'22 Rubicons pulled from Ordering System

[SouthValleyPerformance]

To be fair though my wife bought a 62k Rubi so there’s that for ya

Sponsored

 

[2nd 392]

If the voluntary 'agreement' was made by FCA back in 2016, would they even feel compelled to honor it after ceasing to exist as a corporate entity due to the PSA merger? Think that would give them some leeway if Stellantis decided it was something they weren't willing to do just yet, at least on all of their vehicles.

Considering the chip shortage and rising inflation over the past few years, it just seems kinda dumb to force expensive (and un-mandated) advanced safety tech on consumers that don't particularly want it.

Stick that goofy shit on your posh 50-foot Grand Wagoneer buses, but not on your off-road rock crawling machines largely bought by traditionalist auto enthusiasts.

Standard equipment on posh 392 but FWIW , 7 months and it hasn’t slammed on the brakes yet as my GC does ( it goes tilt in long curves and when passing turn lanes)

 

[AFD]

Standard equipment on posh 392 but FWIW , 7 months and it hasn’t slammed on the brakes yet as my GC does ( it goes tilt in long curves and when passing turn lanes)

Thought folks here were saying this auto-braking system was different than what's currently included in the Advanced Safety Group? Not sure if they meant it's more aggressive or more intrusive. I've been driving a '21 Mazda with auto-braking and haven't had it slam on the brakes yet either, though I've had the warning come up on the dash a few times. If it's not any worse than that and hopefully can be disabled, then I really don't mind (other than the unnecessary added expense of something I don't particularly want).

 

[Ratbert]

Thought folks here were saying this auto-braking system was different than what's currently included in the Advanced Safety Group? Not sure if they meant it's more aggressive or more intrusive. I've been driving a '21 Mazda with auto-braking and haven't had it slam on the brakes yet either, though I've had the warning come up on the dash a few times. If it's not any worse than that and hopefully can be disabled, then I really don't mind (other than the unnecessary added expense of something I don't particularly want).

A girl going 60mph slammed into four stopped vehicles on I-25 on October 10th of last year. I don't know about the two vehicles that were in front of me, but my Rubicon was totaled along with Melissa's (a fellow forum member that literally "met me" that day). Nobody died, but people were, and still are, injured.

The girl driving the car that smashed into Melissa's bumper at 60mph never touched her brakes. She apparently had no clue that she was about to royally fuck up people's lives. I can't imagine what her insurance rates are now that she was found to be responsible for totaling at least two vehicles, most likely three with hers included. Her insurance policy wasn't sufficient to cover all five vehicles, so I'm not sure how all of that played out.

Can you imagine what would have happened if that 20 year old girl had a working AEB system?

Can you instead imagine if someone had died and she had a working AEB system that she had disabled?

 

[OffroadCalling77]

A girl going 60mph slammed into four stopped vehicles on I-25 on October 10th of last year. I don't know about the two vehicles that were in front of me, but my Rubicon was totaled along with Melissa's (a fellow forum member that literally "met me" that day). Nobody died, but people were, and still are, injured.

The girl driving the car that smashed into Melissa's bumper at 60mph never touched her brakes. She apparently had no clue that she was about to royally fuck up people's lives. I can't imagine what her insurance rates are now that she was found to be responsible for totaling at least two vehicles, most likely three with hers included. Her insurance policy wasn't sufficient to cover all five vehicles, so I'm not sure how all of that played out.

Can you imagine what would have happened if that 20 year old girl had a working AEB system?

Can you instead imagine if someone had died and she had a working AEB system that she had disabled?

Interesting. Her insurance must have dropped her. My last two accident it’s was just me and no other cars or people involved. Also no police reports. Maybe why my insurance is still manageable.

 

[AFD]

A girl going 60mph slammed into four stopped vehicles on I-25 on October 10th of last year. I don't know about the two vehicles that were in front of me, but my Rubicon was totaled along with Melissa's (a fellow forum member that literally "met me" that day). Nobody died, but people were, and still are, injured.

The girl driving the car that smashed into Melissa's bumper at 60mph never touched her brakes. She apparently had no clue that she was about to royally fuck up people's lives. I can't imagine what her insurance rates are now that she was found to be responsible for totaling at least two vehicles, most likely three with hers included. Her insurance policy wasn't sufficient to cover all five vehicles, so I'm not sure how all of that played out.

Can you imagine what would have happened if that 20 year old girl had a working AEB system?

Can you instead imagine if someone had died and she had a working AEB system that she had disabled?

That's awful, but why should the vast majority of responsible drivers be impacted by a small a group of distracted and unattentive drivers that really shouldn't have a license in the first place? Knock on wood, but in several decades of driving I've never once driven into another vehicle or had an issue where automatic braking would've done anything other than cause a more dangerous situation for myself and others around me.

