2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee Srt8 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

164K Jeep Cherokees recalled to protect liftgate from moisture

FCA is recalling 164,003 examples of the 2014 and 2015 Jeep Cherokee because moisture can damage the power liftgate controls on models that are equipped with that feature. Regionally, this includes 99,436 of them in the US, 13,195 in Canada, 2,406 in Mexico, and 48,966 outside of NAFTA. The problem came to light after the automaker started investigating a fire in one of the SUVs. There were no injuries, though. According to FCA US' research, the power hatch's control module potentially can be exposed to water. This can cause a short circuit and possibly a fire, as in this case. Until the issue is repaired, the company is advising owners to keep the cargo area dry on Cherokees equipped with this feature. To fix things, dealers will install a shield around the controls to protect them from moisture and will replace any modules showing exposure to water. Statement: Water-Shield Installation June 24, 2015 , Auburn Hills, Mich. - FCA US LLC is voluntarily recalling an estimated 99,436 SUVs in the U.S. to install shields that protect their power liftgate control modules, and related components, from moisture. FCA US LLC began an investigation after learning of a reported vehicle fire. The probe revealed power liftgate control modules in certain SUVs may be inadvertently exposed to water. This may cause a short-circuit, creating a fire hazard. However, the Company is unaware of any related injuries or accidents. The campaign affects model year 2014 and 2015 Jeep Cherokee SUVs, but is limited to vehicles equipped with power liftgates. An estimated 13,195 customers are affected in Canada, along with an estimated 2,406 customers in Mexico and 48,966 outside the NAFTA region. The estimated total recall population is 164,003. All affected customers will be advised when they may schedule service. If the modules show signs of water exposure, they will be replaced. All recall-related work will be performed free of charge. In the interim, the cargo areas of 2014-15 Cherokees equipped with power liftgates should be monitored and kept dry. Customers with questions may call the FCA US Customer Information Center at 1-800-853-1403.

Chrysler 3.0L EcoDiesel V6: Autoblog Technology of the Year finalist

Offering a diesel engine in an American pickup is anything but new - Ford, General Motors and Chrysler all offer excellent and almost impossibly powerful oil-burning engines in their various fullsize trucks. What is new and novel about the 3.0L EcoDiesel, though, is its size, and the variety of vehicles that use it. It's the smallest engine, as far as displacement is concerned, currently offered in a large truck in the US, and, for 2014 and 2015, it is available in the Ram 1500 and the Jeep Grand Cherokee.
Though it may be small, it's got muscle. While 240 horsepower isn't particularly impressive these days, the engine's 420 pound-feet of torque more than makes up for that. The torque rating is even greater force than even the big 5.7-liter Hemi can muster. Chrysler's well-regarded eight-speed automatic transmission makes the most of all that bull-headed pulling power in both the Ram and Grand Cherokee. Chrysler claims the Ram EcoDiesel 1500 can tow as much as 9,200 pounds when properly equipped, which makes it "90-percent of the Hemi with a night and day difference in fuel economy."
Make no mistake; it's that promise of a sizable fuel economy improvement that many long-haul truckers will be most interested in. In the Ram 1500 that we tested for our Tech of the Year competition, the diesel engine costs $2,850 more than the gas-fed V8, and Ram estimates that EcoDiesel buyers will pay off their investment when compared to the Hemi engine in less than three years, which is considerably less time than the 4.5 or so years the average buyer will keep his or her fullsize pickup. The more you drive, the more you'll save, and the math proves equally as effective in the Jeep Grand Cherokee.

2018 Nissan Kicks vs other tiny crossovers: How they compare on paper

Update: As we now have now driven the 2018 Nissan Kicks and have all the specs and figures available, we thought it was time to update this comparison post. The data chart has been updated with final Kicks information as well as changes to competitors made for 2019. Anyone else have "Pumped Up Kicks" by Foster the People stuck in their heads? Well, you do now. I couldn't be the only one. Anyway, the 2018 Nissan Kicks is a thing. It replaces the Nissan Juke, which Mr. Stocksdale thought was a bad idea and Mr. Myself thought was a smart idea. Nevertheless, neither of us were especially pumped up by the Kicks. However, the majority of car buyers are all about SUVs, and this littlest segment of them has been multiplying like Tribbles in the past few years. The Juke was one of the first of these subcompact crossovers, but it was probably too oddball for a mainstream audience (not to mention inefficient) and never really caught on. Newer competitors certainly didn't help. Well, to see how the Kicks compares to those very competitors, lets fire up the Autoblog Comparo Generator 3000 (TM). Specifically, we'll be looking at those subcompact crossovers with similarly small dimensions, especially low prices and/or a disinclination to offering all-wheel drive. We're talking about the Nissan Kicks vs the Toyota C-HR, Hyundai Kona, Kia Soul, Honda HR-V and Jeep Renegade. Now, if you're interested in literally the exact opposite SUV segment, check out our recent Mercedes G-Class comparo. Otherwise, on to the spreadsheet: Dimensions and passenger space In terms of exterior dimensions, the new Kicks is right smack in the middle of the segment. It's virtually the same as the Honda HR-V, yet manages to eek out a few extra cubic feet of cargo space behind its raised back seat. The Honda and its "Magic Seat" still beats it in terms of maximum capacity, but it sure is close. The Kia Soul has the biggest maximum number, but that's largely the result of being a box. Its small behind-the-back-seat cargo number is likely a better indicator of how much you'll be dealing with on a day-to-day basis. And in that day-to-day way, the Kicks is excellent. Backseat legroom seems to be a Kicks downside, as all but the C-HR surpass it. (Seriously, it's almost impressive how large the C-HR is on the outside but cramped inside.) However, the Kicks' tall greenhouse not only allows for ample headroom, but seats that are mounted high off the ground.