1983 Jeep Cj7 ,renegade , Silver, Small Block Chevy on 2040-cars

Auto blog

What would you drive in 1985?

Bereft of live baseball games to watch, I've turned to the good ship YouTube to watch classic games. While watching the 1985 American League Championship Series last night, several of the broadcast's commercials made its way into the original VHS recording, including those for cars. "Only 8.8% financing on a 1985 Ford Tempo!" What a deal! That got me thinking: what would I drive in 1985?  It sure wouldn't be a Tempo. Or an IROC-Z, for that matter, despite what my Photoshopped 1980s self would indicate in the picture above. I posed this question to my fellow Autobloggists. Only one could actually drive back then, I was only 2 and a few editors weren't even close to being born. Here are our choices, which were simply made with the edict of "Come on, man, be realistic."  West Coast Editor James Riswick: OK, I started this, I'll go first. I like coupes today, so I'm pretty sure I'd drive one back then. I definitely don't see myself driving some badge-engineered GM thing from 1985, and although a Honda Prelude has a certain appeal, I must admit that something European would likely be in order. A BMW maybe? No, I'm too much a contrarian for that. The answer is therefore a 1985 Saab 900 Turbo 3-Door, which is not only a coupe but a hatchback, too. If I could scrounge up enough Reagan-era bucks for the ultra-cool SPG model, that would be rad. The 900 Turbo pictured, which was for auction on Bring a Trailer a few years ago, came with plum-colored Bokhara Red, and you're damn sure I would've had me one of those. Nevermind 1985, I'd probably drive this thing today.   Associate Editor Byron Hurd: I'm going to go with the 1985.5 Ford Mustang SVO, AKA the turbocharged Fox Body that everybody remembers but nobody drives. The mid-year update to the SVO bumped the power up from 175 ponies (yeah, yeah) to 205, making it almost as powerful (on paper, anyway) as the V8-powered GT models offered in the same time frame. I chose this particular car because it's a bit of a time capsule and, simultaneously, a reminder that all things are cyclical. Here we are, 35 years later, and 2.3-liter turbocharged Mustangs are a thing again. Who would have guessed?

Chrysler nets $1.6B income in Q4, Fiat profit up 5%

Chrysler announced its 2013 financial results today and unveiled its new name and decidedly bank-like logo. Amid the announcement, Chrysler posted big gains in income, while Fiat didn't perform to analysts' expectations.
For 2013, Chrysler had revenue of $72.1 billion, up 10 percent from 2012. Net income reached $2.8 billion, a 65-percent increase. It was the company's third straight year of annual profits.
In terms of unit sales, Chrysler sold 2.4 million cars worldwide in 2013, up 9 percent. According to Automotive News, 1.8 million of those vehicles were sold in the US, a 14-percent increase. The sales growth boosted Chrysler's US market share to 11.4 percent, up 0.2 percent.

Here's what it'll take to build a Jeep Grand Cherokee Hellcat

Let's get one thing straight: We want a 707-horsepower Grand Cherokee Hellcat to happen. Badly. The latest report from Motor Authority is encouraging; the bonkers SUV supposedly has a codename, Project K, and has been given the green light for production. Fingers crossed. You might be wondering why the Trackhawk isn't already a thing. Hellcat engines exist, SRT Grand Cherokees exist, so just combine the two, right? It's not quite that easy. Here, we outline what needs to happen, why it should be the quickest Hellcat vehicle out there, and why it won't come anywhere near 200 miles per hour. How To Build A Hellcat Jeep The first engineering problem is feeding the air-intensive beast that is the 6.2-liter supercharged V8. The first engineering problem is feeding the air-intensive beast that is the 6.2-liter supercharged Hellcat V8. Breathing is important on two counts: pulling in enough air for the combustion to put out 707 hp, and then cooling the various heat exchangers once the engine is up to temperature. Dodge did it with the Charger and Challenger, it can do it with the Jeep. This is one place where the Grand Cherokee's larger frontal area might be a boon, as it gives the engineers more surfaces through which to suck air. Once you generate the 707 horsepower and 650 pound-feet of torque, it has to get to the wheels somehow. Jeep's current SRT all-wheel-drive system will at least need some beefing up to handle the torque. It could require a more complete re-engineering. We at least know the ZF-supplied eight-speed auto, used in the Dodge Hellcat models, is up to the task. The Hellcat engine should fit in the Grand Cherokee, as it's about the same size as the 6.4-liter currently in SRT Jeeps, but the Hellcat is taller because of its supercharger. The hood may need to be raised or at least resculpted for clearance, as well as to address those cooling needs. Quicker Than Everything, But Not Faster 200 mph? We're skeptical, from both a physics standpoint and a legal one. A reminder of the quick/fast distinction: quick is acceleration, fast is road speed. The Jeep's all-wheel drive will help put the Hellcat engine's power to the ground in a more manageable way than the Charger and Challenger do through just the rear wheels. That means better acceleration times than the Dodges (11.0 seconds in the quarter-mile for the Charger Hellcat, 11.2 for its Challenger sibling).