1967 Chrysler Imperial Mobile Director Incredible Time Capsule No Reserve! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Former Chrysler dealers could reopen under appeals court ruling

Years after the bankruptcies and subsequent bailouts of Chrysler (now FCA) and General Motors, the automotive industry is still seeing legal decisions about them come through the courts. The latest ruling from a US appeals court has given 4 of the 789 dealers that Chrysler closed in its Chapter 11 process one less hurdle towards reopening. Following the bankruptcy, 105 of the shuttered dealers went through an arbitration process in hopes of reopening, and 32 won their arguments. However, a victory in that undertaking didn't necessarily mean that the stores could reestablish themselves. For these three showrooms in Michigan and one in Las Vegas, state laws allowed nearby competitors from the same automaker to stand in the way of restarting, according to Automotive News. This problem brought yet another lawsuit, and a US district court found that the arbitration decisions did not overrule state laws. The latest appeals court ruling overturned that decision. However, as with many legal proceedings, the process for reopening for these dealers still isn't exactly easy. The latest decision only covers the nearby dealers' ability to protest; it doesn't mandate FCA actually to open the stores again. According to a statement from Michael Palese of FCA legal communications to Automotive News, the ruling, "did not provide for reinstatement of the dealers who prevailed in arbitration, but only gave them a right to a 'customary and usual' letter of intent." It means for these showrooms to start selling again, now they need to work things out with Chrysler's new owner.

2017 Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid: The 80-MPGe minivan [w/video]

As automakers rush to add hybrids and plug-ins to every type of vehicle, one popular segment has been overlooked: minivans. If the idea of a hybrid minivan makes sense to you, that's because it's a smart idea, and one that we're surprised hasn't happened yet. So kudos to Chrysler for not just making it happen, but for creating a plug-in version with an estimated 80 miles per gallon equivalent. You can read all the practical details of the 2017 Pacifica (not Town & Country) here. For the sake of this story, we'll focus on what's different with the hybrid model. Yes, Chrysler is just calling it Pacifica Hybrid, not Plug-In Hybrid, because the company's executives think that when people hear "plug" they think "range anxiety" and freak out. That's not a worry here, though, because when the 16-kWh battery runs out of juice, the 3.6-liter Pentastar V6 kicks in and the minivan functions as normal. Just don't run out of gas. With a full charge, the Pacifica Hybrid can travel up to 30 miles on electric power. And though the gas engine is the same 3.6-liter V6 found in the non-hybrid model, it's detuned to 248 horsepower and 230 pound-feet of torque. Charging the battery takes just two hours on a 240-volt plug, and Chrysler houses the battery pack underneath the floor in the middle of the van, where the wells for Stow 'N Go seating are found on gas-only models. So no, you can't get Stow 'N Go seats on the hybrid, but the third row does still fold into the floor. Powertrain aside, the Pacifica Hybrid is nearly identical to its gas-only sibling, save the addition of the charge port on the driver's side front fender. Unique wheels in 17- and 18-inch sizes can be had, and the Pacifica Hybrid only comes in Touring and Limited Platinum trims. You can read more details on the hybrid system in the release below. First hybrid powertrain in minivan segment "Due to its large footprint and multiple daily trip patterns, the minivan is ideally suited for electrification technology," said Bob Lee, Vice President and Head of Engine, Powertrain and Electrified Propulsion Systems Engineering, FCA – North America. "The all-new 2017 Chrysler Pacifica lives up to this promise and then some, with efficiency, power and refinement." Launching in second half of 2016, the Pacifica Hybrid is the industry's first electrified minivan.

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.