2013 Dodge Journey Se on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Question of the Day: Most heinous act of badge engineering?

Badge engineering, in which one company slaps its emblems on another company's product and sells it, has a long history in the automotive industry. When Sears wanted to sell cars, a deal was made with Kaiser-Frazer and the Sears Allstate was born. Iranians wanted new cars in the 1960s, and the Rootes Group was happy to offer Hillman Hunters for sale as Iran Khodro Paykans. Sometimes, though, certain badge-engineered vehicles made sense only in the 26th hour of negotiations between companies. The Suzuki Equator, say, which was a puzzling rebadge job of the Nissan Frontier. How did that happen? My personal favorite what-the-heck-were-they-thinking example of badge engineering is the 1971-1973 Plymouth Cricket. Chrysler Europe, through its ownership of the Rootes Group, was able to ship over Hillman Avanger subcompacts for sale in the US market. This would have made sense... if Chrysler hadn't already been selling rebadged Mitsubishi Colt Galants (as Dodge Colts) and Simca 1100s as (Simca 1204s) in its American showrooms. Few bought the Cricket, despite its cheery ad campaign. So, what's the badge-engineered car you find most confounding? Chrysler Dodge Automakers Mitsubishi Nissan Suzuki Automotive History question of the day badge engineering question

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.

Ford Police Interceptors dominate Michigan State Police testing

Once again, Ford Motor Company builds the fastest police vehicles. The Blue Oval touted the news in an official release following Michigan State Police and Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department testing. Ford did very well. Except for one acceleration metric – zero to 10 miles per hour – the Blue Oval's Taurus and Explorer-based cop cars were the quickest, with particular praise coming for the EcoBoost-powered models, which bested Chevrolet and Dodge's V8-powered variants. Dearborn's products also posted the fastest average times around MSP's vehicle dynamics course. But it wasn't all positive for Ford. The only four-cylinder in the contest, the 2.0-liter, EcoBoost Ford SSP Sedan, had both the lowest top speed, 120 mph, and the slowest acceleration figures. It was also the slowest in track testing. Ford's products also failed to match the braking and top speeds of its rivals from Detroit and Auburn Hills – the rear-drive Charger Pursuit posted the best braking stats of the entire test, while the V8-powered Chevrolet Caprice hit the highest top speed, at 155 mph. Ford did score a top speed award, among SUVs, but at 132 mph, the naturally aspirated Police Interceptor Utility had to share its award with the equally fast, rear-drive Chevrolet Tahoe. The LA County Sheriff's timing isn't publicly available, but according to Ford, the EcoBoost-powered police cars put on a similarly impressive show for cops on the West Coast. We've assembled a spreadsheet on Google Docs that offers an easy to browse comparison of the different stats assembled by the Michigan State Police, and divided the vehicles between standard V6-powered sedans, high-performance sedans (EcoBoost and V8 models), and SUVs. You can check it out here. Related Video: