2002 Dodge Intrepid Se on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2015 Dodge Charger darts into NY traffic

Meet the refreshed 2015 Dodge Charger; notice anything different? You would have to be pretty farsighted to miss the sedan's new Dart-like nose, and it's likely going to be quite polarizing to the car's fans. Gone are the previous furrowed, aggressive headlights in favor of a wider, friendlier look.
While the more rounded headlights and narrower grille are going to be the first thing most people notice, Dodge claims its designers have made changes to nearly every panel on the Charger. The hood dips down deeper at the front, and the doors show off a more angled version of the car's shoulder blister. LED running lights and taillights are standard on all models, and SXT and RT trims get LED foglights. Even though the front might not be as intimidating, Dodge has hung onto the sedan's muscular stance with angular contours making up the rest of the redesign.
Under the hood is the same engine range you've come to know over recent years. Both the 5.7-liter V8 and the 3.6-liter V6 return for 2015, with the Hemi making 370 horsepower and 395 pound-feet of torque, and the standard Pentestar outputting 292 hp and 260 lb-ft. All models are now equipped with Chrysler's TorqueFlight eight-speed automatic as standard. Fuel economy for V8 Chargers is predicted at 16 miles per gallon city and 25 mpg highway, compared to 15 mpg / 25 mpg last year with a five-speed automatic. All models also come with electric power steering, and the axles are cast from aluminum to save weight.

FCA's U.S. sales chief sues company for wrongful retaliation

Some fresh controversy is brewing at Fiat Chrysler Automobiles as The Detroit News reports that the head of U.S. sales has filed a federal whistleblower lawsuit against the company.. Reid Bigland, who's also in charge of the Ram truck brand, alleges that FCA made him a scapegoat for wrongful sales inflation practices and fixing vehicle sales statistics, which are currently under investigation by federal agents. Bigland claims that FCA executives punished him for cooperating with the federal investigators in the case by cutting his pay by more than 90 percent, according to the lawsuit he filed. The plan apparently was to use the money saved to pay for fines following any settlements made with the Securities and Exchange Commission. So far, the lawsuit alleges that FCA cost Bigland over $1.8 million in income. "They had the largest growth in retail sales in 17 years last year and refuses to pay him," Deborah Gordon, Bigland's lawyer in the case, said to The Detroit News. "Why is that? Because he participated in the SEC investigation and they don't like what he said." Bigland claims he just cooperated with the SEC investigation by testifying about FCA's sales reporting, from the time he took the position to the period prior to being appointed the company's U.S. sales chief. "In late 2018, presumably as a way to wrap up their investigation with some result, the SEC suggested to plaintiff that he admit to some wrongdoing as to defendants' monthly sales reporting," Gordon further said in a statement as part of the lawsuit. "The SEC also suggested a resolution involving some penalty to FCA. Because (Bigland) had not engaged in any wrongdoing, and there was no wrongdoing, he declined to do so." However, exacerbating the issue is the fact that Bigland reportedly sold his shares in the company last year, prompting FCA to act against him even more. FCA came under fire recently by federal agents in at least two separate investigations, potentially exposing conspiracy and corruption between company executives and private entities. The investigations are being led independently by the U.S. Attorney's Office and the FBI. So far, eight convictions were reportedly secured, with one including former Fiat Chrysler Automobiles Vice President Alphons Iacobelli, as one of the defendants. Iacobelli was one of the former top labor-relations executives for the automaker.

Fiat Chrysler wins top Total Quality Award for first time

The Strategic Vision Total Quality Awards are 20 years old in 2015, and Chrysler has never topped the awards before. Until now, that is. Fiat Chrysler takes the overall award on the corporate level with six segment leaders from Fiat, Dodge, Jeep, and Ram. The Fiat 500 won Small Multi-Function Car, the 500e won Small Alternative Powertrain, the Dodge Challenger tied at the top in the Specialty Coupe category alongside the very un-coupe Mini Cooper Countryman, the Jeep Wrangler Unlimited took the Entry SUV category, the Dodge Durango won in Mid-Size SUV, and Ram took the overall in Best Non-Luxury Brand. The accolade means FCA has gone from one segment winner in 2010 to overall victory in five years. Cars have gotten so good, says Strategic Vision, that it is harder than ever to win. In fact, says the group, 18 years ago 85 percent of all vehicle brands had more than half a problem per vehicle. This year, no brand has more than half a problem per vehicle. The organization measures "over 155 specific aspects of the customer's experience," and scores are based on input from more than 46,000 customers. Other notables in and near the winner's circle include Volkswagen and General Motors, who tied for second place on the corporate scale, one point behind FCA. The Mini Cooper Roadster scored the highest of any model, the Corvette Stingray Convertible and Coupe scored the second- and third-highest. The Chevrolet Colorado is the first domestic Standard Pickup winner in more than ten years, and the Nissan Titan carried the Full-Size Pickup category. The press release below has all the details on how winners and losers are selected, and the full list of automakers and how they finished. "The Customer's 'Total' Experience Defines Quality, Fiat Chrysler Scores Highest in Total Quality," says Strategic Vision The 2015 Total Quality Awards® SAN DIEGO, Friday, July 17, 2015 — Unknown to many, when some consumer research firms rank a car company's quality performance they often do so by simply "counting problems." In the past, this may have been acceptable, but in today's modern and efficient manufacturing world the difference between the worst brand and best brand is LESS than half-a-problem per vehicle. Thus, any "quality ranking" based on this method is severely lacking in the complete picture of the "Total" Quality experience that customers actually use to judge their product ownership.