1998 Jeep Wrangler on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

Video charts evolution of Jeep from military vehicle to SUV powerhouse

Here's a fun new video from our car-obsessed friends at Donut Media. It shows the evolution of the iconic Jeep from its World War II roots to the forthcoming 2019 Scrambler pickup in a little over two minutes. Using illustrations and audio of Jeep engines and broadcast advertising spots, it's a fascinating look at the common traits that have persisted over more than 75 years and changing consumer preferences. Three companies originally responded to the U.S. Army's request in 1940 for proposals to make a quarter-ton "light reconnaissance vehicle" tailored to its specs — Bantam, Ford and Willys. The video starts by showing all three early contenders — the Bantam Reconnaissance Car, Ford Pygmy and Willys MB, which was based on the Willys-Overland "Quad" prototype, named for the 4x4 system it utilized. Willys eventually won the contract in 1941 to build 16,000 revised MB models for American and Allied forces. Willys would trademark the Jeep name in 1945 with its CJ-2A, a Civilian Jeep geared toward farmers. As the video shows, Jeep really started to diversify its body styles and colors in the 1970s and '80s under the ownership of American Motors Corp., which purchased the money-losing Jeep brand in 1970 from Kaiser-Jeep, which itself had acquired the brand from Willys in 1953. The '70s brought models like the CJ-5 Renegade and CJ-5 Laredo, and the video includes updates including the second-generation Wrangler Unlimited in 2004 and the Wrangler-based Scrambler pickup. Chrysler purchased Jeep from American Motors in 1987, shortly after the debut of the Jeep Wrangler, and has managed to hold onto the brand and ride it to success despite its own bumpy ownership trials and tribulations since then. Despite the many owners over time, Jeep has maintained its headquarters all along in Toledo, Ohio.

Trying the new Compass and other Jeeps on for size

If any brand has license to sell several like-sized SUVs, it's Jeep, which invented the concept in the first place. Yet, with the Cherokee, Renegade, and the redesigned 2017 Jeep Compass revealed at the LA Auto Show, just how like-sized is this trio of compact SUVs? Well, as it turns out, that answer is more complicated than just looking at various spreadsheets of specifications. After the cover was pulled off the new Compass, I managed to explore each back-to-back-to-back to see how their back seats and cargo areas compare. Perhaps obviously, the Renegade is the smallest of the trio no matter how you look it. Well, it actually has the most headroom, but rear legroom is cramped (a 6-footer can't sit behind another 6-footer) and it's quite obvious the cargo area is about nine cubic feet smaller with the rear seats raised. However, the Cherokee and Compass are surprisingly similar both on paper and in person – and even more surprisingly, the newer, smaller-on-the-outside Compass is actually a bit more spacious despite being nine inches shorter in overall length. View 14 Photos When seated in back, my knees were just touching the driver seat when it was motored most of the way back to accommodate my 6-foot-3 frame. However, the Cherokee's slightly chunkier seatback meant the Compass actually had a bit more rear legroom. I then set the passenger seat to a more average distance and again, the Compass had a slight advantage. The Cherokee did have a bit more under-thigh support, however, which indicates the seat is mounted a bit higher. But that creates a problem, as headroom is more significantly affected when the panoramic sunroof is specified. In the Cherokee, my head was into the sunroof cavity and resting against its rigid surround. In the Compass, there was just enough clearance. It should be a difference, both in terms of headroom and perceived roominess that those of average height should notice. As for their cargo areas, the Compass' is larger and more useable. With the rear seats raised, it has 27.2 cubic feet versus the Cherokee's 24.6. You can scoot its sliding seat forward to nearly equal the Compass, but of course doing so reduces its rear legroom. The main reason is width. The Cherokee is noticeably narrow and it gets worse when equipped with the optional subwoofer. In terms of maximum cargo volume with the rear seats lowered, the Compass has 59.8 cubic feet to the Cherokee's 54.9.