White 7 Passenger Mini Van In Great Condition. Low Mileage!! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Toledo continues fight for Jeep Wrangler production, despite mayor's death

Where will the next-generation Jeep Wrangler be built? That's an open question, but it's one that the city of Toledo, OH desperately wants to be the answer to. The city suffered a major blow, though, with the death of Mayor Michael Collins earlier this month. Collins had been the city's biggest champion during talks with Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, before suffering a fatal heart attack on Feb. 6. But Collins' tragic death isn't dampening the city's desire to carry on as the home of the Wrangler. "The mayor's passing is tragic. But on Monday, when I came to work, I knew exactly what I needed to do and exactly what needed to be done," the city's director of development, Matt Sapara, told the Detroit Free Press. According to the Freep, Sapara said Toledo and the state of Ohio have delivered an outline of a development plan that would give FCA the ability to buy an extra 100 acres to expand the factory. This is to help accommodate FCA's targeted output of 300,000 to 350,000 next-generation Wranglers, up from the 240,000 the factory can make now. "Our target in the proposal is to provide a way to increase the production capacity to a number that allows Fiat Chrysler to meet its business model," Sapara told the Freep, adding that the land could be available later this summer. FCA, meanwhile, has shown a somewhat ambivalent attitude towards Toledo production, with CEO Sergio Marchionne openly discussing the pros and cons of continuing to build the Wrangler south of the Michigan border. "We are going to take a very hard look at this without ignoring what these guys have done," Marchionne told the Free Press at last month's Detroit Auto Show, adding that he'd like to keep production there, provided the cost of retooling is comparable to relocating to another facility. Related Video:

FCA UConnect fiasco could set over-the-air updates back years

Since cars have become more software dependent, most major automakers have been inching toward enabling over-the-air updates to keep vehicle electronics, ranging from infotainment systems to safety features, current. But there are only two car companies — Fiat Chrysler and Ford —± currently doing OTA updates, and on a limited basis. GM CEO Mary Barra announced last summer that the automaker will launch a new EV architecture and infotainment system capable of over-the-air updates "before 2020." The one exception, per usual, is Tesla. Since the release of the Model S almost six years ago, the maverick EV automaker has made routine OTA software updates a core part of its vehicle platforms and value proposition, and has sent out updates for everything from adjusting ride height to enabling Autopilot, largely without incident. When I've asked automakers why they can't do the same thing, I've heard reasons ranging from running afoul of their dealers (and archiac regulation) to security concerns. Automakers like Ford and General Motors say they want to act like tech companies, which routinely send out OTA updates for a wide range of devices, but overall the car industry still moves at a very cautious snail's pace. And when automakers do try to move faster and take more risks — unlike with a smartphone update, which people bitch about but live with — the consequences can be significant when things go wrong. That's the case with Fiat Chrysler America and its recent public-relations nightmare when an OTA update went awry. The update went out at the end of last week for the Uconnect system in late-model vehicles, and it made head units go into a near continuous reboot, which caused owners to not only lose access to entertainment features, but also critical functions like emergency assistance. Almost immediately, owners took to Twitter to express outrage, and FCA was caught flatfooted. A tweet went out on Monday on the UconnectCares Twitter account that read, "Certain 2017 & 2018 Uconnect systems may experience a reboot every 45-60 seconds. Our Engineering teams are investigating the cause and working towards a resolution.

Question of the Day: Most heinous act of badge engineering?

Badge engineering, in which one company slaps its emblems on another company's product and sells it, has a long history in the automotive industry. When Sears wanted to sell cars, a deal was made with Kaiser-Frazer and the Sears Allstate was born. Iranians wanted new cars in the 1960s, and the Rootes Group was happy to offer Hillman Hunters for sale as Iran Khodro Paykans. Sometimes, though, certain badge-engineered vehicles made sense only in the 26th hour of negotiations between companies. The Suzuki Equator, say, which was a puzzling rebadge job of the Nissan Frontier. How did that happen? My personal favorite what-the-heck-were-they-thinking example of badge engineering is the 1971-1973 Plymouth Cricket. Chrysler Europe, through its ownership of the Rootes Group, was able to ship over Hillman Avanger subcompacts for sale in the US market. This would have made sense... if Chrysler hadn't already been selling rebadged Mitsubishi Colt Galants (as Dodge Colts) and Simca 1100s as (Simca 1204s) in its American showrooms. Few bought the Cricket, despite its cheery ad campaign. So, what's the badge-engineered car you find most confounding? Chrysler Dodge Automakers Mitsubishi Nissan Suzuki Automotive History question of the day badge engineering question