2012 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Sport on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Stellantis expects strike to cost it $795 million in third-quarter profits

MILAN — Automaker Stellantis said Tuesday that the autoworkers strike in North America is expected to cost the company around 750 million euros ($795 million) in profits — less than its North American competitors. The Europe-based maker of Jeep, Fiat and Peugeot reported a 7% boost in net revenues to 45.1 billion euros, with production halts caused by the strikes costing the company 3 billion euros in sales through October. The net revenue boost was due to higher volumes in all markets except Asia. Chief Financial Officer Natalie Knight told journalists that StellantisÂ’ strike impact was lower than the other Big Three automakers due to its global profile as well as some high-profile cost-cutting measures, calculating the hit at around 750 million euros ($795 million.) GM, the last carmaker to reach a deal to end the strike, reported an $800 million strike hit. Ford has put its impact at $1.3 billion. “We continue to be in a very strong position globally and in the U.S. This is an important market for us, and weÂ’re highly profitable and we are very committed to our future," Knight said. “But mitigation is core to how we act, and how we proceed.” Stellantis has canceled appearances at the CES technology show in Las Vegas next year as well as the LA Auto Show, due to the strike impact. Stellantis on Saturday reached a tentative agreement with the United Auto Workers Union to end a six-week strike by more than 14,000 workers at its assembly plants in Michigan and Ohio, and at parts warehouses across the nation. Stellantis does not report full earnings for the third quarter, instead providing shipments and revenues. It said that global sales of electric vehicles rose by 37% over a year earlier, powered by the Jeep Avenger and commercial vehicle sales. North America continued to be the revenue leader, contributing 21.5 billion euros, an increase of 2% over last year, and representing nearly half of global revenues. Europe, the next biggest performing region, saw revenues grow 5% to 14 billion euros, as sales rose 11%. Related video: Earnings/Financials UAW/Unions Alfa Romeo Chrysler Dodge Fiat Jeep Maserati RAM

Chrysler 3.0L EcoDiesel V6: Autoblog Technology of the Year finalist

Offering a diesel engine in an American pickup is anything but new - Ford, General Motors and Chrysler all offer excellent and almost impossibly powerful oil-burning engines in their various fullsize trucks. What is new and novel about the 3.0L EcoDiesel, though, is its size, and the variety of vehicles that use it. It's the smallest engine, as far as displacement is concerned, currently offered in a large truck in the US, and, for 2014 and 2015, it is available in the Ram 1500 and the Jeep Grand Cherokee.
Though it may be small, it's got muscle. While 240 horsepower isn't particularly impressive these days, the engine's 420 pound-feet of torque more than makes up for that. The torque rating is even greater force than even the big 5.7-liter Hemi can muster. Chrysler's well-regarded eight-speed automatic transmission makes the most of all that bull-headed pulling power in both the Ram and Grand Cherokee. Chrysler claims the Ram EcoDiesel 1500 can tow as much as 9,200 pounds when properly equipped, which makes it "90-percent of the Hemi with a night and day difference in fuel economy."
Make no mistake; it's that promise of a sizable fuel economy improvement that many long-haul truckers will be most interested in. In the Ram 1500 that we tested for our Tech of the Year competition, the diesel engine costs $2,850 more than the gas-fed V8, and Ram estimates that EcoDiesel buyers will pay off their investment when compared to the Hemi engine in less than three years, which is considerably less time than the 4.5 or so years the average buyer will keep his or her fullsize pickup. The more you drive, the more you'll save, and the math proves equally as effective in the Jeep Grand Cherokee.

Fiat Chrysler dumped 40,000 unordered vehicles on dealers

In a move that echoes recent history, Fiat Chrysler has been making more cars and trucks than dealers in the U.S. are willing to accept, with Bloomberg reporting that at one point the automaker had built up a glut of around 40,000 unordered vehicles. That’s led some dealers to accuse FCA of reviving the dreaded “sales bank” accounting practice of obscuring inventory to improve the balance sheet. The company reportedly began building up its inventory of unordered cars this summer despite an industrywide slowdown in sales and an eagerness by some dealers to thin their inventories because rising interest rates are making it more expensive to hold unsold cars. The inventory build-up also coincided with Fiat ChryslerÂ’s efforts to find a merger partner, first with Renault, which fell through, then last monthÂ’s announcement that it will merge with FranceÂ’s PSA Group. FCA denies any such scheme and tells Bloomberg the rising inventory is down to a new predictive analytics system designed to better square supply with demand from dealers that is helping the company save money and narrow the numbers of unsold vehicles. The company recently agreed to pay a $40 million civil penalty to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to settle a complaint that it paid dealers to report fake sales figures over a span of five years. While no one is suggesting that FCA is in dire financial straits — the company saw higher than expected earnings in the third quarter and record profits in North America — the practice has strong historical precedent by Chrysler, which built up bloated inventories in the run-up to its two federal bailouts, in 1980 and 2009. It was also common at GM and Ford during the 2000s, when all three Detroit automakers struggled with excess manufacturing capacity and plummeting sales in the lead-up to the Great Recession. Back in 2012, CFO Magazine wrote about a report that explained automakersÂ’ rationale for the practice and how it works: Say fixed costs for a given factory are $100, and that the factory can make 50 cars. Consumers, however, demand only 10. Under absorption costing, if the company makes all 50 cars, its cost-per-car is $2. If it makes only up to demand, or 10 cars, the cost-per-car is $10. Although each car adds variable costs for steel and other parts, if those costs are low, the company still has an incentive to make more cars to keep the cost-per-car down.