1990 Jeep Wrangler With Hard Top Automatic on 2040-cars

Auto blog

7 major automakers to build open EV charging network

A new joint venture established by BMW, GM, Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Mercedes-Benz and Stellantis will build a new North American electric vehicle charging network on a scale designed to compete with Tesla's industry-benchmark Supercharger network. The 30,000-plus planned new chargers will accommodate both Tesla's almost-standard North American Charging System (NACS) and existing automakers' Combined Charging System (CCS) options, effectively guaranteeing compatibility with the vast majority of current and upcoming electric models — whether they're from one of the involved automakers or not.  "With the generational investments in public charging being implemented on the Federal and State level, the joint venture will leverage public and private funds to accelerate the installation of high-powered charging for customers. The new charging stations will be accessible to all battery-powered electric vehicles from any automaker using Combined Charging System (CCS) or North American Charging Standard (NACS) and are expected to meet or exceed the spirit and requirements of the U.S. National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) program." Critically, the automakers involved will have a say in how the charging tech is implemented, guaranteeing that the hardware will play nicely with each automaker's in-house charging systems. Hyundai and Kia, for example, were hesitant to jump on board the Tesla NACS bandwagon earlier this year over concerns that the Supercharger network is insufficient for powering the two automakers' 800-volt charging systems; similar tech is used by Volkswagen and Porsche.  In addition to providing much-needed capacity and high-output charging for America's growing fleet of electric cars and trucks, the new network will integrate seamlessly with each automaker's in-app and in-vehicle features, rather than forcing customers to use third-party tools and payment systems, as is the case with some existing public charging infrastructure.  "The functions and services of the network will allow for seamless integration with participating automakersÂ’ in-vehicle and in-app experiences, including reservations, intelligent route planning and navigation, payment applications, transparent energy management and more. In addition, the network will leverage Plug & Charge technology to further enhance the customer experience," the announcement said.

Jeep beefs up the Wrangler Rubicon with 2017 Recon Edition hardware

The Wrangler Rubicon Hard Rock is dead. Don't worry; the 2017 Rubicon Recon is heading to showrooms soon to take its place, and judging by what it's packing you'll hardly miss the Hard Rock. Essentially, this is a Rubicon with some beefed-up bits underneath and a few special cosmetic tweaks, a bit like the outgoing Hard Rock. Up front, there's a stronger Dana 44 with strengthened tubes and heavy-duty end forgings. Likewise, the front and rear differentials get stronger cast covers than the Hard Rock's stamped ones. The ratios are the same, with 4.10:1 front and rear ratios, Tru-Lok locking diffs, and a Rock-Trac transfer case. There's also a half-inch lift. Cosmetically, there are new 17-inch wheels exclusive to the Recon equipped with 32-inch BF Goodrich KM tires, and the rock rails have been reshaped to allow owners to fit 35-inch tires without interference. The Recon also adds red seatbelts and stitching, something you haven't been able to get in a Wrangler before, a Jeep rep told us. If that's what you were waiting for to get into a Wrangler Rubicon, well, there you go. There's also the special-edition farkles you'd expect: a dashboard plaque the fender badge, and a unique gauge cluster treatment. The two-door Recon will start at $40,140 and the four door at $43,940 – that's compared to the base Rubicon, which starts at $34,190 in two-door form. So, the Recon represents a nearly $6,000 premium over the base Rubicon and a $1,150 premium over the outgoing Hard Rock. It'll be available in dealers at the end of this month. Related Video:

In Michigan, car hackers could face life imprisonment

Car 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.