Looks more like a Kia to me!
Ever since Fiat became FCA – Fiat Chrysler Automotive – there has been something a bit incongruous about the mix of brands. An Italian Jeep takes a bit of getting used to. Refined ride, exceptionally nice leather, a responsive automatic gearbox, multi-link rear suspension. It’s all a bit, well, not-Jeep. And the good things …
I see what you mean.
But there will be important, hidden differences that the Jeep/Fiat brands offer: beneath the skin of the Cherokee the traditional values will run deep. So presumably buyers should anticipate abominable reliability, dealers that are somewhere south of abominable, and resale values that sink faster than a depth charge.
Well that is pretty true it seems for 99, and up cherokees from what I read. Only read bad things when I was looking for a truck about the 99+'s, but found the pre 99's were generally reliable, and cost more.
Side note agree with the original poster in that it looks like a Kia :(
That thing isn't a Jeep - it's a cookie-cutter SUV.
For reference, the last of the original Cherokee XJ models was the 2001 model year with the 4.0 HO straight-six. 84-86 models had the anemic GM 2.8l v-6's, 87-90 was the regular 4.0, with the 91's-up taking the HO 4.0 straight 6. I've owned an 84, a 91, and a 99 XJ.
No personal data on the turbo diesels - never saw one in the wild here in the US. Biggest flaw was the monoque(sic?) chassis, unibody IMO - unless you reinforced the two 'tunnels' under it, they would start to crack. Most noticeably between the doors if 4 door, it would begin to sag. Loved XJ's, still do.
Be nice if you could still get the farmer version of the CJ2->up, had PTO's from the factory, could use it to power farm machinery. Outfit a V8 CJ-7 with portal axles from a Unimog and you'll have something nice to putt around in muaaaahaaaahaaa!
<ahem.. 'scuse me ;)>
Biggest flaw was the monoque(sic?) chassis, unibody IMO - unless you reinforced the two 'tunnels' under it, they would start to crack. Most noticeably between the doors if 4 door, it would begin to sag. Loved XJ's, still do.
Heh. Reminds me of if I ever parked the XJ on too uneven surface (say a rock or bigger branch under one rear wheel) you couldn't shut the tail gate if you opened it as the body flexed too much for the catch to work properly.
I do miss the XJ. Rock solid 4.0 HO with NP242 transfer case.
So presumably buyers should anticipate abominable reliability, dealers that are somewhere south of abominable, and resale values that sink faster than a depth charge.
Having owned several pre-2000 Jeeps (both XJ and WJ) all I can say is that they're very reliable. Never left me stranded anywhere. Can't speak for newer models but the older ones (both I6 4.0 and V8 4.7) have been uttterly reliable.
Dealers, well they're dealers and them some. Luckily with an old one there is little need for them, apart from some parts or fluids (where original might be preferable to 3rd part ones).
No argument about the resale value. That's one of the reasons I had few of them. Cheap and very cheerful.
Far better visual appearance than almost anything from Japan, for example.
I'd agree that too many Japanese cars look bland or odd (with quite a few exceptions), but the Koreans aren't even going to let the Japanese own the "Weird & ugly" niche, to judge by the Ssangyong Rodius. In fact, even the Europeans have had a crack, in the shape of the Porsche Cayenne.
"Looks like a Kia"
In 2015 that's a fair compliment, in fact it isn't quite as impressive looking as a Kia to my eyes, not many cars are. Thanks to Peter Schreywr.
I really am not impressed by the emphasis in the article in the alleged lack of power, the car is more than capable of doing what is required for modern driving. And "what'll it do Mr" sounds like something in a bubble caption in 1964 Dandy comic. More likely some chav Peugeot 106 pilot will say "woss its top end then mate". But nobody else will really care.
The way the vehicle delivers the torque in response to the pedal is far more important.
"The way the vehicle delivers the torque in response to the pedal is far more important."
