2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee Overland on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Chrysler 3.0L EcoDiesel V6: Autoblog Technology of the Year finalist

Offering a diesel engine in an American pickup is anything but new - Ford, General Motors and Chrysler all offer excellent and almost impossibly powerful oil-burning engines in their various fullsize trucks. What is new and novel about the 3.0L EcoDiesel, though, is its size, and the variety of vehicles that use it. It's the smallest engine, as far as displacement is concerned, currently offered in a large truck in the US, and, for 2014 and 2015, it is available in the Ram 1500 and the Jeep Grand Cherokee.
Though it may be small, it's got muscle. While 240 horsepower isn't particularly impressive these days, the engine's 420 pound-feet of torque more than makes up for that. The torque rating is even greater force than even the big 5.7-liter Hemi can muster. Chrysler's well-regarded eight-speed automatic transmission makes the most of all that bull-headed pulling power in both the Ram and Grand Cherokee. Chrysler claims the Ram EcoDiesel 1500 can tow as much as 9,200 pounds when properly equipped, which makes it "90-percent of the Hemi with a night and day difference in fuel economy."
Make no mistake; it's that promise of a sizable fuel economy improvement that many long-haul truckers will be most interested in. In the Ram 1500 that we tested for our Tech of the Year competition, the diesel engine costs $2,850 more than the gas-fed V8, and Ram estimates that EcoDiesel buyers will pay off their investment when compared to the Hemi engine in less than three years, which is considerably less time than the 4.5 or so years the average buyer will keep his or her fullsize pickup. The more you drive, the more you'll save, and the math proves equally as effective in the Jeep Grand Cherokee.

2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee probed by NHTSA for brake problems

Remember how Toyota got in all kinds of trouble over unintended acceleration? Well, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is investigating Jeep over unintended braking. NHTSA has announced a probe of 20,000 Grand Cherokee SUVs from model year 2014. Nine complaints have been received, with owners alleging that their Jeeps have issued brake warnings or gone ahead and applied the brakes when no threat was presented. Each complaint alleges that the vehicles have exhibited this behavior repeatedly, leading to a "sudden reduction in vehicle speed in traffic." So basically, a system designed to prevent accidents could actually increase the odds of a collision happening. Speaking to the Associated Press, Jeep spokesperson Eric Mayne said owners whose vehicles are exhibiting this behavior should report to dealers, while adding that the automatic braking/adaptive cruise control systems can be deactivated. Related Video: Scroll down for the official bulletin on the investigation from NHTSA. Date Investigation Opened: JUN 01, 2015 Date Investigation Closed: Open NHTSA Action Number: PE15021 Component(s): FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE Manufacturer: Chrysler (FCA US LLC) SUMMARY: The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has received nine complaints alleging inappropriate activations of the autonomous braking system in model year (MY) 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles. All nine reports alleged unexpected braking incidents preceded by collision imminent brake warnings and resulting in sudden reduction in vehicle speed in traffic. Two complaints reported autonomous braking incidents with no objects on the road resulting in rapid increase in brake force and anti-lock braking system (ABS) activations. The complaints alleged experiencing multiple events at different locations and road conditions. A Preliminary Evaluation has been opened to assess the frequency, scope and consequences of the alleged defect. The following VOQ numbers are associated with the issues discussed in this resume: 10543837, 10713629, 10690650, 10663320, 10630362, 10596913, 10533622, 10533524, 10651269.

Fiat Chrysler wins top Total Quality Award for first time

The Strategic Vision Total Quality Awards are 20 years old in 2015, and Chrysler has never topped the awards before. Until now, that is. Fiat Chrysler takes the overall award on the corporate level with six segment leaders from Fiat, Dodge, Jeep, and Ram. The Fiat 500 won Small Multi-Function Car, the 500e won Small Alternative Powertrain, the Dodge Challenger tied at the top in the Specialty Coupe category alongside the very un-coupe Mini Cooper Countryman, the Jeep Wrangler Unlimited took the Entry SUV category, the Dodge Durango won in Mid-Size SUV, and Ram took the overall in Best Non-Luxury Brand. The accolade means FCA has gone from one segment winner in 2010 to overall victory in five years. Cars have gotten so good, says Strategic Vision, that it is harder than ever to win. In fact, says the group, 18 years ago 85 percent of all vehicle brands had more than half a problem per vehicle. This year, no brand has more than half a problem per vehicle. The organization measures "over 155 specific aspects of the customer's experience," and scores are based on input from more than 46,000 customers. Other notables in and near the winner's circle include Volkswagen and General Motors, who tied for second place on the corporate scale, one point behind FCA. The Mini Cooper Roadster scored the highest of any model, the Corvette Stingray Convertible and Coupe scored the second- and third-highest. The Chevrolet Colorado is the first domestic Standard Pickup winner in more than ten years, and the Nissan Titan carried the Full-Size Pickup category. The press release below has all the details on how winners and losers are selected, and the full list of automakers and how they finished. "The Customer's 'Total' Experience Defines Quality, Fiat Chrysler Scores Highest in Total Quality," says Strategic Vision The 2015 Total Quality Awards® SAN DIEGO, Friday, July 17, 2015 — Unknown to many, when some consumer research firms rank a car company's quality performance they often do so by simply "counting problems." In the past, this may have been acceptable, but in today's modern and efficient manufacturing world the difference between the worst brand and best brand is LESS than half-a-problem per vehicle. Thus, any "quality ranking" based on this method is severely lacking in the complete picture of the "Total" Quality experience that customers actually use to judge their product ownership.