The Problem That Won't Go Away: Fatal Jeep Crash Puts Spotlight on Years-old Recall

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems
It’s the same safety issue that saddled Ford’s Pinto with a notorious legacy that continues to this day, and Jeep can’t seem to put it in its rear-view.In 2013, at the urging of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles issued a recall for 1.56 million Jeep Liberty and Grand Cherokee SUVs to correct a serious flaw. The vehicles’ gas tanks, located between the rear axle and bumper, had proven especially vulnerable to rupturing in rear-end collisions. A total of 26 deaths were recorded at the time of the recall.After installing trailer hitches on each affected vehicle, FCA felt it had the issue well in hand. Unfortunately, the fires continued, as did the deaths. Now, it’s happened again.According to Bloomberg, Vicki Hill, 58, died this week after her 2007 Jeep Liberty burst into flames after being rammed from behind by a Buick. Hill’s vehicle was stopped at an Ohio intersection at the time. The Liberty in question — among the newest of the recalled vehicles — was outfitted with a trailer hitch, FCA records show.FCA’s recall covered Libertys built from 2002 to 2007, plus 1993-1998 Grand Cherokees. Not surprisingly, news of Hill’s death has safety advocates claiming Jeep’s recall didn’t fix a deadly problem.The Ralph Nader-founded Center for Auto Safety, a D.C.-based nonprofit group, is renewing its calls for a new investigation into the fires. “Our fear then and our fear today remains to be that the fix is not sufficient,” CAS executive director Jason Levine told Bloomberg.The organization began calling for an investigation in 2011 after three CAS-commissioned tests performed on mid-90s Grand Cherokees revealed a tendency for fuel tank rupture in 50-mile-per-hour rear-end collisions. A Ford Explorer of the same vintage held up after a 70 mph impact from a Ford Taurus test vehicle. Two years later, CAS presented the NHTSA with a white paper illustrating its concerns over the Grand Cherokee and Liberty.By this time, the affected models were on their way to a recall. FCA redesigned the Liberty for the 2008 model year, and its Grand Cherokee had long since relocated its fuel tank ahead of the rear axle. However, the old vehicle remained, now outfitted with a solution CAS called “inadequate.”Following the recall, former CAS Executive Director Clarence Ditlow told T he New York Times that the vehicles remained vulnerable. In its letter to the NHTSA, the automaker claimed the center-mounted hitch would “incrementally improve the performance of certain of the subject vehicles in certain types of low-speed impacts.” Ditlow argued the tanks were still susceptible to angled rear-end crashes. Also, heavy braking could cause the impacting vehicle’s nose to dive under the Jeep’s high rear bumper.It isn’t known how fast the Buick that hit Hill’s Liberty was travelling at the time of impact. The NHTSA, which closed its investigation in 2014, claims it is monitoring the issue and “will take action as appropriate.” CAS began calling for another federal investigation early last year.When contacted by Bloomberg, FCA spokesman Eric Mayne issued condolences on behalf of the company. However, barring NHTSA intervention, the fire issue seems closed. “The 2007 Jeep Liberty meets or exceeds all applicable federal safety standards,” Mayne said, “including those that test fuel-system integrity in rear impacts.”[Image: Wikimedia Commons ( CC BY-SA 2.0)]
Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 60 comments
  • INeon INeon on Sep 01, 2017

    This story makes me think its tinfoil hat time. Weren't we just selling-off Jeep last week? So which company wants a lower value for Jeep, that might have some sway with these agencies/foundations? No company can be held liable for a vehicle's not protecting occupants against 50-70mph rear impacts 25 years after it sold those cars. That's lunacy.

  • Volvoguyincanada Volvoguyincanada on Sep 01, 2017

    “A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.”

    • Fiasco Fiasco on Sep 03, 2017

      Ford tried this with the Pinto and it ended less than well for them.

  • 1995 SC I don't know what the answer is, but out Germaning the Germans hasn't been it. Look at what works and do that (Escalade?). Maybe the world is ready for an option that just sort of shuts the world out at the end of the day and gives the driver a nice, supple ride home and is suited to the world that most people drive in.They won't though. The Journos will hate it and cry about ring times and at the end of the day that and dealers are who the cars are built for...not you. And Cadillac will likely fail sadly.
  • Daniel I couldn't agree more! As someone who is literally 100% brand agnostic, Cadillac is right up there with Lincoln for (relatively) very nice American brand designs and powetrains (OK, their sedans are getting a little stale with the same pointy, CyberTruck angles, but I digress) but their interiors really are absolutely lacking almost *any* differentiation from the "solid for what it is" Chevy parts bin and deserves better!
  • Fred Do what GM wants, cut costs. Pull out of racing hyper cars, defund the F1 program. Finally make more SUVs.
  • Cprescott I would do the following for Cadihack:[list=1][*] Make the V-Series as the base model and then add hybrid to the upgrade;[/*][*]Can the hideous Arts and Scientology (!) design disaster and bring out smoother yet crisp and sleek styling - no more boxes or tacky lighting. Let the body sculpturing win the day. I'd say take Audi and cross it with Genesis to give the vehicles stance and easily identifiable brand cues.[/*][*]Come up with interiors that are unique with quality materials and not something that looks like you ripped off Hyundai and Kia. The car must have four bucket seats that are all adjustable. [/*][*]Build to order. Get rid of this buying a Cadihack off the lot and sell at retail for a car built specifically for the client. Nothing makes a premium statement than a car built specifically for the customer - dealer will like because car will be sold at sticker.[/*][*]Expand exterior and interior colors and combinations.[/*][*]Share nothing with any other GM product. Each car / vehicle has to be a standout model even if the basis is common platform - if Hyundai/Kia/Genesis can pull this off, GM must be able to do.[/*][*]Do not mistake sticker price for luxury. The car's design and material integration will do that for you. If it does not feel, look, and smell premium, it is a Chevrolet.[/*][*]Special customer service - at the time of delivery, client gets to meet the service team that will deliver five years of complimentary service PLUS free tires for the first 50k. Special appointments and pick up car from customer and then bring it back. [/*][*]Loaner car delivered if vehicle is in the shop more than routine maintenance and picked up free of charge for first five years.[/*][*]Thoughtful design trumps technology. Vehicle should be intuitive to use and built to coddle the customer beyond his/her expectations. Vehicle must have "Wow!" - not just good enough.[/*][/list=1]
  • KOKing Kinda hate to say this but they need to be an American Land Rover sans the offroad image (and capability). Leave the Escalade alone and do a shrunken Escalade-esque lineup (the first time I saw a Hyundai Palisade I thought that was the XT6 that Cadillac shoulda made) and dump the alphabet soup models and trims.
Next