2005 Chrysler Crossfire Coupe, Low Miles, Fun And Sporty !!! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Toyota Sienna vs Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid | Minivan comparison test

Shopping for a new car can be difficult due to the sheer number of choices. Which brand do you start with, which do you skip and are you missing something worthwhile? Thankfully, minivans are much simpler. There are effectively only four choices, they're all pretty good and they're even different enough to make choosing the right one for you a bit easier. This comparison features the two most recently updated minivans: the Toyota Sienna versus the Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid. Besides their common newness, they stand out in another fundamental way: they're both hybrids. Now, they're very different hybrids – the Toyota comes standard with a traditional gasoline-electric system like that of a Prius, whereas the Pacifica is offered with an optional plug-in hybrid system that provides an estimated 32 miles of all-electric range before effectively turning into a traditional hybrid – but in both cases, fuel economy is the priority. With the rare exception, the minivan segment has exclusively used V6 engines, which provide sufficient power to move hefty loads of people and stuff. The Chrysler Pacifica comes standard with a V6, while a V6 is the sole powertrain option for the Honda Odyssey and new 2022 Kia Carnival. The fuel economy difference between those and our hybrid competitors is staggering: The new Sienna gets an EPA-estimated 36 mpg combined while the Odyssey and V6 Pacifica get 22 mpg. That equates to saving an estimated $750 every year on gas, according to the EPA. And the Pacifica Hybrid could potentially save you even more as long as you routinely utilize its electric range. This frugality alone could send the Sienna and Pacifica Hybrid to the top of many shopping lists, but as we've seen in previous tests, they offer more than enough in other respects to warrant top consideration. But which is better, Sienna or Pacifica? Well, we knew this was going to be close, and we were right. After averaging the scores from 16 categories, the difference between first and second was a mere 0.06 out of 10. When we added extra weight to key minivan-buying attributes (second-row space/versatility, safety features and functionality, infotainment, interior storage, cargo space/versatility, value and fuel economy), the gap was only 1 point out of a possible 230. We then triple checked and conducted a recount, but the order remained. In the end, there are no losers here.

Chrysler minivans under investigation for stalling after fuel refill

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, at least one man has reported that his 2007 Dodge Grand Caravan stalled unexpectedly on the highway shortly after being refueled. The unidentified man who contacted NHTSA regarding the issue cited as many as eight similar instances reported by other drivers.
NHTSA has announced that it will launch an inquiry into this issue, which could affect as many as 160,000 minivans from Dodge and Chrysler that were sold in 2007 (or more, if a problem is found that extends to additional models years, we'd assume). As of yet, there's no formal investigation, let alone a recall, on these vans, as the agency is merely determining if further action is needed.
Two months ago, Chrysler recalled nearly 700,000 vehicles, the majority of which were minivans, from the 2008-2010 model years to replace ignition switches after an investigation found that their weak springs and detent positions could fool a driver into thinking the car was in the "Run" position, when it's actually in the "Accessory" position.

Move over Audi, now Chrysler has a beef with Tesla's claims

In the same week that Audi said "not so fast" to some claims from Tesla, Chrysler has responded to a new press release from the California-based EV-maker by saying "not exactly, Tesla." The statement, released through the company's blog, comes in response to Tesla claiming it was "the only American car company to have fully repaid the government." Chrysler notes that it, too, recently paid back Uncle Sam from its 2008 bailout. Similar to Audi's recent press release, which was eventually and mysteriously deleted from the German automaker's site, Chrysler is both right and wrong in its statement.
Tesla specifically said that it had paid back the Department of Energy loans that many automakers received - including Fisker and VPG Autos - while Chrysler's retort argues Tesla is "unmistakably incorrect" since it repaid the government in 2011 a full six years early. Technically, the statements from both automakers are correct, but Tesla's startup loan originated from the DoE, while Chrysler's loan came in bailout form from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). Further, as The Detroit News notes, Chrysler's loan still cost taxpayers well over a billion dollars after all was said and done - those negative assets tied to "old Chrysler" in the bankruptcy did not require repayment.