Batmobile on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Would you pay $17 a month to give your older Ford connectivity?

When it was first introduced in 2007, there was nothing like the original Ford Sync system, since it allowed car owners to connect and use a portable device better than anything that came before it. And because it was a brought-in/tethered and software-based system, Sync leveraged a device's connectivity and was easily updated. It took competitors awhile to catch up: Toyota Entune wasn't available until 2011, and Chevy MyLink didn't roll out until 2012. But now Ford is the one playing catchup since it stuck with the brought-in strategy while most other automakers were quicker to add connectivity via an embedded cellular modem. Ford initially installed 2G/3G modems in its small fleet of electric and plug-in electric vehicles starting in 2012 so that owners could keep tabs on charging. Embedded connectivity came to Lincoln in 2014, and Ford began adding onboard 4G LTE via Sync Connect to select cars starting with the Escape in 2015. To get more cars connected more quickly, last week the automaker rolled out its FordPass SmartLink solution that plugs into the OBD port of 2010 to 2017 model year vehicles. This lets owners retroactively get onboard Wi-Fi, set up a "geo-fence" to keep tabs on a car's location, receive vehicle health reports and allows remote engine starting and door locking/unlocking using a smartphone app, among other features. But to connect older Ford vehicles will cost owners $16.99 a month for two years, not including installation. Ford throws in 1 GB of data or a 30-day trial, whichever comes first, after which owners have to add the vehicle to their Verizon shared data plan, which supplies connectivity for SmartLink, or establish a new account. (Disclosure: Autoblog is owned by Verizon.) By comparison, GM's 4G LTE data plans start at $10 a month for 200 MB and goes up to $30 for 3 GB, and owners can also add a car to an AT&T shared-data plan. But OnStar doesn't have a separate monthly subscription for the embedded modem or an installation charge, and standard features via the RemoteLink Mobile App are free for the first five years of ownership. FCA's Uconnect Access service also uses an embedded modem to provide similar telematics features for $20 per month following a free one-year trial, while a la carte in-car Wi-Fi is offered for $10 per day, $20 per week or $35 per month.

FCA UConnect fiasco could set over-the-air updates back years

Since cars have become more software dependent, most major automakers have been inching toward enabling over-the-air updates to keep vehicle electronics, ranging from infotainment systems to safety features, current. But there are only two car companies — Fiat Chrysler and Ford —± currently doing OTA updates, and on a limited basis. GM CEO Mary Barra announced last summer that the automaker will launch a new EV architecture and infotainment system capable of over-the-air updates "before 2020." The one exception, per usual, is Tesla. Since the release of the Model S almost six years ago, the maverick EV automaker has made routine OTA software updates a core part of its vehicle platforms and value proposition, and has sent out updates for everything from adjusting ride height to enabling Autopilot, largely without incident. When I've asked automakers why they can't do the same thing, I've heard reasons ranging from running afoul of their dealers (and archiac regulation) to security concerns. Automakers like Ford and General Motors say they want to act like tech companies, which routinely send out OTA updates for a wide range of devices, but overall the car industry still moves at a very cautious snail's pace. And when automakers do try to move faster and take more risks — unlike with a smartphone update, which people bitch about but live with — the consequences can be significant when things go wrong. That's the case with Fiat Chrysler America and its recent public-relations nightmare when an OTA update went awry. The update went out at the end of last week for the Uconnect system in late-model vehicles, and it made head units go into a near continuous reboot, which caused owners to not only lose access to entertainment features, but also critical functions like emergency assistance. Almost immediately, owners took to Twitter to express outrage, and FCA was caught flatfooted. A tweet went out on Monday on the UconnectCares Twitter account that read, "Certain 2017 & 2018 Uconnect systems may experience a reboot every 45-60 seconds. Our Engineering teams are investigating the cause and working towards a resolution.

Jeep and Ram could be spun off from FCA, says Marchionne

Jeep is surely the biggest single feather left in the cap of the Fiat Chrysler Automobiles portfolio. Under Sergio Marchionne's leadership, Jeep went from fewer than 500,000 annual sales in 2008 to 1.4 million in 2016, and is on track for 2 million by 2018. Add in the brand's legacy, status as one of the most recognizable nameplates in the world, and rabid fan base, and Jeep has extraordinary monetary value to its parent company. Investors and analysts have certainly noticed Jeep's inherent value. According to The Detroit Free Press, Morgan Stanley's Adam Jonas asked FCA chief Sergio Marchionne if he would ever consider spinning Jeep and Ram, FCA's dedicated truck brand, into a separate corporate entity, and he responded with a simple "Yes." Jonas estimated Jeep's worth in January of this year at $22 billion. Ram was valued at $11.2 billion. Marchionne has a history of spinning off brands while keeping them part of FCA's corporate umbrella. The most noteworthy example of this value maximization was with Ferrari, which now trades on the New York Stock Exchange and rakes in $3.4 billion in annual revenue and close to $435 million in net income, reports the Free Press. Marchionne still serves as chairman and CEO of Ferrari, and Fiat heir John Elkann owns 22 percent of the Italian marque's shares. Even if the offloading of Jeep and Ram into a separate entity would amount to little more than a profit-driven ownership change on paper, it would be huge news to the brands' loyal fanbases. In any case, such a move would likely take years to actually happen and probably wouldn't mean much at all to the products that Jeep and Ram produce. In other words, Jeep fans can keep the pitchforks in the shed ... for now. Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.