2002 Chrysler Prowler Roadster 3.5l V6 Leather Only 12k Texas Direct Auto on 2040-cars

Auto blog

FCA employees likely to reject UAW contract

For a brief, blissful glimmer of time, it seemed like we might have a period of labor harmony here in the Motor City. The United Auto Workers and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, the UAW's lead bargaining company, came to a pending agreement that seemed promising enough that union president Dennis Williams, shown above with FCA boss Sergio Marchionne, thought it'd be ratified by the membership. Well, he was wrong. It's widely expected that FCA's rank-and-file workforce will vote against the deal, which gave workers a raise, would establish a VEBA-style healthcare pool, and deliver a $3,000 bonus for signing the agreement, while retaining the much-hated two-tier wage system. According to The Detroit News, it'd be the first time in over three decades the union's general population didn't follow its leadership's recommendation. Two of FCA's big US facilities, Toledo Assembly and Sterling Heights Assembly, overwhelmingly voted no, with The News saying they "mathematically sealed the deal's fate." According to The News, UAW Local 1700 President Charles Bell said roughly 90 percent of SHAP's 3,000-plus union workforce voted "no" on the deal. Should the pending agreement fail as it's expected to, there are three potential avenues for the union. First, as The News details, both sides could return to the bargaining table. Second, FCA workers could hit the picket line. Finally, union leadership may opt to focus its firepower on General Motors or Ford. It's a good thing we aren't the gambling sort, because those all seem very much within the realm of possibility. Not surprisingly, rank-and-file UAW members have taken issue with the survival of the two-tier wage structure, while others simply think that union employees deserve a wage hike. There was also, we're betting, some serious concerns over the reshuffling of production that would come with a new FCA/UAW deal. As previously reported, no fewer than four UAW facilities would have their vehicle lines shuffled around, including both SHAP and Toledo. Expect more news as soon as the UAW formally announces the results of its FCA voting. News Source: The Detroit NewsImage Credit: Paul Sancya / AP Plants/Manufacturing UAW/Unions Chrysler Fiat FCA toledo sterling heights

Fiat Chrysler working on an inline-six to replace the Pentastar V6?

Get out your Skeptics Hat for this one and keep it close by. Allpar cites "reliable sources" to write that Fiat Chrysler appears to be working on a new inline-six engine to be slotted into company products around the globe. The purported engine would be based on the 2.0-liter Global Medium Engine inline-four. Allpar first reported on the potential development in February 2017 and has filed a few updates since then, one citing "internal communications referring to a GME T6" — the "T" meaning turbocharged. It's said that some engineers have changed their online resumes to reflect their focus on the new motor. Apparently, FCA tried adding forced induction to the Pentastar V6 but didn't like the results. The new direction then turned toward a "compact straight-six." In at least one guise, the GME I-6 would come in at just under three liters in order to escape taxes on engines 3.0-liters and above in certain European markets; the 2.0-liter four-cylinder has an actual displacement of 1.995 liters. The present V6 Pentastar comes in 3.2-liter and 3.6-liter guises; a turbocharged 3.0-liter straight-six should be able to replace both as far as output. Hooking up to the company's eTorque system used on the 3.6-liter Pentastar and 5.7-liter Hemi would make things even more punchy. With the trend in truck engine downsizing, it wouldn't be crazy to see such an engine head straight to Ram. The four-cylinder GME unit serves in the Alfa Romeo Giulia and Stelvio, and Jeep Cherokee, Wrangler, and Grand Commander. The big Alfa Romeos and full-size Jeep and Ram models shouldn't have any problem with a longer inline engine. Maserati, which doesn't use the Pentastar engine, could be a candidate as well should it choose to step away from its Ferrari-developed engine cred. Speaking of Ferrari, the Italian brand is working up a new V6 based, in its words, on "a very, very particular architecture." It isn't clear where it will go or if one of the other Italian brands will get access to it, but the Allpar piece says the Ferrari V6 will be based on the core GME architecture for Maserati. Chrysler gave up its last inline-six 11 years ago when the 4.0-liter I-6 retired alongside the JK-series Jeep Wrangler. The engine format is back in vogue, and its reincarnations have received good reviews. But inline-sixes are generally longer, hence FCA's focus on a compact unit, and that could limit the purported engine's placement options.

Auto bailout cost the US goverment $9.26B

Depending on your outlook, the US Treasury's bailout of General Motors, Chrysler (now FCA) and their financing divisions under the Troubled Asset Relief Program was either a complete boondoggle or a savvy move to secure the future of some major employers. Regardless of where you fall, the auto industry bailout has officially ended, and the numbers have been tallied. Of the $79.69 billion that the Feds invested to keep the automakers afloat, it recouped $70.43 billion – a net loss of $9.26 billion. The final nail in the coffin for the auto bailout came in December 2014 when the Feds sold its shares in Ally Financial, formerly GMAC. The deal turned out pretty good for the government too because the investment turned a 2.4 billion profit. The actual automakers have long been out of the Treasury's hands, though. The current FCA paid back its loans six years early in 2011, the Treasury sold of the last shares of GM in late 2013. According to The Detroit News, the government's books actually show an official loss on the auto bailouts of $16.56 billion. The difference is because the larger figure does not include the interest or dividends paid by the borrowers on the amount lent. While it's easy to see fault in any red ink on the Feds' massive investment, the number is less than some earlier estimates. At one time, deficits around $44 billion were thought possible, and another put things at a $20.3 billion loss. Outside of just the government losing money, the bailouts might have helped the overall economy. A study from the Center for Automotive Research last year estimated that the program saved 2.6 million jobs and about $284.4 billion in personal wealth. It also indicated that the Feds' reduction in income tax revenue alone from Chrysler and GM going under could have been around $100 billion for just 2009 and 2010, significantly more than any loss in the bailout.