2000 Jeep Cherokee Sport 4-door, 4x4, 4.0, Low Low Low Highway Miles on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.

Georgia jury awards $150 million in Jeep fire case

FCA US continues to fight allegations that some Jeep Grand Cherokee and Liberty sport-utility vehicles are unsafe because of the possibility of fires in rear-end collisions. In one recently decided case, a jury in Georgia awarded $150 million in damages to a family whose child died in a blaze in 2012 in a 1999 Grand Cherokee. The jury believed that FCA acted with "reckless and wanton disregard," and didn't do enough to warn owners, according to Reuters. The automaker was found liable for 99 percent of the damages, and the remaining one percent was for the driver who rear-ended the family's SUV. In a statement from FCA US, the company said that it is considering an appeal. Under Georgia law, the automaker was allegedly unable to present a three-year investigation of rear-impact data to jurors. This was the same information the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration used to decide that the '99 Grand Cherokee "did not pose an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety." The original recall for the models covered 1.56 million examples of the 2002-2007 Liberty and 1993-1998 Grand Cherokee. With the fuel tank located between the rear axle and bumper, NHTSA and FCA eventually agreed to install a trailer hitch for extra protection. A further 1.2 million 1999-2004 Grand Cherokees owners received notice of a customer service action to have their vehicles inspected, though no hitch installed. Subsequent tests showed this remedy to be effective for impacts below 40 miles per hour. The automaker has maintained the SUVs met the applicable safety standards of the period when they were built. The company was chastised by NHTSA last year for low repair rates of the problem. FCA US LLC Statement Regarding Walden v Chrysler Group Verdict: April 2, 2015 , Auburn Hills, Mich. - FCA US is disappointed and will consider an appeal of this verdict. It is unfortunate that under Georgia Law the jury was prevented from taking into account extensive data submitted to NHTSA during a three year investigation, which included more than 20 years of rear impact accident data for tens of millions of vehicles. This and other information provided the basis for NHTSA's determination that the 1999 Jeep Grand Cherokee did not pose an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety.

NHTSA investigating why Jeep recall fix is taking so long

Jeep's saga with the National Traffic Safety Administration and the voluntary campaign to repair 1.56 million vehicles for allegedly unsafe trailer hitches, is getting yet another chapter. The controversy appeared to finally be over in January when the automaker found a supplier for the replacement parts. Nothing is ever that easy, though, and the government regulator is now requesting documents from the company to clarify why the repairs are taking so long to begin.
Jeep parent company Chrysler has until July 16 to submit documents and answers to NHTSA explaining the situation. The regulator claims that despite its compromise to inspect and repair the models with improper hitches in June 2013, Chrysler didn't find a part supplier until December and didn't order the replacements until January. The government agency believes that the first components weren't manufactured until May of this year and vehicles may not actually be repaired until as late as August. According to the report, if the Chrysler doesn't supply what NHTSA is asking for, the agency could "take additional appropriate action as warranted."
Throughout this entire process, Chrysler has asserted that the vehicles met the applicable crash test standards of the time, and it has kept NHTSA abreast of the repair activity. In a recently released statement it said that the regulator analyzed eight rear impact reconstruction tests and found the replacement hitch to be safe. To keep up with the high demand for replacements, Chrysler is working with multiple suppliers, and they are running three shifts, six days a week to get the parts ready as soon as possible.