Ultra-nice-loaded-jxi-leather-convertible-v6-auto-cold-ac-cd-1-of-the-best-2-buy on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Trump is pleased with FCA's investment in Michigan and Ohio, but it wasn't done for him

Fiat Chrysler announced yesterday that it would be spending $1 billion on vehicle production in both Michigan and Ohio. The company estimates that its investment will yield about 2,000 jobs between both states. In addition to attracting our attention, it caught the gaze of President-elect Donald Trump, who tweeted praise to both FCA and the Ford Motor Company. He praised the latter for the company's move to cancel a new factory in Mexico. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Trump's writing also seems to imply he deserves a certain amount of credit for these shifts to American production. However, as Sergio Marchionne, CEO of FCA, explained to the press in a conference today, Trump and his impending administration had nothing to do with the decision. He said the decision to invest in the plants in Michigan and Ohio were in place well before Trump was going to be the President of the United States. In addition, he said that FCA has not been in contact with Trump or any of his colleagues regarding the decision. Marchionne also stated that neither he nor the company was making any preemptive plans for manufacturing locations the light of the upcoming Trump presidency. Rather, he said that the company will change to address regulations that are actually passed, and the only way the company could change plans ahead of new laws or taxes would be with more information and clarity. We assume that a "big border tax" isn't specific enough. Still, the fact that automakers are going out of their way to make and clarify announcements about manufacturing illustrates the massive attention Trump brings with every Tweet. Related Video: Government/Legal Plants/Manufacturing Detroit Auto Show Chrysler Fiat Sergio Marchionne FCA 2017 Detroit Auto Show

Is it time for American carmakers to give up on dual-clutch transmissions? [w/poll]

Last week, in the midst of Detroit's first days seeking relief in Chapter 9 of the bankruptcy code, Automotive News contributor Larry P. Vellequette penned an editorial suggesting that American car companies raise the white flag on dual clutch transmissions and give up on trying to persuade Americans to buy cars fitted with them. Why? Because, Vellequette says, like CVT transmissions, they "just don't sound right or feel right to American drivers." (Note: In the article, it's not clear if Vellequette is arguing against wet-clutch and dry-clutch DCTs or just dry-clutch DCTs, which is what Ford and Chrysler use.) The article goes on to state that Ford and Chrysler have experimented with DCTs and that both consumers and the automotive press haven't exactly given them glowing reviews, despite their quicker shifts and increased fuel efficiency potential compared to torque-converter automatic transmissions.
Autoblog staffers who weighed in on the relevance of DCTs in American cars generally disagreed with the blanket nature of Vellequette's statement that they don't sound or feel right, but admit that their lack of refinement compared to traditional automatics can be an issue for consumers. That's particularly true in workaday cars like the Ford Focus and Dodge Dart, both of which have come in for criticism in reviews and owner surveys. From where we sit, the higher-performance orientation of such transmissions doesn't always meld as well with the marching orders of everyday commuters (particularly if drivers haven't been educated as to the transmission's benefits and tradeoffs), and in models not fitted with paddle shifters, it's particularly hard for drivers to use a DCT to its best advantage.
Finally, we also note that DCT tuning is very much an evolving science. For instance, Autoblog editors who objected to dual-clutch tuning in the Dart have more recently found the technology agreeable in the Fiat 500L. Practice makes perfect - or at least more acceptable.

Junkyard Gem: 1964 Plymouth Valiant V-200 Wagon

When Chrysler introduced the Valiant for the 1960 model year, the automotive world had no idea that this new compact would become one of the most successful products in the company's history. Valiants and its A-Body siblings were built and sold by the millions around the world, with production continuing into the early 1980s (in Australia and South America). The sales pinnacle for the Valiant in the U.S. was 1964, and today's Junkyard Gem is one of those cars: an upscale V-200 station wagon, found in a Denver-area wrecking yard a few weeks back. The Valiant began life as its own marque, became a Plymouth for 1961, left Plymouth for 1962, then returned as a Plymouth model until American Valiant production ceased in 1976, and the Volare took its place. You'll barely see any mention of the Plymouth brand in the 1964 Valiant brochure, and Plymouth badging on the '64s was minimal. You could get the 1964 Valiant wagon as the base V-100, starting at $2,273, or as the nicer V-200 with its $2,388 price tag (that's about $21,150 and $22,220 in 2022 dollars). Valiant coupes and convertibles could be had with the even swankier (by cheap small-car standards) Signet trim level. As Ford showed us in the middle 2000s, numbers are just classier if you spell them out on emblems. In the middle 1960s, substituting an automatic for the base three-on-the-tree column-shift manual transmission jacked up the price of an affordable car by an eye-watering amount. The Torqueflite three-speed automatic and its slick-looking push-button shifter cost 172 bucks extra (around $1,600 today), which made the car more than 7% costlier. A four-on-the-floor manual was available for the first time in a new Valiant that year, but it cost $180. Also new for the 1964 Valiant was a V8 option (a 273-cubic-incher rated at 180 horsepower), but this car has the good old Slant-6. If it's the engine that came with the car when it rolled off the assembly line, it's a 101-horse example with 170 cubic inches… but these cars are notorious for getting engine swaps early and often and I didn't check the block casting numbers. The cassette deck tells us that it was being driven as recently as the late 1980s through middle 1990s. There's some rust in the usual spots, about what this car would have acquired by 1967 if it had stayed in Michigan. This car could have been restored, though the expense for rust repair and interior refurbishment wouldn't have been a good investment from a financial standpoint.