Follow us on social media:
Runtime: 10:39
0:00 Meet the Next U.S. Transportation Secretary
0:50 Acura To Launch RSX EV, Not on GM Ultium
2:13 Great Wall Says Net Profit Shot Up 76%
3:04 Stellantis Stops Chrysler EV
4:22 EU Admits Too Much Emphasis on EVs
5:01 CARB Backs Off Heavy Truck Emission Rules
5:23 Saudi Aramco Explores Lithium Production
6:06 GM Gets Synthetic Graphite from Vianode
6:50 GM Launches Gen-2 Ultium Platform in China
7:55 Cadillac Aims For #1 EV Sales in Lux Segment
Visit our sponsor to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: Intrepid Control Systems and Teijin Automotive.
This is Autoline Daily, the show dedicated to enthusiasts of the global automotive industry.
MEET THE NEXT U.S. TRANSPORTATION SECRETARY
We’re getting a look at who the next U.S. Secretary of Transportation is going to be. Meet Sean Duffy, a former U.S. Congressman from Wisconsin, but probably better known as a personality on Fox News. In Congressional hearings yesterday, he promised to prioritize regulations that provide a balance between innovation and safety when it comes to autonomous cars and eVTOLs. While some of President Trump’s cabinet appointees have generated a lot of controversy, Sean Duffy looks like someone who is going to breeze through his confirmation.
ACURA TO LAUNCH RSX EV, NOT ON GM ULTIUM
Acura is getting ready to launch its second EV later this year. It’s called the RSX and it’s built on an EV architecture that Honda developed in-house, not GM’s Ultium platform. The RSX is a 4-door crossover with a fastback design to give it more of a coupe-like appearance and it will be built at what Honda calls its EV Hub in Ohio. That includes the Marysville and East Liberty assembly plants as well as the Anna engine plant, which is being outfitted with 6,000 ton die casting machines to make large castings for the battery pack which will also be part of the vehicle’s structure. Acura already sells the ZDX EV, which is made by General Motors at a plant in Spring Hill, Tennessee. And it says the ZDX will remain in its lineup for a full cycle, which is a bit vague, but would suggest anywhere from 6 to 8 years. Acura is also going to launch what it calls a gateway vehicle in just a few months. It’s a compact crossover called the ADX and will be powered by a turbocharged engine, but that’s all it announced at this time. By the way, when Acura says “gateway vehicle” it means a cheaper price to bring more people into the brand.
GREAT WALL SAYS NET PROFIT SHOT UP 76%
Great Wall Motors in China hasn’t released its official financial results for last year, but it said it’s going to post some blockbuster numbers. It sold 1.2 million vehicles last year, which was the same as the year before. But it expects its net profit to soar 76% to about $1.7 billion. That’s impressive, especially considering the price war going on in the Chinese market. Great Wall attributes its better bottom line to product excellence and customer satisfaction. Yeah, whatever. We think it’s probably got to do more with keeping a lid on spending and getting better pricing by shifting more production to NEVs. We’ll have a better idea of how it managed this when it officially posts its year end results.
STELLANTIS STOPS CHRYSLER EV
Did you know Chrysler will be celebrating its 100th anniversary this year? Neither did we, maybe because neither Chrysler nor Stellantis have said peep about it. Maybe that’s a sign the brand is not long for this world. Mopar Insiders reports that Stellantis stopped all development and spending on its electric car codenamed C6X which is based on the Halcyon concept car. Chrysler only has two models in its lineup, the Pacifica minivan and a cheaper version for fleets called the Voyager. It only sold 125,000 vehicles in the U.S. last year and sales continue to fall. So if it doesn’t get the electric Halcyon in its lineup you have to wonder if it’s even worth keeping the Chrysler brand. Just for the record, Walter P. Chrysler officially launched the Chrysler Corporation on June 6, 1925.
EU ADMITS TOO MUCH EMPHASIS ON EVs
With automakers in Europe facing massive fines for missing CO2 targets, it sounds like the EU could ease up on some of its vehicle emission mandates. And while the EU isn’t backing off its goal to ban selling ICE vehicles by 2035, the EU’s climate chief, Wopke Hoekstra, says that it needs to better address the concerns of companies and voters about the impact of its policies. Hoekstra says “we have been too one-dimensional” which we interpret to mean that the EU put too much emphasis on electric cars.
