA tried adding forced induction to the Pentastar V6 but didn't like the results. The new direction then turned toward a "compact straight-six." In at least one guise, the GME I-6 would come in at just under three liters in order to escape taxes on engines 3.0-liters and above in certain European markets; the 2.0-liter four-cylinder has an actual displacement of 1.995 liters. The present V6 Pentastar comes in 3.2-liter and 3.6-liter guises; a turbocharged 3.0-liter straight-six should be able to replace both as far as output. Hooking up to the company's eTorque system used on the 3.6-liter Pentastar and 5.7-liter Hemi would make things even more punchy. With the trend in truck engine downsizing, it wouldn't be crazy to see such an engine head straight to Ram. The four-cylinder GME unit serves in the Alfa Romeo Giulia and Stelvio, and Jeep Cherokee, Wrangler, and Grand Commander. The big Alfa Romeos and full-size Jeep and Ram models shouldn't have any problem with a longer inline engine. Maserati, which doesn't use the Pentastar engine, could be a candidate as well should it choose to step away from its Ferrari-developed engine cred. Speaking of Ferrari, the Italian brand is working up a new V6 based, in its words, on "a very, very particular architecture." It isn't clear where it will go or if one of the other Italian brands will get access to it, but the Allpar piece says the Ferrari V6 will be based on the core GME architecture for Maserati. Chrysler gave up its last inline-six 11 years ago when the 4.0-liter I-6 retired alongside the JK-series Jeep Wrangler. The engine format is back in vogue, and its reincarnations have received good reviews. But inline-sixes are generally longer, hence FCA's focus on a compact unit, and that could limit the purported engine's placement options.

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.