1969 Dodge Dart Pro Street on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Killing the Dart and 200 might lower FCA's fuel economy burden

Killing the Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200 could allow FCA US to take advantage of an intriguing quirk in the next decade's fuel economy regulations. By increasing its ratio of trucks versus cars, the automaker might not need to worry so much about hitting the more stringent efficiency rules. At first thought, it might seem harder for an automaker with a ton of trucks to meet the government's mandated 54.5 mile per gallon corporate average fuel economy for 2025. However, every company doesn't need to hit that lofty figure, according to The Detroit Free Press. The exact target varies by the product mix between trucks and cars. "While passenger car and light truck categories have separate CAFE targets, it's still true that more trucks versus cars in a company lineup means a lower combined CAFE target," Brandon Schoettle, Project Manager Sustainable Worldwide Transportation at the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, told Autoblog. "While passenger car and light truck categories have separate CAFE targets, it's still true that more trucks versus cars in a company lineup means a lower combined CAFE target." FCA US' current product blend has 80 percent pickups and CUVs, which means the company stands to benefit from a lower fuel economy target. It might not seem entirely fair environmentally, but this is a great move from a business perspective. The new CAFE rules aren't set in stone, according to The Detroit Free Press, but potentially taking advantage of the regulation is just one more reason to cut the Dart and 200. Modern crossovers also aren't gas guzzlers like older SUVs, which could make it easier to hit the fuel economy target. "Utilities offer practicality and versatility that cars do not, and now, built on car architectures, they do not penalize consumers on fuel economy as they once did," AutoTrader Senior Analyst Michelle Krebs told Autoblog. Schoettle warns that FCA is still making a gamble by killing the small sedans. "Depending on the previous sales volumes and how much these vehicles might have exceeded their specific CAFE targets, it's possible that these cars helped earn CAFE credits for FCA that they could bank for future use," he said. "Future sales breakdowns [car vs.

FCA seeks partner to keep building Dodge Dart, Chrysler 200

Mere weeks after FCA announced it was shutting down production of the Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200, new hope emerges to give the sedans a stay of execution. Speaking at the Geneva Motor Show last week, Sergio Marchionne said that the company was looking for a partner "who is better at it than we are and who has got capacity available" in order to continue building the models on its behalf. "There are discussions going on now," said Marchionne, according to Motor Trend. "I think we will find a solution. We continue to talk. It's both a technical solution and an economic one. We need to find a solution that works economically." Contracting vehicles to be manufactured offsite is more common practice among European automakers than it is with American ones. Chrysler's former patron Mercedes, for example, has the G-Class built for it by Magna Steyr in Austria, the A-Class by Valmet in Finland, and the R-Class by AM General in Indiana (even though it's no longer sold in the US). This arrangement would, on the surface at least, appear more similar to the deal that Toyota struck with Mazda to build the Scion iA, drawing on the contractor's expertise and capacity to build the small sedan on the client company's behalf. Only rather than basing a new model on one of the partner's existing ones, this deal would ostensibly continue building FCA models on FCA platforms using FCA components. We'll have to wait to find out with whom FCA strikes up the manufacturing deal, but we wouldn't be surprised to see Marchionne turn to a partner he already knows. The company is, after all, at the center of an intricate web of joint ventures and manufacturing contracts. The Fiat 124 Spider, for example, is built by Mazda. The Fiat Sedici that preceded the 500X was built by Suzuki. Models like the Dodge Stealth and Eagle Talon were built in Illinois at the Diamond-Star Motors joint venture before Mitsubishi took it over altogether. And Dodge continued selling the Mercedes-made Sprinter long after DaimlerChrysler split. The Ram ProMaster, though built by FCA in Mexico for the North American market, stems from a partnership in France with PSA Peugeot Citroen. And the ProMaster City is built in a joint-venture plant in Turkey, from which it's also sold by GM as an Opel in Europe and a Vauxhall in the UK. With all those deals coming and going, after all, what would one more add to the complexity?

Brand new cars are being sold with defective Takata airbags

If you just bought a 2016 Audi TT, 2017 Audi R8, 2016–17 Mitsubishi i-MiEV, or 2016 Volkswagen CC, we have some unsettling news for you. A report provided to a US Senate committee that oversees the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and reported on by Automotive News claims these vehicles were sold with defective Takata airbags. And it gets worse. Toyota and FCA are called out in the report for continuing to build vehicles that will need to be recalled down the line for the same issue. That's not all. The report also states that of the airbags that have been replaced already in the Takata recall campaign, 2.1 million will need to eventually be replaced again. They don't have the drying agent that prevents the degradation of the ammonium nitrate, which can lead to explosions that can destroy the airbag housing and propel metal fragments at occupants. So these airbags are out there already. We're not done yet. There's also a stockpile of about 580,000 airbags waiting to be installed in cars coming in to have their defective airbags replaced. These 580k airbags also don't have the drying agent. They'll need to be replaced down the road, too. A new vehicle with a defective Takata airbag should be safe to drive, but that margin of safety decreases with time. If all this has you spinning around in a frustrated, agitated mess, there's a silver lining that is better than it sounds. So take a breath, run your fingers through your hair, and read on. Our best evidence right now demonstrates that defective Takata airbags – those without the drying agent that prevents humidity from degrading the ammonium nitrate propellant – aren't dangerous yet. It takes a long period of time combined with high humidity for them to reach the point where they can rupture their housing and cause serious injury. It's a matter of years, not days. So a new vehicle with a defective Takata airbag should be safe to drive, but that margin of safety decreases with time – and six years seems to be about as early as the degradation happens in the worst possible scenario. All this is small comfort for the millions of people who just realized their brand-new car has a time bomb installed in the wheel or dashboard, or the owners who waited patiently to have their airbags replaced only to discover that the new airbag is probably defective in the same way (although newer and safer!) as the old one.