2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Which electric cars can charge at a Tesla Supercharger?

The difference between Tesla charging and non-Tesla charging. Electrify America; Tesla Tesla's advantage has long been its charging technology and Supercharger network. Now, more and more automakers are switching to Tesla's charging tech. But there are a few things non-Tesla drivers need to know about charging at a Tesla station. A lot has hit the news cycle in recent months with regard to electric car drivers and where they can and can't plug in. The key factor in all of that? Whether automakers switched to Tesla's charging standard. More car companies are shifting to Tesla's charging tech in the hopes of boosting their customers' confidence in going electric.  Here's what it boils down to: If you currently drive a Tesla, you can keep charging at Tesla charging locations, which use the company's North American Charging Standard (NACS), which has long served it well. The chargers are thinner, more lightweight and easier to wrangle than other brands.  If you currently drive a non-Tesla EV, you have to charge at a non-Tesla charging station like that of Electrify America or EVgo — which use the Combined Charging System (CCS) — unless you stumble upon a Tesla charger already equipped with the Magic Dock adapter. For years, CCS tech dominated EVs from everyone but Tesla.  Starting next year, if you drive a non-Tesla EV (from the automakers that have announced they'll make the switch), you'll be able to charge at all Supercharger locations with an adapter. And by 2025, EVs from some automakers won't even need an adaptor.  Here's how to charge up, depending on which EV you have:  Ford 2021 Ford Mustang Mach-E. Tim Levin/Insider Ford was the earliest traditional automaker to team up with Tesla for its charging tech. Current Ford EV owners — those driving a Ford electric vehicle already fitted with a CCS port — will be able to use a Tesla-developed adapter to access Tesla Superchargers starting in the spring. That means that, if you own a Mustang Mach-E or Ford F-150 Lightning, you will need the adapter in order to use a Tesla station come 2024. But Ford will equip its future EVs with the NACS port starting in 2025 — eliminating the need for any adapter. Owners of new Ford EVs will be able to pull into a Supercharger station and juice up, no problem. General Motors Cadillac Lyriq. Cadillac GM will also allow its EV drivers to plug into Tesla stations.

Build a Jeep Gladiator 392 next? The Hummer H3T Alpha blazed the trail

The 2021 Wrangler Rubicon 392 will combine the go-anywhere capability of a Jeep's iconic off-roader with the grunt of a V8 for the first time in decades. As cool as that is, we can't help but think Jeep is missing out on a huge opportunity to pair that 470-horsepower, 6.4-liter Hemi V8 with the Wrangler's pickup cousin, the Jeep Gladiator, in the form of a Mojave 392.  Autoblog took part in a media Q&A session with Jeep ahead of the Rubicon 392's announcement in which the company's product higher-ups said that there are currently no official plans to build a 392 variant of the Gladiator pickup. But whether or not Jeep has plans, it certainly has precedent, and from our perspective, a market.  Rewind to 2008, better known as one of the worst possible years to introduce a gas-guzzling, V8-powered pickup truck. Enter the 2009 Hummer H3T Alpha, the first variant of Hummer's midsize truck/SUV hybrid to be offered with a 5.3-liter V8. The 300-horsepower small-block was an upgrade to the sturdy but relatively uninspiring 3.7-liter inline-5 that the H3 lineup had inherited from its midsize pickup platform mates.  As our Jeremy Korzeniewski noted in the Rubicon 392's introductory piece, an open-top Jeep has not been offered with an optional V8 for as long as the "Wrangler" nameplate has existed. The last Jeep 4x4 to do so was still a CJ, or civilian Jeep, and the 304 cubic-inch engine came from American Motors Corporation. Incidentally, this generation of the Wrangler is also the first to be offered in a pickup variant. Cue the beard-stroking.  Now, frankly, it's not even remotely fair to compare the H3T's powertrain offerings to the decade-newer Gladiator's, but the Hummer actually boasts a few advantages over Jeep's modern pickup. While most of the Jeep's off-road specs give it an edge, the Gladiator doesn't come close to the H3T's 30.1-degree departure angle, for instance. And in more practical terms, the stubbier H3T has other maneuverability advantages. The Gladiator has 3" of wheelbase and 5" of overall length on the H3T, and a 22.4-foot turning radius to show for it. The Hummer's? Just 18.5'.

2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee probed by NHTSA for brake problems

Remember how Toyota got in all kinds of trouble over unintended acceleration? Well, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is investigating Jeep over unintended braking. NHTSA has announced a probe of 20,000 Grand Cherokee SUVs from model year 2014. Nine complaints have been received, with owners alleging that their Jeeps have issued brake warnings or gone ahead and applied the brakes when no threat was presented. Each complaint alleges that the vehicles have exhibited this behavior repeatedly, leading to a "sudden reduction in vehicle speed in traffic." So basically, a system designed to prevent accidents could actually increase the odds of a collision happening. Speaking to the Associated Press, Jeep spokesperson Eric Mayne said owners whose vehicles are exhibiting this behavior should report to dealers, while adding that the automatic braking/adaptive cruise control systems can be deactivated. Related Video: Scroll down for the official bulletin on the investigation from NHTSA. Date Investigation Opened: JUN 01, 2015 Date Investigation Closed: Open NHTSA Action Number: PE15021 Component(s): FORWARD COLLISION AVOIDANCE Manufacturer: Chrysler (FCA US LLC) SUMMARY: The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has received nine complaints alleging inappropriate activations of the autonomous braking system in model year (MY) 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles. All nine reports alleged unexpected braking incidents preceded by collision imminent brake warnings and resulting in sudden reduction in vehicle speed in traffic. Two complaints reported autonomous braking incidents with no objects on the road resulting in rapid increase in brake force and anti-lock braking system (ABS) activations. The complaints alleged experiencing multiple events at different locations and road conditions. A Preliminary Evaluation has been opened to assess the frequency, scope and consequences of the alleged defect. The following VOQ numbers are associated with the issues discussed in this resume: 10543837, 10713629, 10690650, 10663320, 10630362, 10596913, 10533622, 10533524, 10651269.