We Finance! 2006 Limited Used Certified 2.4l I4 16v Fwd Suv Premium on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Chrysler stays IPO until 2014

There will not be a Chrysler IPO in 2013. Fiat, according to a report from Forbes, has announced that it will not be able to make the American brand's initial public offering before the end of the year, saying that the short, five-week window that makes up the rest of 2013 is "not practicable."
Not surprisingly, the issue with the Chrysler IPO is the same as it's always been - a disagreement between parent company Fiat, which owns 58.5 percent of the Chrysler Group and a UAW healthcare trust, which owns 41.5 percent. Fiat wants to buy out the UAW VEBA healthcare trust, which is responsible for shouldering retiree healthcare costs, but the two sides are hung up on an actual price tag for the remaining two-fifths of the company.
The original idea saw an IPO as a way of setting a fair market price for the remaining shares, although it's not entirely clear what broke down and led to a delay of the IPO plan. As Forbes points out, by waiting until 2014, Chrysler could be risking a cool-off in the IPO market, which could mean less money in its pocket when the automaker finally goes public.

2020 Chrysler Voyager priced at $28,480

CarsDirect got eyes on early order guides for the 2020 Chrysler Voyager, revealing the minivan's MSRP in base L trim as $26,985 before a $1,495 destination charge, for a total of $28,480. The only other trim available to the public, the Voyager LX, rings up at $31,290. That means that not only will the Voyager L and LX replace the Pacifica L and LX trims, the Voyager will start out $250 cheaper than the 2019 Pacifica models before incentives. The Voyager LXi, reserved for fleet customers, charges $34,490, which is $500 less than the Pacifica Touring trim. The figures make the Voyager L $215 less expensive than the Kia Sedona, $3,205 less than the Honda Odyssey, and $4,430 less than the Toyota Sienna. The closest price competitor sits on the other side of the dealership, that being the Dodge Grand Caravan SE priced just $65 above the Voyager L. With Chrysler becoming the people-mover brand, many expect the Voyager to replace the hoary Grand Caravan, so buyers shouldn't need to suffer analysis paralysis for too long. We still aren't sure why Chrysler needed to create a new model to replace trim levels, but perhaps it was to break buyer perception that the Grand Caravan was the first and last stop for an inexpensive minivan. Transaction prices are so high on Pacificas — and frankly, the Pacifica looks so nice — that casual shoppers might have thought why bother investigating the Chrysler. Chrysler worked to keep things financially frugal on the Voyager by omitting splashier options from the menu. Infotainment begins and ends with the seven-inch Uconnect touchscreen, the larger 8.4-inch screen forbidden. Driver assistance tech will be limited to the cost-extra rear park assist, blind-spot monitoring, and rear cross traffic detection; items like adaptive cruise control and autonomous braking aren't offered. And only the fleet model gets ritzy treats like leatherette seats, second-row Stow 'n Go chairs, and remote start. The LX only goes so far as second-row quad seats and in-floor storage bins. Yet with the same sheetmetal and the same 287-horsepower Pentastar V6 and nine-speed transmission under the hood, only the black door handles and badging will give Voyager owners away, and they can always buy one in black to help the illusion along.

Is it time for American carmakers to give up on dual-clutch transmissions? [w/poll]

Last week, in the midst of Detroit's first days seeking relief in Chapter 9 of the bankruptcy code, Automotive News contributor Larry P. Vellequette penned an editorial suggesting that American car companies raise the white flag on dual clutch transmissions and give up on trying to persuade Americans to buy cars fitted with them. Why? Because, Vellequette says, like CVT transmissions, they "just don't sound right or feel right to American drivers." (Note: In the article, it's not clear if Vellequette is arguing against wet-clutch and dry-clutch DCTs or just dry-clutch DCTs, which is what Ford and Chrysler use.) The article goes on to state that Ford and Chrysler have experimented with DCTs and that both consumers and the automotive press haven't exactly given them glowing reviews, despite their quicker shifts and increased fuel efficiency potential compared to torque-converter automatic transmissions.
Autoblog staffers who weighed in on the relevance of DCTs in American cars generally disagreed with the blanket nature of Vellequette's statement that they don't sound or feel right, but admit that their lack of refinement compared to traditional automatics can be an issue for consumers. That's particularly true in workaday cars like the Ford Focus and Dodge Dart, both of which have come in for criticism in reviews and owner surveys. From where we sit, the higher-performance orientation of such transmissions doesn't always meld as well with the marching orders of everyday commuters (particularly if drivers haven't been educated as to the transmission's benefits and tradeoffs), and in models not fitted with paddle shifters, it's particularly hard for drivers to use a DCT to its best advantage.
Finally, we also note that DCT tuning is very much an evolving science. For instance, Autoblog editors who objected to dual-clutch tuning in the Dart have more recently found the technology agreeable in the Fiat 500L. Practice makes perfect - or at least more acceptable.