2004 Chrysler Pacifica on 2040-cars

Auto blog

FCA's SEMA vans: A Ram ProMaster bar and a Mopar'd Pacifica

For this year's SEMA show, FCA created six machines that range from mild to wild, and what we have here are the two mildest examples: a custom Ram ProMaster and an accessorized Chrysler Pacifica. Of the two, the ProMaster is easily the more interesting. It's called the BrewMaster and it's a rolling bar. Get it? View 11 Photos The pub-themed interior has a variety of custom touches, including Mopar neon signs and beer taps with shift-knob handles. The outside gets some conceptual parts as well. The grille loses the crosshair design in favor of a large-font "RAM" badge in the center, similar to the one on the Ram Rebel. It also gets some custom 20-inch wheels and large fender flares to accommodate the wider rubber. The message here: Don't drink and drive, but definitely drive somewhere and drink. The Pacifica has far fewer custom goodies, and, sadly, no Hellcat powertrain, but that means what you see is something you could realistically replicate at a dealer. Called the Pacifica Cadence, this van is a rolling showcase of Mopar accessories. The newest piece is a running board that is designed to look like part of the sheetmetal, as opposed to a tacked-on aftermarket accessory. We'd say it's fairly successful if not super-exciting. View 7 Photos The Pacifica also features loads of other Mopar bits including the roof rack, dog kennel, all-weather floor mats, and wireless charging pad. Aside from the custom wrap and painted wheels, you could outfit your own Pacifica identically using a Mopar catalog. As for the BrewMaster, that might require a bit more custom work. Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Image Credit: FCA, Joel Stocksdale SEMA Show Chrysler RAM Minivan/Van Concept Cars chrysler pacifica ram promaster SEMA 2016

UAW warns automakers: Restarting U.S. plants is 'too soon and too risky'

WASHINGTON/WARREN, Mich. — The head of the United Auto Workers union on Thursday said it was "too soon and too risky" to reopen auto plants and Michigan's economy in early May, citing insufficient scientific data and coronavirus testing to assure workplaces are safe. The warning from UAW President Rory Gamble on Thursday afternoon came as General Motors Co , Ford Motor Co and Toyota Motor Corp took new steps toward reopening North American vehicle manufacturing operations in an environment where consumer demand is uncertain and worker safety paramount. The union has said that 24 of its members have died from Covid-19, though it was unclear whether they might have become infected in the workplace. Unionized Detroit automakers and non-union German and Asian automakers have been preparing to restart U.S. vehicle making operations by early May. Companies have shifted reopening dates amid uncertainty about government stay-at-home orders. Gamble's statement appeared to derail plans by the Detroit Three to start bringing UAW workers back to vehicle manufacturing jobs on May 4. The longer the automakers cannot produce profitable U.S.-made trucks and sport utility vehicles, the longer they burn cash. The UAW leader's statement was also aimed at Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who has come under pressure from conservative groups and President Donald Trump to ease coronavirus stay-at-home restrictions. "At this point in time, the UAW does not believe the scientific data is conclusive that it is safe to have our members back in the workplace. We have not done enough testing to really understand the threat our members face," Gamble said. "We strongly suggest to our companies in all sectors that an early May date is too soon and too risky to our members, their families and their communities." Gamble said the union was "happy with the auto companiesÂ’ response and cooperation on working through the health and safety protocols we will need in the workplace when it is appropriate to restart." Earlier Thursday, GM began notifying front line managers to come back to work next week to get trained on new safety protocols designed to prevent the spread of the novel coronavirus as workers return to plants.

The problem with how automakers confront hacking threats

More than anyone, Chris Valasek and Charlie Miller are responsible for alerting Americans to the hacking perils awaiting them in their modern-day cars. In 2013, the pair of cyber-security researchers followed in the footsteps of academics at the University of Cal-San Diego and University of Washington, demonstrating it was possible to hack and control cars. Last summer, their research established which vehicles contained inherent security weaknesses. In recent weeks, their latest findings have underscored the far-reaching danger of automotive security breaches. From the comfort of his Pittsburgh home, Valasek exploited a flaw in the cellular connection of a Jeep Cherokee and commandeered control as Miller drove along a St. Louis highway. Remote access. No prior tampering with the vehicle. An industry's nightmare. As a result of their work, FCA US recalled 1.4 million cars, improving safety for millions of motorists. For now, Valasek and Miller are at the forefront of their profession. In a few months, they could be out of jobs. Rather than embrace the skills of software and security experts in confronting the unforeseen downside of connectivity in cars, automakers have been doing their best to stifle independent cyber-security research. Lost in the analysis of the Jeep Cherokee vulnerabilities is the possibility this could be the last study of its kind. In September or October, the U.S. Copyright Office will issue a key ruling that could prevent third-party researchers like Valasek and Miller from accessing the components they need to conduct experiments on vehicles. Researchers have asked for an exemption in the Digital Millennial Copyright Act that would preserve their right to analyze cars, but automakers have opposed that exemption, claiming the software that runs almost every conceivable vehicle function is proprietary. Further, their attorneys have argued the complexity of the software has evolved to a point where safety and security risks arise when third parties start monkeying with the code. Their message on cyber security is, as it has been for years, that they know their products better than anyone else and that it's dangerous for others to meddle with them. But in precise terms, the Jeep Cherokee problems show this is not the case. Valasek and Miller discovered the problem, a security hole in the Sprint cellular connection to the UConnect infotainment system, not industry insiders.