AD #2961 – PSA CEO Says No More ICEs; Jeep Wrangler Gets a V8; Tesla Getting Added to S&P 500

November 17th, 2020 at 11:51am

Audio-only version:
Listen to “AD #2961 – PSA CEO Says No More ICEs; Jeep Wrangler Gets a V8; Tesla Getting Added to S and P 500″ on Spreaker.

Follow us on social media:

Instagram Twitter Facebook

Runtime: 10:01

0:07 VW Getting Ready to Sell Lamborghini & Ducati
0:34 UK Expected to Pull Forward ICE Ban
0:54 PSA CEO Says No More ICEs
1:10 BMW Wants to Increase Stake in Chinese JV
2:34 Ford Applies Customer-Centric Design to Max Recline Seats
3:49 Jeep Wrangler Gets a V8
5:08 Mercedes EQC Receives New Standard On-Board Charger
5:54 Tesla Getting Added to the S&P 500
6:50 NHTSA Expands Investigation Into Tesla’s Blank Screens
7:54 GMC Hummer SUV Goes Into Production in 2023
8:46 Does MINI’s Future Hold a MINIvan?

Visit our sponsors to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: Bridgestone, Hyundai and Intrepid Control Systems.

»Subscribe to Podcast |

5661 rss-logo-png-image-68050 stitcher-icon youtube-logo-icon-65475

Thanks to our partner for embedding Autoline Daily on its website: WardsAuto.com

36 Comments to “AD #2961 – PSA CEO Says No More ICEs; Jeep Wrangler Gets a V8; Tesla Getting Added to S&P 500”

  1. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Putting a V8 in the Wrangler would make the most sense for a lowered, street-optimized vehicle, but instead, the only way they will sell the V8 is in a lifted, off-road version. I guess that’s the best approach for getting people to pay lots of money for it, but for actual serious off-roading, you don’t need 470 hp. A 100 hp 4 cylinder would have plenty of power for going 5 mph in low range.

  2. Lambo2015 Says:

    So the UK is going to try and ban ICEs in the next 9 years. I guess they figure mandating EVs will bring the price down? People already complain that the average cost of a new vehicle is too high. With EVs running about an additional 10 to 20K they will kill new car sales in the UK. Even if EVs resolve range and charging times a 25% increase in cost will prevent many people from buying them.

  3. Lambo2015 Says:

    The Jeep Wrangler has been headquartered in Toledo, Ohio, ever since Willys-Overland launched production of the first CJ or Civilian Jeep models there in 1945. So plenty of Jeeps here in Toledo. Many have received a V8 swap so good to see FCA offering it from the factory. Glad to see they didn’t go with the 5.7 and just went all in with the 6.4L. Why not.

  4. Kevin A Says:

    There are lots of Morris Minors from the 50s & 60s still trundling around the UK. If they stop selling ICEs in 2030, in another 70 years, most of the ICEs will be gone!

  5. Kit Gerhart Says:

    I guess some CJs had OEM V8s when AMC had Jeep. I know someone who has put a Chevy V8 in a newer Wrangler. I suspect there are a lot of those.

  6. Bob Wilson Says:

    “BMW TO INCREASE STEAK IN CHINESE JV” is that a Porthouse, T-bone, or bone-in rib eye?

  7. Kit Gerhart Says:

    4 They were just ending Morris Minor production when I was in Scotland in 1970-71. In the summer of 2018, I saw a cool “resto-mod” at a show, a Minor with modern 4 cylinder, a GM 2.4 as I remember.

  8. Kevin A Says:

    Sean, Can we assume that Jeep Europe will have Maserati build a “Wranglerati” instead of a gas guzzling V8 for European customers?

  9. Bob Wilson Says:

    About the Tesla screens going black, the consensus in the Tesla community the root cause are flash memory chips used to store the controller logs. Flash memory has a maximum number of operations before the fail and these older chips are failing. If you’ve had a thumb drive fail, same mechanism.

  10. Larry D. Says:

    Hey Shawn,

    Is BMW really trying to increase its ‘steak” in chinese JVs? Is it also trying to find a ‘grill’, for its new offerings?

    Re Musk’s net worth, fully deserved, but I was shocked to see that Facebook clown with his WORTHLESS product be so high up in the list.

  11. Larry D. Says:

    6 Did not see you caught it first. Any steak, as long as it comes with a Foreman “grille”..

  12. Lex Says:

    I would like to see what Subaru has on the horizon for electricification on it’s models.

    One improvement I would suggest to Subaru designers is to add the Outback’s swing arm roof rail system to the Forester and Ascent. This would make is much easier for us Dad’s to pile more stuff on top of our Subaru’s for those outdoor adventures.

  13. Larry D. Says:

    If the Wrangler has 33″ tires, why couldn’t they fit much larger than 17″ wheels? Like 20 or 22″s? And make the wheels brighter, the ones in the video look as dull and glum as the Wrangler’s joyless interior.

