2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee Srt on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Updated 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee ace same controversial moose test it failed in 2012 [w/video]

Some background: one of the more scandalous international incidents of he-said/he-said from 2012 was when Swedish magazine Teknikens Varld put the Jeep Grand Cherokee through its "moose (or elk) test" and reported that the SUV nearly rolled over. That lead to a whole lot of accusations and rebuttals: more than one website and Chrysler's own blog reported that the Jeep was overloaded; Chrysler said Teknikens printed the magazine then let Chrysler respond, Teknikens answered all of the charges in a lengthy post and said Chrysler was given a chance to comment before it went to print; when Chrysler sent investigators to oversee the test and the Jeep didn't go up on two wheels as it did in the first test, furthermore all four wheels stayed on the ground when Auto Motor und Sport tested a Grand Cherokee in the same way.
Teknikens then re-ran the test with a new vehicle and said it's been doing this test since the 1970s, uses the loading information that Chrysler provides to the Swedish motor authority and the previous Grand Cherokee passed with no problem. In the second test, the Jeep failed again, then it gave Chrysler engineers access to the car's electronics and ran the test again. In that second round the Grand Cherokee didn't repeat the lurid two-wheel action, but in eleven runs it blew out front left tire seven times. Chrysler still objects to the results of all of those tests and maintains that vehicle was safe.
The 2014 Grand Cherokee was given its shot at the gauntlet in the latest round of moose tests, and Teknikens Varld reports that it passed without any problem at all, its stability control working perfectly, controlling motion at low speeds and all the way up to 44.1 miles per hour. You can watch the video of the new test and read the press release from the magazine on the updated Grand Cherokee below.

Marchionne says no offers are on the table for Fiat Chrysler

MONZA, Italy (Reuters) - Fiat Chrysler (FCA) has not received any offer for the company nor is the world's seventh-largest carmaker working on any "big deal", Chief Executive Sergio Marchionne said on Saturday. Speaking on the sidelines of the Italian Formula One Grand Prix, Marchionne said the focus remained on executing the company's business plan to 2018. Asked whether FCA had been approached by someone or whether there was an offer on the table, he simply said: "No." The company's share price jumped to record highs last month after reports of interest for the group or some of its brands from China. China's Great Wall Motor Co Ltd openly said it was interested in FCA, but had not held talks or signed a deal with executives at the Italian-American automaker. The stock move was also helped by expectations that the company might separate from some of its units. Marchionne reiterated on Saturday that FCA was working on a plan to "purify" its portfolio and that units, such as the components businesses, would be separated from the group. He hopes to complete that process by the end of 2018. "There are activities within the group that do not belong to a car manufacturer, for example the components businesses. The group needs to be cleared of those things," he told journalists. Asked whether an announcement could come this year, Marchionne said it was up to the board to decide and that it would next meet at the end of September. He said the time was not right for a spin-off of luxury brand Maserati and premium Alfa Romeo and the two brands needed to become self-sustainable entities first and "have the muscle to stand on their feet, make sufficient cash". "The way we see it now, it's almost impossible, if not impossible, to see a spin-off of Alfa Romeo/Maserati, these are two entities that are immature and in a development phase," he said. "It's the wrong moment, we are not in a condition to do it." He said the concept of separating the two brands from FCA's mass market business made sense and did not rule out this happening in future, but not under his tenure, which lasts until April 2019. "If there is an opportunity in future, it would certainly happen after I'm gone. It won't happen while Marchionne is around," he said.

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.