R/t New 5.7l Power Door Locks Power Windows Power Driver's Seat Air Conditioning on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Lexus tops JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study again, Buick bests Toyota

It shouldn't surprise anyone, but Lexus has once again taken the top spot in JD Power's Vehicle Dependability Study. That'd be the Japanese luxury brand's fourth straight year at the top of table. The big news, though, is the rise of Buick. General Motor's near-premium brand beat out Toyota to take second place, with 110 problems per 100 vehicles compared to Toyota's 111 problems. Lexus owners only reported 89 problems per 100 vehicles. Besides Buick's three-position jump, Scion enjoyed a major improvement, jumping 13 positions from 2014. Ram and Mitsubishi made big gains, as well, moving up 11 and 10 positions, respectively. In terms of individual segments, GM and Toyota both excelled, taking home seven segment awards each. The study wasn't good news for all involved, though. A number of popular automakers finished below the industry average of 147 problems per 100 vehicles, including Subaru, (157PP100), Volkswagen (165PP100), Ford/Hyundai (188PP100 each) and Mini (193PP100). The biggest losers (by a tremendous margin, we might add) were Land Rover and Fiat, recording 258 and 273 problems per 100 vehicles. The next closest brand was Jeep, with 197PP100. While the Vehicle Dependability Study uses the same measurement system as the Initial Quality Survey, the two metrics analyze very different things. The VDS looks at problems experienced by original owners of model year 2012 vehicles over the past 12 months, while the oft-quoted IQS focuses on problems in the first 90 days of new-vehicle ownership. Like the IQS, though, the VDS has a rather broad definition of what a problem is. Because of that, a low score from JD Power is no guarantee of extreme unreliability, so much as just poor design. In this most recent study, the two most reported problems focused on Bluetooth connectivity and the voice-command systems. The former leaves plenty of room for user error due to poor design (particularly true of the Bluetooth systems on the low-scoring Fords, Volkswagens and Subarus), while the second is something JD Power has already confirmed as being universally terrible. That makes means that while these studies are important, they shouldn't be taken as gospel when it comes to automotive reliability. News Source: JD PowerImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Jeremy Korzeniewski / AOL Buick Fiat Ford GM Hyundai Jeep Land Rover Lexus MINI Mitsubishi RAM Scion Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Auto Repair Ownership study

How the Ram Multifunction Tailgate compares to Ford, GMC, Honda

Ram just announced its Multifunction Tailgate — a descriptive if not very creative name. It's an asymmetrical barn-door arrangement, which can both fold down like a conventional tailgate or swing open like a gate. There's a new bed step, but unlike Ford or GM, the step isn't part of the tailgate itself. Rather, it kicks out from under the bumper (as opposed to out from under the driver's side of the rear bumper in its previous incarnation). So let's just focus on the tailgate functionality. A video of the Ram Multifunction Tailgate in action is above. For one, either of the swinging tailgate sections can be opened independently. They open to a full 88 degrees. In conventional flip-down mode, the tailgate works just like a normal one, too, with a 2,000-pound rating. The bottom line is that while it gives a variety of types of access to the load area, it doesn't "do" anything else. It's a $995 option on any Ram 1500. Its closest analogue is the Honda Ridgeline, which works basically the same way, but on that truck the tailgate swings as one piece. And the Honda's load rating isn't as hefty as the Ram's tailgate: 300 pounds. As Honda says, that's sufficient to hold the weight of the part of an ATV hanging out of the bed, or something similar, but it's a lighter-duty unit (and a lighter-duty truck) than the Ram's overall. Let's also get Ford's one-trick tailgate out of the way before comparing to the more analogous, and complicated, GM MultiPro. A bit of trivia: Ford's optional Tailgate Step is actually designed and supplied by Multimatic, better known as the outfit that builds the Ford GT and produces the DSSV spool-valve shocks. This step has been available for years. It pulls out of the top edge of the tailgate when the tailgate is lowered, deploying a single step. A separate handle pulls out from beside the step and flips up, giving a handhold. While it was initially (and infamously) mocked by competitors, with load floor heights as high as they are it's better than toting around a stepstool. It's currently a $375 standalone option. Now we get to the GMC MultiPro tailgate, the most complicated and multi-functioned around. It's essentially a tailgate within a tailgate, with a fold-out stopper that deploys from the inner tailgate. This gives it several functions depending on the position of all the parts. It can still be used like a normal tailgate, dropping down at the push of a button or using the key fob.

Ram recalls 30k trucks over faulty turn signals

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Chrysler is issuing a recall of 30,197 pickup trucks in the United States, all from the 2013 model year. The affected vehicles are the Ram 1500, 2500 and 3500, all of which were built between September 9, 2012 and March 5, 2013.
The problem affects models equipped with "optional premium taillamps," and according to NHTSA, the turn signal indicator "may not flash at a double rate to give a notification to the driver of a turn signal malfunction." The report states that if a driver is unaware of a problem with the turn signals and continues to use them as normal, other vehicles on the road may not be alerted that the vehicle is turning, which increases the risk of a crash.
Other recall woes have affected the Ram line recently. In April, we reported that Ram 1500 models were being recalled due to an improper adjustment of the parking brake cable, and several thousand Heavy Duty models were being called in for engine covers that do not have as much heat resistance as they're supposed to.