2008 Chrysler Sebring Limited Convertible ~only 1,073 Miles~ on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Trump wants a trade deal, but South Korea doesn't want US cars

SEOUL - US auto imports from the likes of General Motors and Ford must become more chic, affordable or fuel-efficient to reap the rewards of President Donald Trump's attempts to renegotiate a trade deal with key ally South Korea, officials and industry experts in Seoul say. Meeting South Korean President Moon Jae-in last week in Washington, Trump said the United States would do more to address trade imbalances with South Korea and create "a fair shake" to sell more cars there, the world's 11th largest auto market. "What we really want to say to the United States is: Make good cars, make cars that Korean consumers like." While imports from automakers including Ford, Chrysler and GM more than doubled last year largely thanks to free trade deal which took effect in 2012, sales account for just 1 percent of a market dominated by more affordable models from local giants Hyundai and affiliate Kia. Imports make up just 15 percent of the overall Korean auto market, and are mainly more luxurious models from German automakers BMW and Daimler AG's Mercedes-Benz, which also benefit from a trade deal with the European Union. "Addressing non-tariff barriers would not fundamentally raise the competitiveness of US cars," a senior Korean government official told Reuters, declining to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject. "What we really want to say to the United States is: Make good cars, make cars that Korean consumers like." TASTE BARRIER In Korea, US imports are seen as lagging German brands in brand image, sophistication and fuel economy, industry experts say. US imports do have a competitive advantage in electric cars: Tesla Motors' electric vehicles are seen as both environmentally friendly and trendy, while GM has launched a long-range Bolt EV. US Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross had cited a quota in the current trade deal as an obstacle to boosting imports. The quota allows US automakers to bring in each year 25,000 vehicles that meet US, not necessarily Korean, safety standards. Should GM, for example, decide to bring in more than its quota of one model - the Impala sedans - it would cost up to $75 million to modify the cars to meet Korean safety standards, the company told its local labor union. Asked about non-tariff barriers, a spokesman at GM's Korean unit said removing them could expand the range of models the company can bring in from the United States. No US company, however, has yet to make full use of the quota, industry data shows.

The Hemi deserves to die | Opinion

Hi. I'm Byron and I love V8s. I want them to stick around for a long, long time. But not all V8s are created equal, and I will not mourn the passing of the modern Hemi. You shouldn't either. While we may agree that its death is untimely, if you ask me, that's only because it came far too late.  Stellantis’ announcement of its new, turbocharged inline-six that is all but guaranteed to kill off the Hemi V8 has led to quite a few half-baked internet takes. The notion being suggested by some, that automotive media were brainwashed into believing the Hemi was in need of replacement, is so far divorced from reality that I openly guffawed at the notion. Journalists have been challenging Chrysler, FCA and now Stellantis for years to deliver better high-performance engines. The response has always been the same: “Why?” Why replace a heavy V8 with a lighter, all-aluminum one? Why repackage powertrains for smaller footprints and better handling vehicles? Why be better when “good enough” sells really, really well? I too mourn the departure of good gasoline-burning engines, but since when was the Hemi one? HereÂ’s a quiz: Name every SRT model with an all-aluminum engine. TimeÂ’s up. If you named any, you failed. They donÂ’t exist. This isnÂ’t GMÂ’s compact, lightweight small-block, nor is it a DOHC Ford Coyote that at least revs high enough to justify its larger footprint. The Hemi is an overweight marketing exercise that happened to be in the right place at the right time. That time was 2003, when Chrysler was still Chrysler — except it was Daimler-Chrysler and the "merger of equals" was doing a bang-up job of bleeding the company's cash reserves dry while doing virtually nothing to address its mounting legacy costs. "That thang got a Hemi?" was emblematic of the whimsical, nostalgia-driven marketing of the colonial half of the "marriage made in heaven." That was 20 years ago. 20 years prior to that, emissions-choked American V8s were circling the drain faster than a soapy five-carat engagement ring in a truck stop sink.

Marchionne recruiting activist investors to prompt GM merger

Sergio Marchionne may have been rebuffed in his previous advances at General Motors, but he's not about to give up that easily. According to The Wall Street Journal, the Fiat Chrysler chief is now turning to activist investors to help coax GM into joining forces. Marchionne has been a staunch and ceaseless advocate of the need for consolidation, arguing that the industry needs to amalgamate into larger groups that will share resources and reduce overhead. Under his leadership, the Fiat group consolidated its own operations, and officially merged with Chrysler last year. But he's also been pursuing additional mergers with the likes of Volkswagen, Peugeot, Ford, and Opel (to name just a few). Now he's pursuing a merger with GM, which has not shown much enthusiasm towards the idea. For one thing, GM is a much larger company, and probably doesn't need FCA as much as FCA needs it. For another, it has a troubled past with Marchionne, who in 2005 dissolved an agreed merger (of sorts) with GM, yet still managed to get the General to pay Fiat some $2 billion in the process. However, Marchionne is evidently hoping that the intervention of activist investors could compel GM CEO Mary Barra and company to proceed with a merger anyway. For precedent, he's looking at the recent negotiation between GM and some of its stakeholders that prompted the company to buy back $5 billion of its own shares, demonstrating Barra's willingness to deal with investors. The more compelling precedent, however, may have been set in 2006, when activist investor Kirk Kerkorian locked arms with Carlos Ghosn to get GM to consider joining the alliance between Renault and Nissan. GM ultimately declined, and Ghosn turned instead of Daimler (which of course has its own history of having merged with Chrysler). Only time will tell if this initiative will prove more successful, but one thing's for sure, and that's that Marchionne isn't about to relent in his pursuit of a major merger partner.