2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited 4x4 3.0l Diesel Eng Loaded No Reserve on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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?

Daily Driver: 2015 Jeep Renegade Sport 4x4

Daily Driver videos are micro-reviews of vehicles in the Autoblog test fleet, reviewed by the staffers who drive them every day. Today's Daily Driver features the 2015 Jeep Renegade Sport 4x4, reviewed by Adam Morath. Something to note: The vehicle tested here is a pre-production unit, and we had some issues with the MySky removable roof system. (Associate editor Brandon Turkus mentioned these problems in his Quick Spin.) FCA confirms that improvements were made for production-spec cars. You can watch the video above or read a transcript below. Watch more Autoblog videos at /videos. [00:00:00] Hey, this is Adam Morath with another Daily Driver. Today, we're in the 2015 Jeep Renegade and I'm excited to be driving this in a Sport trim level. That's the lowest trim that they offer it in. I say I'm excited, because often we get the cars to totally spec-ed out to the max, the automaker trying to show off what they can do with the car but it doesn't always give you a realistic view of how most customers are going to spec the car, and I think with the Renegade being the entry-level model for Jeep now [00:00:30] replacing the outgoing Patriot and Compass, it makes sense to drive this in the Sport trim. We do have it in 4x4, comes in at just around $23,000. It's powered by a turbocharged 1.4 liter inline 4 and we've got it, made it to the 6-speed manual transmission, which is pretty cool. Again you can see FCA's fingerprints on this car. If they wanted to do well in Europe, of course you've got to offer it with a manual and that's nice for consumers here to have that choice of having a stick shift in the Jeep again. [00:01:00] That's kind of fun. It produces 160-horsepower, 184 pound-feet of torque. It's got a little pack to it. I wouldn't call it sporty but it's enough for a vehicle of this size. This is a pretty basic version of the renegade. The only options we have on it are the AC, the roof rails, 4-wheel drive, which is a must here in Michigan and then these MySky roof panels, which I'll get to in a minute, but that takes us from a base price of $18,000, the cheapest you'll be able to get into a Renegade for [00:01:30] up to about $23,700, which is where we're at. Yes, these are MySky roof panels. It's a totally new feature on the Renegade that Jeep is trying out and I think it's pretty cool. It's like a tee top system, except the panels aren't side by side. You have one in the front and one in the back.

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.