2014 Jeep Cherokee
CF Veteran
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 4,169
Likes: 6
From: York, PA
Year: 1998
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0
Saw this today.
http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2013/...ntcmp=features


LOL! It ACTUALLY has mall-wheel-drive. Literally.
http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2013/...ntcmp=features
Originally Posted by some ****ing jackass
Jeep’s Cherokee head honcho Mitch Clauw, a veteran from the XJ days, says that even though the new one is more car than truck, it was built to a much higher durability standard than the original and can do everything its forebear can off-road, maybe more.


Originally Posted by another ****ing jackass
Assisting it in this mission is a suite of electronic aids for its all-wheel-drive system that includes hill descent control, a low-speed cruise control that works down to .6 mph, and Select-Terrain, with settings for sand, rock, unplowed mall parking lot, etc.
Herp Derp Jerp

Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 18,251
Likes: 17
From: Parham, ON
Year: 1999
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0L OBD-II
Wow. He had the ***** to say some design cues were taken from CJs? This guy needs to get his ****ing head checked.
I love how he couldn't speak for the bug-lights in the corner. "A lot of people ask WHY the headlights are like this. Well the headlights are down here. These are DRLs, and they're aerodynamic" uhhhhh so he has no ****ing idea. lol
I love how he admitted that nobody at Jeep actually thought it would pass the test for Trail Rated. hahahaha
Apparently having a little Jeep icon on the windshield makes it authentic. Nice. I'm gonna go paint that on the next Tercel and ask him if he loves offroading.
I love how he couldn't speak for the bug-lights in the corner. "A lot of people ask WHY the headlights are like this. Well the headlights are down here. These are DRLs, and they're aerodynamic" uhhhhh so he has no ****ing idea. lol
I love how he admitted that nobody at Jeep actually thought it would pass the test for Trail Rated. hahahaha
Apparently having a little Jeep icon on the windshield makes it authentic. Nice. I'm gonna go paint that on the next Tercel and ask him if he loves offroading.
CF Veteran
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 4,169
Likes: 6
From: York, PA
Year: 1998
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0
CF Veteran
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,603
Likes: 3
From: SLC, Utah
Year: 1999
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0L
Wow. He had the ***** to say some design cues were taken from CJs? This guy needs to get his ****ing head checked. I love how he couldn't speak for the bug-lights in the corner. "A lot of people ask WHY the headlights are like this. Well the headlights are down here. These are DRLs, and they're aerodynamic" uhhhhh so he has no ****ing idea. lol I love how he admitted that nobody at Jeep actually thought it would pass the test for Trail Rated. hahahaha Apparently having a little Jeep icon on the windshield makes it authentic. Nice. I'm gonna go paint that on the next Tercel and ask him if he loves offroading.
Herp Derp Jerp

Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 18,251
Likes: 17
From: Parham, ON
Year: 1999
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0L OBD-II
Trail Hawk edition for a DD? Kind of pricey for a pavement queen
CF Veteran
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,603
Likes: 3
From: SLC, Utah
Year: 1999
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0L
We like the way it looks much better then the others. Besides mall speed bumps are massive. We are also looking at Subaru crosstecs. No need for 3 wheeling vehicles. My Xj is for family and mild to medium trails I am building my YJ for more hardcore stuff.
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 918
Likes: 6
From: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Year: 1995
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0L HO
X2,
I would buy a Crosstrek, Forester, or Outback (depending on what size vehicle I needed) long before I would buy a KL "Cherokee". The Subarus have 8.7" of ground clearance and symmetric-AWD standard, capibilities that only a KL "Trail-Hawk" could beat (and just barely) for a $10k premium. The Subarus are much cheaper, lighter, more fuel-efficient, less-ugly, etc.
You can get the Subarus for the low $20ks ($22k base for Crosstrek and Forester, $23.5K for Outback) with AWD and 8.7" ground clearance standard (as stated above). A 4-cyl FWD KL starts at $23K but a 4WD/AWD KL starts at $25k (4-cyl) and a V6 4WD/AWD KL starts at around $29K, to match the ground clearance of the Subarus you would have to go to the "Trail-Hawk" KL which would start at $30k with a 4-cyl or $32k with a V6. And even the "Trail-Hawk" KL has a 4WD/AWD system that only sends power to the rear if it detects slippage of the front-wheels (more like FWD with rear assist than AWD) as per existing reviews (maybe they fixed this with that emergency transmission reprogram that delayed delivery for several months but I haven't heard anything indicating that yet) versus the Subaru system that is known to work very well and is capable of doing a true 50/50 split.
On the on the other hand you could get a WK2 Grand Cherokee with V6 and 4WD for $31k (base 4WD Laredo) or $34k with Quadra-Drive II (2-speed transfer case) and the "off-road adventure I package" (skid-plates, tow-hooks, AT tires, etc.) which is a far superior vehicle to the KL for only a little more, or a 4-door JK for $26k if you don't need the "luxury features" of the KL or WK2. Or just about any low-mileage used SUV/CUV and have money left over.
I really have a hard time understanding why anyone would buy a KL given it's price-point and availability of better options at both ends of the spectrum.
I would buy a Crosstrek, Forester, or Outback (depending on what size vehicle I needed) long before I would buy a KL "Cherokee". The Subarus have 8.7" of ground clearance and symmetric-AWD standard, capibilities that only a KL "Trail-Hawk" could beat (and just barely) for a $10k premium. The Subarus are much cheaper, lighter, more fuel-efficient, less-ugly, etc.
You can get the Subarus for the low $20ks ($22k base for Crosstrek and Forester, $23.5K for Outback) with AWD and 8.7" ground clearance standard (as stated above). A 4-cyl FWD KL starts at $23K but a 4WD/AWD KL starts at $25k (4-cyl) and a V6 4WD/AWD KL starts at around $29K, to match the ground clearance of the Subarus you would have to go to the "Trail-Hawk" KL which would start at $30k with a 4-cyl or $32k with a V6. And even the "Trail-Hawk" KL has a 4WD/AWD system that only sends power to the rear if it detects slippage of the front-wheels (more like FWD with rear assist than AWD) as per existing reviews (maybe they fixed this with that emergency transmission reprogram that delayed delivery for several months but I haven't heard anything indicating that yet) versus the Subaru system that is known to work very well and is capable of doing a true 50/50 split.
On the on the other hand you could get a WK2 Grand Cherokee with V6 and 4WD for $31k (base 4WD Laredo) or $34k with Quadra-Drive II (2-speed transfer case) and the "off-road adventure I package" (skid-plates, tow-hooks, AT tires, etc.) which is a far superior vehicle to the KL for only a little more, or a 4-door JK for $26k if you don't need the "luxury features" of the KL or WK2. Or just about any low-mileage used SUV/CUV and have money left over.
I really have a hard time understanding why anyone would buy a KL given it's price-point and availability of better options at both ends of the spectrum.
Last edited by dmill89; Nov 2, 2013 at 12:10 AM.
CF Veteran
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 4,169
Likes: 6
From: York, PA
Year: 1998
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0
Just the fact that he'd be supporting Jeep making this turd by justifying purchasing one for a DD is what irks me! But, that's how the free market is I reckon...
Here's a video I was watching where they explain the design: Video Link: http://youtu.be/mKL7D3UuQJ8 If Wranglers move to IFS, that will be the final nail in Jeeps coffin for many purists.



