2010 Jeep Libertysport Sunroof Trailer Hitch Satellite Radio Running Boards on 2040-cars

Auto blog

EPA suspected Fiat Chrysler of using 'defeat device' in 2015

U.S. regulators told Fiat Chrysler Automobiles in November 2015 that they suspected some of the automaker's vehicles were equipped with secret software allowing them to violate emission control standards, according to emails disclosed on Friday. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and California Air Resources Board accused Fiat Chrysler in January of using the software, known as a "defeat device," to illegally allow excess diesel emissions in 104,000 Jeep Grand Cherokees and Dodge Ram 1500 trucks built between 2014 and 2016. Byron Bunker, director of the EPA's Transportation and Air Quality compliance division, said in a January 2016 email to Fiat Chrysler, obtained by Reuters under the Freedom of Information Act, that he was "very concerned about the unacceptably slow pace" of the automaker's efforts to explain high nitrogen oxide emissions from some of its vehicles. Nitrogen oxide is linked to smog formation and respiratory problems. Bunker's email said the EPA had told Fiat Chrysler officials at a November 2015 meeting that at least one auxiliary emissions control device on the car maker's vehicles appeared to violate the agency's regulations. Mike Dahl, head of vehicle safety and regulatory compliance for Fiat Chrysler's U.S. unit, responded in a separate email that the company was working diligently and understood the EPA's concerns. He added that if the EPA identified Fiat Chrysler vehicles as containing defeat devices it would result in "potentially significant regulatory and commercial consequences." The documents redacted the vehicles named, but two officials briefed on the matter said they referred to diesel models. The EPA's November 2015 meeting with Fiat Chrysler came two months after Volkswagen AG, mired in a major tailpipe emissions scandal, admitted to installing secret defeat device software in hundreds of thousands of U.S. diesel cars to make them appear cleaner than they were on the road.

Ward's releases 10 Best Interiors list for 2014

While we're still a ways off from the automotive awards season proper, where things like North American Car and Truck of the Year, Motor Trend's Car of the Year and Car and Driver's Ten Best are named, that doesn't mean there aren't trophies being handed out to deserving automakers. Ward's 10 Best Interiors being one of them.
As the name might imply, the magazine focuses on the very best interior treatments in the US market. Whereas some awards purposely exclude extreme, high-dollar offerings, Ward's considers them - the only requirement is that a vehicle has a "new or significantly redesigned interior."
Ward's offered up the list of winners in simple, alphabetical order, and it only seems fair to do the same:

Lexus tops JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study again, Buick bests Toyota

It shouldn't surprise anyone, but Lexus has once again taken the top spot in JD Power's Vehicle Dependability Study. That'd be the Japanese luxury brand's fourth straight year at the top of table. The big news, though, is the rise of Buick. General Motor's near-premium brand beat out Toyota to take second place, with 110 problems per 100 vehicles compared to Toyota's 111 problems. Lexus owners only reported 89 problems per 100 vehicles. Besides Buick's three-position jump, Scion enjoyed a major improvement, jumping 13 positions from 2014. Ram and Mitsubishi made big gains, as well, moving up 11 and 10 positions, respectively. In terms of individual segments, GM and Toyota both excelled, taking home seven segment awards each. The study wasn't good news for all involved, though. A number of popular automakers finished below the industry average of 147 problems per 100 vehicles, including Subaru, (157PP100), Volkswagen (165PP100), Ford/Hyundai (188PP100 each) and Mini (193PP100). The biggest losers (by a tremendous margin, we might add) were Land Rover and Fiat, recording 258 and 273 problems per 100 vehicles. The next closest brand was Jeep, with 197PP100. While the Vehicle Dependability Study uses the same measurement system as the Initial Quality Survey, the two metrics analyze very different things. The VDS looks at problems experienced by original owners of model year 2012 vehicles over the past 12 months, while the oft-quoted IQS focuses on problems in the first 90 days of new-vehicle ownership. Like the IQS, though, the VDS has a rather broad definition of what a problem is. Because of that, a low score from JD Power is no guarantee of extreme unreliability, so much as just poor design. In this most recent study, the two most reported problems focused on Bluetooth connectivity and the voice-command systems. The former leaves plenty of room for user error due to poor design (particularly true of the Bluetooth systems on the low-scoring Fords, Volkswagens and Subarus), while the second is something JD Power has already confirmed as being universally terrible. That makes means that while these studies are important, they shouldn't be taken as gospel when it comes to automotive reliability. News Source: JD PowerImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Jeremy Korzeniewski / AOL Buick Fiat Ford GM Hyundai Jeep Land Rover Lexus MINI Mitsubishi RAM Scion Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Auto Repair Ownership study