2010 Chrysler Town & Country Touring Plus on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Question of the Day: Most heinous act of badge engineering?

Badge engineering, in which one company slaps its emblems on another company's product and sells it, has a long history in the automotive industry. When Sears wanted to sell cars, a deal was made with Kaiser-Frazer and the Sears Allstate was born. Iranians wanted new cars in the 1960s, and the Rootes Group was happy to offer Hillman Hunters for sale as Iran Khodro Paykans. Sometimes, though, certain badge-engineered vehicles made sense only in the 26th hour of negotiations between companies. The Suzuki Equator, say, which was a puzzling rebadge job of the Nissan Frontier. How did that happen? My personal favorite what-the-heck-were-they-thinking example of badge engineering is the 1971-1973 Plymouth Cricket. Chrysler Europe, through its ownership of the Rootes Group, was able to ship over Hillman Avanger subcompacts for sale in the US market. This would have made sense... if Chrysler hadn't already been selling rebadged Mitsubishi Colt Galants (as Dodge Colts) and Simca 1100s as (Simca 1204s) in its American showrooms. Few bought the Cricket, despite its cheery ad campaign. So, what's the badge-engineered car you find most confounding? Chrysler Dodge Automakers Mitsubishi Nissan Suzuki Automotive History question of the day badge engineering question

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.

Feds fretting over remote hack of Jeep Cherokee

A cyber-security gap that allowed for the remote hacking of a Jeep Cherokee has federal officials concerned. An associate administrator with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said Thursday that news of the breach conducted by researchers Chris Valasek and Charlie Miller had "floated around the entire federal government." "The Homeland Security folks sent out broadcasts that, 'Here's an issue that needs to be addressed,'" said Nathaniel Beuse, an associate administrator with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Valasek and Miller commandeered remote control of the Cherokee through a security flaw in the cellular connection to the car's Uconnect infotainment system. From his Pittsburgh home, Valasek manipulated critical safety inputs, such as transmission function, on Miller's Jeep as he drove along a highway near St. Louis, MO. The scope of the remote breach is believed to be the first of its kind. The prominent cyber-security researchers needed no prior access to the vehicle to perform the hack, and the scope of the remote breach is believed to be the first of its kind. A NHTSA spokesperson said the agency's cyber-security staff members are "putting their expertise to work assessing this threat and the response, and we will take action if we determine it's necessary to protect safety." A Homeland Security spokesperson referred questions about the hack to Chrysler. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles has already been the subject of a federal hearing this month, in which officials scrutinized whether the company had adequately fixed recalled vehicles and repeatedly failed to notify the government about defects. But cyber-security concerns are a new and different species for the regulatory agency. Only hours before the Jeep hack was announced by Wired magazine earlier this week, NHTSA administrator Dr. Mark Rosekind said hacking vulnerabilities were a threat to privacy, safety, and the public's trust with new connected and autonomous technologies that allow vehicles to communicate. NHTSA outlined its response to the cyber-security challenges facing the industry in a report issued Tuesday. In it, the agency summarized its best practices for thwarting attacks and said it will analyze possible real-time infiltration responses. But the agency's ability to handle hackers may only go so far.