2016 Jeep Wrangler Custom Lifted Leather Hardtop S on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Stellantis will give its brands 10 years to prove they deserve to live

Formed by the merger of PSA Peugeot-Citroen and Fiat-Chrysler Automobiles, Stellantis has 14 brands under its roof, a number that makes it one of the largest groups in the industry. Rumors claimed not every brand would survive, with Chrysler often earmarked to get axed, but the firm said it will give them all a chance to shine. "We're giving each (brand) a chance, giving each a time window of 10 years and giving funding for 10 years to do a core model strategy. The CEOs need to be clear in brand promise, customers, targets, and brand communications," announced Stellantis boss Carlos Tavares during the Financial Times' Future of the Car event. His comments confirm Chrysler fans and dealers don't need to worry about the future — at least not yet. And, against all odds, Lancia enthusiasts can breathe a sigh of relief, too. Former FCA head Sergio Marchionne warned of the brand's demise on several occasions. Alfa Romeo is safe for now, too, as is Vauxhall, which are basically just Opels sold in the United Kingdom with a different badge. The engagement made by Tavares also means Stellantis won't divest any of its brands to raise capital until at least 2031. It's now up to each executive team to make a case for the brand they run, an unusual survival-of-the-fittest strategy in an era when cutting costs is more common than spending cash. Diving into the vast Stellantis parts bin should help even the most troubled brands turn their fortunes around on a relatively tight budget. It seems likely that survive Chrysler will need to look beyond the 300 and the Pacifica/Voyager, the only models in its range, and completely reinvent its image, which is currently nebulous at best. Lancia, once the champion of luxury, performance, and innovation, faces the same challenge. It's not starting quite from scratch, it's relatively popular in its home country of Italy, but it will need to think globally and expand outside of the city car segment to survive. Featured Gallery 2020 Chrysler 300 View 24 Photos Chrysler Dodge Fiat Jeep RAM Citroen Lancia Opel Peugeot Vauxhall

7 months later, Jeep 'trailer hitch' recall still stalled

For the past few years, Chrysler and its CEO, Sergio Marchionne, have gone head-to-head with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and its boss, David Strickland, over the government safety agency's request for Chrysler to recall almost three-million Jeep vehicles due to what NHTSA says is a safety issue that has caused at least 51 deaths. After a three-year investigation and Chrysler's initial refusal to issue a recall because it deemed the vehicles safe and built to the day's federal requirements, last summer, the two parties compromised on a "voluntary campaign" to inspect 1.56 million vehicles, those being the 1992 to 1998 Grand Cherokee and 2002 to 2007 Liberty.
Those vehicles were designed with their gas tanks between the rear axle and the bumper, and NHTSA says that in rear-end collisions, damage to the fuel tank has caused fires responsible for those 51 deaths. The compromise reached last summer was that Chrysler would inspect 1.56 million vehicles and, "if necessary, provide an upgrade to the rear structure of the vehicle." Practically speaking, that meant Chrysler would replace aftermarket trailer hitches, but would take no action if a vehicle had a factory-installed hitch or an aftermarket hitch from Mopar.
A report in The Detroit News says the "voluntary campaign" is just now getting under way, with Chrysler saying last week that the design of the replacement part had been finalized and it was tooling up "to deliver the required volume." Seven months later, still in question is whether NHTSA will crash-test the fix engineered by Chrysler, noteworthy because not only did the vehicles in question pass every safety standard necessary to be cleared for sale at the time, there are still questions (to those of us on the outside) as to how the Jeeps at issue fare among their peers in such incidents. Either way, Chrysler and NHTSA apparently still disagree on the efficacy of the remedy itself: the carmaker says it might help in low-speed crashes but not high-speed collisions, a position the NHTSA is at odds with. All of this means the campaign doesn't yet have an end in sight.

In Michigan, car hackers could face life imprisonment

Car hackers may not want to mess with vehicles in and around the Motor City. A pair of Michigan lawmakers introduced legislation Thursday that would punish anyone who infiltrates a vehicle's electronic systems with penalties as harsh as life imprisonment. Senate bill 927 says that "a person shall not intentionally access or cause access to be made to an electronic system of a motor vehicle to willfully destroy, damage, impair, alter or gain unauthorized control of the motor vehicle." Offenders will be deemed guilty of a felony, and may be imprisoned for any number of years up to life in prison. The proposed legislation is one of the first attempts nationally to address the consequences for car hacking, which has become a top concern throughout the auto industry. Critics have accused executives of being slow to respond to the threats, which were first known as long as six years ago but gained attention last July when a pair of researchers remotely controlled a Jeep Cherokee. In January, the industry established an Information Sharing and Analysis Center to collectively evaluate security measures and counter breaches. But the Michigan bill isn't noteworthy only because of the life penalty prescribed; it's noteworthy for what's missing in its details. Language in the bill doesn't delineate between independent cyber-security researchers and criminals who intend to inflict harm or havoc. Under its provisions, it's possible Charlie Miller, pictured below, and Chris Valasek, the researchers who demonstrated last summer that the Cherokee could be remotely commandeered and controlled, could face life behind bars. Provisions of the legislation that prevent a person from "altering" the motor vehicle could ensnare car enthusiasts or gearheads who tinker with electronic systems to boost performance, increase fuel efficiency or add aftermarket features. In that context, Senate Bill 927 seems like the latest measure in a running feud between independent researchers, gearheads and big automakers. Car companies don't like third parties poking around their electronic systems and would prefer the researchers not reveal security weaknesses. Researchers, on the other hand, say many carmakers are either slow to fix or unwilling to repair security holes unless they're able to publish their findings.