    But it STILL looks better than either the Bronco or the so-called “Hummer” BEV.

  14. MERKUR DRIVER Says:

    9) TESLA was warned about that years ago and they didn’t listen. I guess they are listening now.

  15. Larry D. Says:

    14 Baad, baad Tesla! Why can’t you be GOOD, like Bankrupt GM and FCA and crooked NIKOLA???!!!

  16. Lambo2015 Says:

    14 How dare you say anything negative about the almighty Tesla his resident cheerleader is not going to take that sitting down. No doubt will have something lame to say.

  17. Sean McElroy Says:

    @Bob Wilson – I guess I was more hungry than I though

  18. JWH Says:

    #5 – Kit – Not sure what year Jeep stopped putting V-8′s in the CJ. We had a 1979 CJ-7 with the AMC 304 ci V-8 for a number of years.

  19. Kit Gerhart Says:

    13 I doubt if 40 series tires would be the best thing for those who use their Jeeps for hard core off roading. That’s why they use the 17s, with 70 series tires.

  20. Kit Gerhart Says:

    18 According to wikipedia, they used the AMC 304 in CJ-7s from 1976-1980. I thought they might have uses them until the CJ was replaced by Wrangler in ’87, but apparently not.

  21. XA351GT Says:

    @ #18 Well if Sean’s numbers are right 40 years would be 1980 so I’d say in the 1980 to 1987 range when AMC still made Jeeps.

  22. Larry D. Says:

    19 so that “Pretend Hummer” BEV thing, which uses the name of a serious vehicle (the H1), with its 22″ 36s, will be just for show at the Mall?

  23. merv Says:

    I’m sure Ford could have saved a lot of development money by using the old Rambler seat technology :) Plenty of v8 Jeeps around here as a lot of 4×4 shops specialize in conversions

  24. Wim van Acker Says:

    @1, 3, 5: agree with Kit, and the standard 4 cylinder engine is currently probably one of the best engines in the Wrangler for off-roading, since it is light-weight and has good low-end torque. 270 HP and 295 lb ft of torque should be very good for off-roading. I drive several Wranglers off road every year and all have been equipped with a Corvette V8 engine. The vehicles are owned by a drivetrain supplier which has modified the vehicles completely to put their drivetrain and suspension components on. Although I have never seen John McElroy drive those Jeep’s at the event, he has probably driven those vehicles as well.

    I have a Wrangler with the 3.0 L Turbo Diesel engine myself, but have not driven it off-road, yet. It has 50% more torque than the 4 cylinder engine, but is also much heavier, so I do not know whether it performs better off-road. The videos on YouTube are promising, though.

  25. Kit Gerhart Says:

    22 36 inch tires on 22 inch wheels would have sidewalls only an inch less tall the the Jeep’s 33/17s. Of course, we don’t even know what the production Hummer will use.

    24 I’ve done actual off-roading only once ever, in an old FJ Land Cruiser with the engine that was a near-clone of a Chevy “blue flame” six. I don’t know how much power it had, guessing about 100 hp, but it was plenty, and it had linear throttle response.

  26. MERKUR DRIVER Says:

    24) The 392 V8 Wrangler has less ground clearance than the standard wrangler. That is due to the larger axle size required for the added power. Less ground clearance is not necessarily what you want in an off road vehicle. They really should have paired the engine up with taller tires but I am sure the customer base will retrofit those later.

  27. Kit Gerhart Says:

    26 I suppose people will put larger tires, and the necessary aftermarket fender flares on those 392 Wranglers to make them look more “macho,” but most of them will never go off-road. They will just be used to race older Corvettes at stop lights, and similar things. People who want to race Teslas and newer Corvettes at stop lights will need to put smaller, sticker tires, to effectively gear it shorter, and have better traction on pavement.

  28. Larry D. Says:

    https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2020/11/progress-thy-name-is-zeta-new-electric-vehicle-lobbying-group-hits-the-scene/

    Founding ZETA members include 28 major corporations, including ABB, Albemarle Corporation, ChargePoint, ConEdision, EVBox, Lordstown Motors, Lucid Motors, PG&E Corporation, Proterra, Rivian, Siemens, SRP, Tesla, Vistra, Uber, and WAVE

  29. Larry D. Says:

    https://www.autonews.com/automakers-suppliers/tesla-join-sp-500-december?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20201117&utm_content=article6-image

    While the incorrigible and pathological Tesla haters here never mention any of the DAILY HUGE Good news about the company, its inclusion to the S&P 500 is NO ordinary triumph AND will have HUGE COnsequences.

    INDEX FUNDS alone will contribute to a demand for $51 billion worth of Tesla shares.

