[Allpar News System]

[caption id="attachment_5637" align="aligncenter" width="800"]

First and second generations of the Jeep Grand Cherokee[/caption] Chrysler Group has received a letter from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) requesting a recall of 1993-2004 Jeep Grand Cherokees and 2002-2007 Jeep Libertys. Such a recall would involve approximately 2.7 millon vehicles.  The request is based on the agency's Engineering Analysis EA12005, which was opened in June of 2012. It followed a Preliminary Evaluation (PE10031) which was opened in August of 2010 and closed in June, when the investigation was upgraded. Both inquiries regarded crash-related fuel tank fires but, as yet, have not been able to connect the reported incidents to a defect in the design or construction of the Jeep vehicles. Chrysler is rejecting the government request for a recall. In a statement issued this morning, the company said: "Chrysler Group has been working and sharing data with the Agency on this issue..

View the original, full post

 

[Erik Latranyi]

Good for them!

 

[bumonbox]

Good for them!

SO:
Both inquiries regarded crash-related fuel tank fires but, as yet, have not been able to connect the reported incidents to a defect in the design or construction of the Jeep vehicles.

"So we have no reason to believe your design has caused any problem on these vehicles 10 or more years old. But we think you should pour crap tons of money into recalling them anyways,"

This is just plain ol' bizarre. And a waste of time and resources. It keeps resurfacing, should the dingle berries at the NTHSA have the common sense to see it for what it is. It's time for it to go away. The numbers regarding such incidents with the GC are statistically normal compared to other vehicles. There is nothing to see here.

 

[TripleT]

I am trying to figure out what the recall would be for, or the action that would need to be taken if no design or workmanship issue has been identified?

 

[bumonbox]

I am trying to figure out what the recall would be for, or the action that would need to be taken if now design or workmanship issue has been identified?

Move the gas tank!! lol. There in lies the other thing. Just the prospect of potential options to correct vehicles up 20 years old. At 20 years old, large portions of the underbody have been subjected to quite a bit, and many vehicles would have a fair bit of rust. Just the logistics of this sound unreasonable. More over, I'd be willing to bet that given maintenance habits, there are people running these vehicles around with far more dangerous ailments than the insinuated issue at hand. The whole thing just seems a bit ridiculous - if there is really an issue, it wouldn't have taken 20 years and then suddenly become a problem.

 

[TripleT]

Is this just a statistical issue, where that there is just so many of these vehicles STILL on the road that there is bound to be a few fire related crashes?

 

[JohnRogers]

Of course question number two is how does Chrysler win this in the media? I'm glad Chrysler is "fighting city hall" I just hope they have a strategy to win.

 

[bumonbox]

Of course question number two is how does Chrysler win this in the media? I'm glad Chrysler is "fighting city hall" I just hope they have a strategy to win.

This completely depends on them. On one hand, they don't want to call too much attention to it. On the other hand, anything coming from NTHSA needs to be answered to. NTHSA has no leg to stand on in this particular incident. If this is worthy of a safety recall, it should never have taken 20 years. Especially because their claiming the problem is not because of a failure (I can understand unusual failures taking time to set in), but rather what is claimed to be a flawed design.
It looks absurdly bad that they "just noticed"

 

[Dave Z]

For one thing, they made darned sure every reporter on the planet knew their response.

I disagree on the 20 year argument and on the "why do we still see them" argument (because they havent' been hit yet?)

But Chrysler's arguments are hard to argue with...

1) Exceeded all requirements
2) No more dangerous than competitor vehicles
3) Same design as competitors

 

[JohnRogers]

Oh they will need to answer. The media is all over it. The low information voter still doesn't understand what "recall" really means. The media screams recall and the sheep think "crap" or "death trap". Enjoy the photo in the link.
http://money.cnn.com/2013/06/04/autos/chrysler-recall-refusal/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

 

[MoparDanno]

I love the "Estimated only $300 million to perform the recall"

When Chrysler is still dangling by a thread finance wise, $300 million is a HUGE chunk of change.

Sounds like someone has a bone to pick with Chrysler. And legally, can the current corporation be held responsible? Wouldnt that fall on to Old Car Co?

 

[Jeepnut]

I think Larrys article might shed a little light on it.
http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20130604/OEM11/130609966&template=mobile
Looks like Clarence Ditlow is the one pushing this. I especially love the quote at the end from him saying something to the effect that since the US govt bailed out Chrysler it owes the government the recall!

 

[Erik Latranyi]

It is way past time for companies to stand up to this type of intimidation and nonsense.

We are no longer a nation of laws, we are a nation of ruled by the whims of men and women in the moment.

 

[BASONE88]

Amen Dave. Agreed Erik. Likewise, there is no end to the individuals and groups that would like nothing better than to see CGLLC go down.

 

[JohnRogers]

...there is no end to the individuals and groups that would like nothing better than to see CGLLC go down.

Exactly, so while being armed with the truth is good. A message about how flawed the NHTSA analysis is, in away the people will grasp is more important. Think about how many mini-vans NHTSA and that insurance body's recommendations sell.

 

[Stratuscaster]

My mother-in-law called my wife today - concerned that my son's girlfriend's car might be affected by this alleged flaw.

All she heard on the news was "Jeep", "recall", "gas tank", and "fire."

My son's girlfriend drives my old 1995 Cherokee. Not a Grand Cherokee or a Liberty.

But thanks for checking.

 

[MudTJ]

My mother-in-law called my wife today - concerned that my son's girlfriend's car might be affected by this alleged flaw.

All she heard on the news was "Jeep", "recall", "gas tank", and "fire."

My son's girlfriend drives my old 1995 Cherokee. Not a Grand Cherokee or a Liberty.

But thanks for checking.

Gas tank is still in the same place.

 

[dana44]

This completely depends on them. On one hand, they don't want to call too much attention to it. On the other hand, anything coming from NTHSA needs to be answered to. NTHSA has no leg to stand on in this particular incident. If this is worthy of a safety recall, it should never have taken 20 years. Especially because their claiming the problem is not because of a failure (I can understand unusual failures taking time to set in), but rather what is claimed to be a flawed design.
It looks absurdly bad that they "just noticed"

It's all about the money and control. Chrysler was not supposed to survive as well as they have and they can't handle it. I agree, give me proof the fires are related to design. No proof, no fix needed. After 20 years of operation, there is an exponential increase of possibilities that a crash cause a fire.

 

[barracudafett]

It's all about the money and control. Chrysler was not supposed to survive as well as they have and they can't handle it. I agree, give me proof the fires are related to design. No proof, no fix needed. After 20 years of operation, there is an exponential increase of possibilities that a crash cause a fire.

exactly!

 

[Curtis Redgap]

It's all about the money and control. Chrysler was not supposed to survive as well as they have and they can't handle it. I agree, give me proof the fires are related to design. No proof, no fix needed. After 20 years of operation, there is an exponential increase of possibilities that a crash cause a fire.

Moreover........why now? Did Marchionne paying off the bank early tick someone off for loss of lots of ernest interest money..........or what? Pure government bureaucrat think. Can't really find a defect....don't know if it is a real defect..... spent lots of make work money on research to make it a defect.....no cause for a defect......... B U T.......... recall it anyway...... at YOUR expense, BTW.

Good on ya Chrysler.