CARB BACKS OFF HEAVY TRUCK EMISSION RULES
And it’s not just Europe that is easing off stricter CO2 rules. The California Air Resources Board withdrew its request to set tougher emission rules for heavy-duty trucks, trains and cargo ships. The CARB is giving up its push to set stricter standards since the incoming Trump Administration would squash them anyway.
SAUDI ARAMCO EXPLORES LITHIUM PRODUCTION
As we reported last month, Saudi oil giant Aramco is getting into lithium production by extracting the metal from brine that’s left over from drilling for oil. Saudi mining company Ma’aden and King Abdullah University are also part of the pilot project. Earlier today, Saudi Arabia’s mining minister said the project is “promising, but not yet commercially viable.” But it’s not too far off, with commercial production potentially starting in 2027. And along with ExxonMobil’s push into lithium mining in Arkansas, we think it’s significant that Big Oil believes it can be a big player in the EV segment.
GM GETS SYNTHETIC GRAPHITE FROM VIANODE
Speaking of EV battery materials, General Motors just signed a deal with Norwegian battery materials company Vianode to supply it with synthetic graphite. Vianode will start shipping graphite produced at a yet-to-be named site in North America starting in 2027. The graphite will be used by Ultium Cells, the joint venture between GM and LG Energy Solution, for next-gen batteries and drive units. And under the agreement, graphite deliveries can be expanded to other joint ventures. Vianode says its process to make synthetic graphite has a 90% lower CO2 footprint than conventional production methods.
GM LAUNCHES GEN-2 ULTIUM PLATFORM IN CHINA
Let’s stick with General Motors for a minute. It’s launching the second generation of its Ultium platform in China. And it’s been modified to accommodate plug-in hybrid and EREV powertrains, which makes us wonder if GM will do the same thing in the U.S. The Gen 2 version is still scalable, and can be used for different sized sedans, vans and SUVs. The BEV version, as we reported on Monday, gets a 900-volt electric architecture and 6-C fast charging LFP batteries that can deliver 217 miles of range with only 10 minutes of charging. It also sounds like GM China is getting a version of Super Cruise with Level 3 capabilities for both city and highway driving. Though GM got clobbered in the Chinese market over the last 8 years, it may have turned the corner. Sales have been growing for 6 straight months and its NEV sales were up 56% last year.
CADILLAC AIMS FOR #1 EV SALES IN LUX SEGMENT
Meanwhile, back in the ‘States, Cadillac also has some good numbers to report. Last year its U.S. sales grew by 9%, which outpaced the overall market. Better still, its retail sales in California shot up 23%. That seems to be thanks to the Lyriq EV. 40% of them were sold in California, and 76% of those buyers came from other brands. And that’s a key reason why Cadillac is still betting big on EVs. By the end of this year it’s going to have the Lyriq, the Vistiq, the Optiq, the Escalade IQ and the Celestiq in its showrooms. And next week it will unveil the V version of the Lyriq. Cadillac says those EVs are going to make it the best luxury nameplate with EVs in 2025. And it says its moves into endurance racing and Formula One are going to globalize the brand, which means Cadillac really wants to boost its sales outside of the U.S. market.
And that brings us to the end of today’s report, and if you like getting this kind of reporting, please remember to subscribe to our YouTube channel or our daily email blast on our website. Thanks for watching.
Thanks to our partner for embedding Autoline Daily on its website: WardsAuto.com
Would be a shame for Stellantis to cancel Chrysler. It is not the brands fault that an unusually long line of product planners and executives starved it of product over the past decade. Maybe they can rebrand Maserati, Peugots, and alfa romeos as Chryslers.
MERKUR —
My thoughts exactly on shutting down Chrysler! You would think that a way to help share some of the devices of the Charger Daytona, the would do a version for Chrysler? Yet, the development cost are already spread out across the Stellantis portfolio, since a number of their different brands will be using that architecture. So would more vehicle that was designed to not directly compete with the others, would only help reduce cost farther! The Halcyon is such a sharp looking car, it would be a shame to see a version of it on the road. Maybe they are working on an EV SUV instead of the sedan and that’s the reason they are stopping development on sedan? Truth be told, IMHO, the Wagoneer S EV should have been a Chrysler and not a Jeep. When you look at the Renegade, Avenger, Recon, Compass, Wrangler, Cherokee, GC, Wagoneer and GW, the Wagoneer S looks the least like the others. With just a very little tweaking, the exterior of the Wagoneer S would fit the brand better then the Jeep brand, to my eye. While I would love to see Chrysler return to its glory days as a Lincoln and Cadillac competitor, the styling of Alfa Romeo and Maserati are so different from Chrysler, rebadging them as Chrysler’s, while exciting, just does not seem like they would line up.