    Have a hard time understanding this? Here is a clip from the article:

    “Tesla’s inclusion in the widely followed stock market index means investment funds indexed to the S&P 500 will have to sell about $51 billion worth of shares of companies already in the S&P 500 and use that money to buy shares of Tesla, so that their portfolios correctly reflect the index, according to S&P Dow Jones Indices. Tesla will account for about 1 percent of the index.”

    And while the Index funds will HAVE to buy the above shares, by their own RULES, all OTHER funds, automotive or general market funds, will ALSO invest varying but significant amounts in Tesla.

    Conclusion? THe current lofty price of more than $2,200 for an OLD Tesla share (the new is fter a 5 for one split, at $441), is going to go MUCH HIGHER, if that’s possible.

    Some Tesla haters here and elsewhere may need urgent medical care (assuming they can begin to understand the above)

  30. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Fortunately, Tesla will constitute only about 1% of the S&P’s value, so when the stock drops to closer to what it should be for a car company, the index fund investors won’t be affected much.

  31. cwolf Says:

    Yes, Tesla will make up about 1.5% of the index.
    Larry’s statement about the $51B exchange sounds good but can be a double edged sword.
    One should view this from the oposit direction to see the pit falls; Tesla can be a risk to the S&P index.
    … Tesla is way over priced. Its market cap of $400B way exceeds other manufactures while revenues are below $30B.
    …Its high stock price is based upon its P/E ratio which is crazy high. This is due to Teslas sale and reliance on the sale of tax credits to show a profit over the last 5 quarters. In short, Tesla would have never shown a profit if it were not for the government-induced side markets.
    While investors only see Tesla potential, they overlook the fact that competition is nipping at it’s heals in both manufacturing and battery cells. At this time, Tesla is still buying batteries from Panasonic.
    If Tesla’s luster fades and competition keeps growing at a faster and faster rate, Tesla’s market cap and P/E ratio could be real trouble for the S&P and the US stock market.
    So Larry’s comment that I pointed out will turn out for the best in the future, but if Tesla’s competition and and fewer credi sales become problematic, the whole idex could pay the price.

  32. Larry D. Says:

    30 you seem to be dragged down by a naive belief in what is cheap and what is overvalued and you are BLIND to the WINDS OF CHANGE and the WILL of all kinds of governments, widely dispersed around the world, to ELECTRIFY their fleets.

    You seem to be an investor that would consider GM a ‘bargain’ in 2008, only to see 100% (not 99%, 100%!) of your savings WIPED OUT when it went bankrupt, and while Obama protected his fat cat UAW contributors, he did NOT protect ANY of the small investors who lost their LIFE SAVINGS.

    You seem to believe that the markets are some kind of seedy Las Vegas casino where investors have no clue what they are doing, and when they become multi-billionaires like Musk, it is always “luck” or “coincidence” and not his TRUE BRILLIANCE AND GENIUS as BOTH an engineer AND an Econ Literate CEO that made him worth $115 billion today, and who knows, a trillion 10 years from now.

    “Success is just a matter of luck. Just as any failure”

    (from “Murphy’s laws on work)

  33. Larry D. Says:

    30 PS Tesla is not a car company. That is another reason you cannot understand its valuation.

    it is a HIGH TECH company that HAPPENS to provide what the whole world demands, AFFORDABLE, High-Tech BEVs

    that can be made AT A PROFIT and NOT at a loss like the LUTZ model that grabs profits from GM’s SUVs to fund the losses of his LOSER compliance BEVs.

    And if it is so successful now that oil prices are DIRT CHEAP, imagine how successful it would be the next time oil is at a peak like in 2008, when it reached $150 a barrel,only to fall with the financial crisis soon after.

  34. Kit Gerhart Says:

    32,33 You seem to be dragged down by a naive belief that no one is ever going to compete with Tesla in the BEV market. VW is well on their way, and others will follow. I’m not saying that Tesla will go the way of Enron, which you may have worshiped at one time, but that, when the competition gets going, Tesla’s stock is likely to be more like other successful car companies, like Toyota.

  35. Lambo2015 Says:

    33 What a joke.. YES GM does grab profits from its SUVs to offset the huge BEV costs because it has them and people want their SUVs. More than the amount of people that want a Tesla.

    What you continually fail to see Larri is Tesla in no different other than it uses other manufacturers to make those desirable SUVs and then they buy Carbon credits from Tesla. So Teslas losses just get offset by carbon credits that get bought by the manufacturers you detest. Tesla no different when it comes to how they make a BEV affordable you fool. Face it the BEV market could not survive currently without the sales of ICEs. ICE’s are keeping BEVs afloat. Its just a shuffling of money to support electrification.

  36. Kit Gerhart Says:

    35 Exactly. GM SUVs, Jeeps, and other ICE vehicles subsidize Tesla, as they subsidize the legacy companies’ in-house BEVs.

Leave a Comment