1996 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limmited on 2040-cars

Auto blog

EV cost burden pushing automakers to their limits, says Stellantis' CEO Tavares

DETROIT — Stellantis CEO Carlos Tavares said external pressure on automakers to quickly shift to electric vehicles potentially threatens jobs and vehicle quality as producers struggle with EVs' higher costs. Governments and investors want car manufacturers to speed up the transition to electric vehicles, but the costs are "beyond the limits" of what the auto industry can sustain, Tavares said in an interview at the Reuters Next conference released Wednesday. "What has been decided is to impose on the automotive industry electrification that brings 50% additional costs against a conventional vehicle," he said. "There is no way we can transfer 50% of additional costs to the final consumer because most parts of the middle class will not be able to pay." Automakers could charge higher prices and sell fewer cars, or accept lower profit margins, Tavares said. Those paths both lead to cutbacks. Union leaders in Europe and North America have warned tens of thousands of jobs could be lost. Automakers need time for testing and ensuring that new technology will work, Tavares said. Pushing to speed that process up "is just going to be counter productive. It will lead to quality problems. It will lead to all sorts of problems," he said. Tavares said Stellantis is aiming to avoid cuts by boosting productivity at a pace far faster than industry norm. "Over the next five years we have to digest 10% productivity a year ... in an industry which is used to delivering 2 to 3% productivity" improvement, he said. "The future will tell us who is going to be able to digest this, and who will fail," Tavares said. "We are putting the industry on the limits." Electric vehicle costs are expected to fall, and analysts project that battery electric vehicles and combustion vehicles could reach cost parity during the second half of this decade. Like other automakers that earn profits from combustion vehicles, Stellantis is under pressure from both establishment automakers such as GM, Ford, VW and Hyundai, as well as start-ups such as Tesla and Rivian. The latter electric vehicle companies are far smaller in terms of vehicle sales and employment. But investors have given Tesla and Rivian higher market valuations than the owner of the highly profitable Jeep and Ram brands. That investor pressure is compounded by government policies aimed at cutting greenhouse gas emissions. The European Union, California and other jurisdictions have set goals to end sales of combustion vehicles by 2035.

Why the 2018 Jeep Grand Cherokee Trackhawk really exists

"But really, what do we do for Jeep? We listen to our customers, that's our job. We give them what they want. So the reason why is, they ask. Lots of them asked." – Darryl Smith "Why not?" It's a simple-enough explanation and one that should resonate with any car lover who views the absurd and the gloriously pointless as fundamental principles of their passion. And putting a ridiculously powerful engine into a vehicle that would normally not have one is perhaps the pinnacle of that. It's the reason that so many of us view a Mercedes-AMG E63 wagon as far cooler than an SLS AMG with roughly the same engine. With that in mind that we sat down with two of the men responsible for the 2018 Jeep Grand Cherokee Trackhawk, the latest entry into the absurd and gloriously pointless segment. We wanted to find out from Darryl Smith, director for SRT engineering, and Paul Mackiewicz, vehicle development manager, if there were actual market-based reasons for the Trackhawk's creation. Effectively, why'd they actually do it? "Why not?" Smith immediately offered during an interview at the New York Auto Show, clearly possessing a similar mindset. "But really, what do we do for Jeep? We listen to our customers, that's our job. We give them what they want. So the reason why is, they ask. Lots of them asked." View 24 Photos If "lots" of people are asking for a 707-horsepower, 645-pound-feet, off-road-capable, luxury-lined, five-person SUV, then perhaps we shouldn't be too worried about the demise of the human-driven automobile after all. "There is a very defined customer base out there that want a sport SUV," Mackiewicz said. "They want a sports car with the capabilities of having an SUV, of being able to tow, of being able to drive their sports car all year round. And that's what this car enables. It is ultimate performance, all year round, in any condition." If BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Porsche, and even Maserati can produce high-performance SUVs, doesn't it seem fitting that the father of all SUV brands should top them all under the hood? Of course, expanding the 6.2-liter Hellcat engine beyond the Challenger and Charger is clearly a smart business case in the current SUV-obsessed marketplace. FCA had a lust-worthy engine, and it had a solid performance base in the existing Grand Cherokee SRT, so it can be argued that marrying the two made sense and that it could be done with minimal fuss — even if in practical terms, it's absurd.

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.