2dr Convertible Gt 2.4l Turbo Cd Leather A/c Automatic Trans on 2040-cars

Auto blog

The problem with how automakers confront hacking threats

More than anyone, Chris Valasek and Charlie Miller are responsible for alerting Americans to the hacking perils awaiting them in their modern-day cars. In 2013, the pair of cyber-security researchers followed in the footsteps of academics at the University of Cal-San Diego and University of Washington, demonstrating it was possible to hack and control cars. Last summer, their research established which vehicles contained inherent security weaknesses. In recent weeks, their latest findings have underscored the far-reaching danger of automotive security breaches. From the comfort of his Pittsburgh home, Valasek exploited a flaw in the cellular connection of a Jeep Cherokee and commandeered control as Miller drove along a St. Louis highway. Remote access. No prior tampering with the vehicle. An industry's nightmare. As a result of their work, FCA US recalled 1.4 million cars, improving safety for millions of motorists. For now, Valasek and Miller are at the forefront of their profession. In a few months, they could be out of jobs. Rather than embrace the skills of software and security experts in confronting the unforeseen downside of connectivity in cars, automakers have been doing their best to stifle independent cyber-security research. Lost in the analysis of the Jeep Cherokee vulnerabilities is the possibility this could be the last study of its kind. In September or October, the U.S. Copyright Office will issue a key ruling that could prevent third-party researchers like Valasek and Miller from accessing the components they need to conduct experiments on vehicles. Researchers have asked for an exemption in the Digital Millennial Copyright Act that would preserve their right to analyze cars, but automakers have opposed that exemption, claiming the software that runs almost every conceivable vehicle function is proprietary. Further, their attorneys have argued the complexity of the software has evolved to a point where safety and security risks arise when third parties start monkeying with the code. Their message on cyber security is, as it has been for years, that they know their products better than anyone else and that it's dangerous for others to meddle with them. But in precise terms, the Jeep Cherokee problems show this is not the case. Valasek and Miller discovered the problem, a security hole in the Sprint cellular connection to the UConnect infotainment system, not industry insiders.

Auto bailout cost the US goverment $9.26B

Depending on your outlook, the US Treasury's bailout of General Motors, Chrysler (now FCA) and their financing divisions under the Troubled Asset Relief Program was either a complete boondoggle or a savvy move to secure the future of some major employers. Regardless of where you fall, the auto industry bailout has officially ended, and the numbers have been tallied. Of the $79.69 billion that the Feds invested to keep the automakers afloat, it recouped $70.43 billion – a net loss of $9.26 billion. The final nail in the coffin for the auto bailout came in December 2014 when the Feds sold its shares in Ally Financial, formerly GMAC. The deal turned out pretty good for the government too because the investment turned a 2.4 billion profit. The actual automakers have long been out of the Treasury's hands, though. The current FCA paid back its loans six years early in 2011, the Treasury sold of the last shares of GM in late 2013. According to The Detroit News, the government's books actually show an official loss on the auto bailouts of $16.56 billion. The difference is because the larger figure does not include the interest or dividends paid by the borrowers on the amount lent. While it's easy to see fault in any red ink on the Feds' massive investment, the number is less than some earlier estimates. At one time, deficits around $44 billion were thought possible, and another put things at a $20.3 billion loss. Outside of just the government losing money, the bailouts might have helped the overall economy. A study from the Center for Automotive Research last year estimated that the program saved 2.6 million jobs and about $284.4 billion in personal wealth. It also indicated that the Feds' reduction in income tax revenue alone from Chrysler and GM going under could have been around $100 billion for just 2009 and 2010, significantly more than any loss in the bailout.

FCA and Cummins named in diesel emissions class-action lawsuit

Chrysler is now the first United States-based carmaker to be sued for allegedly skewing emissions results. In a move that sounds eerily similar to the troubles of European manufacturers, Chrysler is claimed to have hid diesel engine characteristics causing emissions as much as 14 times higher than permitted by regulations. According to Bloomberg, the lawsuit alleges that Chrysler, together with its diesel engine partner Cummins, has concealed the nitrogen oxide output of certain Ram vehicles produced between 2007 and 2012. The NOx pollutants were meant to be broken down in a process called regeneration in the truck's NAC system, or NOx Absorption Catalyst, which predated the 2013-introduced SCR, or Selective Catalytic Reduction system. By design, the NAC captures and stores NOx emissions, converting them to nitrogen and oxygen through a catalytic process. The lawsuit claims the Cummins engine's system has a limited capacity to store the emissions, and as a result the pollutants escape, increasing emissions, worsening fuel consumption and wearing down the catalytic converter. The later, cleaner SCR system uses a urea-water injection, and it gradually replaced the NAC on Cummins 6.7-liter engines, as it was first implemented in 2011 and made standard in 2013. As Bloomberg notes, the model years of Ram trucks involved in the lawsuit predate the earliest Volkswagen "Dieselgate" models by two years. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of 500,000 truck owners, accuses Chrysler and Cummins of fraud, false advertising and racketeering. As an underlying motive, the filing mentions a 2001 change in EPA emissions standards. Announced to become effective in 2010, the EPA requirements drove Chrysler and Cummins to try and reach those already by 2007. However, the NAC system is said to have fallen short of these goals, and the filing claims that Chrysler and Cummins chose to "rig" the engines instead. The affected vehicles predate the 2014 merger of Chrysler and Fiat. FCA US has released a statement regarding the lawsuit, saying it will contest the lawsuit "vigorously". News Source: BloombergImage Credit: Getty Editorial Government/Legal Green Chrysler Dodge RAM Emissions Diesel Vehicles FCA cummins diesel