2005 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited 4.0l/6spd A/c Tint Soft Top 72k Mi $8,200 In Extras on 2040-cars
Corona, California, United States
Jeep Wrangler for Sale
2003 jeep wrangler x convertible 4x4 5-speed alloys 50k texas direct auto(US $15,980.00)
2011 jeep wrangler sport 4x4 hardtop lifted winch 41k texas direct auto(US $23,780.00)
4x4 6cyl hard top soft top(US $6,999.00)
1990 jeep wrangler, 6 cyl., 5 speed, 28,000 original miles, one owner(US $11,000.00)
2011 jeep wrangler unltd sahara 4x4 auto hard top 33k texas direct auto(US $28,980.00)
2008 jeep wrangler sahara 4x4 hardtop automatic nav 62k texas direct auto(US $22,980.00)
Auto Services in California
Yuki Import Service ★★★★★
Your Car Specialists ★★★★★
Xpress Auto Service ★★★★★
Xpress Auto Leasing & Sales ★★★★★
Wynns Motors ★★★★★
Wright & Knight Service Center ★★★★★
Auto blog
Jeep Grand Cherokee redesign delayed
Sat, Jun 27 2015The launch of the next-gen Jeep Grand Cherokee is being now being pushed back until late 2018 or even into 2019, Jeep CEO Mike Manley indicated Friday, according to Automotive News citing a Reuters report. Under the original five-year plan, the SUV was supposed to be replaced in the third quarter of 2017. That would have made for a big year for Jeep with a refreshed Renegade and new Wrangler also slated for 2017. A delayed Grand Cherokee could send ripples through Jeep's product plans. The three-row Grand Wagoneer is meant to give the brand a vehicle to take on the Land Rover Range Rover, but it's supposed to use the same platform as the Grand Cherokee. This change is rumored to push that important model's launch further back. There's less uncertainty when it comes to the next-gen Wrangler. Manley said that the model was "broadly on track," according to Automotive News. The five-year plan aimed for a launch in the second quarter of 2017. Controversy, however, has swirled over possible plans to move the Wrangler from its longtime Toledo, OH, factory. One problem Jeep doesn't have to worry about right now is sales. According to Automotive News, Manley said volume was up 20 percent globally and could reach 1.2 million by the end of the year. He also indicated the brand was "on pace" to reach its 1.9-million-vehicle goal for 2018. The Grand Cherokee delay comes in the wake of rumors that FCA US is shuffling around its previous five-year vehicle launch plan to postpone several models. Related Video:
NHTSA closes investigation on 4.7M FCA power modules, no recall
Thu, Jul 30 2015FCA US hasn't had the best time with recalls as of late. Not only did the company recently agree to greater safety oversight and paid $105 million to the government, that came just days after hacking fears prompted a 1.4-million model recall campaign. However, a recent decision to close an investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration means that the automaker doesn't have to worry about another major recall possibly affecting 4.7 million vehicles, according to the agency's report (as a PDF). Last September, the Center for Auto Safety petitioned NHTSA to investigate an alleged problem with the totally integrated power module (TIPM) on these FCA US models. The group claimed that a fault with the component could cause a variety of maladies, including stalls, not starting, catching fire, unintended acceleration, and airbag non-deployment. At the time, it also submitted 70 cases where this had reportedly happened. According to NHTSA, "no valid evidence was presented in support of claims related to airbag non-deployment, unintended acceleration, or fire resulting from TIPM faults and these claims were found to be wholly without merit based on review of the field data and design of the relevant systems and components." The agency did find signs of an issue with the fuel pump relay in some Jeep Grand Cherokees and Dodge Durangos, but FCA US issued recalls for the problem in September 2014 and February 2015. Without anything else to go on, the Feds don't think it's worth investigating this topic any more.
Ram and Jeep diesel emissions allegations spur class action lawsuits
Tue, Jan 17 2017This 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.