2003 Jeep Liberty Sport 4x4 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee

Jeep appears to have nailed it this time. After two decades of assembling its Grand Cherokee sport utility vehicle, the American automaker has finally delivered a world-class off-roader capable of taking on everything in its segment - and more - with a high likelihood of coming out on top.
And if you drove last year's model, it's time to climb behind the wheel again as Jeep has significantly updated the SUV for 2014 with a bold new exterior appearance, an upgraded interior with enhanced electronics and a new transmission that completely transforms the way it drives.
We recently spent a full week with a dark blue 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee Overland 4x4, a well-optioned model fitted with the standard gasoline-fed V6. While it didn't have the punch of the range-topping V8-powered SRT8, or the fuel-sipping economy of its new EcoDiesel sibling, the high-volume variant left us quite impressed.

Chrysler axes old V6s, goes all-Pentastar

Old technology has a way of lingering on, particularly at Chrysler headquarters in Auburn Hills. So while the Pentastar V6 has replaced the older engine architecture in just about every application, it still soldiered on in some export markets. But the introduction of a new 3.0-liter Pentastar V6, produced in Michigan and meant only for the Chinese market, has put the final nail in the old engine's coffin.
Fitted into the 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee and Jeep Wrangler just introduced to China at the Chengdu Motor Show, the downsized six uses the same architecture as the larger 3.6-liter Pentastar V6. But because of its 2,997cc capacity, it can be exported to China without the increased duty the 3.6-liter or even 3.2-liter Pentastar engines would incur. The 3.0-liter V6 develops 230 horsepower at 6,350 rpm and 210 pound-feet at 4,400 rpm.
Admittedly, it's unlikely, but even though the engine was said to be created solely to undercut tax thresholds in China and Europe, the 3.0-liter Pentastar has recently surfaced in rumors of an application here: as the boosted heart of a potential Cherokee SRT with anywhere from 375 to 410 hp.

Auto Mergers and Acquisitions: Suicide or salvation?

We love the Moses figure. A savior riding in from stage right with the ideas, the smarts, and the scrappiness to put things right. Alan Mullaly. Carroll Shelby. Lee Iacocca. Andrew Carnegie. Steve Jobs. Elon Musk. Bart Simpson. Sergio Marchionne does not likely view himself with Moses-like optics, but the CEO of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles recently gave a remarkable, perhaps prophetic interview with Automotive News about his interest and the inevitability of merging with a potential automotive partner like General Motors. Marchionne has been overtly public about his notion that GM must merge with FCA. For a bit of context, GM sold 9.9 million vehicles in 2014, posting $2.8 billion in net income, while FCA sold 4.75 million units and earned $2.4 billion in net income, painting a very rosy FCA earnings-to-sales picture. But that's not the entire picture. Most people in the auto industry still remember the trainwreck that was the DaimlerChrysler "merger" written in what turned out to be sand in 1998. It proved to be a master class in how not to fuse two companies, two cultures, two continents, and two management teams. Oh, it worked for the two individuals at both helms pre-merger. They got silly rich. And the industry itself was in a misty romance at the time with mergers and acquisitions. BMW bought Rolls-Royce. Volkswagen Group bought Bentley, Bugatti, and Lamborghini, putting all three brands into their rightful place in both products and positioning. No marriages there, so no false pretense. Finally, Nissan and Renault got married in 1999. A successful marriage requires several rare elements in this atmosphere of gas fumes and power lust. But a successful marriage requires several rare elements in this atmosphere of gas fumes and power lust, the principle part being honesty. Daimler and Chrysler lied to each other. The heads of each unit, the product planners, and finance all presented their then-current and long-range forecasts to each other with less-than-forthright accuracy. Daimler was the far greater equal and no one from the Chrysler side enjoyed that. The cultures were entirely different, too, and little was done to bridge that gap. Which brings me back to the present overtures by Marchionne to GM. "There are varying degrees of hugs," Marchionne stated in the Automotive News piece. "I can hug you nicely, I can hug you tightly, I can hug you like a bear, I can really hug you." Seriously?