2014 Jeep Cherokee Limited on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2014 Jeep Cherokee facing production delay

Jeep's bold-faced new direction spearheaded by the 2014 Cherokee is facing some teething issues. According to a report by the Detroit Free Press, production start-up of the controversial new utility vehicle at its Toledo North facility is running about a month behind schedule "due to a wide range of issues." That's according to Mark Chernoby, senior vice president of engineering at Chrysler.
Chernoby maintains that the issues being encountered aren't unusual for the launch of a new vehicle - particularly one with a new powertrain - and he downplayed the delay, telling Jeep dealers that they "will have ample inventory of the midsize SUV by fall." Among the kinks being worked out? Calibrating the Cherokee's cutting-edge ZF nine-speed automatic transmission and refining assembly line tasks to make the process more efficient.
Chrysler expects to start building retail-ready versions of the Cherokee around mid-June, with official sales slated to start in September.

Fiat Chrysler working on an inline-six to replace the Pentastar V6?

Get out your Skeptics Hat for this one and keep it close by. Allpar cites "reliable sources" to write that Fiat Chrysler appears to be working on a new inline-six engine to be slotted into company products around the globe. The purported engine would be based on the 2.0-liter Global Medium Engine inline-four. Allpar first reported on the potential development in February 2017 and has filed a few updates since then, one citing "internal communications referring to a GME T6" — the "T" meaning turbocharged. It's said that some engineers have changed their online resumes to reflect their focus on the new motor. Apparently, FCA tried adding forced induction to the Pentastar V6 but didn't like the results. The new direction then turned toward a "compact straight-six." In at least one guise, the GME I-6 would come in at just under three liters in order to escape taxes on engines 3.0-liters and above in certain European markets; the 2.0-liter four-cylinder has an actual displacement of 1.995 liters. The present V6 Pentastar comes in 3.2-liter and 3.6-liter guises; a turbocharged 3.0-liter straight-six should be able to replace both as far as output. Hooking up to the company's eTorque system used on the 3.6-liter Pentastar and 5.7-liter Hemi would make things even more punchy. With the trend in truck engine downsizing, it wouldn't be crazy to see such an engine head straight to Ram. The four-cylinder GME unit serves in the Alfa Romeo Giulia and Stelvio, and Jeep Cherokee, Wrangler, and Grand Commander. The big Alfa Romeos and full-size Jeep and Ram models shouldn't have any problem with a longer inline engine. Maserati, which doesn't use the Pentastar engine, could be a candidate as well should it choose to step away from its Ferrari-developed engine cred. Speaking of Ferrari, the Italian brand is working up a new V6 based, in its words, on "a very, very particular architecture." It isn't clear where it will go or if one of the other Italian brands will get access to it, but the Allpar piece says the Ferrari V6 will be based on the core GME architecture for Maserati. Chrysler gave up its last inline-six 11 years ago when the 4.0-liter I-6 retired alongside the JK-series Jeep Wrangler. The engine format is back in vogue, and its reincarnations have received good reviews. But inline-sixes are generally longer, hence FCA's focus on a compact unit, and that could limit the purported engine's placement options.

The Hemi deserves to die | Opinion

Hi. I'm Byron and I love V8s. I want them to stick around for a long, long time. But not all V8s are created equal, and I will not mourn the passing of the modern Hemi. You shouldn't either. While we may agree that its death is untimely, if you ask me, that's only because it came far too late.  Stellantis’ announcement of its new, turbocharged inline-six that is all but guaranteed to kill off the Hemi V8 has led to quite a few half-baked internet takes. The notion being suggested by some, that automotive media were brainwashed into believing the Hemi was in need of replacement, is so far divorced from reality that I openly guffawed at the notion. Journalists have been challenging Chrysler, FCA and now Stellantis for years to deliver better high-performance engines. The response has always been the same: “Why?” Why replace a heavy V8 with a lighter, all-aluminum one? Why repackage powertrains for smaller footprints and better handling vehicles? Why be better when “good enough” sells really, really well? I too mourn the departure of good gasoline-burning engines, but since when was the Hemi one? HereÂ’s a quiz: Name every SRT model with an all-aluminum engine. TimeÂ’s up. If you named any, you failed. They donÂ’t exist. This isnÂ’t GMÂ’s compact, lightweight small-block, nor is it a DOHC Ford Coyote that at least revs high enough to justify its larger footprint. The Hemi is an overweight marketing exercise that happened to be in the right place at the right time. That time was 2003, when Chrysler was still Chrysler — except it was Daimler-Chrysler and the "merger of equals" was doing a bang-up job of bleeding the company's cash reserves dry while doing virtually nothing to address its mounting legacy costs. "That thang got a Hemi?" was emblematic of the whimsical, nostalgia-driven marketing of the colonial half of the "marriage made in heaven." That was 20 years ago. 20 years prior to that, emissions-choked American V8s were circling the drain faster than a soapy five-carat engagement ring in a truck stop sink.