2016 Dodge Viper Acr on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Stellantis will enter joint venture with Samsung SDI for EV batteries

SEOUL — South Korean battery maker Samsung SDI Co Ltd and global automaker Stellantis NV have agreed to jointly produce electric vehicle (EV) batteries for the North American market, a person familiar with the matter said on Tuesday. Samsung SDI, an affiliate of South Korean tech giant Samsung Electronics, already has EV battery plants in South Korea, China and Hungary, which supply customers such as BMW and Ford. "The two companies (Samsung SDI and Stellantis) have struck a MOU (memorandum of understanding) to produce EV batteries for North America," the person with knowledge of the matter told Reuters. The source spoke of condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter. The person said the location of the battery joint venture is under review and will be announced later. In July, Reuters reported that Samsung SDI may build a battery plant in the United States, citing a company source. South Korea's Yonhap news agency earlier reported the two companies plan to build a factory in the United States, citing industry sources. Samsung SDI and Stellantis did not have immediate comment when reached by Reuters. Stellantis on Monday struck a preliminary deal with battery maker South Korea's LG Energy Solution (LGES) to produce battery cells and modules for North America. Shares of Samsung SDI were up 2.6% as of 0300 GMT, versus a 0.6% rise in the KOSPI benchmark index. Related video: Green Alfa Romeo Chrysler Dodge Ferrari Fiat Jeep Maserati RAM Citroen Lancia Opel Peugeot Vauxhall

Fiat Chrysler dumped 40,000 unordered vehicles on dealers

In a move that echoes recent history, Fiat Chrysler has been making more cars and trucks than dealers in the U.S. are willing to accept, with Bloomberg reporting that at one point the automaker had built up a glut of around 40,000 unordered vehicles. That’s led some dealers to accuse FCA of reviving the dreaded “sales bank” accounting practice of obscuring inventory to improve the balance sheet. The company reportedly began building up its inventory of unordered cars this summer despite an industrywide slowdown in sales and an eagerness by some dealers to thin their inventories because rising interest rates are making it more expensive to hold unsold cars. The inventory build-up also coincided with Fiat ChryslerÂ’s efforts to find a merger partner, first with Renault, which fell through, then last monthÂ’s announcement that it will merge with FranceÂ’s PSA Group. FCA denies any such scheme and tells Bloomberg the rising inventory is down to a new predictive analytics system designed to better square supply with demand from dealers that is helping the company save money and narrow the numbers of unsold vehicles. The company recently agreed to pay a $40 million civil penalty to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to settle a complaint that it paid dealers to report fake sales figures over a span of five years. While no one is suggesting that FCA is in dire financial straits — the company saw higher than expected earnings in the third quarter and record profits in North America — the practice has strong historical precedent by Chrysler, which built up bloated inventories in the run-up to its two federal bailouts, in 1980 and 2009. It was also common at GM and Ford during the 2000s, when all three Detroit automakers struggled with excess manufacturing capacity and plummeting sales in the lead-up to the Great Recession. Back in 2012, CFO Magazine wrote about a report that explained automakersÂ’ rationale for the practice and how it works: Say fixed costs for a given factory are $100, and that the factory can make 50 cars. Consumers, however, demand only 10. Under absorption costing, if the company makes all 50 cars, its cost-per-car is $2. If it makes only up to demand, or 10 cars, the cost-per-car is $10. Although each car adds variable costs for steel and other parts, if those costs are low, the company still has an incentive to make more cars to keep the cost-per-car down.

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.