Jeep Liberty Limited Edition 4x4 *leather And Loaded* Clean 2 Owner Carfax on 2040-cars
Hallandale, Florida, United States
Vehicle Title:Clear
Engine:3.7L 226Cu. In. V6 GAS SOHC Naturally Aspirated
For Sale By:Dealer
Body Type:Sport Utility
Fuel Type:GAS
Make: Jeep
Model: Liberty
Options: Leather Seats
Trim: Limited Sport Utility 4-Door
Safety Features: Anti-Lock Brakes
Power Options: Power Windows
Drive Type: 4WD
Mileage: 90,000
Vehicle Inspection: Inspected (include details in your description)
Sub Model: NO RESERVE
Exterior Color: Red
Number of Cylinders: 6
Interior Color: Gray
Jeep Liberty for Sale
2008 limited edition used 3.7l v6 12v automatic 4wd suv premium(US $16,995.00)
2012 jeep liberty sport 3.7l v6 cd audio alloys 22k mi texas direct auto(US $16,980.00)
Alloy wheels roof rack auto v6(US $12,500.00)
2005 jeep liberty ltd leather sunroof cruise ctrl 61k texas direct auto(US $12,280.00)
2010 jeep liberty
2006 jeep liberty limited edition sport utility - diesel - 4x4 - hard to find(US $9,999.00)
Auto Services in Florida
Yesterday`s Speed & Custom ★★★★★
Wills Starter Svc ★★★★★
WestPalmTires.com ★★★★★
West Coast Wheel Alignment ★★★★★
Wagen Werks ★★★★★
Villafane Auto Body ★★★★★
Auto blog
470,000 Jeep Liberty, Chrysler 200, and Dodge Avenger models recalled for restraint defect
Sat, Oct 14 2017Fiat Chrysler Automobiles said on Friday it is recalling 470,000 vehicles worldwide to replace a component that may inhibit deployment of the vehicles' active head restraints in the event of a crash. Around 414,000 of those vehicles were sold in the United States. Apparently, "a component common to the modules of certain vehicles may degrade after extensive vehicle use." The recall covers 2012 Jeep Liberty sport utility vehicles and 2012-13 Chrysler 200 and Dodge Avenger midsize cars. FCA says a warning light may alert owners to the problem. The Italian-American automaker said it is unaware of any injuries or accidents related to the recall. The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration opened an investigation into the issue in June. (Reporting by David Shepardson; Editing by Steve Orlofsky) Related Video:
Behind the scenes of our subcompact crossover comparison
Tue, Oct 15 2019The cameras had been set up for almost an hour, and now, the living room filled with the sweetness of freshly brewed blonde roast. The late-summer sun had just started peaking over towering maples. In a week the colors will start changing, the inevitable sign of the coming gray skies and snow. Half past eight, the editors arrived. The Scandinavian inspired house that served as the headquarters for our subcompact crossover comparison couldn’t accommodate all seven of us, so they had stayed at a turn of the century farmhouse down the road. While geese, chickens, cats and sheep made for an authentic Northern Michigan farm experience, ingredients for a good nightÂ’s sleep they were not. Within minutes Red Bulls cracked open and short, cocoa-colored mugs appeared, filled with a variety of caffeinated beverages. “I thought we were gonna have fried eggs,” Editor-in-Chief Greg Migliore said, smiling, before refusing a muffin. Associate Producer Alex Malburg ran from camera to camera, adjusting focus and exposure, trying to keep up with the ever-changing light, which poured into the room faster each minute. “I was promised food. IÂ’m not filming.” Consumer Editor Jeremy KorzeniewskiÂ’s sarcasm thinly veiled his true feelings. To keep the group content I promised a craft-services buffet next time. For the second time, we shot our comparison just outside of Traverse City. While we took advantage of a local off-road park for the first, this round proved a bit more tame, utilizing the hilly, winding, wine-country roads that define the region. An air of nervousness could be detected. Only one person knew the outcome of our test, Senior Green Editor John Beltz Snyder. I found myself both impressed and surprised he had kept this secret overnight, though I came to find out later that he revealed the winner to Producer Amr Sayour on the drive to dinner the evening before. The cameras started rolling, the audio recording, but the caffeine hadnÂ’t yet entered the bloodstream, with one exception. Associate Editor Joel Stocksdale sipped his lime green Mountain Dew. That seemed to be working, as he passionately laid out his argument for the Kia Soul and his preference for winter tires over all-wheel drive. From behind the camera I silently disagreed with him. “No one buys winter tires,” Jeremy argued. As we consumed more coffee, the sun came up, and so did the energy of the debate.
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.




















