2014 Jeep Compass Limited on 2040-cars

Auto blog

10 of 18 midsize SUVs earn 'good' IIHS side impact safety rating

It's not terribly surprising that midsize SUVs earned better safety ratings than small SUVs in the latest side-impact tests performed by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). Just how much better they scored, on the other hand, certainly raises an eyebrow. Ten out of 18 midsize SUVs earned the highest rating of 'good' in the stringent new test, altered for vehicles starting with the 2020 model year with a heavier barrier (4,200 pounds) that moves at a higher speed (37 miles per hour) and is fitted with a hard honeycomb frontal structure. By way of contrast, just one out of of 20 small SUVs earned a 'good' score.  SUVs that receiving 'good' scores were the Ford Explorer, Infiniti QX60, Lincoln Aviator, Mazda CX-9, Nissan Pathfinder, Subaru Ascent, Toyota Highlander, Volkswagen Atlas, Volkswagen Atlas Cross Sport and Volkswagen ID.4. For EV fans, it's worth noting the ID.4 was the only electric vehicle included in the test. The Buick Enclave and Chevrolet Traverse scraped away with 'acceptable' ratings while the Honda Passport, Honda Pilot, Hyundai Palisade, Jeep Wrangler 4-door, Kia Telluride and Nissan Murano were deemed merely 'marginal' in the tough new test. Only two models — the Mazda CX-9 and Volkswagen ID.4 — earned a "Good" rating in every test category.  Interestingly, the Jeep Wrangler would have scored a 'good' rating if it were equipped with side airbags for the rear seating positions. It would likely be an engineering challenge to equip its removable top and/or doors with airbags, but the lack of that safety feature allowed the head of the rear passenger dummy to hit the vertical support of the top. Otherwise, the Wrangler scored good ratings across the board. The new Ford Bronco, which makes more allowances for side-impact safety, has not yet been tested.  The popular Hyundai Palisade and Kia Telluride SUVs stand out in the test with 'poor' ratings for driver pelvis injuries. The Nissan Murano, a vehicle last redesigned for the 2015 model year, was the only vehicle tested that received a 'poor' rating for its structure and safety cage. Videos of the tests of 12 of these 18 SUVs can be found on the IIHS' YouTube page. Related video: Green Buick Chevrolet Ford Honda Hyundai Infiniti Jeep Kia Mazda Nissan Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Safety Crossover SUV IIHS Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

The Apple of the auto industry isn't Tesla, it's Jeep

Whenever Apple is going to have a new product for sale in its stores, the fanboys line up in such great numbers that it's surprising Ticketmaster hasn't figured out a way to capitalize on the multitude of anxious buyers with credit cards ready to go. When Elon Musk talks about a new car being added to the lineup, there is an analogous group of people, and Musk has cleverly set up a model in which people place deposits for their place in line. The number of deposits (two per customer only, it should be noted) for the Model 3 is some 400,000. Because Tesla is a Silicon Valley company that has a highly desirable, highly designed suite of products for which there is demand the likes of which is completely uncharacteristic for the category, it is often compared to Apple. After all, has anyone gotten into line to buy a Windows phone? Do you even remember the Zune? So it must be that Tesla is like Apple. But there is one nontrivial problem with this comparison: Apple sells its products in mass quantity. Tesla, even though it just had its best quarter ever, delivering a record 25,418 vehicles - up 69 percent over the first quarter of 2016 - is still, when compared to the car industry in general, selling a specialized product. No, the automotive brand most like Apple is Jeep. Just as with Apple's quickly identified design language - either for the physical phones and computers or the interfaces for same - there is no mistaking a Jeep. Like Apple's legion of fans, there are people for whom a Jeep is not merely a form of transportation, but a statement about one's way of life. Like the companies that wish they could have designs that are Apple-like and do their utmost to have a similar objects or appearances (sometimes landing them in court, a la Samsung), is there a single automotive company that wouldn't like to have some of Jeep's magic? While there aren't people who are lined up outside of dealerships when a new Jeep goes on sale, there is probably more interest in the forthcoming Wrangler than in the accumulation of interest in a half-dozen other vehicles from other companies. And like Apple, Jeep is a comparative volume play. Last year FCA US LLC delivered 926,376 Jeeps. Walter P. Chrysler and the Dodge Brothers must be spinning at high velocity in their graves, because the U.S. total for Chrysler brand was 231,972, and Dodge was 506,858. The sum of the two - 738,830 - is well shy of Jeep's sales. On a global basis, Jeep sold some 1.4 million units in 2016.

Here's what it'll take to build a Jeep Grand Cherokee Hellcat

Let's get one thing straight: We want a 707-horsepower Grand Cherokee Hellcat to happen. Badly. The latest report from Motor Authority is encouraging; the bonkers SUV supposedly has a codename, Project K, and has been given the green light for production. Fingers crossed. You might be wondering why the Trackhawk isn't already a thing. Hellcat engines exist, SRT Grand Cherokees exist, so just combine the two, right? It's not quite that easy. Here, we outline what needs to happen, why it should be the quickest Hellcat vehicle out there, and why it won't come anywhere near 200 miles per hour. How To Build A Hellcat Jeep The first engineering problem is feeding the air-intensive beast that is the 6.2-liter supercharged V8. The first engineering problem is feeding the air-intensive beast that is the 6.2-liter supercharged Hellcat V8. Breathing is important on two counts: pulling in enough air for the combustion to put out 707 hp, and then cooling the various heat exchangers once the engine is up to temperature. Dodge did it with the Charger and Challenger, it can do it with the Jeep. This is one place where the Grand Cherokee's larger frontal area might be a boon, as it gives the engineers more surfaces through which to suck air. Once you generate the 707 horsepower and 650 pound-feet of torque, it has to get to the wheels somehow. Jeep's current SRT all-wheel-drive system will at least need some beefing up to handle the torque. It could require a more complete re-engineering. We at least know the ZF-supplied eight-speed auto, used in the Dodge Hellcat models, is up to the task. The Hellcat engine should fit in the Grand Cherokee, as it's about the same size as the 6.4-liter currently in SRT Jeeps, but the Hellcat is taller because of its supercharger. The hood may need to be raised or at least resculpted for clearance, as well as to address those cooling needs. Quicker Than Everything, But Not Faster 200 mph? We're skeptical, from both a physics standpoint and a legal one. A reminder of the quick/fast distinction: quick is acceleration, fast is road speed. The Jeep's all-wheel drive will help put the Hellcat engine's power to the ground in a more manageable way than the Charger and Challenger do through just the rear wheels. That means better acceleration times than the Dodges (11.0 seconds in the quarter-mile for the Charger Hellcat, 11.2 for its Challenger sibling).