1997 Chrysler Sebring Convertible Jxi (green) +ebra on 2040-cars

Auto blog

1950s car ads are timeless

Usually around the Super Bowl a few great car commercials show up, but for the most part auto ads today pale in comparison to the '1950s and '60s. In an era with a truly viable magazine industry, automakers would take out gorgeous full-page spreads to get the word out about their wares. It was also a time when imports were just hitting the US, and there was a boom in sports cars. Car and Driver has gone for a dig into its advertising archives from when the book was known as Sports Cars Illustrated for a truly great viewing experience. You can imagine a young Don Draper mulling over the copy for these ads, but some of it is laughably quaint today. For example, there's a great image of a driver whipping an Austin-Healey 100 around a track. The italicized red text proudly proclaims, "From 0 to 60 MPH in 10.5 seconds." One of the beautiful parts about these advertisements is that you seldom see photos of the cars. Instead, there are often detailed drawings that slightly distort the vehicles' lines. With this approach, the Porsche 356 ends up looking far more curvaceous than in real life. Plus, the front end of the Chrysler 300 looks large enough to land a helicopter on. The whole thing is worth scrolling through. There are some fascinating glimpses into auto history like an ad for Abarth exhausts before the brand was just known for tuning Fiats. Related Video: News Source: Car and DriverImage Credit: GM Heritage Center Marketing/Advertising Read This Chrysler Fiat Porsche Performance Classics porsche 356 abarth

Ford, Stellantis workers join those at GM in ratifying contract that ended UAW strikes

DETROIT — The United Auto Workers union overwhelmingly ratified new contracts with Ford and Stellantis, that along with a similar deal with General Motors will raise pay across the industry, force automakers to absorb higher costs and help reshape the auto business as it shifts away from gasoline-fueled vehicles. Workers at Stellantis, the maker of Jeep, Dodge and Ram vehicles, voted 68.8% in favor of the deal. Their approval brought to a close a contentious labor dispute that included name-calling and a series of punishing strikes that imposed high costs on the companies and led to significant gains in pay and benefits for UAW workers. The deal at Stellantis passed by a roughly 10,000 vote margin, with ballot counts ending Saturday afternoon. Workers at Ford voted 69.3% in favor of the pact, which passed with nearly a 15,000-vote margin in balloting that ended early Saturday. Earlier this week, GM workers narrowly approved a similar contract. The agreements, which run through April 2028, will end contentious talks that began last summer and led to six-week-long strikes at all three automakers. Shawn Fain, the pugnacious new UAW leader, had branded the companies enemies of the UAW who were led by overpaid CEOs, declaring the days of union cooperation with the automakers were over. After summerlong negotiations failed to produce a deal, Fain kicked off strikes on Sept. 15 at one assembly plant at each company. The union later extended the strike to parts warehouses and other factories to try to intensify pressure on the automakers until tentative agreements were reached late in October. The new contract agreements were widely seen as a victory for the UAW. The companies agreed to dramatically raise pay for top-scale assembly plant workers, with increases and cost-of-living adjustments that would translate into 33% wage gains. Top assembly plant workers are to receive immediate 11% raises and will earn roughly $42 an hour when the contracts expire in April of 2028. Under the agreements, the automakers also ended many of the multiple tiers of wages they had used to pay different workers. They also agreed in principle to bring new electric-vehicle battery plants into the national union contract. This provision will give the UAW an opportunity to unionize the EV battery plants plants, which will represent a rising share of industry jobs in the years ahead.

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.