2000 Jeep Cherokee Sport Xj, 4.0l, 4wd, 4 Door, 151k, Automatic, Snow Tires on 2040-cars

Auto blog

NHTSA investigates a million-plus Jeep Cherokees for parking brake issue

The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) is investigating a potential safety issue that could be present in more than 1 million Jeep Cherokees sold for the 2014-2020 model years. Per owner complaints, these cars may be equipped with an electronic parking brake control module that is susceptible to water intrusion. If the water causes a short, it can result in uncommanded activation of the parking brake while the vehicle is in motion, which can lead to a stall, NHTSA says.  If you follow Jeep Cherokee news closely (and who doesn't?), this issue may ring a bell. That's because Jeep was on the hook for recalling the Cherokee for water intrusion into the liftgate control module, which is fitted right next to the parking brake module. In that instance, short circuits had the potential to cause a fire, which has not so far been indicated as a potential side effect of the new parking brake issue, but any time electricity is involved, there's usually at least some risk for ignition.  The Cherokee is just one of four Stellantis models with a new open investigation, the Detroit Free Press reported Tuesday. NHTSA is also looking into reports of a transmission problem that could strand owners of 2019-2021 Chrysler Pacifica plug-in hybrid minivans and a crankshaft and/or camshaft position sensor problem that could cause a stall in the 2016 Dodge Journey and Jeep Compass. Between the two, these investigations cover an additional 300,000 vehicles.  None of these vehicles are being recalled at this point, however a NHTSA investigation is the first major step toward a recall being initiated. The regulator will work with Stellantis to determine whether a recall is necessary.  Related video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Government/Legal Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ownership Safety SUV

Consumer Reports no longer recommends Honda Civic

Consumer Reports annual Car Reliability Survey is out, and yes, there are some big surprises. First and foremost? The venerable publication no longer recommends the Honda Civic. In fact, aside from the walking-dead CR-Z and limited-release Clarity fuel-cell car, the Civic is the only Honda to miss out on CR's prestigious nod. At the opposite end there's a surprise as well – Toyota and Lexus remain the most reliable brands on the market, but Buick cracked the top three. That's up from seventh last year, and the first time for an American brand to stand on the Consumer Reports podium. Mazda's entire lineup earned Recommended checks as well. Consumer Reports dinged the Civic for its "infuriating" touch-screen radio, lack of driver lumbar adjustability, the limited selection of cars on dealer lots fitted with Honda's popular Sensing system, and the company's decision to offer LaneWatch instead of a full-tilt blind-spot monitoring system. Its score? A lowly 58. The Civic isn't the only surprise drop from CR's Recommended ranks. The Audi A3, Ford F-150, Subaru WRX/STI, and Volkswagen Jetta, GTI, and Passat all lost the Consumer Reports' checkmark. On the flipside, a number of popular vehicles graduated to the Recommended ranks, including the BMW X5, Chevrolet Camaro, Corvette, and Cruze, Hyundai Santa Fe, Porsche Macan, and Tesla Model S. Perhaps the biggest surprise is the hilariously recall-prone Ford Escape getting a Recommended check – considering the popularity of Ford's small crossover, this is likely a coup for the brand, as it puts the Escape on a level playing field with the Recommended Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V, and Nissan Rogue. While Ford is probably happy to see CR promote the Escape, the list wasn't as kind for every brand. For example, of the entire Fiat Chrysler Automobiles catalog, the ancient Chrysler 300 was the only car to score a check – there wasn't a single Dodge, Fiat, Jeep, Maserati, or Ram on the list. That hurts. FCA isn't alone at the low end, either. GMC, Jaguar Land Rover, Mini, and Mitsubishi don't have a vehicle on CR's list between them, while brands like Mercedes-Benz, Volvo, Nissan, Lincoln, Infiniti, and Cadillac only have a few models each. You can check out Consumer Reports entire reliability roundup, even without a subscription, here.

FCA seeking new trial in Jeep fire case, calls $150M judgement 'grossly excessive'

Fiat Chrysler Automobiles is fighting back after a Decatur County, GA jury ordered the company to pay $150 million to the family of a four-year-old boy that was killed after a 1999 Jeep Grand Cherokee crashed and caught fire. The company is requesting the judge reduce the award, and should Walden's family not agree to the lower sum, that a new trial be held. The Detroit Free Press reports that FCA would be forced to pay $120 million over the death of young Remington Walden, with an extra $30 million being paid to the boy's family. Neither figure sits well with the automaker, though, which called the fine "grossly excessive," and claimed it was in violation of Georgia state law. The judgment stems from FCA's long-running problem with the fuel tanks of certain Jeep models built in the 1990s and 2000s. According to the newspaper, FCA argues that the jury was biased after the Waldens' attorneys played on the their passions and pushed for a big award, saying the wrongful death award was 11 times more than any appeals court has ever upheld. FCA said attorneys for the plaintiffs told the jury to base the settlement on Sergio Marchionne's total compensation, $68 million. FCA also claims in its motion that the young boy's suffering was brief. "A $30-million pain-and-suffering award for what plaintiffs acknowledge was at most one minute of suffering is irrational," the motion, which was obtained by The Detroit Free Press, read. "Where such plainly improper arguments are immediately followed by irrational and stunningly excessive damage awards, there can be no doubt that the jury acted from passion and prejudice." Jim Butler, the attorney for the Waldens, has called the motion "nonsense," although he said the family will accept whatever figure the judge sets.