Plenty of folks are ready to blame Mercedes-Benz for all of Chrysler's problems. The suggestion would have seemed ludicrous just a few years ago, back when Chrysler 300s were the darling of rap stars everywhere, Magnums were threatening to revive America's love affair with the station wagon, and a Hemi anything (old or new) was hotter than stolen OJ sports memorabilia.
But then came $3-a-gallon gasoline, Jeeps that can't go off-road, and interior panels best suited for holding frozen dinners. Now that the divorce is final I'm hoping we can all just move on, and this all-new 2008 Jeep Liberty show signs of progress...sort of. For isntance, the exterior shape is a vast improvement over the first-gen Liberty. Like the Patriot, Grand Cherokee and Commander this Jeep looks like a Jeep. Heck, if not for the Punk-As...uh, I mean Compass, I could universally approve of all current Jeeps in terms of exterior design.
I drove this Liberty primarily at night, which likely contributed to my tolerance of the interior. The seats were comfortable and all the switchgrear generally made sense. And, at night, I couldn't see the shine coming off the plastic door panels. But there was something else I couldn't see at night in this car -- the road!
I think it was a simple matter of improper headlight adjustment, but whatever the cause the effect was no light directly in front of the vehicle, then mediocre light starting about 10 feet ahead of the bumper, and then no light again above (give or take) stop sign height. It was like someone shining a flashout out of a tank's eye slit. Weird. And not very safe. This is particularly ironic when you look at the Liberty's exterior design and see those prominent headlights in the grille.
The Liberty's performance, either in terms of acceleration or fuel mileage, didn't help me forget the weak headlights. Its 3.7-liter V6 was mated to a four-speed automatic in our test car, and the on-board computer was reporting 16 mpg throughout my 125-mile drive. That figure wouldn't be as painful if the Liberty was quick...but it isn't. The four-speed automatic often seemed short a gear (or two) to choose from when trying to pass another vehicle, and the engine's refinement was barely adequate.
I know the healing process can sometimes take awhile after a family break-up, but someone really needs to spend quality time with these kids.
By scott65
on November 16, 2007
09:15 AM
I took a peek at one of these on a dealer lot last week, still looked to have the fisher price interior. Also, that v6 mated to that old old old chrysler 4 speed needs to get tossed.
By brett8210
on November 16, 2007
10:07 AM
My wife for some reason last year wanted a JGC. She got the base model with this same engine, but thankfully with a 5 speed transmission.
My main gripe is with the amount of power and the MPG. This is a 3.7 L engine with less horsepower than almost all competitors with smaller engines. Further, I have been averaging 14.5 MPG for 6 months now. We got better mileage with our 2003 Tahoe with the 5.3L.
The interior is cheap. But the ride is pretty good for an SUV. Handling with the JGC is above average and the steering is better than I expected. I personally like the exterior styling. With that said if we did not get $5000.00 rebate I would not have touched it with a ten foot pole.
Sorry to highjack the Liberty's blog, but with the same engine and better handling, ride, and steering get the JGC and leave the Liberty, if you absolutely need a Jeep.
By colloquor
on November 16, 2007
10:33 AM
Other than the interior, the biggest complaint I have is the 3.7L PowerTech engine. It just has a rough sound, and sounds like it's not running on all cylinders. Perhaps, this is because it started its life as a V8? Regardless, it really needs a smoother engine, and a higher-quality interior.
Hmm . . . as with Ford's Eddie Bauer editions, maybe this, and others like it, are Chrysler and Jeep's Fisher Price edition.
By opfreak
on November 16, 2007
11:30 AM
drove in a 2006, or 2007 dont rember. the seats feel. umm well hard and rough.
but its easy to love a jeep. Just follow these simple words "Its a Jeep thing you wouldnt understand".
If BMW had that line of think the m3 today would look just like it did 20 years ago, and have 225 hp.
By pflyer
on November 16, 2007
02:12 PM
Karl,
Comparing the Liberty to what is available in the market today is even more sobering for Chrysler's future. The RAV4 is far superior, especially with the 3.5 V-6 (which IMHO is one of the best V-6 engines on the market, efficient and powerful). Even the Honda CR-V is about as fast, a Honda and very comparable, price-wise.
Unless you are a hardcore offroader, which is rare these days, there are far more attractive options than the Liberty.
