2011 Chrysler 300 Limited on 2040-cars

Auto blog

This or That: 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 vs. 1984 Pontiac Fiero

Welcome to another round of This or That, where two Autoblog editors pick a topic, pick a side and pull no punches. Last round pitted yours truly against Associate Editor Brandon Turkus, and my chosen VW Vanagon Syncro narrowly defeated Brandon's 1987 Land Rover. In fact, it was, by far, the closest round we've seen, with 1,907 voters seeing things my way (for 50.8 percent of the vote) versus 1,848 votes for Brandon's Rover (49.2 percent). Sweet, sweet victory! For this latest round of This or That, I've roped Editor Greg Migliore into what I think is a rather fun debate. We've each chosen our favorite terrible cars, setting a price limit of $10,000 to make sure neither of us went too crazy with our automotive atrocities. I think we've both chosen terribly... and I mean that in the best way possible. 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 Jeremy Korzeniewski: Why It's Terrible: Taken in isolation, the Chrysler Crossfire isn't necessarily a terrible car. In fact, it drives pretty darn well, and there's a lot of solid engineering under its slinky shape. Problem is, that engineering was already rather long in the tooth well before Chrysler ever got its hands on it, having come from Mercedes-Benz, which used the basic chassis and drivetrain in a previous version of its SLK coupe and roadster. Granted, the SLK was an okay car, too, but even when new, it hardly set the world on fire with sporty driving dynamics. Chrysler took these decent-but-no-more bits and pieces from the Mercedes parts bin – remember, this car was conceived in the disastrous Merger Of Equals days – and covered them with a rather attractive hard-candy shell. Unfortunately, the super sporty shape wrote checks in the minds of buyers that its well-worn mechanicals were simply unable to cash, though an injection of power courtesy of a supercharged V6 engine in the SRT6 model, as seen here, certainly helped ease some of those woes. In the end, Chrysler was left with a so-called halo car that looked the part but never quite performed the part. It was almost universally panned by critics as an overpriced parts-bin special, which, I must add, was damningly accurate. As a result, sales were very slow, and within the first few months, dealers were clearancing the car at cut-rate prices, just to keep them from taking up too much of the showroom floor. Why It's Not That Terrible, After All: I can speak from personal experience when discussing the Chrysler Crossfire. You see, I owned one. Well, sort of...

2017 Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid scored 84 MPGe in government testing

The 2017 Chrysler Pacific, in non-hybrid form, was already at the top of the minivan heap in terms of EPA-rated fuel economy. Now the government agency has released its official test numbers for the Pacifica Hybrid, and they're looking pretty good. The non-hybrid Pacifica achieved 28 highway, 18 city, and 22 combined miles per gallon, which compared favorably to the 2016 Honda Odyssey's 28/19/22 and Nissan Quest's 27/20/23 ratings. You can read more about the regular Pacifica's scores right here. But none of these vans compare to the Pacifica Hybrid, which is incidentally the only hybrid in the class. FCA claims that the EPA's numbers are even better than the anticipated 80 MPGe, although we can't speak to whether that's an honest admission or a too-convenient claim. But there's no denying that the official rating – 84 MPGe – is impressive. If you aren't familiar with the MPGe rating, no worries. It's not as straightforward as conventional EPA MPG ratings, but a layperson can understand how it works. MPGe stands for miles per gallon equivalent, and measures fuel economy based on the energy content of a gallon of petroleum-based gasoline. For those who like formulas, the Automotive X Prize once defined MPGe as (miles driven) / [(total energy of all fuels consumed)/(energy of one gallon of gasoline)]). As for a conventional rating, the EPA only provides a combined city/highway number on the Monroney sticker, and an FCA spokesperson told us that the rating for the Pacifica Hybrid will be 32 MPG. This represents the hybrid working as normal, not in EV-only mode. It's also an improvement of almost 10 MPG over the combined ratings of the top three conventional minivans in the segment, including the non-hybrid Pacifica. Range is also fantastic. The EPA rated the total EV-only range as 33 miles, and the overall combined range at a staggering 566 miles. And that's from a fuel tank that's just 17 gallons (compared to the 19-gallon tank in the conventional Pacifica, which nets it a 418-mile EPA-rated range). FCA is going to extraordinary lengths to credit its eFlite transmission-generator unit, which can supply electric power to the front wheels if necessary. It's a piece of equipment that represents a substantial engineering investment, and apparently that's all paid off. Chrysler tells us that the Pacifica Hybrid will go on sale next month, and that dealers will get more volume in Q1. Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party.

More 2015 Chrysler 200 photos surface

Just 24 hours after the first official 2015 Chrysler 200 shot made its way onto the web, a whole smattering of images have surfaced, courtesy of the folks at Motorward. Here, we can see the new Chrysler family sedan from every angle, including the interior, and might we say, she's pretty.
As we told you yesterday, the new 200 will be offered with either a 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine with 184 horsepower and 173 pound-feet of torque or a 3.6-liter Pentastar V6 with 295 hp and 262 lb-ft. A nine-speed automatic transmission accessed through Chrysler's rotary shifter (mounted on a Volvo-style floating center console) will direct power to the wheels. We've heard that both front- and all-wheel drive will be available, and what's more, it's been said that the new 200 will be able to achieve at least 35 miles per gallon on the highway.
An on-sale date has yet to be announced, but the new 200 will reportedly be priced at $21,700, not including $995 for destination. Have a look at the new round of photos in the gallery above - the striking blue model above looks to be the sportier 200S - and stay tuned for the officially official stuff early next week... if not sooner.