2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee Overland on 2040-cars
169 Northland Blvd, Cincinnati, Ohio, United States
Engine:Regular Unleaded V-6 3.6 L/220
Transmission:8-Speed
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 1C4RJFCG5EC479537
Stock Num: J14-657
Make: Jeep
Model: Grand Cherokee Overland
Year: 2014
Exterior Color: Cherry
Options: Drive Type: 4WD
Number of Doors: 4 Doors
Mileage: 7
We are a 5 star dealer with customer service being our #1 priority. As a family owned business since 1945, we strive for excellence in all facets of our establishment. With an inventory unmatched by any dealership in the area and our award winning service department we are here for you. Come see us today.
Jeep Grand Cherokee for Sale
2014 jeep grand cherokee overland(US $47,190.00)
2014 jeep grand cherokee overland(US $48,180.00)
2014 jeep grand cherokee limited(US $42,500.00)
2014 jeep grand cherokee overland(US $48,180.00)
2014 jeep grand cherokee(US $33,690.00)
2014 jeep grand cherokee(US $35,485.00)
Auto Services in Ohio
West Chester Autobody Inc ★★★★★
West Chester Autobody ★★★★★
USA Tire & Auto Service Center ★★★★★
Trans-Master Transmissions ★★★★★
Tom & Jerry Auto Service ★★★★★
Tint Works, LLC ★★★★★
Auto blog
2018 Hyundai Kona vs other small crossovers: How they compare on paper
Tue, Apr 10 2018The 2018 Hyundai Kona is the hottest new thing in the hottest new segment: subcompact crossovers. Or B-segment SUVs. Or whatever you might want to call this hodge-podge collection of vehicles of vaguely similar specs. Each is pretty much just a raised hatchback in some form (or literally in the case of one entry), skewing the increasingly vague line between car and SUV. If there was ever a segment that deserved the term "crossover" for more reasons than just its car-based unibody architecture, this would be it. Now, for this specs and photos comparison, we lined up the new 2018 Kona with an appropriate variety from that hodge-podge. Most are those that people are actually cross-shopping the Kona against — the Honda HR-V, Toyota C-HR and Subaru Crosstrek — while the Kia Soul and Jeep Renegade line up well in other regards. There are certainly others we could've included, but we're frankly a little pressed for spreadsheet space, and if you really want to know how a Chevrolet Trax, Fiat 500X or Ford EcoSport would've stacked up, you can always use our Compare Cars feature. (You can also check out our Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross comparison that includes a few larger choices) Performance, fuel economy and drivetrains Immediately you can see how all over the map this segment is. True, all but the Jeep come with a standard naturally aspirated four-cylinder and fairly comparable horsepower. Torque differs, but not wildly so. Then things get nuts. Some are automatic only, the Toyota is CVT only, the Honda and Subaru come with a manual standard and offer a CVT as an option. The Renegade's base engine is manual-only ... in 2018. Of course, then things flip-flop with the Renegade's upgrade being naturally aspirated and the Hyundai and Kia offering turbocharged mills. The Korean corporate cousins also come with automated manuals, whereas the Renegade has a box with nine gears selected by a lethargic monkey. Then there's the drivetrain. The C-HR is front-drive only, which pretty much cements the Soul's place in a segment it arguably created despite not offering all-wheel drive. That's the only way to get the Crosstrek, while the Honda and Hyundai offer a typical option of a part-time system. In Jeep fashion, the Renegade's "four-wheel drive" systems differ by trim level.
Which electric cars can charge at a Tesla Supercharger?
Sun, Jul 9 2023The difference between Tesla charging and non-Tesla charging. Electrify America; Tesla Tesla's advantage has long been its charging technology and Supercharger network. Now, more and more automakers are switching to Tesla's charging tech. But there are a few things non-Tesla drivers need to know about charging at a Tesla station. A lot has hit the news cycle in recent months with regard to electric car drivers and where they can and can't plug in. The key factor in all of that? Whether automakers switched to Tesla's charging standard. More car companies are shifting to Tesla's charging tech in the hopes of boosting their customers' confidence in going electric. Here's what it boils down to: If you currently drive a Tesla, you can keep charging at Tesla charging locations, which use the company's North American Charging Standard (NACS), which has long served it well. The chargers are thinner, more lightweight and easier to wrangle than other brands. If you currently drive a non-Tesla EV, you have to charge at a non-Tesla charging station like that of Electrify America or EVgo — which use the Combined Charging System (CCS) — unless you stumble upon a Tesla charger already equipped with the Magic Dock adapter. For years, CCS tech dominated EVs from everyone but Tesla. Starting next year, if you drive a non-Tesla EV (from the automakers that have announced they'll make the switch), you'll be able to charge at all Supercharger locations with an adapter. And by 2025, EVs from some automakers won't even need an adaptor. Here's how to charge up, depending on which EV you have: Ford 2021 Ford Mustang Mach-E. Tim Levin/Insider Ford was the earliest traditional automaker to team up with Tesla for its charging tech. Current Ford EV owners — those driving a Ford electric vehicle already fitted with a CCS port — will be able to use a Tesla-developed adapter to access Tesla Superchargers starting in the spring. That means that, if you own a Mustang Mach-E or Ford F-150 Lightning, you will need the adapter in order to use a Tesla station come 2024. But Ford will equip its future EVs with the NACS port starting in 2025 — eliminating the need for any adapter. Owners of new Ford EVs will be able to pull into a Supercharger station and juice up, no problem. General Motors Cadillac Lyriq. Cadillac GM will also allow its EV drivers to plug into Tesla stations.
In Michigan, car hackers could face life imprisonment
Fri, Apr 29 2016Car hackers may not want to mess with vehicles in and around the Motor City. A pair of Michigan lawmakers introduced legislation Thursday that would punish anyone who infiltrates a vehicle's electronic systems with penalties as harsh as life imprisonment. Senate bill 927 says that "a person shall not intentionally access or cause access to be made to an electronic system of a motor vehicle to willfully destroy, damage, impair, alter or gain unauthorized control of the motor vehicle." Offenders will be deemed guilty of a felony, and may be imprisoned for any number of years up to life in prison. The proposed legislation is one of the first attempts nationally to address the consequences for car hacking, which has become a top concern throughout the auto industry. Critics have accused executives of being slow to respond to the threats, which were first known as long as six years ago but gained attention last July when a pair of researchers remotely controlled a Jeep Cherokee. In January, the industry established an Information Sharing and Analysis Center to collectively evaluate security measures and counter breaches. But the Michigan bill isn't noteworthy only because of the life penalty prescribed; it's noteworthy for what's missing in its details. Language in the bill doesn't delineate between independent cyber-security researchers and criminals who intend to inflict harm or havoc. Under its provisions, it's possible Charlie Miller, pictured below, and Chris Valasek, the researchers who demonstrated last summer that the Cherokee could be remotely commandeered and controlled, could face life behind bars. Provisions of the legislation that prevent a person from "altering" the motor vehicle could ensnare car enthusiasts or gearheads who tinker with electronic systems to boost performance, increase fuel efficiency or add aftermarket features. In that context, Senate Bill 927 seems like the latest measure in a running feud between independent researchers, gearheads and big automakers. Car companies don't like third parties poking around their electronic systems and would prefer the researchers not reveal security weaknesses. Researchers, on the other hand, say many carmakers are either slow to fix or unwilling to repair security holes unless they're able to publish their findings.