Unlimited Sp Certified Suv 3.6l Cd Power Convenience Group 6 Speakers Abs Brakes on 2040-cars

Auto blog

NHTSA investigating 2015 Jeep Cherokee after new owner's total-loss fire [w/video]

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has opened a Preliminary Evaluation into the 2015 model year Jeep Cherokee after a single example caught on fire in California. This investigation will decide the cause, scope and frequency of this possible problem and will decide whether a recall is necessary for 50,415 potentially affected examples. According to Automotive News, the Cherokee's owner only purchased the CUV about two days before the fire, and it had been driven less than 100 miles. The new buyer reported parking the Jeep, and noticed a smell like smoke. Shortly after, the vehicle was consumed in flames. There were no injuries, but much of the incident was captured on video. NHTSA is also trying to decide whether another report is related. In this case, a driver noticed smoke under the hood of a 2015 Cherokee with just 45 miles on it, while driving at 60 miles per hour. According to the complaint to the agency, "the vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired," but FCA was notified. Read below NHTSA's announcement of the Preliminary Evaluation. CBS News 8 - San Diego, CA News Station - KFMB Channel 8 INVESTIGATION Subject : Engine compartment fire Date Investigation Opened: JAN 13, 2015 Date Investigation Closed: Open NHTSA Action Number: PE15003 Component(s): ENGINE Vehicle Make Model Model Year(s) JEEP CHEROKEE 2015 Manufacturer: Chrysler (FCA US LLC) SUMMARY: The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has received one complaint (VOQ) of engine compartment fire in model year (MY) 2015 Jeep Cherokee vehicles alleging a severe engine compartment fire incident resulting in a total vehicle loss (VOQ # 10672201). The consumer alleges that the entire vehicle was engulfed in flames approximately 20 feet high within seconds of parking the vehicle. The complaint alleged white smoke coming from under the hood immediately after parking the vehicle and while the ignition is off. In addition, ODI has identified field report data submitted as part of Early Warning Reporting that relate to the alleged defect. A Preliminary Evaluation has been opened to assess the cause, scope and frequency of the alleged defect. The following VOQ numbers are associated with the issues discussed in this opening resume: 10670034, 10672201.

We recap the 2017 Detroit Auto Show | Autoblog Podcast #499

We're back with our first Autoblog Podcast of 2017! This week, Greg Migliore and David Gluckman discuss the 2017 Detroit Auto Show, including the hot debuts, some new versions of bestsellers, and an unofficial theme we picked up on. Then it's on to what they've been driving lately, and we wrap up with Spend My (Your) Money buying advice to help you, our listeners. The rundown is below. Remember, if you have a car-related question you'd like us to answer or you want buying advice of your very own, send a message or a voice memo to podcast at autoblog dot com. (If you record audio of a question with your phone and get it to us, you could hear your very own voice on the podcast. Neat, right?) And please send trivia questions! You'll get the honor of stumping your fellow listeners, and we'll thank you too. Autoblog Podcast #499 The video meant to be presented here is no longer available. Sorry for the inconvenience. Topics and stories we mention Our 2017 Detroit Auto Show coverage America was the unofficial theme of the 2017 Detroit Auto Show 2017 Chevy Malibu Hybrid 2017 Volkswagen Passat 2017 Buick Envision Used cars! Rundown Intro - 00:00 Detroit show recap - 03:04 What we're driving - 25:04 Spend My Money - 35:46 Total Duration: 49:45 Get The Podcast iTunes – Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast in iTunes RSS – Add the Autoblog Podcast feed to your RSS aggregator MP3 – Download the MP3 directly Feedback Email – Podcast at Autoblog dot com Review the show on iTunes Podcasts Detroit Auto Show Buick Chevrolet Ford Honda Jeep RAM Toyota Volkswagen Crossover Minivan/Van SUV Sedan Ford Bronco kia stinger gt

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.