1979 Jeep Cj7, Golden Eagle, 401 Cid V8, 4 Speed on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2013 Jeep Wrangler Moab Edition

There will forever be a soft spot in my heart for the Jeep Wrangler. The last one I owned was red, and, as a 1990 model, had the square headlights derided by Jeep enthusiasts who grew up on the Civilian Jeeps that descended from their General Purpose military ancestors. As a teenager, I couldn't have cared less what shape its headlights happened to be - to me, a Jeep Wrangler represented freedom; a carefree do-it-all machine equally at home with the top stowed away in the summer or with the heater on full blast in the snowy clutches of Old Man Winter. In Dr. Seuss parlance, my square-headlighted Sneetch was just as worthy as any round-headlighted Sneetch.
All that said, I'll be the first person to advise against buying a Jeep Wrangler of any sort for owners who don't plan to use it as its makers intend. There's no good reason to punish yourself with a stiff and springy ride, a loud and somewhat drafty (though generally water-resistant) interior or the poor fuel economy expected of a block-shaped vehicle if you don't enjoy its other, more exciting benefits.
Of course, Jeep has done its darndest over the years to make the Wrangler as civilized as possible while keeping it as capable as federal law will allow. The 2013 Jeep Wrangler Moab edition is one of Jeep's latest attempts to attract attention from the upper reaches of the active lifestyle set, and I spent a week with one to see what makes the Moab special.

25,000 Jeep Grand Cherokee, Dodge Durango SUVs recalled over brake feel

Chrysler has announced that it is recalling over 25,000 Jeep Grand Cherokee and Dodge Durango SUVs from several markets over concerns about brake feel under hard braking. The affected models are from the 2012 and 2013 model years, although the actual dates of production aren't available. 18,700 are in the US, while 825 are in Canada, 530 are in Mexico and a further 5,200 outside of North America.
According to a statement, Chrysler was informed of the issue by a component supplier for the Ready Alert Braking system, which primes the brakes in anticipation of an emergency stop. A component in the system was restricting the flow of brake fluid too much.
As Chrysler is quick to point out, the way the brakes functioned was in compliance with regulations and there are no reported cases of drivers losing braking power. Instead, the issue rests with what Chrysler calls a pedal feel that "was not consistent with customer expectations." So it would seem Chrysler is being proactive and fixing a problem not because there's a legal issue at work, but simply because it doesn't feel the way the manufacturer wants it to. Well done.

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.