The 300 really fit the Chrysler brand, but the van, not so much. I’d hate to see Chrysler die, since my first car was a Chrysler, but it looks likely to happen. The van could, and maybe should be a Dodge
Maybe the Grand Wagoneer should have been a Chrysler Imperial, since it competes with Escalade.
John, is the acronym NEV something that you came up with, because I don’t hear anyone else use that term when speaking of electric vehicles, maybe because New Energy Vehicles is such a misnomer due to electric vehicles being around since the early 1900s.
I’ll bet old Walter Chrysler is spinning in his grave hearing all this talk of getting rid of his name for the company he started, how far his company has fallen, first to the Germans and then to the Italians and now to whatever Stella is.
My dad was a Chrysler man with all sorts of their cars when I was growing up and I will always have a spot in my heart for any Chrysler, Plymouth, or Dodge vehicle since I learned how to drive on a ’64 Plymouth Fury and a Valiant that I can’t for the life of me remember what year it was. My first car was a 74 Plymouth Duster with the slant six and three on the floor. RIP Chrysler if that is what it comes to. Hope not.
Ziggy, I also had a ’74 Duster with a 3 on the floor. I factory ordered mine, green with white vinyl bucket seats.
NEV is standard terminology for China.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202501/1326817.shtml
I thought that it was the end for both Dodge and Chrysler division years ago as step by step they were starved of product and the RAM division took over for Dodge Ram, & the Dodge mini vans (that are no longer mini!) were eliminated for the Pacifica. Recall that Plymouth was cut earlier in 2001. And before that Imperial & Desoto. The Jeep lineup was purchased & thus there is just about no reason to keep a brand with such a sparse lineup. And if Jeep could offer such wimpy vehicles as the Compass then they could certainly offer the Pacifica as a Jeep & even offer an awd version that is NOT designed for off road but at least has the traction to mimic a Jeep. Heck, even the Dodge Challenger could be sold under a Jeep brand if they at least offered it in AWD form. I do not see a reason to keep Chrysler or Dodge, let alone bringing back Imperial or Plymouth or Desoto. They are all dead after a step by step process…
The fact is that Middle Priced divisions were especially under attack in the US since the mid-1950s when suddenly in 1955 the V8 engines and the impressive hp levels & the growing number of available options on what were previously mostly lower priced 6 cylinder cars, made purchasing a middle priced car less and less attractive. it took a while to settle in but today about two divisions suits most automotive companies (an upper one and a lower one both sharing platforms). By the mid 60s with Chevy Caprices & Plymouth VIPs and Ford LTDs even the luxury cars had a growing target on their backs!
No wonder that Imperial died, & even Lincoln was considered for the scrap heap by Mulally back when he took over Ford for a while. And look at the struggle Cadillac has been in for years trying to figure out how to get back to the top of its game in image and substance…
Chrysler’s last heyday as an American company was at the end in the late 90s when the German’s took it over. I had a bad feeling at the time (I was working for GM) and no one cared at all (except me!). Of course as you know, people in modern auto companies do not really give a sheet about the company as long as it survives and they can retire with a pension. Passionate product guys are in fact often hated as a weird man who for some reason wants to compete and produce great vehicles that kick the other company’s ass. That is considered really weird today…
And the people at the top are mostly to blame. Why? They adore complex interactions with giant federal governments that help guide them into particular categories with the security that the a large company is “too big to fail” (as with GM back in 2009 bankruptcy) feds will bail them out if the push for some dumb idea doesn’t pan out (like pushing Electric vehicles on everyone before the market, technology & capitalism has sorted out the realities of what will sell and what won’t!!). In addition they never really desire to tackle long term problems such as supplier relations or relations with the UAW. Instead they just go along to get along and hope they can win in next years competition. When is the last time real engineers headed GM for example (wasn’t it Donner back in 1958??).
