2005 Chrysler Sebring***super Clean***runs Great! Low Miles*** on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Killing the Dart and 200 might lower FCA's fuel economy burden

Killing the Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200 could allow FCA US to take advantage of an intriguing quirk in the next decade's fuel economy regulations. By increasing its ratio of trucks versus cars, the automaker might not need to worry so much about hitting the more stringent efficiency rules. At first thought, it might seem harder for an automaker with a ton of trucks to meet the government's mandated 54.5 mile per gallon corporate average fuel economy for 2025. However, every company doesn't need to hit that lofty figure, according to The Detroit Free Press. The exact target varies by the product mix between trucks and cars. "While passenger car and light truck categories have separate CAFE targets, it's still true that more trucks versus cars in a company lineup means a lower combined CAFE target," Brandon Schoettle, Project Manager Sustainable Worldwide Transportation at the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, told Autoblog. "While passenger car and light truck categories have separate CAFE targets, it's still true that more trucks versus cars in a company lineup means a lower combined CAFE target." FCA US' current product blend has 80 percent pickups and CUVs, which means the company stands to benefit from a lower fuel economy target. It might not seem entirely fair environmentally, but this is a great move from a business perspective. The new CAFE rules aren't set in stone, according to The Detroit Free Press, but potentially taking advantage of the regulation is just one more reason to cut the Dart and 200. Modern crossovers also aren't gas guzzlers like older SUVs, which could make it easier to hit the fuel economy target. "Utilities offer practicality and versatility that cars do not, and now, built on car architectures, they do not penalize consumers on fuel economy as they once did," AutoTrader Senior Analyst Michelle Krebs told Autoblog. Schoettle warns that FCA is still making a gamble by killing the small sedans. "Depending on the previous sales volumes and how much these vehicles might have exceeded their specific CAFE targets, it's possible that these cars helped earn CAFE credits for FCA that they could bank for future use," he said. "Future sales breakdowns [car vs.

Buying bang for your buck: Chrysler 300 and Kia Cadenza

In today's car market a Chrysler or Kia with a base price of $30K can easily become $45K, just by checking a few random boxes. You can do the math – that extra $15K will cost you $300/month over the life (and death) of a 60-month payment book. If your goal is only to get places in a stylish sedan capable of staying with traffic, you can keep your outlay far closer to the base price of these cars. Although they may not appear on many shopping lists, there's a lot to like in the lower-spec versions of both Chrysler's 300 and Kia's upscale Cadenza. The Chrysler is relatively ancient among current product platforms, while the Cadenza was Kia's first upmarket initiative, now supplemented by the larger K900 and the fall debut of Kia's Stinger GT. But you will not find a better transportation value in a Kia showroom than its underappreciated Cadenza. Here's a closer look at both: CHRYSLER 300: This car is a testament to all that was right about the DaimlerChrysler merger of the late '90s. At the time of the 300 introduction, elements of its platform were taken from the Mercedes E-Class, and with proportions suggesting a mix of stately American and neoclassic German, the 300 continues to offer a "just right" mix of respectable accessibility. The guy owning the package store could "Dub" it, while Miss Daisy would have been eminently comfortable in its back seat. In 2017, the 300 is an outlier in the sedan landscape. This is a large four-door with rear-wheel drive (all-wheel drive is optional). But in a sea of Accord this or Avalon that, the 300 impresses as an almost-relevant update of sedans in your murky past. The attachment to Chrysler products of 50 years ago goes beyond the Hemi that might be under the hood; it's the entire vibe of a car company trying hard to distinguish itself in today's marketplace. Despite numerous updates, the Chrysler still seems last century, and that's just fine with older drivers with the cash – or credit rating – to consider a $40K car. Behind the wheel, Chrysler's 300 exhibits all we love about American motoring. You would never confuse the handling with 'crisp,' but it's competent, while the ride is almost sublime. This is a car that in fully-loaded form deserves a Hemi, but the V6 is generally unobtrusive, and might net you 30 mpg on the highway. The conventional, 8-speed automatic goes about its business exactly as an automatic should.

Bring back the Bronco! Trademarks we hope are actually (someday) future car names

Trademark filings are the tea leaves of the auto industry. Read them carefully – and interpret them correctly – and you might be previewing an automaker's future product plans. Yes, they're routinely filed to maintain the rights to an iconic name. And sometimes they're only for toys and clothing. But not always. Sometimes, the truth is right in front of us. The trademark is required because a company actually wants to use the name on a new car. With that in mind, here's a list of intriguing trademark filings we want to see go from paperwork to production reality. Trademark: Bronco Company: Ford Previous Use: The Bronco was a long-running SUV that lived from 1966-1996. It's one of America's original SUVs and was responsible for the increased popularity of the segment. Still, it's best known as O.J. Simpson's would-be getaway car. We think: The Bronco was an icon. Everyone seems to want a Wrangler-fighter – Ford used to have a good one. Enough time has passed that the O.J. police chase isn't the immediate image conjured by the Bronco anymore. Even if we're doing a wish list in no particular order, the Bronco still finds its way to the top. For now (unfortunately), it's just federal paperwork. Rumors on this one can get especially heated. The official word from a Ford spokesman is: "Companies renew trademark filings to maintain ownership and control of the mark, even if it is not currently used. Ford values the iconic Bronco name and history." Trademarks: Aviator, AV8R Company: Ford Previous Use: The Aviator was one of the shortest-run Lincolns ever, lasting for the 2003-2005 model years. It never found the sales success of the Ford Explorer, with which it shared a platform. We Think: The Aviator name no longer fits with Lincoln's naming nomenclature. Too bad, it's better than any other name Lincoln currently uses, save for its former big brother, the Navigator. Perhaps we're barking up the wrong tree, though. Ford has made several customized, aviation themed-Mustangs in the past, including one called the Mustang AV8R in 2008, which had cues from the US Air Force's F-22 Raptor fighter jet. It sold for $500,000 at auction, and the glass roof – which is reminiscent of a fighter jet cockpit – helped Ford popularize the feature. Trademark: EcoBeast Company: Ford Previous Use: None by major carmakers.