2006 Dodge Charger Srt-8 Excellent Condition! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

NHTSA investigates FCA for SUVs that roll out of Park

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is opening a preliminary evaluation into the 2014 Dodge Durango and 2014-205 Jeep Grand Cherokee after 14 complaints of the SUVs rolling out of Park. An estimated 408,000 of them could be affected, if a recall is necessary. All of the current complaints submitted to NHTSA about the issue concern the Grand Cherokee, and the claims allege that the SUV can roll out of Park whether or not the engine is running. Some folks report that they check the indicator each time because the gear sometimes fails to engage. Among the 14 cases, there are five accounts of crashes and three injuries, including a situation with someone allegedly being rolled over. NHTSA's preliminary evaluations are meant to investigate "the scope, frequency, and safety-related consequence" of a reported problem. They don't necessarily lead to a recall. Related Video: INVESTIGATION Subject : Unattended vehicle rollaway Date Investigation Opened: AUG 20, 2015 Date Investigation Closed: Open NHTSA Action Number: PE15030 Component(s): POWER TRAIN All Products Associated with this Investigation Vehicle Make Model Model Year(s) DODGE DURANGO 2014 JEEP GRAND CHEROKEE 2014-2015 Details Manufacturer: Chrysler (FCA US LLC) SUMMARY: The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has received 14 complaints (VOQs) alleging that after being placed in Park the subject vehicles have then rolled away from their parked position. The unintended motion has occurred with both the engine off and the engine running. ODI has also identified EWR field report data related to the alleged defect. The model year 2014 and 2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles are equipped with an electronic gear selector (shift-by-wire system). The gear selection is made by pressing the shifter-paddle forward or backwards; the shifter does not move along a gate path as with conventional gear selectors. A Preliminary Evaluation has been opened to asses the scope, frequency, and safety-related consequence of the alleged defect. The VOQs associated with the opening of this investigation are: 10733158, 10730952, 10683556, 10679497, 10583366, 10725429, 10715401, 10711893, 10676998, 10668651, 10662619, 10662308, 10605865, and 10567538.

Chrysler, Nissan minivans earn 'dire' crash test results, says IIHS [w/video]

First introduced in 2012, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's small-overlap frontal crash test has become the bane of many auto engineers' existence. It's a particularly steep design challenge because it forces just 25 percent of a vehicle's front end to take the brunt of a 40-mile-per-hour impact. The newly released results of four family-minded minivans underscore just how difficult the crash test is: only one scored an Acceptable rating, and the other three did very poorly. The 2008-2015 Chrysler Town & Country and Dodge Grand Caravan, plus the 2011-2015 Nissan Quest, all received Poor ratings in the test, the IIHS' lowest possible score. The three of them showed significant crash intrusion into the driver's area. The dummy in the Nissan actually had to be cut out of the vehicle, with an IIHS spokesperson remarking, "the structure collapsed like a house of cards." In the Fiat Chrysler Automobile vans, the steering wheels moved out of the way, making the airbag less effective and letting the driver's head hit the dashboard. While it was not actually crashed, the agency is also giving the 2009-12 Volkswagen Routan a Poor score because it shares a structure with the FCA models. The newly released results of four minivans underscore just how difficult the small-offset crash test is. The refreshed 2015 Toyota Sienna (shown), conversely, earned an Acceptable rating and is also a Top Safety Pick+ because of its optional forward collision warning and automatic braking system. While the crash test dummy moved around during the impact more than the agency would have liked, sensors showed a low risk of injuries. The IIHS tested the Honda Odyssey last year, and it earned a Good overall score, the agency's best ranking. It's also a Top Safety Pick+ vehicle. The only member of the minivan segment left to test is the latest Kia Sedona, and the Institute is reportedly waiting a little longer for Kia to make changes to improve the model's performance. When reached for comment, Nissan spokesperson Steve Yaeger provided Autoblog with the following statement: "Nissan is committed to vehicle safety and believes that consumers should have information about crash protection so they can make educated buying decisions. Nissan is proud of the 2014 Quest's "good" rating in the IIHS front moderate overlap and side impact tests as well as a "good" head restraint rating.

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