But it is much more than this!! GM became WOKE decades ago hiring people because of their status as to sex or race & not their capability as directed by the Human Resources Department. I could go on and on about this. But GM & Ford & the remains of Chrysler will NEVER ever be great again unless they develop a consuming passion for manufacturing great vehicles and they do not have that and it shows step by step as their ability to survive continues to wane.These companies have a sick culture that has existed for decades (as Sandy Munro has touched on in the past).
In fact it would make an excellent program, John, if Autoline would delve into seemingly untouchable topics such as how to reduce Monday-Friday cars at auto factories (yes they exist at Toyota factories in Japan as well but are much much less common), how to truly reduce or almost eliminate the aggression between line workers and management since the tension and bad feelings result in inefficient, unenthusiastic, UN-motivated, workers and management that thinks poorly of them (see Rivithead by Ben Hamper) & the absurdities that occur on the assembly plant floor, the rotten relationship between the suppliers and Ford or GM & how it waxes and wanes with one side often disrespecting the other, etc.
Another topic is WHY is ultimate quality from top to bottom considered such a boring topic by top executives?? Why? Even Lutz has stated in the recent past a few years ago, how quality is no longer much of an issue. Quality is always an issue!!! As W. Edwards Deming taught Toyota back over 70 years ago about how to build quality in from the start on an auto assembly line, it still matters. Yet today it is evolving into a considerably different animal as the latest cars/trucks have been resorting to more and more efforts to assemble product properly but ignore serviceability as even a minor consideration (ask mechanics about trying to get to a component and having to take 5 hours to reach a thermostat buried under turbos inside the engine) & have no concern over ridiculous complexities that reduce costs to develop and assemble but are hell to service. The ONLY way this can work acceptably is if the standards of quality are so high that these complex systems are 99%+ assured of high quality for 300,000 miles or 30 years as a minimum so that the complex system will not have to be serviced.
Or how about the push for lifetime transmission fluid? Everyone knows this is crap but apparently if it makes the transmission cheaper to assemble (without a separate pan to remove) but now they even say there is no need. WHY? Why? Even on these vehicles there is usually a way to get access to allow at least a passive trans fluid removal. And as we all know the a/t filter function is mainly to catch debris from the initial start up, thus simply doing a passive fluid change (ignoring the torque converter) if the converter holds less than 50% of the fluid thus allows a few of changes to remove most of the older fluid. I think this is occurring because of Federal Government interference as there is a demand by the government to move toward electric or at least plug in hybrids to provide emission reductions over time. Because of this the stress (costs) on manufacturers is so high that they have to cut costs somewhere to provide funds to develop electric vehicles thus there appear more and more cheap, or stupid or ridiculous new auto standards to service or maintain or repair a vehicle…
I don’t see Jeep as being a “fit” for vans, or for AWD sporty cars. They sold AWD Challengers, and currently sell AWD Pacificas, but that doesn’t make them Jeeps.
The one good thing to come out of the Daimler/Chrysler era was the platform used for Charger/Challenger/300/Magnum, which served well for years. Sadly, there is no replacement.
Kit,
Agreed. Jeep needs to stayed focused on its sole mission of off road capable trucks/SUVs. Unless they want to go back to the days of the Forward Control truck for towing/hauling. I would appreciate a substantial increase in reliability of Jeep products though. Stellantis could at least do that for Jeep.
Regarding Automatic Transmissions. – I love how MCR has eliminated the auto trans dipstick for checking & adding fluid. Many of the new vehicles require that you remove a plug in the side of the transmission case.
You said, “We” didn’t know it was Chrysler’s 100th anniversary, but I did! Probably most of your astute viewers, too, thanks to Sean’s report in August (AD #3883 – Walter P.’s Grandson Wants To Buy Chrysler) about Frank Rhodes. Walter P Chrysler’s grandson Frank said he wanted to buy Chrysler before it’s 100th anniversary this year. I guess you all forgot Sean’s report, but when I heard Taveres was gone, I was excited because I expected either the new guy would sell it to Frank, or they would revive it themselves for the 100th anniversary. What better way to push sales than to make a big party and announce new products! Too bad it looks like the new guy is just more of the same. At one point around 2017, it looked like Chrysler was poised to do what Cadillac has since successfully done. They came out with the plug in Pacifica and were teasing proposed upscale EVs and could have easily found success being Stellantis’ luxury EV brand before any of the other established brands went there, but they dropped the ball when Taveres decided to bleed Chrysler to death. Do any of you automotive insiders know if there’s anyone at Stellantis pushing for Chrysler to remain valid?