1984 Jeep Grand Wagoneer Base Sport Utility 4-door 5.9l "wagonmaster" on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 Jeep Wrangler recalled over impact sensor wiring

Fiat Chrysler just announced a pair of recalls totaling nearly 311,000 units. The bigger recall affects certain 2016 and 2017 model year Jeep Wranglers. Although, since FCA claims all of the affected 2017s are in the company's hands, really, only 2016 owners should pay attention here. The affected Wranglers suffer from an issue where wiring disconnects from impact sensors in certain types of crashes, potentially preventing the airbags and pretensioners from activating. FCA uncovered the problem in what its press release calls "a routine, in-house crash test" and claims "service availability is imminent." The affected Jeeps require a simple rewiring. The other recall, announced Tuesday, is more of a fleet issue, affecting 2007 to 2013 model-year Ram 2500 and 3500 pickups and 3500, 4500, and 5500 chassis cabs and 2011 to 2014 Dodge Charger Pursuit police vehicles. There's a problem with "premature diode wear" in alternators that are subject to "frequent load cycling, at or near maximum amperage, [or] in hot ambient temperatures." Affected alternators could short out, causing a vehicle to stall or potentially catch fire. FCA lists 182,743 affected Wranglers in the US, 18,011 in Canada, 3,087 in Mexico, and 20,948 in global markets. The Ram/ Charger Pursuit recall lists 74,833 vehicles in the US, 10,077 in Canada, 1,088 in Mexico, and 134 outside the NAFTA region. Of all those vehicles, the Jeep recall hasn't caused any injuries or fatalities, while FCA says it's aware of one "potentially related injury" and no accidents due to its fleet vehicle recall. FCA says it will notify owners/operators of affected vehicles when service appointments are available. As per usual, all the work is free of charge. Related Video:

Bring back the Bronco! Trademarks we hope are actually (someday) future car names

Trademark filings are the tea leaves of the auto industry. Read them carefully – and interpret them correctly – and you might be previewing an automaker's future product plans. Yes, they're routinely filed to maintain the rights to an iconic name. And sometimes they're only for toys and clothing. But not always. Sometimes, the truth is right in front of us. The trademark is required because a company actually wants to use the name on a new car. With that in mind, here's a list of intriguing trademark filings we want to see go from paperwork to production reality. Trademark: Bronco Company: Ford Previous Use: The Bronco was a long-running SUV that lived from 1966-1996. It's one of America's original SUVs and was responsible for the increased popularity of the segment. Still, it's best known as O.J. Simpson's would-be getaway car. We think: The Bronco was an icon. Everyone seems to want a Wrangler-fighter – Ford used to have a good one. Enough time has passed that the O.J. police chase isn't the immediate image conjured by the Bronco anymore. Even if we're doing a wish list in no particular order, the Bronco still finds its way to the top. For now (unfortunately), it's just federal paperwork. Rumors on this one can get especially heated. The official word from a Ford spokesman is: "Companies renew trademark filings to maintain ownership and control of the mark, even if it is not currently used. Ford values the iconic Bronco name and history." Trademarks: Aviator, AV8R Company: Ford Previous Use: The Aviator was one of the shortest-run Lincolns ever, lasting for the 2003-2005 model years. It never found the sales success of the Ford Explorer, with which it shared a platform. We Think: The Aviator name no longer fits with Lincoln's naming nomenclature. Too bad, it's better than any other name Lincoln currently uses, save for its former big brother, the Navigator. Perhaps we're barking up the wrong tree, though. Ford has made several customized, aviation themed-Mustangs in the past, including one called the Mustang AV8R in 2008, which had cues from the US Air Force's F-22 Raptor fighter jet. It sold for $500,000 at auction, and the glass roof – which is reminiscent of a fighter jet cockpit – helped Ford popularize the feature. Trademark: EcoBeast Company: Ford Previous Use: None by major carmakers.

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.