I mean, some young adult just did something horrible at a grocery store last week, so should we ban or further restrict the tools he used improperly and in a manner that was dangerous and deadly to others? Every year thousands in the US die or are severely injured due to drunk driving, so should ignition-based breathalyzers be installed on everyone's vehicles? And since some people simply can't be trusted with the responsibilities of driving a motor vehicle, should we strive to force everyone else to purchase fully autonomous self-driving cars when they become more readily available? Or maybe get rid of cars altogether and force everyone to take public
transportation?

Imo, driving is a privilege and not a right, and there's far too many people that simply shouldn't be allowed to continue driving. I'm not at all against optional safety tech, but I am somewhat opposed to technology that only serves to train drivers to be even more oblivious and inattentive to their surroundings and the deadly 5,000-pound projectile they're blindly aiming toward others.

Anti-lock brakes were introduced way back in the 60s and has been mandatory for nearly 20 years, and to this day, ABS and most stability controls can still be quickly and easily disabled by the driver. Don't recall ever hearing of any lawsuits stemming from someone who did and I'm guessing the likelihood of a distracted driver actually knowing how or having the inclination to disable these safety features is somewhere around zero. Auto-braking should logically follow this trend and allow being disabled.

 

[Ratbert]

That's awful, but why should the vast majority of responsible drivers be impacted by a small a group of distracted and unattentive drivers that really shouldn't have a license in the first place? Knock on wood, but in several decades of driving I've never once driven into another vehicle or had an issue where automatic braking would've done anything other than cause a more dangerous situation for myself and others around me.

I mean, some young adult just did something horrible at a grocery store last week, so should we ban or further restrict the tools he used improperly and in a manner that was dangerous and deadly to others? Every year thousands in the US die or are severely injured due to drunk driving, so should ignition-based breathalyzers be installed on everyone's vehicles? And since some people simply can't be trusted with the responsibilities of driving a motor vehicle, should we strive to force everyone else to purchase fully autonomous self-driving cars when they become more readily available? Or maybe get rid of cars altogether and force everyone to take public
transportation?

Imo, driving is a privilege and not a right, and there's far too many people that simply shouldn't be allowed to continue driving. I'm not at all against optional safety tech, but I am somewhat opposed to technology that only serves to train drivers to be even more oblivious and inattentive to their surroundings and the deadly 5,000-pound projectile they're blindly aiming toward others.

Anti-lock brakes were introduced way back in the 60s and has been mandatory for nearly 20 years, and to this day, ABS and most stability controls can still be quickly and easily disabled by the driver. Don't recall ever hearing of any lawsuits stemming from someone who did and I'm guessing the likelihood of a distracted driver actually knowing how or having the inclination to disable these safety features is somewhere around zero. Auto-braking should logically follow this trend and allow being disabled.

I'm thinking that it's similar to intentionally disabling any safety feature that has been shown to reduce the likelihood of serious injury or death to those around you. It's up to the judicial system to decide if that person bears responsibility and to what extent.

 

[twinjeepmom]

I went yesterday, 5/21 to order a Sahara altitude and was unable to order that. I ended up ordering a Rubicon. So wonder if certain dealers are still allowed to order them? Hoping I get mine.

 

[2nd 392]

That's awful, but why should the vast majority of responsible drivers be impacted by a small a group of distracted and unattentive drivers that really shouldn't have a license in the first place? Knock on wood, but in several decades of driving I've never once driven into another vehicle or had an issue where automatic braking would've done anything other than cause a more dangerous situation for myself and others around me.

I mean, some young adult just did something horrible at a grocery store last week, so should we ban or further restrict the tools he used improperly and in a manner that was dangerous and deadly to others? Every year thousands in the US die or are severely injured due to drunk driving, so should ignition-based breathalyzers be installed on everyone's vehicles? And since some people simply can't be trusted with the responsibilities of driving a motor vehicle, should we strive to force everyone else to purchase fully autonomous self-driving cars when they become more readily available? Or maybe get rid of cars altogether and force everyone to take public
transportation?

Imo, driving is a privilege and not a right, and there's far too many people that simply shouldn't be allowed to continue driving. I'm not at all against optional safety tech, but I am somewhat opposed to technology that only serves to train drivers to be even more oblivious and inattentive to their surroundings and the deadly 5,000-pound projectile they're blindly aiming toward others.

Anti-lock brakes were introduced way back in the 60s and has been mandatory for nearly 20 years, and to this day, ABS and most stability controls can still be quickly and easily disabled by the driver. Don't recall ever hearing of any lawsuits stemming from someone who did and I'm guessing the likelihood of a distracted driver actually knowing how or having the inclination to disable these safety features is somewhere around zero. Auto-braking should logically follow this trend and allow being disabled.

