1978 Jeep Cj7 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ram and Jeep diesel emissions allegations spur class action lawsuits

This shouldn't come as a surprise. Last week, the EPA issued a notice of violation to FCA after it determined that Jeep and Ram installed eight undisclosed auxiliary emissions control devices on diesel vehicles. Since then US law firm Heninger Garrison Davis, LLC and Canadian firm Sotos LLP have launched class action suits on behalf of owners. These latest lawsuits are unrelated to a previous class action suit brought against FCA and Cummins over NOx emissions in 2007 to 2012 Ram models. The violation notice – and the subsequent lawsuits – covers 2014 to 2016 Jeep Grand Cherokee and Ram 1500 models equipped with the 3.0-liter turbodiesel V6, a total of about 104,000 vehicles in the US. The EPA says that while the emissions control devices aren't necessarily illegal, installing them without disclosing them to the EPA is, as they produce more emissions in real world use than in testing. Skirting certification in this way might be a violation of the Clean Air Act. FCA could see fines of up to $45,000 per vehicle, depending on the outcome of the EPA investigation. FCA denies that these are cheat devices, and has proposed software updates to bring the vehicles into compliance. As for the lawsuits, Heninger Garrison Davis says that "Fiat Chrysler marketed those vehicles as environmentally friendly with enhanced fuel efficiency, better performance, and lower emissions. Although the diesel vehicles were successfully marketed as 'clean,' their environmentally-friendly representations were deceptive to consumers." The suit seeks an undisclosed amount of compensation for owners of these vehicles. In Canada, Sotos LLP is seeking $250 million in damages on behalf of owners. This suit, filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, also claims deception on the part of FCA, "resulting in losses and damage" to owners. These are similar claims to group actions against Volkswagen with regard to its diesel emissions cheating scandal. While VW is fixing or buying back many of the affected vehicles, the company is defending itself against some suits on behalf of owners, saying it expects " no decline in the residual values of the affected vehicles as a result of this issue." Don't be surprised if FCA mounts a similar defense.

Stellantis reveals STLA Large platform with EV and ICE support

Hot on the heels of a Jeep Wagoneer S teaser and photos of the prototype next-generation Dodge Charger (or Challenger), comes a reveal and details of what will likely underpin both of them: the STLA Large platform. It's one of multiple Stellantis flexible architectures that will be the basis of its upcoming electric cars, and apparently internal combustion ones, too. Stellantis says the STLA Large platform will be for D- and E-segment cars, crossovers and SUVs. In other words, it will be for midsize and large vehicles. For reference, lengths supported will be from 187.6 to 201.8 inches, and width will range from 74.7 to 79.9 inches. It will be highly flexible, too, with Stellantis claiming significant amounts of adjustability in overhangs, wheelbase, suspension placement and powertrain arrangement. The powertrain flexibility is quite impressive. Front-, rear- and all-wheel-drive layouts will be supported. Single- and dual-motor layouts will be on offer. Internal combustion will be available, too, either on its own or as a hybrid. Apparently engines can be fitted either longitudinally or transversely, too. Battery packs with between 85 and 118 kWh of capacity will be offered, with Stellantis claiming that sedan-style vehicles could have a range of up to 500 miles. The packs will also be available in 400- and 800-volt designs. Stellantis noted also that the platform can "easily accept future energy storage technologies when they reach production readiness." This seems to hint that the company is looking at different battery chemistries and maybe even solid-state batteries that could be added more easily in the future. Furthermore, the platform is designed to handle impressive output. Stellantis says that some models on the platform will have 0-to-62 mph times in the 2-second range. Limited-slip differentials for improved power delivery and wheel-end disconnects for reduced mechanical drag are also on the table for this platform. All of these details fit well with the information previously given for the concept Dodge Charger Daytona Banshee and Jeep Wagoneer S. The former was previewed with both battery voltage architectures and a wide range of electric powertrains with between 456 and 670 horsepower depending on specification and upgrades. And that's just for the 400-volt system; the 800-volt option wasn't detailed. We've also seen photos of the Charger chassis seemingly with provisions for gas engines, likely versions of the Hurricane I6.

Trying the new Compass and other Jeeps on for size

If any brand has license to sell several like-sized SUVs, it's Jeep, which invented the concept in the first place. Yet, with the Cherokee, Renegade, and the redesigned 2017 Jeep Compass revealed at the LA Auto Show, just how like-sized is this trio of compact SUVs? Well, as it turns out, that answer is more complicated than just looking at various spreadsheets of specifications. After the cover was pulled off the new Compass, I managed to explore each back-to-back-to-back to see how their back seats and cargo areas compare. Perhaps obviously, the Renegade is the smallest of the trio no matter how you look it. Well, it actually has the most headroom, but rear legroom is cramped (a 6-footer can't sit behind another 6-footer) and it's quite obvious the cargo area is about nine cubic feet smaller with the rear seats raised. However, the Cherokee and Compass are surprisingly similar both on paper and in person – and even more surprisingly, the newer, smaller-on-the-outside Compass is actually a bit more spacious despite being nine inches shorter in overall length. View 14 Photos When seated in back, my knees were just touching the driver seat when it was motored most of the way back to accommodate my 6-foot-3 frame. However, the Cherokee's slightly chunkier seatback meant the Compass actually had a bit more rear legroom. I then set the passenger seat to a more average distance and again, the Compass had a slight advantage. The Cherokee did have a bit more under-thigh support, however, which indicates the seat is mounted a bit higher. But that creates a problem, as headroom is more significantly affected when the panoramic sunroof is specified. In the Cherokee, my head was into the sunroof cavity and resting against its rigid surround. In the Compass, there was just enough clearance. It should be a difference, both in terms of headroom and perceived roominess that those of average height should notice. As for their cargo areas, the Compass' is larger and more useable. With the rear seats raised, it has 27.2 cubic feet versus the Cherokee's 24.6. You can scoot its sliding seat forward to nearly equal the Compass, but of course doing so reduces its rear legroom. The main reason is width. The Cherokee is noticeably narrow and it gets worse when equipped with the optional subwoofer. In terms of maximum cargo volume with the rear seats lowered, the Compass has 59.8 cubic feet to the Cherokee's 54.9.