2007 Chrysler Pt Cruiser Touring Edition on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Chrysler defies NHTSA, says it won't recall 2.7M Jeep Grand Cherokee, Liberty models

Facing a possible recall totaling around 2.7 million of its most popular SUVs, Chrysler remains insistent that the 1993-2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee and 2002-2007 Jeep Liberty are safe vehicles. This comes on the heels of a recall request from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for these two models due to fuel tanks mounted behind the rear axle, which could possibly be ruptured during severe rear-end collisions, leading to an increased risk of fire. In response to the allegations, Chrysler says that it does not agree with NHTSA nor does it plan on recalling either vehicle.
Chrysler said both SUVs "met and exceeded" the requirements for fuel-system integrity, and cooperated fully with NHTSA since the investigation was opened in 2010. While 15 deaths and 46 injuries have been reported from fires caused by rear-end collisions on these models, Chrysler is claiming that the vast majority of incidents cited by NHTSA were "high-energy crashes," including one where a stopped Grand Cherokee was rear-ended by a tractor trailer going 65 miles per hour.
The automaker wraps up by saying "NHTSA seems to be holding Chrysler Group to a new standard for fuel tank integrity that does not exist now and did not exist when the Jeep vehicles were manufactured." Scroll down for Chrysler's official response to NHTSA, but we're pretty sure this isn't the last we've heard on this issue.

Is it time for American carmakers to give up on dual-clutch transmissions? [w/poll]

Last week, in the midst of Detroit's first days seeking relief in Chapter 9 of the bankruptcy code, Automotive News contributor Larry P. Vellequette penned an editorial suggesting that American car companies raise the white flag on dual clutch transmissions and give up on trying to persuade Americans to buy cars fitted with them. Why? Because, Vellequette says, like CVT transmissions, they "just don't sound right or feel right to American drivers." (Note: In the article, it's not clear if Vellequette is arguing against wet-clutch and dry-clutch DCTs or just dry-clutch DCTs, which is what Ford and Chrysler use.) The article goes on to state that Ford and Chrysler have experimented with DCTs and that both consumers and the automotive press haven't exactly given them glowing reviews, despite their quicker shifts and increased fuel efficiency potential compared to torque-converter automatic transmissions.
Autoblog staffers who weighed in on the relevance of DCTs in American cars generally disagreed with the blanket nature of Vellequette's statement that they don't sound or feel right, but admit that their lack of refinement compared to traditional automatics can be an issue for consumers. That's particularly true in workaday cars like the Ford Focus and Dodge Dart, both of which have come in for criticism in reviews and owner surveys. From where we sit, the higher-performance orientation of such transmissions doesn't always meld as well with the marching orders of everyday commuters (particularly if drivers haven't been educated as to the transmission's benefits and tradeoffs), and in models not fitted with paddle shifters, it's particularly hard for drivers to use a DCT to its best advantage.
Finally, we also note that DCT tuning is very much an evolving science. For instance, Autoblog editors who objected to dual-clutch tuning in the Dart have more recently found the technology agreeable in the Fiat 500L. Practice makes perfect - or at least more acceptable.

Chrysler dealers terminated in bankruptcy still stuck in court

Part of the deal for the federal bailouts of Chrysler and General Motors was that both organizations were required to trim their vast array of dealerships. This move did not sit well with the people that would be losing out on franchises, though, and in Chrysler's case, 148 of the shuttered dealers have fought for money they feel they are entitled to.
These dealers believe that they should be compensated by the federal government, as Chrysler wouldn't have trimmed its sales centers had it not been ordered to by Uncle Sam. Now, thanks to the ruling of three judges on the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the dealers will get a chance to argue their point.
According to Automotive News, the dealers argue that the mandatory shuttering of dealers was unconstitutional, because the federal government was taking property without compensation. If the dealers are victorious, not only would the government be out millions of dollars, but a precedent could be set that would allow similarly closed GM dealerships to cash in.