Lx 2.7l - 1 Owner - No Accidents - Only 107,439 Miles! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Canada bailed out GM, Chrysler without really knowing what they were getting into

The Auditor General of Canada recently issued a report that makes at least one thing clear: it doesn't know how effective Canadian government loans given to General Motors and Chrysler in 2009 were in ensuring the viability of both companies. That year, the Canadian and Ontario governments dished out $10.8 billion CAD ($9.6B US) to GM and $2.9 billion CAD ($2.6B US) to Chrysler, but hadn't yet sorted out precisely how the funds were to be used before disbursing them. This happened in spite of the fact that, according to a piece in Bloomberg, the loans weren't meant to be handed out until authorities were clear on the manufacturers' plans for reorganization. In fact, federal officials hadn't finished establishing the concessions made by all the involved parties, the pension liabilities, nor the long-term soundness of the automakers' financial positions. On top of that, apparently it didn't keep close tabs on the money after loaning it: the report says that $1B CAD should have been applied to GM Canada pension plans but was instead given to GM to use. Chrysler repaid $1.7 billion, while GM handed back $3.8 billion and Bloomberg believes the feds in Ottawa still own 110 million shares of The General, which, at the stock price as of writing, would be good for another $3.9 billion. Those were mad, bad days, though, and we're not sure what point the report serves, other than to say, "Oh, by the way...." News Source: BloombergImage Credit: Bill Pugliano / Getty Images Government/Legal Chrysler GM bailout

Ram trucks lead 2021 J.D. Power Initial Quality Study

For the first time ever, Ram leads in J.D. Power's annual Initial Quality Study with a score of 128 PP100, or problems experienced per 100 vehicles in the first 90 days of ownership. Ram was in third place in last year's rankings. Coming in second place is Dodge (139 PP100), a sister division to Ram under the Stellantis umbrella, followed by Lexus (144 PP100), this year's highest-ranked premium automaker, in third. These findings reinforce an overall trend over the last few decades where mass-market brands have outperformed premium brands that tend to introduce bleeding-edge technologies that can confuse owners or fail to work entirely. Genesis (148 PP100) is the only other premium automaker to perform better than average. At the bottom of the official rankings is Chrysler (251 PP100), which seems to make little sense considering most of its technologies are shared with Dodge and many with Ram until you consider that Chrysler only offers two platforms and one of them is the Pacifica/Voyager minivan twins that are unique to the brand. The next worst are Audi (240 PP100) and Volkswagen (213 PP100). Tesla would fall in between VW and Audi with its score of 231PP100, but because the electric car manufacturer doesn't provide access to J.D. Power in every state, it's not officially included. Interestingly, J.D. Power said on a followup call that the problems that Tesla owners report most often are more traditional issues, such as panel fitment, interior noises or paint problems instead of problems with the car's electronics. According to J.D. Power, the industry averaged a score of 162 PP100. That is four points higher than the overall score in 2020, and 20 of 32 brands improved their quality scores over the last year. That's a two percent increase in quality in 2021, which is good but slightly lower than the average rate of improvement over the last decade. On a car-by-car basis, the Nissan Maxima leads the overall field with a score of 85 PP100. Issues with infotainment systems — and in particular problems pairing smartphones with in-car technologies — continue to be the top-reported problems. Headaches connecting Apple CarPlay and Android Auto dominate the complaints. "Owners want wireless connectivity, and the industry has responded," according to Dave Sargent, vice president of automotive quality at J.D. Power. "However, this has created a bigger technical challenge for both automakers and tech companies.

FCA earnings improve in first quarter

Following on the recent global financial releases from Ford and from General Motors for the first quarter of 2015, FCA is now putting out its own numbers, and things look quite good for the company. The automaker posted adjusted earnings before taxes and interest of $895 million, a 22-percent jump from Q1 2014, and net profits of $103 million, a $296-million boost from last year. Revenue was also up 19 percent to $30 billion. Despite the favorable figures, actual worldwide shipments fell slightly by 2 percent to 1.1 million vehicles. FCA is giving some credit for these strong Q1 results to the automaker's performance in the NAFTA region. Shipments grew 8 percent to 633,000 vehicles, and net revenue jumped a strong 38 percent to $18.1 billion. Adjusted earnings reached $672 million, compared to $425 million in 2014. The company especially praised the Jeep Renegade, Chrysler 200, and Ram 1500 for helping the bottom line. The numbers could have been even higher, but the corporation admitted that "higher warranty and recall costs" partially drug things down. For the full year in 2015, FCA expects to ship between 4.8 and 5 million vehicles worldwide and post up to $5 billion in adjusted earnings. There should be about $1.3 billion in net profit, as well. FCA CLOSED Q1 WITH NET REVENUES OF ˆ26.4 BILLION, UP 19% AND ADJUSTED EBIT AT ˆ800 MILLION, UP 22% 30/04/15 FCA closed Q1 with net revenues of ˆ26.4 billion, up 19% and adjusted EBIT at ˆ800 million, up 22%. Net industrial debt was ˆ8.6 billion, up ˆ0.9 billion. Full year guidance confirmed. Worldwide shipments were 1.1 million units, 2% lower than Q1 2014, reflecting strong performance in NAFTA and weak market conditions in LATAM. Jeep's positive performance continued with worldwide shipments up 11% and sales up 22%. Net revenues were up 19% to ˆ26.4 billion (+4% at constant exchange rates, or CER). Adjusted EBIT was ˆ800 million, up ˆ145 million from Q1 2014, with all segments except LATAM posting positive results. The positive impact of foreign exchange translation was offset by negative impacts at a transactional level. Net profit was ˆ92 million, up ˆ265 million compared to the net loss of ˆ173 million in Q1 2014. Net industrial debt was ˆ8.6 billion, up ˆ0.9 billion from year-end mainly due to timing of capital expenditures and working capital seasonality. Liquidity remained strong at ˆ25.2 billion. The Group confirms its full-year guidance.