One Owner Heated Leather Power Seats Nav Rear Dvd Entertainment Alloy Wheels on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2019 Toyota Sienna AWD vs 2018 Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid | New meets old

The Toyota Sienna has always been an inconspicuous van. They're out there, there's a lot of them and they're huge, but they blend in with darn near everything. Perhaps Toyota noticed that a little while ago and slapped on the slightly garish grille/not a grille plastic thing in the front bumper, but it still doesn't really stand out. On the other hand, our long-term Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid, which is a great deal newer than the Sienna, has slick styling that gets noticed. Toyota hasn't properly redesigned the Sienna since the 2011 model year, and it shows on every front. Despite its many shortcomings, there are still some valid arguments for going with the dinosaur. Ride and handling Of all the reasons to choose a Sienna over the much newer competition, available all-wheel drive has to be the main one. My tester was so equipped, and I got a chance to test it out in both snow and ice. Obviously, the first thing I did in powder was see if the rear end would break loose. I can confirm that with traction control off, the Sienna will slide around a little bit. You won't be doing any sick drifts, but it's undoubtedly more fun than our Pacifica. The Chrysler is fitted with Nokian Hakkapelitta winter tires. As you might guess, this means that braking and grip around corners is better than the Sienna in snow. If the Sienna were to ditch its slippery all-seasons for a proper set of winters, it would be running circles around the Pacifica. Still, I drove our Pacifica through a lake effect blizzard in Buffalo and it never blinked from lack of traction with multiple inches of snow on the ground. Some folks are going to want the assurance of all-wheel drive, and the Sienna will offer it, but don't make it your only option. All-wheel drive might help you get going, but winter tires are there to save the day when sledding gets tough. What impressed most about the Sienna was its ride quality and composure. This van earned its road warrior status on my drive to the Chicago Auto Show from Detroit. The long highway trek was handled without issue by the big minivan chassis. Bumps and road imperfections were soaked up well. Noise wasn't much of an issue either, something minivans can struggle with given the massive amount of space in the cabin ripe for vibrations and rattles. However, an uncomfortable seat led to some soreness after over four hours in the saddle. No matter how I adjusted the lumbar, it didn't seem to take to my 5'10" slim frame.

This forgotten Chrysler was its bid for Humvee contract

Today, the Humvee might be as associated with the dead automotive brand from General Motors as it is with the hard-working truck that has long served as one of the backbone vehicles of America's military. But Autoline host John McElroy is showing off a practically unknown part of the model's story by digging out some old photos from his personal archive.
The High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle project, better known today as the Humvee, can be traced back to a US Department of Defense request for bids to build a new military truck. According to McElroy, he was invited to the Chrysler proving grounds in 1981 to check out the bid from the brand's defense division. The company's concept was that it might be able to build an inexpensive, capable vehicle by using off-the-shelf parts.
The angular body panels gave the truck a look almost like a modern, stealth vehicle. However, the flat look was actually just to make the tooling as cheap as possible to produce. Still, this Chrysler looked surprisingly futuristic for the early '80s. It's actually not too far away from the famous Lamborghini LM002, itself intended as a possible military-spec machine.

FCA employees likely to reject UAW contract

For a brief, blissful glimmer of time, it seemed like we might have a period of labor harmony here in the Motor City. The United Auto Workers and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, the UAW's lead bargaining company, came to a pending agreement that seemed promising enough that union president Dennis Williams, shown above with FCA boss Sergio Marchionne, thought it'd be ratified by the membership. Well, he was wrong. It's widely expected that FCA's rank-and-file workforce will vote against the deal, which gave workers a raise, would establish a VEBA-style healthcare pool, and deliver a $3,000 bonus for signing the agreement, while retaining the much-hated two-tier wage system. According to The Detroit News, it'd be the first time in over three decades the union's general population didn't follow its leadership's recommendation. Two of FCA's big US facilities, Toledo Assembly and Sterling Heights Assembly, overwhelmingly voted no, with The News saying they "mathematically sealed the deal's fate." According to The News, UAW Local 1700 President Charles Bell said roughly 90 percent of SHAP's 3,000-plus union workforce voted "no" on the deal. Should the pending agreement fail as it's expected to, there are three potential avenues for the union. First, as The News details, both sides could return to the bargaining table. Second, FCA workers could hit the picket line. Finally, union leadership may opt to focus its firepower on General Motors or Ford. It's a good thing we aren't the gambling sort, because those all seem very much within the realm of possibility. Not surprisingly, rank-and-file UAW members have taken issue with the survival of the two-tier wage structure, while others simply think that union employees deserve a wage hike. There was also, we're betting, some serious concerns over the reshuffling of production that would come with a new FCA/UAW deal. As previously reported, no fewer than four UAW facilities would have their vehicle lines shuffled around, including both SHAP and Toledo. Expect more news as soon as the UAW formally announces the results of its FCA voting. News Source: The Detroit NewsImage Credit: Paul Sancya / AP Plants/Manufacturing UAW/Unions Chrysler Fiat FCA toledo sterling heights