2008 Jeep Wrangler X 4x4 4wd V6 Automatic Auto 2dr Two Door Soft Top on 2040-cars
Memphis, Tennessee, United States
Vehicle Title:Clear
For Sale By:Dealer
Engine:3.8L 3778CC 231Cu. In. V6 GAS OHV Naturally Aspirated
Body Type:Sport Utility
Fuel Type:GAS
Make: Jeep
Model: Wrangler
Trim: X Sport Utility 2-Door
Disability Equipped: No
Doors: 2
Drive Type: 4WD
Drive Train: Four Wheel Drive
Mileage: 58,929
Sub Model: X
Number of Cylinders: 6
Exterior Color: Green
Interior Color: Tan
Jeep Wrangler for Sale
- 1997 jeep wrangler sport sport utility 2-door 4.0l
- 2010 jeep wrangler unlimited sahara sport utility 4-door 3.8l 4x4
- 2013 jeep wrangler matte black with 38x15.5xr20 tires(US $52,281.00)
- 2000 jeep wrangler
- Transferable warranty hard & soft top included heated rear window 3k miles(US $38,899.00)
- Rubicon lifted automatic soft top
Auto Services in Tennessee
Wholesale INC ★★★★★
Trust Auto Sales ★★★★★
Top Tech Automotive ★★★★★
TFG Automotive ★★★★★
Tennesse Speed Sport ★★★★★
Smith Auto Group ★★★★★
Auto blog
NHTSA closes investigation into Jeep Liberty fires
Sun, 16 Mar 2014The investigation that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration opened into the Jeep Liberty in October 2013 has been closed. NHTSA received two (!) complaints about fires starting in the driver's door, thought to be caused by the master power window switch. The initial estimate was that 80,000 Libertys could be roped into a possible recall, but according to a report in the Detroit News the agency examined records for 425,000 Chrysler products that used the same window switch, including the Dodge Nitro and Chrysler Town & Country minivan.
After canvassing 265 warranty claims related to the master switches, NHTSA concluded that the rate of fires compared to the "large population of vehicles" was rather low, and that there was no trend pattern behind the few issues it did find. Perhaps with that, and the closure of the trailer hitch investigation, the Liberty can finally rest in peace.
FCA's shifter fiasco proves novel gear selectors are a bad idea
Tue, Feb 9 2016What'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
Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating
Mon, Aug 6 2018Over 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.