2002 Jeep Wrangler 2dr Sport, Only 92k Miles, Sharp!!!! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hendrick wants to put Jeep Wranglers back on the battlefield

The Jeep Wrangler could be headed back to the battlefield. According to reports, negotiations are currently under way with the US Army to adapt the iconical American off-roader for military use. The Wranglers would serve as inexpensive, lightweight, unarmored vehicles that could be more easily airlifted into remote locations than costlier, heavier, and bulkier options. The proposal is not being fielded by the Jeep brand itself or its parent company Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, but by Hendrick Dynamics. The Charlotte-based offshoot of NASCAR racing team Hendrick Motorsports calls its modified Wrangler the Hendrick Commando. Instead of the 3.6-liter Pentastar V6 found in most US-market Wranglers, the Commando version employs the 2.8-liter diesel four built by VM Motori, modified to run on any type of diesel fuel or on JP-8 jet fuel to maximize its deployment versatility and comply with the Army's Single Fuel mandate of 2012. It would also support a variety of modular attachments for specific jobs, ranging from machine gun mounts and counter-mine rakes to radar arrays and advanced communications equipment. Hendrick says the Commando could also be deployed by helicopter or in cargo planes. And because it's based on a civilian platform, the Commando would also benefit from the latest advancements introduced by its manufacturer, the parts and service network already in place, and the thorough testing that's already gone into developing the Wrangler for civilian use. Hendrick has reportedly built 14 prototypes to date, including the two-door Commando 2 (based on the standard Wrangler), the four-door Commando 4 (based on the Wrangler Unlimited), and even a pickup conversion called the Commando S. It is not, however, the only company adapting Jeep Wranglers for military application. Israel-based Automotive Industries Ltd has been producing successive versions of the Wrangler-based Storm for use by the Israel Defense Forces and other militaries overseas since 1990. If the US Army awards the contract for the Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS) vehicle to Hendrick Dynamics, it would bring the iconic Jeep back to the battlefield where it got its start. The brand and its most prolific model trace their roots back to the Willys MB, launched in 1941 on contract from the US Army for deployment in World War II.

Chrysler investigating complaints of vehicles with faulty power modules

Chrysler owners are hopping mad after experiencing a series of electrical gremlins in some of the company's vehicles. Issues range from mere annoyances - windows rolling down and radios turning off of their own accord - to serious safety issues, with headlights that randomly shut off at night and cars that stall and refuse to start.
The issues are being blamed on the total integrated power module, which can cost up to $1,000 for customers to replace. This, of course, has led to a hefty batch of complaints to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, with 240 owners expressing their displeasure so far. Another site, CarComplaints.com, has registered over 300 complaints relating to the 2010 to 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee and Dodge Durango, alone, according to The New York Times.
Chrysler has acknowledged that it's investigating the complaints and is analyzing the faulty TIPMs, but that isn't quite enough for customers of the affected vehicles. The newspaper has snagged a few of the more harrowing tales with the electrically challenged Chrysler products, culled from the NHTSA complaints.

Auto Mergers and Acquisitions: Suicide or salvation?

We love the Moses figure. A savior riding in from stage right with the ideas, the smarts, and the scrappiness to put things right. Alan Mullaly. Carroll Shelby. Lee Iacocca. Andrew Carnegie. Steve Jobs. Elon Musk. Bart Simpson. Sergio Marchionne does not likely view himself with Moses-like optics, but the CEO of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles recently gave a remarkable, perhaps prophetic interview with Automotive News about his interest and the inevitability of merging with a potential automotive partner like General Motors. Marchionne has been overtly public about his notion that GM must merge with FCA. For a bit of context, GM sold 9.9 million vehicles in 2014, posting $2.8 billion in net income, while FCA sold 4.75 million units and earned $2.4 billion in net income, painting a very rosy FCA earnings-to-sales picture. But that's not the entire picture. Most people in the auto industry still remember the trainwreck that was the DaimlerChrysler "merger" written in what turned out to be sand in 1998. It proved to be a master class in how not to fuse two companies, two cultures, two continents, and two management teams. Oh, it worked for the two individuals at both helms pre-merger. They got silly rich. And the industry itself was in a misty romance at the time with mergers and acquisitions. BMW bought Rolls-Royce. Volkswagen Group bought Bentley, Bugatti, and Lamborghini, putting all three brands into their rightful place in both products and positioning. No marriages there, so no false pretense. Finally, Nissan and Renault got married in 1999. A successful marriage requires several rare elements in this atmosphere of gas fumes and power lust. But a successful marriage requires several rare elements in this atmosphere of gas fumes and power lust, the principle part being honesty. Daimler and Chrysler lied to each other. The heads of each unit, the product planners, and finance all presented their then-current and long-range forecasts to each other with less-than-forthright accuracy. Daimler was the far greater equal and no one from the Chrysler side enjoyed that. The cultures were entirely different, too, and little was done to bridge that gap. Which brings me back to the present overtures by Marchionne to GM. "There are varying degrees of hugs," Marchionne stated in the Automotive News piece. "I can hug you nicely, I can hug you tightly, I can hug you like a bear, I can really hug you." Seriously?