2022 Chrysler Voyager Lx on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Jeep will build old Wranglers next to new ones in Toledo

Jeep made a lot of people happy when it confirmed that the next-generation Wrangler would continue to be built in Toledo, OH. Now, news is breaking about the lengths the automaker will go to in updating its northern Ohio factory. There's good news for Jeep dealers (more Wranglers to sell!), Jeep fans (more JKs to buy!), and Jeep itself (more money to be made!). According to a report from Automotive News, capacity at the factory will be increased to 350,000 units per year. That's around a 50 percent increase over what the Toledo complex can currently manage and is, according to Jeep boss Mike Manley, part of a move to keep production "at the right place" so "supply [stays] just behind demand." The other big news revealed by the AN report focuses on the future of the current Wrangler. Yes, the current JK has a future. It'll continue to be built at the Toledo factory up to six months after it successor arrives in showrooms, a move that's partially down to the way Jeep is shuffling production about. Toledo currently builds the Cherokee on a unibody production line – it'll continue to do so until March of 2017, when production will move to Belvidere, IL. The unibody line in Toledo will then be converted for body-on-frame production, which should take about six months. But during that time, the current JK (likely rebadged as a "Wrangler Classic") will continue to be built alongside another line of next-generation Wranglers, keeping dealers supplied with the today's Wrangler through March of 2018. The two Wranglers will overlap for about six months. This is all very good news if you've been waiting to pull the trigger on today's Wrangler. But move quickly – the clock is officially ticking. Related Video: News Source: Automotive News - sub. req.Image Credit: Bill Pugliano/Getty Images Plants/Manufacturing Chrysler Fiat Jeep FCA toledo Mike Manley

2019 Toyota Sienna AWD vs 2018 Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid | New meets old

The Toyota Sienna has always been an inconspicuous van. They're out there, there's a lot of them and they're huge, but they blend in with darn near everything. Perhaps Toyota noticed that a little while ago and slapped on the slightly garish grille/not a grille plastic thing in the front bumper, but it still doesn't really stand out. On the other hand, our long-term Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid, which is a great deal newer than the Sienna, has slick styling that gets noticed. Toyota hasn't properly redesigned the Sienna since the 2011 model year, and it shows on every front. Despite its many shortcomings, there are still some valid arguments for going with the dinosaur. Ride and handling Of all the reasons to choose a Sienna over the much newer competition, available all-wheel drive has to be the main one. My tester was so equipped, and I got a chance to test it out in both snow and ice. Obviously, the first thing I did in powder was see if the rear end would break loose. I can confirm that with traction control off, the Sienna will slide around a little bit. You won't be doing any sick drifts, but it's undoubtedly more fun than our Pacifica. The Chrysler is fitted with Nokian Hakkapelitta winter tires. As you might guess, this means that braking and grip around corners is better than the Sienna in snow. If the Sienna were to ditch its slippery all-seasons for a proper set of winters, it would be running circles around the Pacifica. Still, I drove our Pacifica through a lake effect blizzard in Buffalo and it never blinked from lack of traction with multiple inches of snow on the ground. Some folks are going to want the assurance of all-wheel drive, and the Sienna will offer it, but don't make it your only option. All-wheel drive might help you get going, but winter tires are there to save the day when sledding gets tough. What impressed most about the Sienna was its ride quality and composure. This van earned its road warrior status on my drive to the Chicago Auto Show from Detroit. The long highway trek was handled without issue by the big minivan chassis. Bumps and road imperfections were soaked up well. Noise wasn't much of an issue either, something minivans can struggle with given the massive amount of space in the cabin ripe for vibrations and rattles. However, an uncomfortable seat led to some soreness after over four hours in the saddle. No matter how I adjusted the lumbar, it didn't seem to take to my 5'10" slim frame.

Chrysler called out over lackluster Ram Runner by racer who helped develop it

Fans of off-roading and desert blasting might recall that Chrysler offers an aftermarket conversion that can turn a Ram 1500 into a road-legal desert racer, called the Ram Runner. The kit, sold through Mopar, includes some significant suspension upgrades, body tweaks and a brawnier cat-back exhaust for the truck's 5.7-liter V8.
Considering all of this, comparisons with the almighty Ford F-150 SVT Raptor are common. Among the off-road community, that makes these two a sort of Chevrolet Camaro and Ford Mustang for people that prefer driving on dirt. In the Race-Dezert forum, the discussion as to which truck was better was proceeding as normal - Ram fans said their piece and Ford fans said theirs. Then, a man named Kent Kroeker offered up his two cents.
See, Kroeker is a Baja racer, and the man that helped develop the Ram Runner. Despite his association with the truck, though, he had some less than kind words for Chrysler and the Ram Runner.