2014 Jeep Wrangler Sport on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2018 Alfa Romeo Stelvio Quadrifoglio vs. 2018 Jeep Grand Cherokee Trackhawk: On-paper sibling rivalry

Pricing was revealed for the 2018 Alfa Romeo Stelvio Quadrifoglio, and with its $81,590 price tag, it's within range of yet another high-performance SUV from Fiat-Chrysler: the 2018 Jeep Grand Cherokee Trackhawk. The Hellcat-powered Jeep is more expensive than the Stelvio at $86,995, but depending on options, the price advantage might go either way. This left us wondering, how similar are these two high-powered SUVs? Besides sharing the same number of words in their very-long names, we took a look at some of their performance specs and put them in the spreadsheet below. As always, if you want to compare either of these with other speedy SUVs, be sure to try out our comparison tools. As far as outright speed, both SUVs are surprisingly close. The Trackhawk is just a bit quicker in a straight line, hitting 60 mph in just 3.5 seconds as opposed to the Alfa's 3.9. The Jeep's 180-mph top speed is also 3-mph quicker than the Alfa. But neither of these differences is especially huge. What makes this interesting is how different the paths each SUV takes to get to its results. The Trackhawk accomplishes the task with pure grunt. It has Dodge's Hellcat supercharged 6.2-liter V8 making 707 horsepower and 645 pound-feet of torque to overcome its hefty 5,363-pound body. The Alfa, on the other hand, makes do with less power and torque, 505 and 443, respectively, from its twin-turbocharged 2.9-liter V6. It has less weight, though. Exactly how much less we're not sure, since Alfa hasn't revealed that number, but a regular Stelvio weighs right around 4,000 pounds, so we would guess the weight is similar, possibly a little more. View 14 Photos The differences in how each SUV achieves its performance should result in pretty different driving characteristics, and probably different buyers. Each SUV's bragging points also indicates this. The Trackhawk boasts an impressive 11.6-second claimed quarter-mile time, something that American muscle car fans everywhere care about. The Alfa brags about how it's the fastest production SUV to lap the Nurburgring, something sure to impress fans of foreign cars and those that value handling over straight-line performance. So really, although these two SUVs have performance similarities, they're also very different, and the right one for you depends on what you value. View 29 Photos Also, as an afterthought, we wonder if the guys that attempted a Viper record at the 'Ring would be up for trying to break the Alfa time with the Jeep.

1914 Ford Model T at Historic Greenfield Village | AutoblogVR

We drive all of the newest and most sophisticated cars, but a 102-year-old Ford is one of our recent favorites. Senior Editor Alex Kierstein headed to historic Greenfield Village in Dearborn, MI, to learn to drive a Model T in the latest AutoblogVR segment. Kierstein picks up the Model T fairly quickly, despite its controls. Though they were designed more than a century ago to be simple and easy to use, driving a Model T is complicated and counter-intuitive to the modern motorist. But by the end of his lesson, Kierstein has it all figured out and is enjoying himself. In our other new segment, Detroit Manufacturing, Senior Editor Greg Migliore showcases the city''s industrial might. He tours a modern Fiat Chrysler factory that churns out Dodge Durangos and Jeep Grand Cherokees and then wanders the ruins of the mythical Packard Plant. There's also some tasty and unexpected twists in this VR episode. Each week, new episodes will launch on the AutoblogVR App. We'll preview them here on Autoblog, but for the full immersive experience, head over to the app, which you can download for free from the App store and Google Play. Be sure to try it with a cardboard viewer, too! Ford Jeep Automotive History Driving Classics Videos VR Original Video Detroit ford model t tour 360video

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.