2012 Dodge Journey Sxt Sport Utility 4-door 3.6l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Dodge Dart falls short of Consumer Reports Recommended, Caddy XTS and Lincoln MKS, too

The Dodge Dart, Cadillac XTS and Lincoln MKS all failed to earn a "Recommended" rating from Consumer Reports. When it came to the compact Dart, the organization's testers thought the vehicle offered a quiet cabin, solid-feeling chassis and nimble suspension, but the new model ultimately fell short of the coveted rating due to powertrain issues. The institute's reviewers found the base 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine to be underpowered and noted "drivability issues" when the available turbocharged 1.4-liter four was paired with the optional dual-clutch transmission (some of our editors disliked it paired with the six-speed manual). CR also dinged the latter powerplant for sounding "raspy." For what it's worth, we think the forced-induction engine offers an excellent and playful exhaust note, but that's just us.
As for the XTS, CR lauded the car for its luxurious cabin, but the vehicle's experience was dulled by its finicky CUE infotainment interface. Overall, the big Cadillac scored much higher than its cross-town rival from Lincoln. While testers found the American luxury sedan to offer a quiet ride and quality fit and finish, they felt the MKS delivered a "cramped driving position, ungainly handling, uncomposed ride, and limited visibility." Ouch. At the end of the day, both cars fell short of rivals from Japan, Germany and Korea. Check out the full press release below with more details, along with CR's musings on the Chevrolet Spark and Lexus ES.

FCA's shifter fiasco proves novel gear selectors are a bad idea

What'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

Fiat Chrysler wins top Total Quality Award for first time

The Strategic Vision Total Quality Awards are 20 years old in 2015, and Chrysler has never topped the awards before. Until now, that is. Fiat Chrysler takes the overall award on the corporate level with six segment leaders from Fiat, Dodge, Jeep, and Ram. The Fiat 500 won Small Multi-Function Car, the 500e won Small Alternative Powertrain, the Dodge Challenger tied at the top in the Specialty Coupe category alongside the very un-coupe Mini Cooper Countryman, the Jeep Wrangler Unlimited took the Entry SUV category, the Dodge Durango won in Mid-Size SUV, and Ram took the overall in Best Non-Luxury Brand. The accolade means FCA has gone from one segment winner in 2010 to overall victory in five years. Cars have gotten so good, says Strategic Vision, that it is harder than ever to win. In fact, says the group, 18 years ago 85 percent of all vehicle brands had more than half a problem per vehicle. This year, no brand has more than half a problem per vehicle. The organization measures "over 155 specific aspects of the customer's experience," and scores are based on input from more than 46,000 customers. Other notables in and near the winner's circle include Volkswagen and General Motors, who tied for second place on the corporate scale, one point behind FCA. The Mini Cooper Roadster scored the highest of any model, the Corvette Stingray Convertible and Coupe scored the second- and third-highest. The Chevrolet Colorado is the first domestic Standard Pickup winner in more than ten years, and the Nissan Titan carried the Full-Size Pickup category. The press release below has all the details on how winners and losers are selected, and the full list of automakers and how they finished. "The Customer's 'Total' Experience Defines Quality, Fiat Chrysler Scores Highest in Total Quality," says Strategic Vision The 2015 Total Quality Awards® SAN DIEGO, Friday, July 17, 2015 — Unknown to many, when some consumer research firms rank a car company's quality performance they often do so by simply "counting problems." In the past, this may have been acceptable, but in today's modern and efficient manufacturing world the difference between the worst brand and best brand is LESS than half-a-problem per vehicle. Thus, any "quality ranking" based on this method is severely lacking in the complete picture of the "Total" Quality experience that customers actually use to judge their product ownership.