1999 Jeep Grand Cherokee on 2040-cars
Point Pleasant Beach, New Jersey, United States
Vehicle Title:Clear
Fuel Type:Gasoline
For Sale By:Private Seller
Engine:V6
Number of Cylinders: 6
Make: Jeep
Model: Grand Cherokee
Drive Type: 2WD
Mileage: 141,321
Exterior Color: Black
Trim: N/a
Interior Color: Grey
Jeep Grand Cherokee for Sale
2005 jeep grand cherokee limited sport utility 4-door 4.7l white(US $10,500.00)
2000 jeep grand cherokee limited sport utility 4-door 4.7l(US $5,000.00)
Granite 4wd heated leather dual pane sunroof nav rearcam bluetooth brake assist(US $39,995.00)
2013 laredo 3.6l auto bright silver metallic clearcoat
2013 srt8 used 6.4l v8 16v 4wd suv premium
2007 jeep grand cherokee 2wd 4dr laredo(US $7,900.00)
Auto Services in New Jersey
Xclusive Auto Leasing ★★★★★
Willie`s Auto Body Works ★★★★★
United Motor Service ★★★★★
Ultrarev Inc ★★★★★
Turnersville Transmission Center ★★★★★
Troppoli Automotive Used Cars ★★★★★
Auto blog
China orders Jeep to investigate Wrangler fire risk
Mon, 06 Jan 2014It's been some time since we've heard anything about fires related to the Jeep Wrangler (foreign or domestic), but it sounds like the go-anywhere SUV could be in hot water once again in China. Bloomberg is reporting that the Chinese government is ordering Jeep to investigate the matter and, in the meantime, also recommending Wrangler owners to not drive their vehicles in "extreme conditions" due to a "relatively high risk" of catching on fire.
There is no indication as to how many vehicles or which model years are affected, but the previous fire problems in both the US and China - which led to investigations but no recalls - were traced back to automatic transmission fluid leaks. The article, however, does not say what the potential problem is this time around as Jeep has not released a comment on the matter. The official notice, in Chinese, can be found here.
FCA applies to trademark 'My Freedom' for subscription service
Wed, Jan 22 2020Almost a year ago to the day, several outlets reported that Fiat Chrysler would trial three car-swapping programs in Boston focused on the Jeep brand. One program covered peer-to-peer Jeep rentals through Turo; another was a three-month subscription service through Avis that allowed Jeep owners to swap for Ram or Dodge vehicles; the third was called "Car Borrowing" and enabled Jeep owners to buy "Jeep Coins" to use on a one-day rental of other Fiat Chrysler products. It's possible FCA is taking last year's lessons to the next phase, CarBuzz having discovered the automaker applied to trademark the term "My Freedom" with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The listed purpose of the mark would be "motor vehicle subscription services, namely, providing temporary use of motor vehicles to members for their personal use." Having begun its research using Jeep, it's not clear if a potential My Freedom subscription service would retain the 4x4 SUV focus or include other brands in the fold; with Jeep's martial origins, the brand has made ample use of the Freedom name over the years. There's also a link to new partner Groupe PSA, as the French automaker's mobility division and subscription service is dubbed Free2Move. Related: Autoblog's guide to car subscription services FCA made no comment on the filing, but an analyst at AutoForecast Solutions told The Detroit News that the submission "prepares (FCA) for the future," as. "The idea that autonomy would prevent the need for your own vehicle leads perfectly into subscriptions." U.S. brands haven't cracked the subscription nut yet, even with their premium offerings. Ford bought subscription startup Canvas in 2016, then sold it last year to the car-rental app Fair. GM launch Book by Cadillac in 2016, and shut it down for retooling in 2018 before a re-launch scheduled to happen sometime this year. If nothing else, an FCA subscription program with access to the top-end product could give other-brand luxury owners an easy way to pay attention to Maserati and Alfa Romeo. That would be good for everyone. Related Video:
In Michigan, car hackers could face life imprisonment
Fri, Apr 29 2016Car hackers may not want to mess with vehicles in and around the Motor City. A pair of Michigan lawmakers introduced legislation Thursday that would punish anyone who infiltrates a vehicle's electronic systems with penalties as harsh as life imprisonment. Senate bill 927 says that "a person shall not intentionally access or cause access to be made to an electronic system of a motor vehicle to willfully destroy, damage, impair, alter or gain unauthorized control of the motor vehicle." Offenders will be deemed guilty of a felony, and may be imprisoned for any number of years up to life in prison. The proposed legislation is one of the first attempts nationally to address the consequences for car hacking, which has become a top concern throughout the auto industry. Critics have accused executives of being slow to respond to the threats, which were first known as long as six years ago but gained attention last July when a pair of researchers remotely controlled a Jeep Cherokee. In January, the industry established an Information Sharing and Analysis Center to collectively evaluate security measures and counter breaches. But the Michigan bill isn't noteworthy only because of the life penalty prescribed; it's noteworthy for what's missing in its details. Language in the bill doesn't delineate between independent cyber-security researchers and criminals who intend to inflict harm or havoc. Under its provisions, it's possible Charlie Miller, pictured below, and Chris Valasek, the researchers who demonstrated last summer that the Cherokee could be remotely commandeered and controlled, could face life behind bars. Provisions of the legislation that prevent a person from "altering" the motor vehicle could ensnare car enthusiasts or gearheads who tinker with electronic systems to boost performance, increase fuel efficiency or add aftermarket features. In that context, Senate Bill 927 seems like the latest measure in a running feud between independent researchers, gearheads and big automakers. Car companies don't like third parties poking around their electronic systems and would prefer the researchers not reveal security weaknesses. Researchers, on the other hand, say many carmakers are either slow to fix or unwilling to repair security holes unless they're able to publish their findings.
