Lifted 1999 Jeep Cherokee Xj on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Jeep Grand Wagoneer could top out at $130,000

Jeep's image presents a blue-collar, American brand that builds SUVs for Average Joe drivers, nevermind the thousands of $40,000 Wrangler Unlimited that sell every year. But a revived Grand Wagoneer could push Jeep prices into a whole new realm. Eventually. Speaking to AutoExpress, Jeep boss Mike Manley confirmed "the Grand Wagoneer concept is moving forward," and that its price could reach levels previously unheard of from the brand. "I don't think there's a maximum price ceiling per se for Jeep. If you look at the upper end of the segment in the US, for me, the Grand Wagoneer done well can compete all the way through this segment," Manley told AE. "I'll use US dollars, but pushing the car up to $130,000 to $140,000 may be possible, but we need to establish Grand Wagoneer in its own right first. That's why I wouldn't say there's price ceiling." That's about twice as much as Jeep's current most-expensive model, the $66,690 Grand Cherokee SRT. Hell, it's more than a Dodge Viper ACR, and is roughly on par with a base Maserati GranTurismo. But while getting wrapped up in the idea of a six-figure Jeep is easy, Manley's argument that his brand needs to establish the new model first is more important. It absolutely does not sound like Jeep will introduce the reborn Grand Wagoneer with a trim near $130,000. Instead, we bet the new flagship model will kick off between $50,000 and $60,000, right near the top of where the brand currently plays. That lets Jeep undercut entry level versions of the BMW X5, Mercedes-Benz GLS, and GMC Yukon Denali without giving brand loyalists sticker shock. After establishing the Grand Wagoneer, to use Manley's parlance, Jeep can afford to push higher and challenge the base level Range Rover, which starts around $85,000. Only after that can we expect Manley's hypothesizing to come true. So yeah, while a $130,000 Jeep sounds like a possibility, we wouldn't expect it for at least a few model years after the Grand Wagoneer's big debut. Related Video:

Consumer Reports no longer recommends Honda Civic

Consumer Reports annual Car Reliability Survey is out, and yes, there are some big surprises. First and foremost? The venerable publication no longer recommends the Honda Civic. In fact, aside from the walking-dead CR-Z and limited-release Clarity fuel-cell car, the Civic is the only Honda to miss out on CR's prestigious nod. At the opposite end there's a surprise as well – Toyota and Lexus remain the most reliable brands on the market, but Buick cracked the top three. That's up from seventh last year, and the first time for an American brand to stand on the Consumer Reports podium. Mazda's entire lineup earned Recommended checks as well. Consumer Reports dinged the Civic for its "infuriating" touch-screen radio, lack of driver lumbar adjustability, the limited selection of cars on dealer lots fitted with Honda's popular Sensing system, and the company's decision to offer LaneWatch instead of a full-tilt blind-spot monitoring system. Its score? A lowly 58. The Civic isn't the only surprise drop from CR's Recommended ranks. The Audi A3, Ford F-150, Subaru WRX/STI, and Volkswagen Jetta, GTI, and Passat all lost the Consumer Reports' checkmark. On the flipside, a number of popular vehicles graduated to the Recommended ranks, including the BMW X5, Chevrolet Camaro, Corvette, and Cruze, Hyundai Santa Fe, Porsche Macan, and Tesla Model S. Perhaps the biggest surprise is the hilariously recall-prone Ford Escape getting a Recommended check – considering the popularity of Ford's small crossover, this is likely a coup for the brand, as it puts the Escape on a level playing field with the Recommended Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V, and Nissan Rogue. While Ford is probably happy to see CR promote the Escape, the list wasn't as kind for every brand. For example, of the entire Fiat Chrysler Automobiles catalog, the ancient Chrysler 300 was the only car to score a check – there wasn't a single Dodge, Fiat, Jeep, Maserati, or Ram on the list. That hurts. FCA isn't alone at the low end, either. GMC, Jaguar Land Rover, Mini, and Mitsubishi don't have a vehicle on CR's list between them, while brands like Mercedes-Benz, Volvo, Nissan, Lincoln, Infiniti, and Cadillac only have a few models each. You can check out Consumer Reports entire reliability roundup, even without a subscription, here.

Fiat Chrysler dumped 40,000 unordered vehicles on dealers

In a move that echoes recent history, Fiat Chrysler has been making more cars and trucks than dealers in the U.S. are willing to accept, with Bloomberg reporting that at one point the automaker had built up a glut of around 40,000 unordered vehicles. That’s led some dealers to accuse FCA of reviving the dreaded “sales bank” accounting practice of obscuring inventory to improve the balance sheet. The company reportedly began building up its inventory of unordered cars this summer despite an industrywide slowdown in sales and an eagerness by some dealers to thin their inventories because rising interest rates are making it more expensive to hold unsold cars. The inventory build-up also coincided with Fiat ChryslerÂ’s efforts to find a merger partner, first with Renault, which fell through, then last monthÂ’s announcement that it will merge with FranceÂ’s PSA Group. FCA denies any such scheme and tells Bloomberg the rising inventory is down to a new predictive analytics system designed to better square supply with demand from dealers that is helping the company save money and narrow the numbers of unsold vehicles. The company recently agreed to pay a $40 million civil penalty to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to settle a complaint that it paid dealers to report fake sales figures over a span of five years. While no one is suggesting that FCA is in dire financial straits — the company saw higher than expected earnings in the third quarter and record profits in North America — the practice has strong historical precedent by Chrysler, which built up bloated inventories in the run-up to its two federal bailouts, in 1980 and 2009. It was also common at GM and Ford during the 2000s, when all three Detroit automakers struggled with excess manufacturing capacity and plummeting sales in the lead-up to the Great Recession. Back in 2012, CFO Magazine wrote about a report that explained automakersÂ’ rationale for the practice and how it works: Say fixed costs for a given factory are $100, and that the factory can make 50 cars. Consumers, however, demand only 10. Under absorption costing, if the company makes all 50 cars, its cost-per-car is $2. If it makes only up to demand, or 10 cars, the cost-per-car is $10. Although each car adds variable costs for steel and other parts, if those costs are low, the company still has an incentive to make more cars to keep the cost-per-car down.