There was an infamous modification to the VWs such as the Mk 2 GTI. If you inserted a paperclip into the throttle linkage at just the right place, it changed the relationship between the pedal and the throttle, making the first inch of throttle movement equal to about 100% throttle opening. This simple modification made the car about "twice as fast".
"lane departure warning – which is annoying"
My Skoda gives a very gentle, relaxing almost, 'bing' sound when the outdoor temperature is likely to result in an icy road, and a strident 'BEEEEEPP' when the screen washer bottle is low. And I don't think they can be switched around or off.
Personally I think anything that helps stop lumbering great lumps of iron from wandering about the lanes on a motorway is a good thing.
European models have a different modem and that it's safe from that sort of knavery.
I wasn't aware that the modem was where the "infotainment" system connected to the brake/steering/engine control systems. But, hey, they're the experts.
It's happy to know that everything is safe.
In the beginning, there was the Alfa Romeo Giulietta. Fiat bought Chrysler. They then selected the Giulietta, clicked Copy, moved the cursor to Chrysler, and clicked Paste. Then they realized that cheeseburgers have had an impact on the bottom line in America, so they resized it a bit bigger before clicking Print. Thus was born the Dodge Dart.
Then, they jacked it up to become the "Jeep" Cherokee, sans Grand.
As far as I'm concerned, it's not a real Jeep. But that undoubtedly makes it a better vehicle. What with including some refined engineering and all.
Not too sure about the front wheel drive aspect of its lineage though. But that's becoming more common of course.
My impression that the letters LTD on the back are now more than the same sort of status symbol a GLS, GTI etc used to be here.
When I lived in N.H. it was might be a bit more power, a different trim of different wheels and that was about it.
As for this not being a real Jeep, I totally agree. It is like (IMHO) that any vehicle with a Land Rover badge that is not a Defender type ain't really a Landy.
The last real Landy was a series 3, and that's even being a bit generous.
If it has coil spring suspension it isn't a Landy.
If you still have your kidneys after a 50 mile trip it wasn't in a Landy.
It it has an automatic gearbox it isn't a Landy.
If it has an air conditioner or heater that actually works, it isn't a Landy.
That depends what you want to do with it. If you want to go down to the woods today and not have a big surprise, you need to tow a skip around the yard, you need something to stand on to reach an overhead branch or to get you down to the pub come snow or mud then you need a real Defender.
It was the kidney issue which pretty much made my employer dump all the landies and replace 'em with landcruisers back in the late 70s.
That and the landies' annoying habit of conking out on mountaintops. If you're working in a hilltop microwave or landmobile station and there's a blizzard or electrical storm coming down the ridge, you want to be OFF THIS HILL - NOW!
Jeep do use the "Unlimited" designation on the Wrangler... which has four doors instead of the usual two!
If I remember correctly I'd read somewhere that the new Cherokee was originally going to be an Alfa branded SUV before the FCA merger but when they realised Chrysler couldn't afford to design a new mid range to replace the Liberty they re-tooled it and stuck the prison bar grill on the front.
As someone who's owned both Afla (155) and Jeep (Cherokee and Liberty) this seems to take the worst of both and try to present it as a good thing. I do very little real off-roading (4wd is mostly for gravel tracks and snow) so don't really care about the "trail rated" badge, but I care about looks, safety and mpg and so we'll probably get a Ford Edge to replace the Liberty when it finally bites the dust (around 100k miles in 5 years so it's not been a bad run)
When cowboy boots get made out of Italian leather they're no longer cowboy boots - they're just sexy shoes for wearing in gay bars.
The same is happening with 4WD and other "tough" vehicles. They're no longer designed around practicality, they're now being designed for fashion.
One of the more modern trends (I guess this year's car fashion) is to have deep body panels topped with visor-like slits of glass. Maybe OK on a roadster, but the last thing you want in an offroader - where you need plenty of visibility to see where the wheels are going etc.
Today I saw one of the new Mazda BT50 pickup (what we in NZ call a ute). BT50 was once a hard working ute, but now no more! This has the skinny glass, but IMHO the worst offence are the rear lights. They're split - half on the body and half on the tailgate. In real usage, tailgates get a thrashing. They get dented and bashed. Those lights are going to get broken really, really quickly.