Recall recent thread about lawsuit due to auto-brake that was an Option not installed. Breathalyzers in vehicles by a certain date either is in effect or being worked on. ABS failure created an 80,000lb. Projectile coming down Pacheco Pass that I managed to keep control of and not take anybody else or myself out. A small minority of Idiots or Criminals (or agenda) has and will continue to be the “reason” for loss of rights to”keep us Safe”. And yes the Government wants us on public transportation.

 

[AFD]

Recall recent thread about lawsuit due to auto-brake that was an Option not installed. Breathalyzers in vehicles by a certain date either is in effect or being worked on. ABS failure created an 80,000lb. Projectile coming down Pacheco Pass that I managed to keep control of and not take anybody else or myself out. A small minority of Idiots or Criminals (or agenda) has and will continue to be the “reason” for loss of rights to”keep us Safe”. And yes the Government wants us on public transportation.

You referring to the guy at the dealership that didn't know how a manual worked? Really don't see how any auto-brake system would've saved the mechanic in that situation. Haven't heard about any breathalyzers becoming mandatory. That's f'ing silly and really don't think something like that would fly with most drivers.

After thinking about advanced safety tech for a bit, I've come to a realization that frankly, I still don't have a lot of trust in it, at least as far as primary functions are concerned (steering, braking and throttle). Many times I've had the front and side collision sensors alert me to shit that just wasn't there. Heck, the rain-sensing function can't even tell if it's raining half the time and the auto-headlights don't know what they're doing most of the time and the system freaked out from direct sunlight on the horizon.

I simply don't want a flaky on-board computer deciding when I want to brake (or steer or hit the gas) especially on wet, snowy and icy surfaces, where such driver override could potentially cause a more dangerous accident (auto-brake for a 150lb deer causing a slide head-on into a 50,000lb semi). I put a lot of thought into my driving and when needing to quickly stop with some asshole too close behind me, I'll intentionally use a light press with gradual and measured intensity to both warn the driver behind me and to stop in a manner that tries to minimize any risk of getting rear-ended while stopping in time to avoid whatever's in front of me. Will some flaky sensors and a shitty little computer be able to offer that level of thought and granularity? Of course not. And say I'm already in an accident or stopped in heavy traffic but see someone in my rearview that's obviously going to rear-end me, will the auto-brake allow me the rationale to safely hit the car in front of me if I decide it's less dangerous to move my vehicle off of the road?

There's probably countless scenarios where humans will always have the upper hand in both accuracy of sensors (sight, sound, smell, touch) and sheer computational logic (brain) versus a shitty consumer-grade car computer with a limited amount of sensors. This technology will likely save some lives for the sake of distracted drivers that shouldn't be on the road in the first place and will eventually cause death or injury for others due to its own limitations.

 

[2nd 392]

You referring to the guy at the dealership that didn't know how a manual worked? Really don't see how any auto-brake system would've saved the mechanic in that situation. Haven't heard about any breathalyzers becoming mandatory. That's f'ing silly and really don't think something like that would fly with most drivers.

After thinking about advanced safety tech for a bit, I've come to a realization that frankly, I still don't have a lot of trust in it, at least as far as primary functions are concerned (steering, braking and throttle). Many times I've had the front and side collision sensors alert me to shit that just wasn't there. Heck, the rain-sensing function can't even tell if it's raining half the time and the auto-headlights don't know what they're doing most of the time and the system freaked out from direct sunlight on the horizon.

I simply don't want a flaky on-board computer deciding when I want to brake (or steer or hit the gas) especially on wet, snowy and icy surfaces, where such driver override could potentially cause a more dangerous accident (auto-brake for a 150lb deer causing a slide head-on into a 50,000lb semi). I put a lot of thought into my driving and when needing to quickly stop with some asshole too close behind me, I'll intentionally use a light press with gradual and measured intensity to both warn the driver behind me and to stop in a manner that tries to minimize any risk of getting rear-ended while stopping in time to avoid whatever's in front of me. Will some flaky sensors and a shitty little computer be able to offer that level of thought and granularity? Of course not. And say I'm already in an accident or stopped in heavy traffic but see someone in my rearview that's obviously going to rear-end me, will the auto-brake allow me the rationale to safely hit the car in front of me if I decide it's less dangerous to move my vehicle off of the road?

There's probably countless scenarios where humans will always have the upper hand in both accuracy of sensors (sight, sound, smell, touch) and sheer computational logic (brain) versus a shitty consumer-grade car computer with a limited amount of sensors. This technology will likely save some lives for the sake of distracted drivers that shouldn't be on the road in the first place and will eventually cause death or injury for others due to its own limitations.

