That is 100% awful.

Yeah it was a little over the top but so is the car. And an awesome car it is . . .

In most instances, common response to someone commenting on an article they didn't care for is "don't waste your time then" or "you must care if you're posting".

You want to know why VW sales are down? It isn't because of a lack of midsize crossovers . . . it's the fact that they cheapened the exterior looks of there cars to the point that people won't buy them.

Walter Chrysler, the founder of the Chrysler Corporation, one of America's Big Three automakers, is featured on the cover of Time magazine as its Man of the Year. In 1928, under Walter Chrysler's leadership, his company had acquired the Dodge Brothers Company, thereby becoming the world's third-largest automaker. Also…

I think in car Nav systems are plenty useful. Chrysler Uconnect is awesome, simple, works well. I tend to find the only people who bitch about in car nav systems either bought a car with a horrid system (see GM, Ford, BMW) or are just too cheap to tick the option box. Phone systems and in-car system both have…

Chrysler is building great product, good on them for having a great year.

As diesel and gasoline are two different commodities with their own supply and demand curves they can be expected to have different prices . . .

There is much more at play than just US Shale . . . Russia and Iran are the two big fish for the US and Saudi.

Actually Viper had a good month, sold 89. Not bad for winter.

If BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Porsche and even Land Rover can build high-performace SUV, why couldn't Jeep do the same at a bargain price? The engine is ready...

Driving a Honda . . . not surprised.

That's correct. The bailouts were "loans" as well and we lost a collective $9B+ on them. Fact is, Ford did take government money, that's all.

Actually, yes Tesla has been propped up quite a bit. They've only recently begun to show some signs of financial success. They are loans though so, in theory, they'll pay them back.

Well aware of everything that happened but thanks for the recap. As FMCC is a subsidiary of Ford Motor Company, yes, bailout funds taken by the subsidiary do come under the umbrella of "Ford". And given the fact that OEMs captive finance arms are responsible for financing a good chunk of their sales, solvency of…

A brilliant move by Ford . . . they had enough to survive and they knew it. Lobby hard for your competitors . . . to keep your supply chain afloat.

SBA loans are not the same as the banking bailout which is where Ford Motor Credit got its money.

Others have estimated fewer job losses connected with a failure of GM and Chrysler. The biggest unknown remains if — and how long — it would have taken surviving automakers like Ford Motor Co. and other foreign firms to make up the lost production from GM and Chrysler. Ford did not take a government bailout.

I suppose your next argument will be that we can only force renewable resources to be viable alternatives if we hurry up and use all the oil?

Not sure where I've made any claims to denial. Just statements of fact with regard to current energy prices and oil continuing to be the dominant medium of energy for the foreseeable future. And how it isn't a "bad thing" as was suggested by the author of the post.