2001 Jeep Wrangler on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2020 Land Rover Defender vs. 2020 Jeep Wrangler: How they compare on paper

For ages, the Jeep Wrangler has had the serious off-road SUV market in America all to itself, especially when it comes to two-door variants. But competition is coming, and the first on its way is the 2020 Land Rover Defender, which was just revealed at the Frankfurt Motor Show. Each packages retro looks and impressive off-road capability, but does one have an advantage? We decided to take a look into each SUV's specifications and compare them on their engines, drivetrains, interior space and towing among other things, to see how they stack up. Since both SUVs are offered in two-door and four-door versions, we've made sure to feature both versions. You can find all the vital stats in the chart below, followed by more in-depth analysis. Engines and drivetrains The Land Rover is the clear high-performance option of these two SUVs. Its base turbocharged 2.0-liter four-cylinder, offered only in the four-door Defender 110, is more powerful than either of the gas engines offered on the Jeep Wrangler. The Wrangler's four-cylinder matches it on torque, at least. The optional turbocharged 3.0-liter inline-six in the Defender makes over 100 more horsepower and pound-feet of torque than either Jeep gas engine. But if you're looking for diesel propulsion, along with its associated torque and fuel economy, the Wrangler will be your only option. Final specs haven't been released, but in the Ram 1500, the same engine makes 260 horsepower and 480 pound-feet of torque. Fuel economy hasn't been announced for the Land Rover or the diesel Wrangler. But if fuel economy is a concern, the four-cylinder Wrangler is the most frugal of the SUVs we have numbers on. As for transmissions, the Wrangler is your only choice if you have to have a manual. It's available on both the two-door and four-door models, but only with the V6 engine. If you don't mind an automatic transmission, both SUVs come with variations on the ZF eight-speed auto. Getting the power to the wheels is another area where these two SUVs diverge. The Jeep is very traditional with a standard selectable four-wheel-drive system with two-wheel drive, and low- and high-range four-wheel drive modes. On the Sahara, there's an available full-time four-wheel drive mode, but the other modes are still available. On the Land Rover, you get full-time four-wheel drive, the same kind used on the Land Rover Range Rover.

FCA's shifter fiasco proves novel gear selectors are a bad idea

What's wrong with PRNDL? Why are automakers trying to overly complicate the simple task of selecting gears? If there's any lesson to learn from the recent news that NHTSA is investigating 853,000 Fiat Chrysler vehicles over its problematic gear selectors, it's that the trend of fancy shifters needs to stop. Now. Last year, NHTSA opened an investigation into Jeep Grand Cherokee models, and has now expanded this probe to include the 2012-14 Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger. The problem? The shifter – assembled by ZF – is confusing for many drivers. "Testing ... indicates that operation of the (electronic) shifter is not intuitive and provides poor tactile and visual feedback to the driver, increasing the potential for unintended gear selection," a NHTSA document states. More than 100 crashes and over a dozen injuries are linked to this problem, according to The Detroit Free Press. To us, the problem isn't just limited to FCA. These unnecessarily novel gear selectors are spreading like wildfire across the industry. Honda and Acura use a weird pushbutton setup. Lincolns have buttons on the dashboard. Jaguar's shifter electronically raises out of the center console. Mercedes uses a stalk with up-for-Reverse, down-for-Drive, push-for-Neutral arrangement. And what the hell is BMW thinking with its M cars? FCA has since abandoned the confusing shifters in question. The 300, Charger, and Grand Cherokee now use the rotary shift dial that's quickly proliferating across the company's brands. Simplistic gear selectors might not be sexy, but no one ever complained about not being able to find the right gear in a Hyundai Sonata. What's most interesting is that this NHTSA investigation could push FCA – and possibly other automakers – to redesign vehicle functions that otherwise operate as designed. Just because most people will never have a problem putting a Dodge Charger in Reverse doesn't mean there isn't a flaw with the design. But perhaps a more simplistic solution – good ol' PRNDL – would have prevented these issues from the start. Related Video: News Source: The Detroit Free PressImage Credit: Copyright 2016 AOL Government/Legal Chrysler Dodge Jeep FCA shifters

FCA seeking new trial in Jeep fire case, calls $150M judgement 'grossly excessive'

Fiat Chrysler Automobiles is fighting back after a Decatur County, GA jury ordered the company to pay $150 million to the family of a four-year-old boy that was killed after a 1999 Jeep Grand Cherokee crashed and caught fire. The company is requesting the judge reduce the award, and should Walden's family not agree to the lower sum, that a new trial be held. The Detroit Free Press reports that FCA would be forced to pay $120 million over the death of young Remington Walden, with an extra $30 million being paid to the boy's family. Neither figure sits well with the automaker, though, which called the fine "grossly excessive," and claimed it was in violation of Georgia state law. The judgment stems from FCA's long-running problem with the fuel tanks of certain Jeep models built in the 1990s and 2000s. According to the newspaper, FCA argues that the jury was biased after the Waldens' attorneys played on the their passions and pushed for a big award, saying the wrongful death award was 11 times more than any appeals court has ever upheld. FCA said attorneys for the plaintiffs told the jury to base the settlement on Sergio Marchionne's total compensation, $68 million. FCA also claims in its motion that the young boy's suffering was brief. "A $30-million pain-and-suffering award for what plaintiffs acknowledge was at most one minute of suffering is irrational," the motion, which was obtained by The Detroit Free Press, read. "Where such plainly improper arguments are immediately followed by irrational and stunningly excessive damage awards, there can be no doubt that the jury acted from passion and prejudice." Jim Butler, the attorney for the Waldens, has called the motion "nonsense," although he said the family will accept whatever figure the judge sets.