2007 Chrysler Pt Cruiser Base Wagon 4-door 2.4l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Detroit automakers observing 8:46 of silence to mark Juneteenth

GM Executive Vice President of Global Manufacturing Gerald Johnson, right, talks with employees at the Fairfax Assembly & Stamping Plant in Kansas City, Kansas. (file photo - GM)     All three Detroit automakers are observing Juneteenth, a day commemorating the end of slavery, on Friday by observing 8 minutes and 46 seconds of silence, among other companywide efforts to advance the causes of social and racial justice and equality. Juneteenth marks the date, June 19, in 1865 when Union soldiers, led by Maj. Gen. Gordon Granger, arrived at Galveston, Texas, and announced the Civil War had ended and enslaved African Americans were to be freed. President Abraham Lincoln had officially ended slavery more than two years prior via the Emancipation Proclamation, but Union forces didn't reach Texas until that time, so there was virtually no enforcement. The 8:46 timestamp is significant because it was the length of time that a police officer in Minneapolis knelt on the neck of George Floyd during an arrest, ultimately killing him and sparking waves of protests across the U.S. and overseas. Autoblog asked automakers about their plans to mark Juneteenth, what they were doing to advance the cause of social justice for Black people, and how many African Americans they employ in both blue- and white-collar jobs. We heard back from GM, Ford, Fiat Chrysler and Honda but not from Nissan and Toyota. General Motors GM’s U.S. workforce is 17.2% Black and 69.2% white, according to its most recent corporate Diversity and Inclusion Report. GM's total global employment is 173,000, and it says women and minorities represent 40% of its team of corporate officers. For reference, the Census Bureau says African Americans make up 13.4% of the U.S. population of roughly 328 million people. White people constitute 76.5%. As previously reported, GM planned to pause production at its factories on each shift today and observe silence for 8 minutes and 46 seconds. The company will also have a digital countdown clock atop the GM's headquarters in Detroit for the moment of silence. Additionally, Chairman and CEO Mary Barra has said she will lead a new Inclusion Advisory Board made up of people from within and outside GM to suggest areas for change and hold the company to its commitments to fight injustice and racial inequality.

Fiat and UAW back at negotiating table over Chrysler stake

We knew there'd be no Chrysler IPO before the end of this year, but Fiat is determined to get the best run going into 2014 and is back at the poker table with the UAW. The delay was said to be Chrysler's desire to clean up a tax issue with the IRS; turns out that also bought the carmaker time to try and close a deal for the UAW's 48.5-percent stake in the company before the IPO happens.
Whereas the price Chrysler was willing to pay was once more than $1 billion under the UAW's asking price, the gap has closed to just $800 million of late. A recent valuation of the company at $10 billion - a valuation the UAW has disputed - means Fiat would be looking to pay about $4.2 billion instead of the $5 billion that the UAW seeks. But the UAW needs to hold out for the highest amount it can get because its pension obligations through the Voluntary Employee Benefit Association (VEBA) are $3.1 billion greater than the VEBA's assets, which include the Chrysler stake.
There's a clause in the agreement that Fiat can buy the VEBA shares for $6 billion, but Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne has said that the UAW "should buy a ticket for the lottery" if they even want $5 billion. The UAW, though, has more time to wait; it's Fiat that wants access to Chrysler's $11.9-billion war chest and that would like to avoid the risk of paying the full $6 billion for the UAW share if the float really takes off. With other valuations of Chrysler as high as $19 billion, a hot IPO could make that $6 billion look like a bargain.

This or That: 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 vs. 1984 Pontiac Fiero

Welcome to another round of This or That, where two Autoblog editors pick a topic, pick a side and pull no punches. Last round pitted yours truly against Associate Editor Brandon Turkus, and my chosen VW Vanagon Syncro narrowly defeated Brandon's 1987 Land Rover. In fact, it was, by far, the closest round we've seen, with 1,907 voters seeing things my way (for 50.8 percent of the vote) versus 1,848 votes for Brandon's Rover (49.2 percent). Sweet, sweet victory! For this latest round of This or That, I've roped Editor Greg Migliore into what I think is a rather fun debate. We've each chosen our favorite terrible cars, setting a price limit of $10,000 to make sure neither of us went too crazy with our automotive atrocities. I think we've both chosen terribly... and I mean that in the best way possible. 2005 Chrysler Crossfire SRT6 Jeremy Korzeniewski: Why It's Terrible: Taken in isolation, the Chrysler Crossfire isn't necessarily a terrible car. In fact, it drives pretty darn well, and there's a lot of solid engineering under its slinky shape. Problem is, that engineering was already rather long in the tooth well before Chrysler ever got its hands on it, having come from Mercedes-Benz, which used the basic chassis and drivetrain in a previous version of its SLK coupe and roadster. Granted, the SLK was an okay car, too, but even when new, it hardly set the world on fire with sporty driving dynamics. Chrysler took these decent-but-no-more bits and pieces from the Mercedes parts bin – remember, this car was conceived in the disastrous Merger Of Equals days – and covered them with a rather attractive hard-candy shell. Unfortunately, the super sporty shape wrote checks in the minds of buyers that its well-worn mechanicals were simply unable to cash, though an injection of power courtesy of a supercharged V6 engine in the SRT6 model, as seen here, certainly helped ease some of those woes. In the end, Chrysler was left with a so-called halo car that looked the part but never quite performed the part. It was almost universally panned by critics as an overpriced parts-bin special, which, I must add, was damningly accurate. As a result, sales were very slow, and within the first few months, dealers were clearancing the car at cut-rate prices, just to keep them from taking up too much of the showroom floor. Why It's Not That Terrible, After All: I can speak from personal experience when discussing the Chrysler Crossfire. You see, I owned one. Well, sort of...