2006 Jeep Wrangler 2dr Sport 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.

Massachusetts man charged $48,000 for a tow [w/video]

Tow truck operators are right up there with landlords and IRS auditors on the list of professionals you don't want to deal with. A man in Massachusetts has all the more reason to avoid a tow after he was hit with a $48,000 bill, Fox 25 reports. Joel Ramer and his girlfriend were off-roading in Walpole, MA last week when they wandered were they shouldn't have. They landed in a mud pit on private property. Ramer said it took Assured Collision towing company 12 hours to free his vehicle from the muck. But when he got the bill for the tow, he thought the accounting department must have been off by a decimal. "When I went to pick up the vehicle from Assured Collision, he'd informed me there was some damage done to the vehicle, but didn't get into details. He also informed me the bill was $48,000," Ramer told Fox. "I thought they made a mistake." The phrase 'some damage' was putting it lightly. Ramer says Assured Collision totaled his Jeep. "Frame is broken, leaf spring is broken, drive shaft is broken," Ramer said. The itemized bill showed Ramer exactly what he was paying for. Assured Collision charged him $16,000 for an on-scene supervisor. That's $1,250 an hour. The Statewide Towing Association told Fox 25 that the actual industry standard is $175-$325 an hour. The company also claimed that power lines put them at risk, calling it a "hazmat situation." That allowed them to tack on another $5,000 fee for dangerous condition liability insurance. Finally, there was an extra $10,000 fee for an off-road recovery incident response unit. Insurance won't help with the cost of the tow, so Ramer's broke Jeep is in Assured Collision's hands. On top of the enormous bill and busted Jeep, Ramer was arrested and cited for trespassing on land owned by a utility company and disturbing the peace. Boston News, Weather, Sports | FOX 25 | MyFoxBoston

Land Rover Defender V8 vs. Jeep Wrangler Rubicon 392 | V8 4x4s square off on paper

Land Rover pulled the sheet off its 2022 Defender on Wednesday, introducing another high-performance V8 to the off-road segment. This time, it's a 5.0-liter, supercharged V8 boasting 518 horsepower. It will be available in both the Defender 90 and 110 models. In the former, Land Rover says it can crack off a 0-60 run in just 4.9 seconds on its way to a top speed of 149 mph. The long-wheelbase 110 will be a bit slower, but "slow" probably isn't the right adjective to use here at all.  But Land Rover isn't the only automaker offering a high-performance variant of its off-road SUV. While Jeep may have been sneered at for presenting the 2021 Wrangler Rubicon 392 on the heels of the 2021 Ford Bronco's introduction, it starts to make a lot more sense in this context. There's reportedly a high-output Bronco on the way, too, so call Jeep the dinosaur of the group all you want, but you can't put a price on being first. Well, you can, actually, but that's not the point.  Thankfully, both Land Rover and Jeep have provided enough specs for us to rough out a comparison chart. Since the Rubicon 392 is offered only in four-door guise, we're looking at the long-wheelbase Defender 110 as its direct competitor here. Have a look: There are a few caveats to mention off the top. For starters, we don't have an official curb weight for the V8-powered Defender yet, as Land Rover has not finalized its U.S. specs. We used the European figures (as provided by a spokesperson), which we expect to be accurate within about 50 pounds. The 0-60 time provided by Land Rover was for the Defender 90, which is smaller and somewhat lighter than the 110. When equipped with the inline-6, the Defender 110 is about a tenth of a second slower to 60 than the Defender 90, so we figure it should be roughly the same for the V8.  While the Defender has nearly 50 horsepower on the Wrangler, that advantage disappears thanks to the Land Rover V8's monster weight penalty, which will fall somewhere between 600 and 700 pounds depending on equipment. Yikes. On the flip side, however, the Land Rover has the edge in top speed, and it's not even close. Chalk that up to the tires, we suspect. We know for a fact that the Rubicon 392's all-terrains dictate its speed limiter; Jeep's own engineers told us as much. This could make for a (hypothetically) interesting drag race, as the Jeep's advantage off the line may evaporate once triple digits come into play.