Anybody on here have thoughts on the new Jeep Cherokee's?

The wife would like something that sits higher than the current CT200h, so I will probably be assuming that for daily duty (plus some F-sport sways and wheels/tires I would imagine) and she has taken kindly to the new Cherokee.

I've never driven one, but sounds like the 4-pot doesn't have the necessary grunt and the Pentastar V6 is the way to go. I would option it up as either a Limited or Trailhawk (would prefer the basic 4WD as we are in FL and wouldn't use it much, but would be nice to have for launching kayaks, etc.) with the V6 and the larger 8.4" screen along with back-up camera, etc.

Hoping to stay right at 20k, which almost seems doable. Reviews seem to be favorable, but did read they held production to do a reflash of the ECU programming for shifts in the new 9(!) speed auto. CPO adds on a 7yr/100k powertrain, which eases my fears slightly.

Anybody have any thoughts, driving impressions, pros/cons before we start test driving? TIA

I own two vehicles that were so badly supported by Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge/Ram that they were forced by the NHTSA to buy them back. I wouldn't trust that warranty for much more than making paper airplanes. If there's an alternative vehicle that would do what you need it to do, I would recommend you consider carefully.

I know a person with a limited, they upgraded from an older Rav-4, they have no complaints.

I hear that the transmission never hits 9th gear though.

Keith Tanner wrote: I own two vehicles that were so badly supported by Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge/Ram that they were forced by the NHTSA to buy them back. I wouldn't trust that warranty for much more than making paper airplanes. If there's an alternative vehicle that would do what you need it to do, I would recommend you consider carefully.

My only experience with them was an SRT4 and a WJ, which were both actually really good to me, but I am leery of new Fiat/Chrysler.

She hasn't shown much interest in the regular players in the CUV space and was big on the infotainment in the Jeep (which apparently is a strong point). Any similar recommendations right around $20k? The CX-5 wasn't tech-y enough, not a fan of CR-V or RAV4, Lexus RX's are very rich these day's...

CobraSpdRH wrote:

Keith Tanner wrote: I own two vehicles that were so badly supported by Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge/Ram that they were forced by the NHTSA to buy them back. I wouldn't trust that warranty for much more than making paper airplanes. If there's an alternative vehicle that would do what you need it to do, I would recommend you consider carefully.

My only experience with them was an SRT4 and a WJ, which were both actually really good to me, but I am leery of new Fiat/Chrysler. She hasn't shown much interest in the regular players in the CUV space and was big on the infotainment in the Jeep (which apparently is a strong point). Any similar recommendations right around $20k? The CX-5 wasn't tech-y enough, not a fan of CR-V or RAV4, Lexus RX's are very rich these day's...

One of those vehicles in the recalls is a ZJ, which predates your WJ (and FCA). The recall also affected the WJ. The other vehicle is a 2010 Dodge Ram, which also predates FCA. I swear all Dodge/Ram trucks come from the factory with a recall notice for ball joints in the glovebox, and have for a decade.

FYI.

The AWD system in the new CX-5 is pretty spectacular. Dramatically better than the Subaru and CR-V. If the CX-5 is using the same infotainment system as the Miata, then it's actually open source and hackable. Play videos off your phone to the center screen? No problem.

Keith Tanner wrote:

CobraSpdRH wrote:

Keith Tanner wrote: I own two vehicles that were so badly supported by Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge/Ram that they were forced by the NHTSA to buy them back. I wouldn't trust that warranty for much more than making paper airplanes. If there's an alternative vehicle that would do what you need it to do, I would recommend you consider carefully.

My only experience with them was an SRT4 and a WJ, which were both actually really good to me, but I am leery of new Fiat/Chrysler. She hasn't shown much interest in the regular players in the CUV space and was big on the infotainment in the Jeep (which apparently is a strong point). Any similar recommendations right around $20k? The CX-5 wasn't tech-y enough, not a fan of CR-V or RAV4, Lexus RX's are very rich these day's...

One of those vehicles in the recalls is a ZJ, which predates your WJ (and FCA). The recall also affected the WJ. The other vehicle is a 2010 Dodge Ram, which also predates FCA. I swear all Dodge/Ram trucks come from the factory with a recall notice for ball joints in the glovebox, and have for a decade. FYI. The AWD system in the new CX-5 is pretty spectacular. Dramatically better than the Subaru and CR-V. If the CX-5 is using the same infotainment system as the Miata, then it's actually open source and hackable. Play videos off your phone to the center screen? No problem.

I have a ZJ that I bought for $500 and the previous owner scheduled it for the recalls. Took it there and it was too rusty for them to install the trailer hitch (Seriously, that's the fix, they zap a trailer hitch on it). I'm still rolling around in it because I love it.

As for the new Cherokee, I've actually come to like how they look and I drove one and it was pretty peppy with the I4. I hear the Trailhawk is surprisingly competent in light offroading.

Keith Tanner wrote: Dramatically better than the Subaru and CR-V. If the CX-5 is using the same infotainment system as the Miata, then it's actually open source and hackable. Play videos off your phone to the center screen? No problem.

This sounds like an extraordinarily bad idea

Oh, I didn't say it was smart.

How about this - I've been dinking around with the code, and I know how I could build an integrated lap timer...

We've test-driven the new GC to replace our current one, and I was impressed. But I just have trouble giving them any more money, because we'll want to keep it for more than the lifespan of a lease.

My wife and I both owned '98 Cherokees and both vehicles were well loved. When we started shopping for a family vehicle, she wanted a Grand Cherokee because the new Cherokee wasn't out yet. By the time we were ready to buy, they just started coming out so we test drove one. It's probably because of our beloved old Cherokees' truck like ride that when we drove the new one, it felt like a tall economy car. The interior was kind of dull and cheap feeling. After looking at GCs and test driving a Cherokee, buying the GC was a no brainer for us since we already budgeted for the bigger price tag.

RossD wrote: My wife and I both owned '98 Cherokees and both vehicles were well loved. When we started shopping for a family vehicle, she wanted a Grand Cherokee because the new Cherokee wasn't out yet. By the time we were ready to buy, they just started coming out so we test drove one. It's probably because of our beloved old Cherokees' truck like ride that when we drove the new one, it felt like a tall economy car. The interior was kind of dull and cheap feeling. After looking at GCs and test driving a Cherokee, buying the GC was a no brainer for us since we already budgeted for the bigger price tag.

In theory we like the improved fuel economy and slightly smaller size of the regular Cherokee (plus we could get a newer one with lower miles in our budget), but I wonder if when push comes to shove we find the GC a nicer place to be and go that route instead.

We found our 2014 in 2014 with 20k miles at about a $6-7k discount over a new car price. I was pushing for the 8 speed for fuel economy reason as I live about 26 miles from work.

I've heard not good things about the Chrysler info/media system from a late model Ram owner. FWIW we were cross shopping a loaded to the gills new cherokee last spring w/ a Lincoln MKC. Bouncing from one to the other in the same day made the MKC a no-brainer. It might not be reachable in your budget, though. I mention it also because it might be a big step for her to go from the lex to a mid-grade offering. My lady friend didn't like the Escape as much as the Jeep, but I think it'd be worth a look at a loaded up one in this case.

oh, the foot activated liftgate. I thought it was gimmicky as all get-out... until I owned one (well marrying into). I love the E36 M3 out of that feature.

self-parking is useless if you live in a real city, if that's part of her "tech" requirement. doesn't matter what brand, don't bother.

This is probably fodder for a different thread, but 9 speeds? WTF! Especially if you're using a reasonably torquey V6, is the cost and complexity worth it for an extra MPG or so?(Assuming that's the reason for doing it)

When we drove the GC, the biggest single advancement was the transmission. Made our WJ feel agricultural. The newer truck has a much smaller engine, but it made far better use of it than the older one did of the V8.

bluej wrote: I've heard not good things about the Chrysler info/media system from a late model Ram owner. FWIW we were cross shopping a loaded to the gills new cherokee last spring w/ a Lincoln MKC. Bouncing from one to the other in the same day made the MKC a no-brainer. It might not be reachable in your budget, though. I mention it also because it might be a big step for her to go from the lex to a mid-grade offering. My lady friend didn't like the Escape as much as the Jeep, but I think it'd be worth a look at a loaded up one in this case. oh, the foot activated liftgate. I thought it was gimmicky as all get-out... until I owned one (well marrying into). I love the E36 M3 out of that feature. self-parking is useless if you live in a real city, if that's part of her "tech" requirement. doesn't matter what brand, don't bother.

I will vouch for Josh's Lincoln...it's really, really nice. And he flat-tows his rallycross car with it and pulled away from me easily on hills (me towing a trailer with a V8 Sequoia)....

I think the MKC is the best Lincoln product out right now.

I do think the Cherokee is ok. It's certainly a lot nicer to look at in person than in photos. The loaded Trailhawk i checked out once was pretty cool.

I'm not sure what to think about the 9spd. It doesnt seem to make the cars it's equipped in any faster on paper than the same cars with the 6 spd, and i didn't like the way the 6spd shifted either. This suggests to me that the 9spd spends so much time shifting softly that it doesn't actually add any enthusiast appeal over a trans with less gears. I need to put that reasoning to the test with an actual drive, though.

Don't tell my wife but I kinda like the Lincoln MKC .. I could do without the push button transmission but the paddle shifters would make up for it.

I just can't get over how fugly the new ones look. And this isn't JEEP fanboi. I'm JEEP neutral.

Keith Tanner wrote: The AWD system in the new CX-5 is pretty spectacular. Dramatically better than the Subaru

Wait, what? My Subaru has 50/50 torque split and a rear LSD (and available front LSD). Th AWD works fairly well. I'm not saying your're wrong, I'm just wondering how.

Kreb wrote: This is probably fodder for a different thread, but 9 speeds? WTF! Especially if you're using a reasonably torquey V6, is the cost and complexity worth it for an extra MPG or so?(Assuming that's the reason for doing it)

In doing my research it appears that 4 of those speeds are for overdrive. How one utilizes 4 overdrives is beyond me.

Hoping to make a CarMax trip this weekend to sit in the usual suspects. I hadn't looked into the MKC, so will have to check that out as well.

Brett_Murphy wrote:

Keith Tanner wrote: The AWD system in the new CX-5 is pretty spectacular. Dramatically better than the Subaru

Wait, what? My Subaru has 50/50 torque split and a rear LSD (and available front LSD). Th AWD works fairly well. I'm not saying your're wrong, I'm just wondering how.

ya subarus awd especially if you have a front lsd is one of the best so i'm curious how myself

The only thing I thought was bad was the previous WRX that had open front and rear lsd. I don't believe the new subarus are like that anymore.

Overdrive just means that the output speed is higher than the input speed. Maybe the diff ratios are really short.

As for the Subaru, my Subaru-owning father had the same sputtering response. And Mazda expected it, they set up one test specifically to show the weakness.

We parked on an icy slope and turned the front wheels slightly. Brand new Forester auto. Then attempted to proceed - figure it's the same as coming out of a driveway or parking garage. Turns out this Subaru does not send power to the rear wheels when the fronts are turned due to concerns about drivetrain binding. The Subaru helplessly spun and spun its front wheels. I had to back down and take a run at it. The CR-V activated the world's least subtle traction control and pulled away. The Mazda did a good imitation of simply being on dry pavement.

We also took the cars through a slalom and around a sweeper that was fast enough to play with cornering attitudes. The Subaru felt slightly truck-like with a lot of traction control activation - accompanied by a big "I JUST SAVED YOUR LIFE HUMAN" announcement on the big screen on the dash, but you could move it around a bit by being aggressive. Janel's reaction after her first run: "Do I have to do any more in this car?" The CR-V was heavy-handed on the traction control reaction and understeered as much as possible. The Mazda's setup enabled instead of hindered.

Seriously, it felt like a next generation system compared to the others. Pretty interesting stuff. They're taking input from a range of sensors such as ABS, windshield wipers, wheel slip, outdoor temp, etc to predict traction conditions and try to distribute torque before it's needed instead of reacting. It's also got a memory, so it remembers that when you pulled up to a stop, things were slippery - and so they probably still are.

I'm guessing the Forester had the Variable Torque Distribution (VTD) system that Subaru offers.

Subaru said: An AWD system designed exclusively for 5-speed automatic transmission, E-5AT (with manual mode) models to provide aggressive, sporty driving with increased turning abilities all while retaining the fundamental driving stability offered by the Symmetrical AWD. An uneven 45:55 front and rear torque distribution has been set for the front and rear tyres. Sending greater torque to the rear wheels can reduce understeer, a trait that plagues 4WD vehicles, when cornering for smooth and agile handling. Torque distribution is controlled automatically up to an equal 50:50 front and rear to suit road surface conditions for both sporty driving and stability.

I have no experience with automatic Subaru AWD, nor any experience with the AWD systems in Subarus past 2005. Not splitting power when the wheels are turned seems silly.

There is this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_MXK2nzt2Y

What about a Mitsubishi Outlander? You can get them pretty loaded up with a v6..

Beware of the Pentastar 3.6 engines STILL having cylinder head cracking issues. Chrysler said they fixed it but they didn't. Also, the fact that I can't tell them apart from a Kia takes a couple points off for me.

CX5, CRVs, Forester's all come to mind (In that order IMO).