2006 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited, I-6, Six Speed Manual New All-terrain A/t Tires on 2040-cars

Auto blog

FCA inline-six rumored to be real, headed for Jeep Wagoneer

In September, Allpar reported that that clues being dropped at Fiat- Chrysler headquarters, in the carmaker's factories, and on engineer resumes pointed to the development of an inline six-cylinder engine. The site has just proclaimed the rumor is reality, writing that the straight-six, "turbocharged to meet or beat 5.7 Hemi power ratings, with a smoother torque curve, is on the way." The motor's first outing is expected to be either the next-generation Jeep Grand Cherokee, debuting perhaps next year, or the Jeep Wagoneer, debuting in 2020 or 2021. "Tornado" is the purported codename for the power plant said to be just under three liters in displacement, expanding the family begun with the Global Medium Engine 2.0-liter turbo codenamed Hurricane. Engine bay constraints and a long use horizon mean engineers won't simply add two more cylinders to the GME, however. Allpar says the brief is to keep the Tornado GME-T6 — the alphanumeric for "turbocharged six" — no more than three inches longer than the Tigershark 2.4-liter four-cylinder. That means "major design changes" that could include a space-saving head, more closely spaced cylinders, and no cylinder liners. An FCA division called Comau could be called on for its "SmartSpray" plasma lining technology. Allpar muses that the standard version of the engine for Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, and Ram could get a single twin-scroll turbocharger. Performance trims for Alfa Romeo and Maserati could get different heads and maybe twin turbos, an SRT version might also get both those tweaks. History shows that the Italian versions would make changes to the block, as well. Even so, the Tornado would be less expensive than any Ferrari-supplied V6. A straight-six would put FCA in company with current adopters BMW and Mercedes-Benz, future users like Jaguar, and perhaps Aston Martin. The engine would span the widest range of use cases in the U.S. carmaker's portfolio, though. Potential applications include being a base engine for Ram trucks, serving double duty as a base engine and 5.7-liter Hemi replacement for the Dodge Charger and Challenger, working in the high-end Jeeps, and as a properly hot trim — with Ferrari-designed heads — in the luxury Italian sports cars. The Alfa Romeo Giulia begs for just such motivation to fill the gap between the 280-hp, $42,695 Ti Sport RWD and the 505-hp, $73,700 Giulia Quadrifoglio RWD. And a twin-turbo inline-six in a Maserati Alfieri would stack up nicely with the Germans.

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.

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.