2011 Chrysler 300 Base on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Autoblog Minute: FCA hit with record fine, issues recall and buyback

FCA, found in violation of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act, agrees to buyback recalled models as part of record penalties issued by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The cars in question are more than half a million Chrysler vehicles with defective suspension parts that could cause cars to lose control, and more than a million Jeeps that are prone to deadly fires. Autoblog's Eddie Sabatini reports on this edition of Autoblog Minute, with expert commentary from Pete Bigelow. Show full video transcript text [00:00:00] FCA faces record penalties as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration finds the automaker in violation of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act. I'm Eddie Sabatini and this is your Autoblog Minute. Penalties for the automaker include submitting to increased government oversight, a hundred and five million dollar civil penalty, as well as, mandates to buy back defective vehicles from owners and payment for repairs. The cars in question are [00:00:30] more than half a million Chrysler vehicles with defective suspension parts that could cause cars to lose control, and more than a million Jeeps that are prone to deadly fires. Autoblog's Pete Bigelow discussed the NHTSA findings with us. [00:01:00] [PETE BIGELOW INTERVIEW] This fine and buyback recall, combined with the 1.4 million vehicles recalled over remote hacking concerns makes for a rough couple of weeks for FCA. For Autoblog, I'm Eddie Sabatini. Autoblog Minute is a short-form video news series reporting on all things automotive. Each segment offers a quick and clear picture of what's happening in the automotive industry from the perspective of Autoblog's expert editorial staff, auto executives, and industry professionals.

Chrysler Airflow EV concept gets new duds for New York

Chrysler's Airflow electric crossover returned to the stage in New York Wednesday in a new exterior finish as Chrysler's development engineers creep closer and closer to their goal of taking the brand all-electric by 2028. The brand's first electric vehicle is due by 2025, and some variant of this definitely-not-a-revived-Celine-Dion-era-Pacifica-crossover thing is likely to be it.  This version of the Airflow is dubbed "Graphite" and is the iteration Chrysler teased ahead of the show, but as we expected, not much of substance has really changed. Perhaps that's because this concept isn't yet particularly substantial. That's the beauty of an EV; once you have the basic design nailed down, the rest is really just an elaborate Lego project. Chrysler's builders are evidently still hard at work putting together a final product that lives up to the initial hype and range target of 400 miles on a charge.  In the meantime, the design team has been tweaking the looks. As we saw in the teaser, the updated Airflow gets a new grille design with a thin light bar at the Airflow's nose and acute beneath flanking the headlights forming a symmetrical pair of lightning bolts (gee, d'ya suppose it's electric?) aimed at the car's nose. The lower fascia appears a bit more sharply defined too, but it could just be the lighting.  The updates to the exterior are repeated inside on the wheel and dash, which have also had their colors inverted from the concept we saw at CES. Some of the interior details have also been tightened up from what we can see here. The selector dial on the center console appears to be more compact, as does the primary infotainment screen (though again, that could be a trick of the "photography"). The secondary display beneath the main infotainment screen has also been eliminated. We're guessing those controls have either been integrated into the main screen or as touch-sensitive elements hidden in the glossy plastic where the screen once was. The same was done to the steering wheel controls, it seems.

Appeals court delays 'sensible resolution' meeting between GM, Fiat Chrysler CEOs

DETROIT — Three federal appeals judges have delayed a court-ordered meeting between the CEOs of General Motors and Fiat Chrysler to try to settle a lawsuit over corruption by union leaders. U.S. District Court Judge Paul Borman last week ordered GM CEO Mary Barra and FCA CEO Mike Manley to meet before July 1. But GM on Friday asked the federal appeals court in Cincinnati to overturn the order and remove Borman from the case. In an order issued Monday, three appellate judges delayed Borman's order to provide time to consider legal points raised by GM. GM is suing crosstown rival FCA alleging that it got an advantage by paying off United Auto Workers union leaders to reduce labor costs during contract talks. FCAÂ’s former labor chief, Al Iacobelli, is in prison, although the company denies that it directed any prohibited payments. In his order last week, Borman described the lawsuit as a “nuclear option” that would be a “waste of time and resources” for years if he allows the case to move forward. The judge ordered Barra and Manley to sit down without lawyers by July 1 and reach a “sensible resolution of this huge legal distraction.” Borman wants an update from them on a public video conference that same day. Over the weekend he modified the order to allow lawyers to attend the meeting. In a court filing, GM called BormanÂ’s order a “profound abuse” of power. “The court possesses no authority to order the CEOs of GM and FCA to engage in settlement discussions, reach a resolution and then appear alone at a pretrial conference eight days later, without counsel,” GMÂ’s attorneys said. “Second, the court has no business labeling a properly filed federal lawsuit assigned to the court for impartial adjudication ‘a distractionÂ’ or a ‘nuclear option,’” GM said. Borman canÂ’t be viewed as impartial, company lawyers said. The judge declined to comment. In a court filing Monday, Fiat Chrysler lawyers wrote that GM didn't make a good case to remove Borman because judges routinely direct lawsuit parties to talk about settling. The lawyers wrote that GM originally wanted the case assigned to Borman but now apparently is worried that his tough questions mean he will dismiss GM's claims. “GM should not be permitted now to complain that that judge has turned out to be less hospitable to GMÂ’s claims than GM anticipated. Parties are not permitted to engage in such judge shopping," the filing said.