Jeep Grand Cherokee, Good Truck Strong Engine And Trans on 2040-cars
College Park, Maryland, United States
Body Type:SUV
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:4.6
For Sale By:Private Seller
Number of Cylinders: 6
Make: Jeep
Model: Grand Cherokee
Trim: grey
Options: 4-Wheel Drive, CD Player
Drive Type: 4wd
Safety Features: Anti-Lock Brakes, Driver Airbag, Passenger Airbag
Mileage: 190,000
Power Options: Air Conditioning, Cruise Control, Power Locks, Power Windows, Power Seats
Sub Model: laredo
Exterior Color: Blue
Disability Equipped: No
Interior Color: grey
Warranty: Vehicle does NOT have an existing warranty
Jeep Grand Cherokee for Sale
- Jeep grand cherokee !!! no reserve !!!
- 2000 jeep grand cherokee 4.7l with newer engine.(US $2,500.00)
- 2002 grand cherokee laredo 4wd power window and locks(US $3,400.00)
- 2006 jeep grand cherokee 4x4 hemi !(US $17,500.00)
- 2013 jeep grand cherokee srt-8 vapor 4x4 sunroof nav 4k texas direct auto(US $59,780.00)
- 2013 jeep grand cherokee srt-8 vapor 4x4 sunroof nav 6k texas direct auto(US $57,980.00)
Auto Services in Maryland
V & R Towing ★★★★★
Tom Knox Auto Service ★★★★★
TNT Auto Repair & Towing Service ★★★★★
Tint and Sound Customizing ★★★★★
Thompson Toyota Scion ★★★★★
Somco Machine Co ★★★★★
Auto blog
The biggest gas-guzzlers of 2024: 'The Meanest List' is the opposite of greenest cars
Thu, Mar 14 2024In some circles — especially some automotive circles — bigger is better. This explains the Hummer, for example. In its so-called “Meanest List” of a dozen models, the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) makes no apologies for berating “the worst-performing mass market automobiles” sold in 2024 in the U.S. The most diminutive car on the list is a Chevy Corvette Z06. At the top of this particular heap is the Mercedes-Benz AMG G63, a gas-powered SUV that the environmental agency says was “the worst-performing vehicle of the more than 1,200 models assessed by Greener Cars and has an annual fuel cost over $4,000.” Not to mention its MSRP of around $184,000. Rank Make & Model Powertrain Green Score MSRP Estimated Annual Fuel Cost* 1 Mercedes-Benz AMG G63 Gas 20 $184,000 $4,242 2 Ram 1500 TRX 4x4 Gas 22 $98,335 $3,819 3 Ford F150 Raptor R Gas 24 $79,975 $3,777 4 Cadillac Escalade V Gas 26 $152,295 $3,388 5 Dodge Durango SRT Gas 26 $74,995 $3,332 6 Jeep Wrangler 4dr 4X4 Gas 27 $35,895 $3,260 7 Jeep Grand Wagoneer 4x4 Gas 28 $91,945 $3,058 8 Mercedes-Benz G550 Gas 28 $143,000 $3,186 9 GMC Hummer EV SUV EV 29 $98,845 $1,746 10 GMC Sierra Gas 29 $37,700 $3,069 11 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 Gas 30 $114,395 $3,169 12 Mercedes-Benz Maybach S680 Gas 30 $234,300 $3,031 *ACEEE analysis using EIA data of the annual cost of driving 15,000 miles In terms of numbers, the dirty dozen of the meanest includes seven SUVs and three trucks. Lonely at the middle of the list is the sole electric, the GMC Hummer EV, which weighs in at 9,000 pounds. The council notes that “though EVs have lower emissions than similarly sized gasoline models, the Hummer demonstrates that size and efficiency, not just fuel source, are important factors in a carÂ’s environmental impact.” ItÂ’s also worth reminding prospective buyers that the average fuel cost of a vehicle on the “Greenest List” eats up only a fifth of the fuel cost of a vehicle on the Meanest List, “showing that greener options can also be more affordable.” The ACEEE also put out a "Greener List" of efficient gasoline and hybrid cars that don't require plugging in. By the Numbers Green Cadillac Chevrolet Dodge Ford GMC Hummer Jeep Maybach Mercedes-Benz RAM Emissions Fuel Efficiency Green Automakers Truck SUV Electric Hybrid
Here's what it'll take to build a Jeep Grand Cherokee Hellcat
Fri, Jun 19 2015Let's get one thing straight: We want a 707-horsepower Grand Cherokee Hellcat to happen. Badly. The latest report from Motor Authority is encouraging; the bonkers SUV supposedly has a codename, Project K, and has been given the green light for production. Fingers crossed. You might be wondering why the Trackhawk isn't already a thing. Hellcat engines exist, SRT Grand Cherokees exist, so just combine the two, right? It's not quite that easy. Here, we outline what needs to happen, why it should be the quickest Hellcat vehicle out there, and why it won't come anywhere near 200 miles per hour. How To Build A Hellcat Jeep The first engineering problem is feeding the air-intensive beast that is the 6.2-liter supercharged V8. The first engineering problem is feeding the air-intensive beast that is the 6.2-liter supercharged Hellcat V8. Breathing is important on two counts: pulling in enough air for the combustion to put out 707 hp, and then cooling the various heat exchangers once the engine is up to temperature. Dodge did it with the Charger and Challenger, it can do it with the Jeep. This is one place where the Grand Cherokee's larger frontal area might be a boon, as it gives the engineers more surfaces through which to suck air. Once you generate the 707 horsepower and 650 pound-feet of torque, it has to get to the wheels somehow. Jeep's current SRT all-wheel-drive system will at least need some beefing up to handle the torque. It could require a more complete re-engineering. We at least know the ZF-supplied eight-speed auto, used in the Dodge Hellcat models, is up to the task. The Hellcat engine should fit in the Grand Cherokee, as it's about the same size as the 6.4-liter currently in SRT Jeeps, but the Hellcat is taller because of its supercharger. The hood may need to be raised or at least resculpted for clearance, as well as to address those cooling needs. Quicker Than Everything, But Not Faster 200 mph? We're skeptical, from both a physics standpoint and a legal one. A reminder of the quick/fast distinction: quick is acceleration, fast is road speed. The Jeep's all-wheel drive will help put the Hellcat engine's power to the ground in a more manageable way than the Charger and Challenger do through just the rear wheels. That means better acceleration times than the Dodges (11.0 seconds in the quarter-mile for the Charger Hellcat, 11.2 for its Challenger sibling).
Fiat Chrysler wins top Total Quality Award for first time
Mon, Jul 20 2015The 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.