Lifted 4x4 Red Automatic Sport Unlimited Kevlar Led Lights 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.

Ram and Jeep diesel emissions allegations spur class action lawsuits

This shouldn't come as a surprise. Last week, the EPA issued a notice of violation to FCA after it determined that Jeep and Ram installed eight undisclosed auxiliary emissions control devices on diesel vehicles. Since then US law firm Heninger Garrison Davis, LLC and Canadian firm Sotos LLP have launched class action suits on behalf of owners. These latest lawsuits are unrelated to a previous class action suit brought against FCA and Cummins over NOx emissions in 2007 to 2012 Ram models. The violation notice – and the subsequent lawsuits – covers 2014 to 2016 Jeep Grand Cherokee and Ram 1500 models equipped with the 3.0-liter turbodiesel V6, a total of about 104,000 vehicles in the US. The EPA says that while the emissions control devices aren't necessarily illegal, installing them without disclosing them to the EPA is, as they produce more emissions in real world use than in testing. Skirting certification in this way might be a violation of the Clean Air Act. FCA could see fines of up to $45,000 per vehicle, depending on the outcome of the EPA investigation. FCA denies that these are cheat devices, and has proposed software updates to bring the vehicles into compliance. As for the lawsuits, Heninger Garrison Davis says that "Fiat Chrysler marketed those vehicles as environmentally friendly with enhanced fuel efficiency, better performance, and lower emissions. Although the diesel vehicles were successfully marketed as 'clean,' their environmentally-friendly representations were deceptive to consumers." The suit seeks an undisclosed amount of compensation for owners of these vehicles. In Canada, Sotos LLP is seeking $250 million in damages on behalf of owners. This suit, filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, also claims deception on the part of FCA, "resulting in losses and damage" to owners. These are similar claims to group actions against Volkswagen with regard to its diesel emissions cheating scandal. While VW is fixing or buying back many of the affected vehicles, the company is defending itself against some suits on behalf of owners, saying it expects " no decline in the residual values of the affected vehicles as a result of this issue." Don't be surprised if FCA mounts a similar defense.

Certain Chrysler owners eligible for buyback program

Certain car owners whose Chrysler vehicles contain dangerous defects will soon have a way to get rid of their lemons without losing money. As part of an agreement with federal regulators, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles has agreed to buy back more than 500,000 vehicles susceptible to veering out of control without warning at above market-value prices. The deal mainly covers certain models of RAM trucks, the Dodge Dakota pickup and Dodge Durango SUV. Further, owners of more than 1.5 million Jeep Liberty and Grand Cherokees at heightened risk for lethal fires are eligible to trade in their vehicles at above market value or, alternately, get a gift certificate if they prefer to have repairs made. Chrysler has "a heavy responsibility to make sure the products they make are safe for the traveling public," said Mark Rosekind, administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. "... Here, we are sending an unambiguous signal to industry that if you skirt the laws or violate the law, or don't live up to the responsibility that consumers expect, we are going to penalize you." The buy-back and trade-in options for motorists come as part of an unprecedented penalty NHTSA slapped against Chrysler for violating federal motor-vehicle safety laws. Chrysler will pay a $105 million fine, the highest ever levied by the regulatory agency. In addition to the buy-backs, Chrysler also agreed to an independent monitor for three years. Investigators had outlined problems in the company's conduct in 23 recalls that affected more than 11 million defect vehicles. As part of a consent-order agreement, Chrysler acknowledged it did not notify vehicle owners of recalls in an effective manner and did not notify NHTSA of safety problems. Though those recalls affected millions of drivers, the buy-back and trade-in options are only for a small portion of the vehicles involved. Because Chrysler struggled to fix the problem and no repair was apparent, Rosekind said the buy-backs are reserved "for customers who didn't have a remedy." Buy-backs are for trucks and SUVs affected by three recalls that occurred in 2013 (recalls 13V-038, 13V-527 and 13V-529), that addressed a rear-axle pinion nut that could come loose and cause a loss of vehicle control. Those recalls covered 579,228 vehicles, including 2009-2012 Ram 1500, 2500, 3500, 4500 and 5500 trucks, 2009-2012 Dodge Dakotas, 2009 Chrysler Aspen and the 2009 Dodge Durango.