2014 Jeep Patriot 16k Clear Title No Reserve Salvage Damaged Rebuilder on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ram and Jeep diesel emissions allegations spur class action lawsuits

This shouldn't come as a surprise. Last week, the EPA issued a notice of violation to FCA after it determined that Jeep and Ram installed eight undisclosed auxiliary emissions control devices on diesel vehicles. Since then US law firm Heninger Garrison Davis, LLC and Canadian firm Sotos LLP have launched class action suits on behalf of owners. These latest lawsuits are unrelated to a previous class action suit brought against FCA and Cummins over NOx emissions in 2007 to 2012 Ram models. The violation notice – and the subsequent lawsuits – covers 2014 to 2016 Jeep Grand Cherokee and Ram 1500 models equipped with the 3.0-liter turbodiesel V6, a total of about 104,000 vehicles in the US. The EPA says that while the emissions control devices aren't necessarily illegal, installing them without disclosing them to the EPA is, as they produce more emissions in real world use than in testing. Skirting certification in this way might be a violation of the Clean Air Act. FCA could see fines of up to $45,000 per vehicle, depending on the outcome of the EPA investigation. FCA denies that these are cheat devices, and has proposed software updates to bring the vehicles into compliance. As for the lawsuits, Heninger Garrison Davis says that "Fiat Chrysler marketed those vehicles as environmentally friendly with enhanced fuel efficiency, better performance, and lower emissions. Although the diesel vehicles were successfully marketed as 'clean,' their environmentally-friendly representations were deceptive to consumers." The suit seeks an undisclosed amount of compensation for owners of these vehicles. In Canada, Sotos LLP is seeking $250 million in damages on behalf of owners. This suit, filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, also claims deception on the part of FCA, "resulting in losses and damage" to owners. These are similar claims to group actions against Volkswagen with regard to its diesel emissions cheating scandal. While VW is fixing or buying back many of the affected vehicles, the company is defending itself against some suits on behalf of owners, saying it expects " no decline in the residual values of the affected vehicles as a result of this issue." Don't be surprised if FCA mounts a similar defense.

What would you drive in 1985?

Bereft of live baseball games to watch, I've turned to the good ship YouTube to watch classic games. While watching the 1985 American League Championship Series last night, several of the broadcast's commercials made its way into the original VHS recording, including those for cars. "Only 8.8% financing on a 1985 Ford Tempo!" What a deal! That got me thinking: what would I drive in 1985?  It sure wouldn't be a Tempo. Or an IROC-Z, for that matter, despite what my Photoshopped 1980s self would indicate in the picture above. I posed this question to my fellow Autobloggists. Only one could actually drive back then, I was only 2 and a few editors weren't even close to being born. Here are our choices, which were simply made with the edict of "Come on, man, be realistic."  West Coast Editor James Riswick: OK, I started this, I'll go first. I like coupes today, so I'm pretty sure I'd drive one back then. I definitely don't see myself driving some badge-engineered GM thing from 1985, and although a Honda Prelude has a certain appeal, I must admit that something European would likely be in order. A BMW maybe? No, I'm too much a contrarian for that. The answer is therefore a 1985 Saab 900 Turbo 3-Door, which is not only a coupe but a hatchback, too. If I could scrounge up enough Reagan-era bucks for the ultra-cool SPG model, that would be rad. The 900 Turbo pictured, which was for auction on Bring a Trailer a few years ago, came with plum-colored Bokhara Red, and you're damn sure I would've had me one of those. Nevermind 1985, I'd probably drive this thing today.   Associate Editor Byron Hurd: I'm going to go with the 1985.5 Ford Mustang SVO, AKA the turbocharged Fox Body that everybody remembers but nobody drives. The mid-year update to the SVO bumped the power up from 175 ponies (yeah, yeah) to 205, making it almost as powerful (on paper, anyway) as the V8-powered GT models offered in the same time frame. I chose this particular car because it's a bit of a time capsule and, simultaneously, a reminder that all things are cyclical. Here we are, 35 years later, and 2.3-liter turbocharged Mustangs are a thing again. Who would have guessed?

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.