1963 Dodge Polara on 2040-cars

Auto blog

1970 Dodge Charger destroyed by man sick of lowballers — he showed them!

There are open and shut cases, and there's this one, the purchase and crush case. This is so wild it's hard to believe it's real. Apparently a man named Daniel Gagliardi bought a rusted-out 1970 Dodge Charger project car with the intent to flip it. Contacted by The Drive, Gagliardi said he bought the car for $4,200 and listed it for $8,500. "It was a complete car," he said, "not missing a single thing inside, out, underneath, under the hood, wasn't missing a damn thing. Had fender tag, VIN tag, clean title." Instead of negotiating with serious buyers, Gagliardi told the outlet a stream of jokers jerked him around for six months. The time-wasting took a toll, and after 180 days of "no-showers, thousands of no-showers, and a whole bunch of flakers" who didn't have the decency to bring a decent offer and cash, he decided to teach them all a lesson. So he destroyed the car, filmed the destruction, and cheered it on. The humorous and ironic part of the video is when Gagliardi tells another man off-camera, "But we got it first! We already robbed it, you can only rob it once!" After that levity, there's only chagrin for anyone sad to see a Charger meet its end so spitefully. Admittedly, however, and in spite of all the vitriol aimed at him, Gagliardi is free to destroy his own property. He's not the first person to crush a car capriciously. Any divorce attorney could tell you a book of tales about precious goods meeting ugly ends for vindictive reasons. Or there's the guy who, commenting on Gagliardi's video on another site, relates how he crushed the Yamaha quad he wanted $800 for after he "got tired of people offering me $200." Ah well. This won't be the last time. Warning for language, and exceptionally shaky video. If you're hungry for more Charger carnage after this, check out the cinematic obliterations in "7 Ways to Destroy a Charger."

Fiat Chrysler wins top Total Quality Award for first time

The Strategic Vision Total Quality Awards are 20 years old in 2015, and Chrysler has never topped the awards before. Until now, that is. Fiat Chrysler takes the overall award on the corporate level with six segment leaders from Fiat, Dodge, Jeep, and Ram. The Fiat 500 won Small Multi-Function Car, the 500e won Small Alternative Powertrain, the Dodge Challenger tied at the top in the Specialty Coupe category alongside the very un-coupe Mini Cooper Countryman, the Jeep Wrangler Unlimited took the Entry SUV category, the Dodge Durango won in Mid-Size SUV, and Ram took the overall in Best Non-Luxury Brand. The accolade means FCA has gone from one segment winner in 2010 to overall victory in five years. Cars have gotten so good, says Strategic Vision, that it is harder than ever to win. In fact, says the group, 18 years ago 85 percent of all vehicle brands had more than half a problem per vehicle. This year, no brand has more than half a problem per vehicle. The organization measures "over 155 specific aspects of the customer's experience," and scores are based on input from more than 46,000 customers. Other notables in and near the winner's circle include Volkswagen and General Motors, who tied for second place on the corporate scale, one point behind FCA. The Mini Cooper Roadster scored the highest of any model, the Corvette Stingray Convertible and Coupe scored the second- and third-highest. The Chevrolet Colorado is the first domestic Standard Pickup winner in more than ten years, and the Nissan Titan carried the Full-Size Pickup category. The press release below has all the details on how winners and losers are selected, and the full list of automakers and how they finished. "The Customer's 'Total' Experience Defines Quality, Fiat Chrysler Scores Highest in Total Quality," says Strategic Vision The 2015 Total Quality Awards® SAN DIEGO, Friday, July 17, 2015 — Unknown to many, when some consumer research firms rank a car company's quality performance they often do so by simply "counting problems." In the past, this may have been acceptable, but in today's modern and efficient manufacturing world the difference between the worst brand and best brand is LESS than half-a-problem per vehicle. Thus, any "quality ranking" based on this method is severely lacking in the complete picture of the "Total" Quality experience that customers actually use to judge their product ownership.

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.