2005 Dodge Sprinter 158" W/b Ex Dhl Van on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Chrysler recalls AWD 300, Charger, Ram 1500 over ZF transmission

What do the Chrysler 300, Dodge Charger and Ram 1500 all have in common? Yes, they're all Chrysler products, and two of them are based on the same platform. And we're sure you could find more similarities between them all, but the common trait we're looking at here is that, while they all come standard in rear-drive form, they're also available with all-wheel drive. And it's the transmission in those models that's the subject of the latest recall notice issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
The output shaft on the eight-speed automatic transmission supplied by ZF to Chrysler for the AWD versions of the 300, Charger and Ram 1500 is apparently prone to fracture. That in the end could leave the vehicle without power and could, according to the NHTSA investigation, increase the chance of a crash. The vehicle could also roll away if even if left in Park without the handbrake applied.
That's why Chrysler is calling in 4,194 examples of those three models from the 2013 model year. Dealers will be responsible for inspecting the transmissions and, where necessary, replace the entire unit. See the full recall notice below for all the details.

China own a Detroit automaker? Would the U.S. let that happen?

The news that several Chinese automakers want to buy Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, and that one has even made an offer, elicits some mixed feelings. On one hand, as some have pointed out, it could be a win-win both for China and for FCA's American workers, ensuring the company's survival and opening new markets. On the other hand, this is China, whose trade relationship with the U.S. is the source of considerable scrutiny from the Trump administration — and whose not-a-friend, not-an-enemy status is particularly difficult to gauge right now during heightened tensions with its client state North Korea. So would such a deal pass regulatory muster? One reason that springs to mind for blocking any sale has to do with national security. Chrysler's role as a military supplier dates back to Dodge trucks used by Gen. Blackjack Pershing to chase Pancho Villa in Mexico, and shortly thereafter by American forces in World War I. The Detroit Three automakers were, of course, mainstays of the Arsenal of Democracy of World War II. Even before U.S. entry into the war in December 1941, America's industrial machinery went into overdrive, and Chrysler was one of the biggest cogs. It engineered and built the M3, Sherman and Pershing tanks and trucks for Gen. George Patton's Redball Express. It helped develop a radar-guided antiaircraft gun that knocked German bombers and V1 rockets out of the sky — on one day, shooting down 97 of 101 V1s headed for London. On D-Day, the radar system helped thwart Luftwaffe counterattacks on the beaches of Normandy, and it later helped Allied forces break out at the Battle of the Bulge. Chrysler redesigned the Wright Cyclone engines used by the Boeing B-29 Superfortress, the plane that firebombed Tokyo and dropped the atomic bombs that ended the war. Chrysler even played a secret role refining uranium in Oak Ridge, Tenn., that was used in the Hiroshima bomb and in the ensuing Cold War arms race. It worked on military missiles and was NASA's prime contractor for the Saturn V rocket that put men on the moon. More recently, Chrysler produced the M1 Abrams tank. And of course Chrysler is the keeper of the flame for Jeep, a 75-plus-years military legacy handed down from Bantam and Willys to Kaiser to AMC to Chrysler. The point of this history lesson is to note that in times of war or national emergency, America's industrial might has been called to serve, and may well be called on again.

This or That: 2005 Dodge Ram SRT-10 vs. 2005 Subaru WRX STI [w/poll]

Some cars, due to ultimate desirability, particular rareness, or spectacular performance/prestige eventually become collectible. It's darn near impossible to know which ones will make it into the rarefied stratosphere of collectibility – why is a late 1960s AMC AMX so affordable these days, whereas prices for late '70s Pontiac Trans Ams are soaring? – but there are some useful indicators to keep tabs on. We're not exactly experts on investing, but we do know cars. As such, we've decided to take our non-expertise on one hand, combine it in the other with our knowledge of all things automotive, wad it up, throw it out and ask for your forgiveness. Or something like that. I've challenged Senior Editor Seyth Miersma to choose a car he thinks will become a future collector's item that's not more than 10 years old, and for no more than $25,000. I've done the same, and we vigorously argued for and against each other's picks. I feel good about my choice, but I don't have the best track record in these contests (I've lost three times, won twice, but they've all been pretty close), so, while I'm not going to beg (please vote for me!), I do hope you find my argument convincing. But first, let's hear from Seyth: Miersma: Ten-years old or newer makes this challenging. At that age most vehicles feel like a plain old used car to me, few hit the "classic" button. But the Subaru WRX STI has always been a special car, and the 2005 cutoff year proves to be very attractive for the parameters of our contest. It's rare; with fewer than 5,000 STI models sold that model year. It's probably the best looking WRX STI ever sold in America; narrowly avoiding the dreadful "horse collar" front fascia. And it's got one of the more die-hard car-geek followings out there. For $25,000, you can also still find examples that have reasonable miles, are in good condition, and haven't all been molested by grown-up Initial D wannabes. With the street racers hacking up collectable examples every day, I like my odds for steep appreciation by way of conservation. I couldn't agree more. It really is difficult to predict what cars will catch the eye of collectors, and the WRX STI seems like a pretty good choice. But I think mine is even better, and I can't let him know that I'd love to park just such an STI in my very own garage. And so goes my argument: Korzeniewski: I like your choice as a driver, Seyth. I'm less convinced of its status as a sure-fire collectible.