2008 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Sahara 3.8l Lifted on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

2014 Jeep Cherokee musters 22 MPG city, 31 highway

Production and media drive delays included, there has been no lack of press surrounding the 2014 Jeep Cherokee. With the most recent delay reportedly due to powertrain calibrations, we've been waiting to see how the Cherokee's fuel economy looks against the highly competitive compact CUV segment. Thanks to the EPA, we now know the fuel economy figures for the newest member of the Jeep family.
Arguably, the Cherokee has the most modern powertrain in its class with an updated base engine, all-new V6 and all-new nine-speed automatic transmission, but its fuel economy figures are simply on par for the segment. Still nothing to scoff at, though. According to fueleconomy.gov, front-wheel-drive Cherokee models with the base four-cylinder mill will top out the lineup with 22 miles per gallon in the city and 31 mpg on the highway; opting for four-wheel drive with this engine drops the figures to 21 city and 28 highway. Get even crazier with the option list, and the new 3.2-liter Pentastar V6 will get you 19 mpg city and 28 mpg highway in two-wheel-drive form or 19 city and 27 highway for 4WD.
If you're wondering how that stacks up among compact CUVs, head on over to Automobile Magazine for a full fuel economy breakdown for the segment. The controversially styled crossover hits dealers this month, and we'll be driving it in just a couple of weeks.

Chrysler recalls 468,700 Jeep Grand Cherokees, Commanders over rollaway risk

Chrysler has issued a recall covering a combined 469,000 units of the 2005-2010 Jeep Grand Cherokee and the 2006-2010 Jeep Commander (inset). Of that number, 295,000 are in the US, roughly 33,000 in Canada and Mexico and the remainder in other markets. It seems an electrical fault in the transfer case can allow the affected SUVs to shift into neutral on their own, while an Associated Press report says that Chrysler had "found cracks in a circuit board that turns the four-wheel-drive system on and off." The issue was discovered when an owner started his car remotely and it rolled away.
Chrysler is expected to begin notifying owners in June 2013, who can then take their cars to dealers. The dealer will reflash the final drive controller free of charge. There's a bulletin from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration below with more information.