2004 Chrysler Crossfire Base Coupe 2-door 3.2l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM says it favors fuel-efficiency rules based on historic rates

WASHINGTON — General Motors backs an annual increase in fuel-efficiency standards based on "historic rates" rather than tough Obama era rules or a Trump administration proposal that would freeze requirements, according to a federal filing made public on Monday. The largest U.S. automaker said the Obama rules that aimed to hike fleet fuel efficiency to more than 50 miles per gallon by 2025 are "not technologically feasible or economically practicable." The Detroit automaker said that since 1980, the motor vehicle fleet has improved fuel efficiency at an average rate of 1 percent a year. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV said in separate comments that the auto industry is complying with existing fuel efficiency requirements by using credits from prior model years. As a result, even if requirements are frozen at 2020 levels, "the industry would need to continue to improve fuel economy" as credits expire, it added, warning if the government hikes standards beyond 2020 requirements "the situation worsens ... without some significant form of offset or flexibility." Fiat Chrysler and Ford urged the government to reclassify two-wheel drive SUVs as light trucks, which face less stringent requirements than cars. A four-wheel drive version of the same SUV is considered a light truck. Ford backs fuel rules "that increase year-over-year with additional flexibility to help us provide more affordable options for our customers." GM's comments said it was "troubled" that President Donald Trump's administration wants to phase out incentives for electric vehicles. The Trump plan's preferred alternative freezes standards at 2020 levels through 2026 and hikes U.S. oil consumption by about 500,000 barrels per day in the 2030s but reduces automakers' collective regulatory costs by more than $300 billion. It would bar California from requiring automakers to sell a rising number of electric vehicles or setting state emissions rules. The administration of former President Obama had adopted rules, effective in 2021, calling for an annual increase of 4.4 percent in fuel-efficiency requirements from 2022 through 2025. GM has been lobbying Congress to lift the existing cap on electric vehicles eligible for a $7,500 tax credit. The credit phases out over a 12-month period after an individual automaker hits 200,000 electric vehicles sold, and GM is close to that point.

FCA inline-six rumored to be real, headed for Jeep Wagoneer

In September, Allpar reported that that clues being dropped at Fiat- Chrysler headquarters, in the carmaker's factories, and on engineer resumes pointed to the development of an inline six-cylinder engine. The site has just proclaimed the rumor is reality, writing that the straight-six, "turbocharged to meet or beat 5.7 Hemi power ratings, with a smoother torque curve, is on the way." The motor's first outing is expected to be either the next-generation Jeep Grand Cherokee, debuting perhaps next year, or the Jeep Wagoneer, debuting in 2020 or 2021. "Tornado" is the purported codename for the power plant said to be just under three liters in displacement, expanding the family begun with the Global Medium Engine 2.0-liter turbo codenamed Hurricane. Engine bay constraints and a long use horizon mean engineers won't simply add two more cylinders to the GME, however. Allpar says the brief is to keep the Tornado GME-T6 — the alphanumeric for "turbocharged six" — no more than three inches longer than the Tigershark 2.4-liter four-cylinder. That means "major design changes" that could include a space-saving head, more closely spaced cylinders, and no cylinder liners. An FCA division called Comau could be called on for its "SmartSpray" plasma lining technology. Allpar muses that the standard version of the engine for Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, and Ram could get a single twin-scroll turbocharger. Performance trims for Alfa Romeo and Maserati could get different heads and maybe twin turbos, an SRT version might also get both those tweaks. History shows that the Italian versions would make changes to the block, as well. Even so, the Tornado would be less expensive than any Ferrari-supplied V6. A straight-six would put FCA in company with current adopters BMW and Mercedes-Benz, future users like Jaguar, and perhaps Aston Martin. The engine would span the widest range of use cases in the U.S. carmaker's portfolio, though. Potential applications include being a base engine for Ram trucks, serving double duty as a base engine and 5.7-liter Hemi replacement for the Dodge Charger and Challenger, working in the high-end Jeeps, and as a properly hot trim — with Ferrari-designed heads — in the luxury Italian sports cars. The Alfa Romeo Giulia begs for just such motivation to fill the gap between the 280-hp, $42,695 Ti Sport RWD and the 505-hp, $73,700 Giulia Quadrifoglio RWD. And a twin-turbo inline-six in a Maserati Alfieri would stack up nicely with the Germans.

Marchionne says the Chrysler 200 and Dodge Dart were terrible investments for FCA

In a press conference during the Detroit Auto Show, Sergio Marchionne was quite candid about why the Chrysler 200 and Dodge Dart were discontinued altogether without replacement. He essentially said they weren't worth the trouble. "I can tell you right now that both the Chrysler 200 and the Dodge Dart, as great products as they were, were the least financially rewarding enterprises that we've carried out inside FCA in the last eight years," Marchionne said. "I don't know one investment that was as bad as these two were." Marchionne was responding to a question about whether he felt the company's shift toward trucks and SUVs and sacrifice in sedan development was shortsighted. Marchionne said he felt that the market would likely continue to be strong for trucks and SUVs, and that the sedan market requires enormous investment that might not pay off. He used the 200 and Dart as examples. When we tried out the 200 and the Dart, we had mixed feelings. We enjoyed the 200's potent V6, pleasant interior, and solid handling. However, it was lacking in space (especially in the rear seat area), and doesn't drive any better than the top vehicles in the midsize sedan class. As for the Dart, it was fairly roomy, and had great infotainment thanks to Uconnect, but lackluster handling and a surprising amount of weight left it only average. With that in mind, it's probably not a bad idea to get rid of the 200 and Dart. The sedan segment is shrinking, and FCA can only afford to invest in areas where it can be a class-leader. Related Video: