2014 Jeep Cherokee

[Madman]

The people who ACTUALLY buy a majority of Jeeps don't give a rat's ass about its off-roadability.  They don't care.

Most of the used Jeeps I've seen are 2WD, which only goes to prove your point.

[280Z Turbo]

Off roading sucks anyway.

[Soup DeVille]

I can't say I'm terribly surprised to see all this negativity from the Jeep fanboys.  Most of these people seem to think everything introduced after the original Willys MB is a desecration of the Jeep name.  The problem with this line of thinking is there are only so many people who want a spartan, bare-bones off roader with fewer creature comforts than a Guantanamo prision cell.

Besides, I've never met a Jeep-freak who bought theirs new, so why should they try to pander to an audience who has never directly given them any money, anyway?  These guys remind me of all those bikers who ride around on 20-year-old Harleys and bitch about how the new ones all suck.

Like much of the rest of automotive marketing: Jeep deals in a certain percentage of fantasy. Just as only a very small percentage of Corvette owners will ever have their car on a track, most of them buy it because of what they believe it CAN do on a track, and it gives them the fantasy that they are hot shot race care drivers.

So, the same thing goes for Jeep: Because a small (arguably larger) percentage of Jeep owners are serious "wheelers," most Jeep owners like to think of themselves as adventurous, rugged types, who could and might use their Jeep off-road someday.

But, just as there are only a small percentage of owners who want a simple, rugged, spartan Jeep: there's only really one vehicle filling that niche anyways: and it continues to sell (despite the fact that its now more expensive, complicated and comfortable than its ever been)

[Soup DeVille]

Most of the used Jeeps I've seen are 2WD, which only goes to prove your point.

You see a lot of postal Jeeps for sale around you?

[93JC]

Besides, I've never met a Jeep-freak who bought theirs new, so why should they try to pander to an audience who has never directly given them any money, anyway?

That's rich coming from you.

[Madman]

You see a lot of postal Jeeps for sale around you?

I occasionally run across one on craigslist, but they're rare.  What I'm talking about are decade-old Cherokees, Grand Cherokees and Libertys, most of which seem to be 2WD.  We don't get a lot of snow, so that might explain the lack of interest in 4WD.  I also see lots of 2WD Isuzu Rodeos going dirt cheap.  Not that anybody would want one.

[Madman]

That's rich coming from you.

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to say that! 

[Atomic]

The people who ACTUALLY buy a majority of Jeeps don't give a rat's ass about its off-roadability.  They don't care.  They want a Jeep because it's an SUV and then a Jeep.  This is perfect for those people.  Want Jeep to keep building the Wrangler?  It takes vehicles like this to keep doing it.

Unlike many of us, I think you are so right. I would love my Volvo for the road (great cruiser) and a rough & tough Jeep (a bruiser) for off-roading. Not as psyched about that little red roaster after the near fatal accident.

Well? A Volvo, Mercedes or Benz convertible... Maybe 

[Atomic]

Off roading sucks anyway.

I can see this except when it's a way of life for those living in the sticks. Where I reside, there are may cabin, cottages, remote hunting-fishing type lodges and all sorts of places for summer and winter recreational activities where getting there is half the fun.

The MY14 Jeep Cherokee could do very well as an multi-purpose vehicle whereas the JGC might a bit too nice to go off-roading and the Wrangler too rough and gruff to take from New York to Miami for the winter. Not the best snowbird in 90 degree weather. Trust me... Been there, done that in a Wrangler soft-top pre-Wrangler Unlimited (4-door, more refined) stretch of time with high school buddies of mine. However, it was quite a lot of fun back then then 

[TurboDan]

Initial drive wheels won't matter if it has 4WD or you can otherwise lock the front and rear together, and especially if you can also lock the left and right together or if it has techno stuff to successfully mimic that.

The LR2 has the aforementioned "techno stuff to successfully mimic that" (LR's Terrain Response system) and the computer determines the electronic locking based on what you select. I actually find it to be more versatile off-road than a few other 4WD vehicles since it clamps down or eases up in real time depending on what you're dealing with. Nearly all of my 4WD experience before this was in a Durango, and once you learn to trust the vehicle, it ends up inspiring a lot of confidence.

Well, techy aids can do all the stuff you could ever want and beat the pants off old-school rigs, but whether they do or not is a different story.

I think the value in the tech stuff is more that it's an "equalizer" of sorts. In other words, you can take a unibody platform with a kickass AWD system and make it (generally, in most situations) as capable as the older SUVs. The real awesomeness of this stuff can be seen in vehicles like the Range Rover, which has all the tech stuff but also has traditional 4WD with lockers, low range, etc. But in most applications, in my opinion, the electronic gizmos can bridge the gap between a comfortable on-road vehicle and a capable off-road vehicle.

Bleh, my JGC had an easier time in the deep ass sand at the outer banks then the redneck in an old Blazer with mudders who told me I didnt have a "real" 4WD vehicle.  I also had a redneck in a jacked up F250 get stuck behind me climbing an access road over a dune.

Sand is interesting terrain, because you can have hard packed sand like in Daytona, or extremely soft, deep sugar sand like we have here at the NJ shore. The LR2 tends to do much better than a lot of the jacked up trucks with A/T or mud tires because there's less friction and less of a footprint in the soft sand, which (when there's enough of it built up) can cause you to bog down.

Terrain Response also tends to be VERY good in sand because it can react to turns, dunes, and other changes in the terrain very easily. Just give it some extra gas and the computer detects, reacts and gets you through whatever you've found yourself in. It's pretty cool.

[veeman]

there are many 2wd jeeps (grand cherokees and libertys) for sale in the south. 

[Rupert]

I think the value in the tech stuff is more that it's an "equalizer" of sorts. In other words, you can take a unibody platform with a kickass AWD system and make it (generally, in most situations) as capable as the older SUVs. The real awesomeness of this stuff can be seen in vehicles like the Range Rover, which has all the tech stuff but also has traditional 4WD with lockers, low range, etc. But in most applications, in my opinion, the electronic gizmos can bridge the gap between a comfortable on-road vehicle and a capable off-road vehicle.

Right.

But the original Cherokee was unibody. Unibody has nothing to do with the capability of the vehicle. Being tough, having good clearance and app/dep/break angles, good suspension, good tires, good gearing, good diffs, and enough power to move all that is what a classic 4x4 needs to have good capability, and, as you said, if you add technowizardry to all that, it's even better. But BOF vs. unibody has nothing to do with it.

[Soup DeVille]

Right.

But the original Cherokee was unibody. Unibody has nothing to do with the capability of the vehicle. Being tough, having good clearance and app/dep/break angles, good suspension, good tires, good gearing, good diffs, and enough power to move all that is what a classic 4x4 needs to have good capability, and, as you said, if you add technowizardry to all that, it's even better. But BOF vs. unibody has nothing to do with it.

The problem with the technonannies doing the work is their long-term robustness, or at least their programming. The Honda turns of the rear axle drive whenever there's a CEL on, no matter what it is. Failed ECT sensor? CEL is on: and you're in permanent FWD mode.

what does the engine coolant have to do with the rear axle clutch? not a damned thing.

[Rupert]

And there are a lot of technowiznannies that don't really do anything or don't do enough, etc. But just in terms of ability, tech does have the potential to be a good thing. Or at least to increase the capability of a rig.

Same deal with sports cars, really.

[93JC]

I don't think anyone really has a problem with this new Cherokee being a cute-ute and not particularly good offroad. I don't anyway. The problem is that's what separates a Jeep from something else. If the vehicle doesn't have the capability then why bother buying a Jeep? This new car may be quite good but I bet it won't be a particularly compelling buy over some Hyundai or Toyota or whatever. The fact that it's horrendous looking makes it even worse.

[LonghornTX]

I think it is bold for them to go in this direction. I think it may have found something unique here, I guess we will see.

[hotrodalex]

I don't think anyone really has a problem with this new Cherokee being a cute-ute and not particularly good offroad. I don't anyway.

I never got that far in my judgement. One look and I puked.

[Madman]

I never got that far in my judgement. One look and I puked.

I've learned to accept the fact that ugly is the new normal.  Once you get used to it, the new Cherokee isn't that bad. 

[veeman]

i'm sure the 4X4 models will be "trail rated" so who cares what mechanicals they use to accomplish it (very few people off-road for entertainment in the u.s.) 

it doesn't look that different from the direction the grand cherokee is going.  i think it actually looks kind of cool.  the front is overwrought but it looks way better than a rav4 or cr-v, both of whom crush the current liberty in sales.  those who really want to off-road don't buy liberties anyways.  they get wranglers or x-terras.  or raptors.

[cawimmer430]

What blind motherfucker looked at that and said, "Build it."?

What the fuck?

Hmmm

[TurboDan]

i'm sure the 4X4 models will be "trail rated" so who cares what mechanicals they use to accomplish it (very few people off-road for entertainment in the u.s.) 

it doesn't look that different from the direction the grand cherokee is going.  i think it actually looks kind of cool.  the front is overwrought but it looks way better than a rav4 or cr-v, both of whom crush the current liberty in sales.  those who really want to off-road don't buy liberties anyways.  they get wranglers or x-terras.  or raptors.

Wranglers are Xterras absolutely, but the douchebags who buy Raptors seem to get their jollies cutting people off on the highway and racing at stop lights more than anything done off road.

As for the Liberty, I see a lot of people using them off road around here. It's a decently popular rig for guys to take them out on the remote beaches fishing. They seem to do fine. A lot of people enjoy driving off road without "muddin'" and acting like a general jackass.

[Klackamas]

Photos are official now:


http://blogs.automotive.com/official-2014-jeep-cherokee-name-confirmed-first-images-released-128857.html#axzz2LgN26COh

Horrible. Looks like a turd. WTF? 

Contact Us by Telephone
1-877-IAM-JEEP
(1-877-426-5337)
M-F 7:00 AM - 12:00 AM ET
SAT 8:00 AM - 8:00 PM ET
SUN 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM ET

[2o6]

I honestly do not understand the design of this car. It's not even cohesively ugly like the Juke (this is the Juke's charm, whether you like the styling or not), but it's just fuck-ugly for no reason at all.

[veeman]

if the interior is nice and the ride is as good as the escape's, it'll sell well.  it looks better than the cr-v and rav-4.  if you want to go "off-roading" on a beach or up to a ski-lodge, it'll do fine just like any cute ute or even subaru will do. 

it's kind of like a murano.  not pretty but distinctive.  kind of has a jurassic park dinosaur vibe to it.  definitely not feminine looking. 

[Klackamas]

Uhhhhhhh, no.

[hotrodalex]

It's not even cohesively ugly like the Juke

   

[2o6]

   

Look at the fucking Quzana concept.

[Rupert]

I agree with 2o6. Ugly can be good, if it's the right kind of ugly and it works for the car. Juke is like that, this isn't.

[SVT666]

I agree with 2o6. Ugly can be good, if it's the right kind of ugly and it works for the car. Juke is like that, this isn't.

I agree.  I kinda like the Juke because it's ugly done right.  I can't believe I just said that.

[TurboDan]

I hate the Juke. And can't they make an SUV that looks like a real fucking SUV? Jesus Christ.... 

Whatever...