1968 Chrysler Newport Custom Convertible 55,469k Original Miles 2-door 440 7.2l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Jeep in St. Louis hacked from Pittsburgh

One of America's most popular vehicles contains a security flaw that allows hackers to remotely commandeer it from anywhere on the planet. Cyber-security researchers Chris Valasek and Charlie Miller say they've accessed critical vehicle controls on a 2014 Jeep Cherokee that allowed them to remotely control critical vehicle functions like braking, transmission function, and steering. Automakers have downplayed the possibility a car could be remotely compromised, but the significance of the findings detailed Tuesday could cause them to reevaluate the threats posed to hundreds of thousands of vehicles already on the road. A key finding – the pair needed no physical access to the Jeep to pull off the attack. Valasek and Miller accessed the controls via a security hole in the Sprint cellular connection to Chrysler's UConnect infotainment system. In the course of their research, Valasek sat in his Pittsburgh home and remotely manipulated Miller's Jeep as he drove along a highway outside St. Louis. If you know a car's IP address, they say, a hacker could control it from anywhere. "We didn't add anything, didn't touch it," Valasek told Autoblog. "A customer could drive one of these things off a lot, and they'd have no clue it had these open attack surfaces." Remotely, he disabled brakes, turned the radio volume up, engaged windshield wipers and tampered with the transmission. Further, they could conduct surveillance on the Jeep, measuring its speed and tracking its whereabouts. They conducted the experiments over multiple breaches. They made their findings public on the same day the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the federal agency in charge of vehicle safety, released its latest report on the readiness of government and automakers to fend off these sorts of cyber attacks. Later today, two US Senators are expected to introduce legislation that would help consumers better understand the potential risks of car hacking. In the early stages of their research, Valasek and Miller found a security flaw in the car's wi-fi that allowed them to remotely manipulate controls from a range of about three feet. But in recent months, they found another vulnerability in the Sprint cellular connection in the UConnect system. That was a key breakthrough. "Lo and behold, we found we could communicate with this thing using cellular, and then more research, and 'Holy cow,' we're using the Sprint network to communicate with these vehicles," Valasek said.

Chrysler defies NHTSA, says it won't recall 2.7M Jeep Grand Cherokee, Liberty models

Facing a possible recall totaling around 2.7 million of its most popular SUVs, Chrysler remains insistent that the 1993-2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee and 2002-2007 Jeep Liberty are safe vehicles. This comes on the heels of a recall request from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for these two models due to fuel tanks mounted behind the rear axle, which could possibly be ruptured during severe rear-end collisions, leading to an increased risk of fire. In response to the allegations, Chrysler says that it does not agree with NHTSA nor does it plan on recalling either vehicle.
Chrysler said both SUVs "met and exceeded" the requirements for fuel-system integrity, and cooperated fully with NHTSA since the investigation was opened in 2010. While 15 deaths and 46 injuries have been reported from fires caused by rear-end collisions on these models, Chrysler is claiming that the vast majority of incidents cited by NHTSA were "high-energy crashes," including one where a stopped Grand Cherokee was rear-ended by a tractor trailer going 65 miles per hour.
The automaker wraps up by saying "NHTSA seems to be holding Chrysler Group to a new standard for fuel tank integrity that does not exist now and did not exist when the Jeep vehicles were manufactured." Scroll down for Chrysler's official response to NHTSA, but we're pretty sure this isn't the last we've heard on this issue.

Is it time for American carmakers to give up on dual-clutch transmissions? [w/poll]

Last week, in the midst of Detroit's first days seeking relief in Chapter 9 of the bankruptcy code, Automotive News contributor Larry P. Vellequette penned an editorial suggesting that American car companies raise the white flag on dual clutch transmissions and give up on trying to persuade Americans to buy cars fitted with them. Why? Because, Vellequette says, like CVT transmissions, they "just don't sound right or feel right to American drivers." (Note: In the article, it's not clear if Vellequette is arguing against wet-clutch and dry-clutch DCTs or just dry-clutch DCTs, which is what Ford and Chrysler use.) The article goes on to state that Ford and Chrysler have experimented with DCTs and that both consumers and the automotive press haven't exactly given them glowing reviews, despite their quicker shifts and increased fuel efficiency potential compared to torque-converter automatic transmissions.
Autoblog staffers who weighed in on the relevance of DCTs in American cars generally disagreed with the blanket nature of Vellequette's statement that they don't sound or feel right, but admit that their lack of refinement compared to traditional automatics can be an issue for consumers. That's particularly true in workaday cars like the Ford Focus and Dodge Dart, both of which have come in for criticism in reviews and owner surveys. From where we sit, the higher-performance orientation of such transmissions doesn't always meld as well with the marching orders of everyday commuters (particularly if drivers haven't been educated as to the transmission's benefits and tradeoffs), and in models not fitted with paddle shifters, it's particularly hard for drivers to use a DCT to its best advantage.
Finally, we also note that DCT tuning is very much an evolving science. For instance, Autoblog editors who objected to dual-clutch tuning in the Dart have more recently found the technology agreeable in the Fiat 500L. Practice makes perfect - or at least more acceptable.