on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Dodge recalling 2k SRT Hellcat Challengers and Chargers for fuel leak

Bad news for fans of the obscene output of the Dodge Hellcat twins, as FCA has announced a voluntary recall of both 707-horsepower variants of the 2015-model-year Charger sedan and Challenger coupe. According to FCA, a total of 2,211 cars are being recalled after a dealer discovered a "possible fuel leak" during a pre-delivery inspection. Despite getting cleared by suppliers, FCA claims its engineers found "improperly installed" hose seals. Owners of affected vehicles will receive notification and be asked to report in for repairs. Of the vehicles affected, the overwhelming majority, 2,012, were sold in the US market. The remainder were sold in Canada (148), Mexico (30) and just 21 outside of North America. Scroll down for the official release from FCA. Related Video: Statement: Hose Seals March 1, 2015 , Auburn Hills, Mich. - FCA US LLC is voluntarily recalling an estimated 2,211 cars globally to replace fuel-delivery components that may leak. An FCA US dealer alerted the Company to a possible fuel leak following a pre-delivery vehicle inspection. These components had passed the supplier's leak-testing, but FCA US engineers launched an investigation and discovered certain hose seals may have been improperly installed. The Company is unaware of any related injuries, accidents or customer complaints. Affected are model-year 2015 Dodge Challenger SRT coupes and Dodge Charger SRT sedans equipped with 6.2-liter V-8 engines. There are an estimated 2,012 in the U.S.; 148 in Canada; 30 in Mexico and 21 outside the NAFTA region. Affected customers will be notified and advised when they may schedule service. Customers with questions or concerns may call the FCA US Customer Information Center at 1-800-853-1403.

America was the unexpected theme at the 2017 Detroit Auto Show thanks to Trump

President-elect Donald Trump was not in attendance at this year's Detroit Auto Show, but it sure seemed like he was the target audience for many of the press conferences and announcements surrounding the event. Several manufacturers chose to play up existing and future commitments to the US in general and American jobs specifically in their presentations to the press, and we're pretty sure that has everything to do with Trump's recent targeting of automakers on Twitter. To us, it seemed automakers were going on the offensive to try and preempt any future tweet-shaming for investing in auto manufacturing anywhere but the US. The pro-America sentiment started the week prior to the auto show, with Ford announcing that it would build several future electrified vehicles at its Flat Rock Assembly Plant in Michigan and also cancel a $1.6 billion factory planned for Mexico. Ford announced the two items on the same day, but the reality is that they likely have no relation to each other; the Mexican plant is being skipped because the company doesn't need the extra capacity to build the Ford Focus right now. Trump was still happy to share the news on Twitter. Then, on Sunday, FCA announced it would invest $1 billion in manufacturing plants in Ohio and Michigan to produce the new Jeep Wagoneer, Grand Wagoneer, and Wrangler-based pickup. It's not as though those potential new jobs were on their way out of the US, necessarily, but FCA took the opportunity to mention that plant upgrades at the Warren Truck Plant would allow the company to build Ram heavy duty trucks, which are currently assembled in Mexico, there. CEO Sergio Marchionne confirmed that Trump and his proposed tariffs had nothing to do with the decision. We certainly believe that, but we also have to believe that the timing of the release, positive outcome for America, and zero gain for Mexico were all orchestrated. Again, Trump sent out a victory tweet as if this had been his doing. Ford then used its press conference at the show on Monday to reiterate the plans for Flat Rock and also confirm that the Ford Bronco and Ranger nameplates will be returning to the US market, and that both will be built at a plant in Michigan. Announcements of manufacturing locations are usually aimed at the UAW, which certainly has a stake in these things, but again this one was broadcast to the auto show crowd in general.

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...