2009 Jeep Wrangler on 2040-cars
Mission, Kansas, United States
For Sale By:Dealer
Engine:3.8L 3778CC 231Cu. In. V6 GAS OHV Naturally Aspirated
Body Type:Sport Utility
Transmission:6 SPEED
Fuel Type:GAS
Make: Jeep
Model: Wrangler
MPGHighway: 19
Trim: Unlimited X Sport Utility 4-Door
BodyStyle: SUV
MPGCity: 15
Drive Type: 4WD
FuelType: Gasoline
Mileage: 30,600
Sub Model: Unlimited X 4WD
Exterior Color: Orange
Interior Color: Gray
Number of Cylinders: 6
Jeep Wrangler for Sale
2013 jeep wrangler unlimited moab edition 4x4(US $41,500.00)
1997 jeep wrangler se sport utility 2-door 2.5l
Inca gold 2003 jeep rubicon on a 4" lift
2008 jeep wrangler x sport utility 2-door 3.8l
2005 jeep wrangler unlimited(US $17,500.00)
2005 jeep wrangler unlimited rubicon sport utility 2-door 4.0l(US $16,750.00)
Auto Services in Kansas
X-Treme Automotive L.L.C. ★★★★★
Vilela Auto Body ★★★★★
Salazar Auto Repair ★★★★★
Roe Body Shop ★★★★★
Rich Industries Auto Parts ★★★★★
Ray`s Muffler & Auto Repair ★★★★★
Auto blog
Federal investigations about safety of rear-mounted gas tanks is nothing new
Sun, 09 Jun 2013The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Chrysler are currently making waves in our daily news feeds due to a disagreement over the safety of a few million Jeep Liberty and Grand Cherokee models. Specifically, NHTSA has asked Chrysler to recall the SUVs because of the location of their fuel tanks, but you may be interested to know that requests such as this are nothing new.
Besides the two Jeep models, NHTSA has launched investigations over the years in such models as the Ford Crown Victoria (and its police-car counterpart), GM pickups built between 1972 and 1987, and rather famously the Ford Pinto.
Understanding how automakers and NHTSA have dealt with fuel-tank-safety concerns in the past may offer a better understanding of how Chrysler and the government agency will settle their current dispute. Check out the complete article from The Detroit News here.
Chrysler 3.0L EcoDiesel V6: Autoblog Technology of the Year finalist
Wed, 19 Nov 2014Offering a diesel engine in an American pickup is anything but new - Ford, General Motors and Chrysler all offer excellent and almost impossibly powerful oil-burning engines in their various fullsize trucks. What is new and novel about the 3.0L EcoDiesel, though, is its size, and the variety of vehicles that use it. It's the smallest engine, as far as displacement is concerned, currently offered in a large truck in the US, and, for 2014 and 2015, it is available in the Ram 1500 and the Jeep Grand Cherokee.
Though it may be small, it's got muscle. While 240 horsepower isn't particularly impressive these days, the engine's 420 pound-feet of torque more than makes up for that. The torque rating is even greater force than even the big 5.7-liter Hemi can muster. Chrysler's well-regarded eight-speed automatic transmission makes the most of all that bull-headed pulling power in both the Ram and Grand Cherokee. Chrysler claims the Ram EcoDiesel 1500 can tow as much as 9,200 pounds when properly equipped, which makes it "90-percent of the Hemi with a night and day difference in fuel economy."
Make no mistake; it's that promise of a sizable fuel economy improvement that many long-haul truckers will be most interested in. In the Ram 1500 that we tested for our Tech of the Year competition, the diesel engine costs $2,850 more than the gas-fed V8, and Ram estimates that EcoDiesel buyers will pay off their investment when compared to the Hemi engine in less than three years, which is considerably less time than the 4.5 or so years the average buyer will keep his or her fullsize pickup. The more you drive, the more you'll save, and the math proves equally as effective in the Jeep Grand Cherokee.
What would you drive in 1985?
Wed, May 6 2020Bereft of live baseball games to watch, I've turned to the good ship YouTube to watch classic games. While watching the 1985 American League Championship Series last night, several of the broadcast's commercials made its way into the original VHS recording, including those for cars. "Only 8.8% financing on a 1985 Ford Tempo!" What a deal! That got me thinking: what would I drive in 1985? It sure wouldn't be a Tempo. Or an IROC-Z, for that matter, despite what my Photoshopped 1980s self would indicate in the picture above. I posed this question to my fellow Autobloggists. Only one could actually drive back then, I was only 2 and a few editors weren't even close to being born. Here are our choices, which were simply made with the edict of "Come on, man, be realistic." West Coast Editor James Riswick: OK, I started this, I'll go first. I like coupes today, so I'm pretty sure I'd drive one back then. I definitely don't see myself driving some badge-engineered GM thing from 1985, and although a Honda Prelude has a certain appeal, I must admit that something European would likely be in order. A BMW maybe? No, I'm too much a contrarian for that. The answer is therefore a 1985 Saab 900 Turbo 3-Door, which is not only a coupe but a hatchback, too. If I could scrounge up enough Reagan-era bucks for the ultra-cool SPG model, that would be rad. The 900 Turbo pictured, which was for auction on Bring a Trailer a few years ago, came with plum-colored Bokhara Red, and you're damn sure I would've had me one of those. Nevermind 1985, I'd probably drive this thing today. Associate Editor Byron Hurd: I'm going to go with the 1985.5 Ford Mustang SVO, AKA the turbocharged Fox Body that everybody remembers but nobody drives. The mid-year update to the SVO bumped the power up from 175 ponies (yeah, yeah) to 205, making it almost as powerful (on paper, anyway) as the V8-powered GT models offered in the same time frame. I chose this particular car because it's a bit of a time capsule and, simultaneously, a reminder that all things are cyclical. Here we are, 35 years later, and 2.3-liter turbocharged Mustangs are a thing again. Who would have guessed?