But no doubt they'll sell in droves to Italian leather cowboy boot wearers to go clubbing.
Here in California, I'd say pre-1970. Post smog-control vehicles have absolutely zero low-end torque, and you're not really allowed to futz with it if you want to keep it street legal. On the bright side, I just bought a 1964 CJ5 that should match well with a Ford 300ci inline 6, T-10 transmission, a couple of Dana 60 axles, and a NP-205 that I have been hording "just in case".
Yes, they do still make 'real' offroaders. Toyota still does the 70 (but unfortunately they don't bring it to Europe oficially), Foers Ibex will make you one based on LR running gear, Jeep has the Rubicon, and the US manufacturers make some fine pick-ups that will do nicely with a bit of tweaking.
I know, I drive them, own and have owned several different ones, and am currently researching the next one.
It takes a bit more effort than walking into the nearest showroom, but you CAN have a 'real' offroader if you really want one and are prepared to pay for the privilege.
So the author picks the "Limited" edition, and then bitches about how it isn't really a Jeep, and lacks power. And then goes on to say that the Trailhawk edition does exist - and btw cures BOTH of those problems (and more) as every Jeep enthusiast knows - but some Jeep manager said it was "specialist", so you ignored it.
WTF Simon - the answer to your criticism is right in front of you and you engineer a way to ignore it so you can write a hatchet piece?
And no, I'm not a Jeep owner - I drive an FJ Cruiser, their arch enemy - but I DO give proper off-roading respect any Jeep that says Trailhawk or Rubicon...basically any Jeep that has locking diffs.
And for those of us who did our homework before plonking down $40K. It has been a really worthy replacement for my 4.7L '02 GC and the 4L '93 Cherokee Sport before it.
What's more it goes like a banshee on the highway at 10L per 100K handles like a Mini Cooper and crawls the back country where I live in Canada with total aplomb. This review is a prime example of technological masturbation.
no more so than was Daimler Chrysler
most amusing quote from the linked story: "But it wasn't long before Chrysler executives complained the bullheaded Germans wouldn't listen to the Americans."
All that verdammt insistence upon things like "quality" and "craftsmanship." SHEESH!
Err, don't think you'll find that Mercedes was making a quality product when they merged. As a Mercedes owner of a 2000 E class, its reliability is horrific. The Mercedes you think of, making something of quality and reliable, was taken out back of a Mercedes factory in the mid 90s and shot in the forehead.
Ah - it just gets sadder to see.
I still have my 2001 XJ 4.0L 60th Anniversary edition and in 120,000 miles and 15 years it has 'broken down' exactly once - needing the replacement of a £40 sensor (which I did myself)
Yes at 17mpg it isn't going to win any green awards but i've never owned a vehicle that can do 100mph down the motorway and then climb a 40 degree muddy incline without so much as a gear change.
I wouldn't even look at these new, so-called Jeeps, they are not related in anyway to Jeep.
My Cherokee rocks!
Jeep Cherokee, the car of choice of the agressive douche for more than 20 years!
Well, maybe that's not true where the cars are right-hand-drive, but here in Colorado... About 15 years ago, I heard a singer/songwriter perform a song with a chorus that started "it's just another asshole in a Jeep Cherokee,.."
Pretty decent song actually.
I would agree that the Limited is a 4WD street vehicle. That's why I got the Trailhawk. Active Drive II, every conceivable option from the Limited (except the glass roof). It's "Trail Rated" in Jeep vernacular, which means it CAN do the Rubicon (which mine has done).
So far it's been a great vehicle. 4 months and 10,000 miles. I guess we'll see in another few years but so far it's all thumbs up.
3.2 L V6 get about 23mpg combined. Though to use 9th gear the computer is programmed that you need to be doing at least 80 mph. I haven't used sport mode yet - I'll have to go try that... But I can attest that both Sand and Rock modes work just fine.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021