Yes- the mechanic lawsuit, ABS wasn’t installed although available as an option but only in an expensive trim level upgrade is the argument as I recall. Breathalyzer requirement by X date was in the news recently and I believe implemented, perhaps someone can confirm. After almost getting rear ended the third time when my GC slammed on the brakes when passing an occupied turn lane on a long curve I have changed my normal route and take the long way when driving it. I have survived driving Dad’s Nanny Free 3A for 56 years knowing it’s limitations and using common sense. Nannies are helpful in many situations especially with Idiots who rely on them but in other situations (as you mentioned) common sense would be my choice. With Common Sense no longer common the nannies are being shoved up- err- down our throats!?

 

[Ratbert]

You referring to the guy at the dealership that didn't know how a manual worked? Really don't see how any auto-brake system would've saved the mechanic in that situation. Haven't heard about any breathalyzers becoming mandatory. That's f'ing silly and really don't think something like that would fly with most drivers.

After thinking about advanced safety tech for a bit, I've come to a realization that frankly, I still don't have a lot of trust in it, at least as far as primary functions are concerned (steering, braking and throttle). Many times I've had the front and side collision sensors alert me to shit that just wasn't there. Heck, the rain-sensing function can't even tell if it's raining half the time and the auto-headlights don't know what they're doing most of the time and the system freaked out from direct sunlight on the horizon.

I simply don't want a flaky on-board computer deciding when I want to brake (or steer or hit the gas) especially on wet, snowy and icy surfaces, where such driver override could potentially cause a more dangerous accident (auto-brake for a 150lb deer causing a slide head-on into a 50,000lb semi). I put a lot of thought into my driving and when needing to quickly stop with some asshole too close behind me, I'll intentionally use a light press with gradual and measured intensity to both warn the driver behind me and to stop in a manner that tries to minimize any risk of getting rear-ended while stopping in time to avoid whatever's in front of me. Will some flaky sensors and a shitty little computer be able to offer that level of thought and granularity? Of course not. And say I'm already in an accident or stopped in heavy traffic but see someone in my rearview that's obviously going to rear-end me, will the auto-brake allow me the rationale to safely hit the car in front of me if I decide it's less dangerous to move my vehicle off of the road?

There's probably countless scenarios where humans will always have the upper hand in both accuracy of sensors (sight, sound, smell, touch) and sheer computational logic (brain) versus a shitty consumer-grade car computer with a limited amount of sensors. This technology will likely save some lives for the sake of distracted drivers that shouldn't be on the road in the first place and will eventually cause death or injury for others due to its own limitations.

Tesla's accident rates seem to conflict with that analysis. It looks like their nanny devices result in about 1/3rd as many accidents as the rest of the industry. Their full self driving, on the other hand, is involved in about 1/8th a many accidents.

FCA, of course, is several years behind Tesla.

 

[AFD]

Tesla's accident rates seem to conflict with that analysis. It looks like their nanny devices result in about 1/3rd as many accidents as the rest of the industry. Their full self driving, on the other hand, is involved in about 1/8th a many accidents.

FCA, of course, is several years behind Tesla.

Yeah, a manufacturer that develops their own AI semiconductors and only sells $50-$160k cars loaded with more cameras, sensors and computational power than any other vehicle should stand to fair a little bit better than everyone else in that regard.

I'm actually a little surprised that a company who's average price per vehicle offered is $97k with such a large focus on advanced safety tech doesn't have a more significant decrease in accidents than the figures you posted. A large part of those statistics could be due to the likelihood that your average oblivious distracted driver isn't the person spending that kind of money by buying this brand?

I mean, sure, there's definitely shitty drivers for every brand and price point, but I'm guessing that people spending double or triple the amount of an average-priced car ($47k) generally have more interest in not damaging or destroying their vehicle. And even more so when compared to people spending a small fraction of that when buying used or a $22k Civic (nothing wrong with that, just saying your statistics can't possibly paint the whole picture).

 

[BEACHED WHALE]

I was focusing on this:

The announcement comes as FCA US joins 19 other automakers today in signing the Automobile Industry Commitment to Implement Automatic Emergency Braking Technology.​

Just another light to go off on the dash to bring to the dealer. That way you you get the "waiting room report" from the service guy. "We fixed the EBT BUT FOUND you need etc,etc,etc,. So you leave sad, broke, and thinking about that 23 that just came out

 

[Whaler27]

If you're ordering your Jeep, there's a dealer in GA and one in LA that are offering 4%-5% off Invoice. You'd have to pay to get it delivered or picked up.

Make sure they don’t…
1) Require a $500+ “doc fee” or a bunch of other invented fees, or
2) Require financing through their programs, or
3) Require participation in any other program or purchase to qualify for the deal.
…. lots of lying bastards out there…

Sponsored