My questions to Chrysler would be, who buys the Liberty? (besides rental car companies) When will an acceptable V-6 engine be developed for this vehicle? Why is it soooo difficult to get plastic to look somewhat rich when other car companies can get that look. (good grief, even GM has better looking plastic!) When can we expect more than four forward gears in the tranny?
Sitting inside a Liberty is a depressing experience.
By editor_karl
on November 16, 2007
04:06 PM
+1 on all of that pf. Tthe RAV4 V6 is almost stupid fast...and stupid refined -- while still getting good mileage! Awesome engine!
By rick8365
on November 16, 2007
04:51 PM
Just back from Maui - rented a Wrangler X which I believe has the same powertrain, it wasn't bad but it wasn't great either. I think someone questioned here recently why Chrysler didn't put the new 4.0 in the new Jeep, I have the same question. The Wrangler had adequate power and was fun to drive (esp. top down) but it could / should have been better. It had 8K miles and I noticed that besides catching the trans in moments of indecision the engine had an occasional surging problem. If I drove with a steady throttle at around 30 or 40 it surged a few times like I was on and off the gas or like it was being motivated by the gas sloshing fore and aft in the tank.
At first I was pretty jazzed to be driving it around and was thinking it might be fun to own, but after awhile the somewhat anemic and thirsty drivetrain, choppy ride, and tons of wind noise with the top up; I decided "Jeep thing" or not, I don't think I'd want one on a daily basis.
The Liberty probably handles some of these issues but I'd be concerned about the old engine/tranny and the lack of mechanical / technical refinement. And, I'm still scratching my head about the Compass and Patriot.....what they may indicate about where the Jeep brand is these days. Shouldn't the brand have the "Jeep Thing" going on across all of there vehicles. I kind of feel the same way about the H2 and definitely the H3 and the Hummer brand name.
The Wrangler was fun…..for a few days on vacation
By carlisimo
on November 16, 2007
05:11 PM
That's worrying if the only good thing about the new one is its exterior. Around here, the previous Liberty is widely loved... for its looks. The locals aren't falling in love with the new boxy look (those who are into that sort of thing have been getting Nitros).
By firstwagon
on November 16, 2007
05:41 PM
The Wrangler has a different engine then the Liberty.
The Liberty is a 90 deg V6 that's basically a 4.7 V8 minus 2 cylinders.
The 3.8 V6 in the Wrangler is a 60 deg V6 that's a bored and stroked version of the 3.3 V6 found in front drive Chryslers since 1990.
The 3.8 is the better engine.
By rick8365
on November 16, 2007
06:37 PM
Thanks for the clarification, firstwagon.
By hondacura4
on November 18, 2007
05:26 PM
I drove a friends 2005 (I think) Liberty with the 3.7 and it feels like the engine was trying to hard. Its not refined AT ALL. I also could feel a strange grind or binding while turning, felt like the 4wd system or something in the drivetrain wasnt getting along with something else.
Very similar to my mothers former Expedition as it had similar noises/feelings but it wasnt as noticeable in the Jeep. Jeep...err....Chrysler needs to work on material quality and refinement ASAP!
By tysalpha
on November 19, 2007
11:01 AM
Have to agree with Carlisimo on this one. Othern than the bling-tastic grill and headlights, this new Liberty looks tooooo much like a 1990 Cherokee.
By texases
on November 19, 2007
11:17 AM
Make that a 1986 Cherokee, like the one I had. Not a bad look, but can't they come up with something better in 20 years? And the Commander is a malformed version of it, not attractive IMHO.
By opfreak
on November 19, 2007
07:48 PM
umm, thats what jeeps are. the same car spit out over 100 years. just keep rising the price. 0 engineering costs. and some of the most loyal/blind buyers on the market
By firstwagon
on November 20, 2007
08:49 AM
When you have a design and look that works, you don't have reinvent yourself every 4 years like car makers.
By technetium99
on November 20, 2007
06:29 PM
>>>this new Liberty looks tooooo much like a 1990 Cherokee.
Well, maybe sort of. It looks more like a Cherokee that is a proud alumni of the Roseanne Barr miracle weight gain program. Way too bloated to appeal to true Cherokee fans, of which there are still many.
The old Liberty was the "chick Jeep," and this new one doesn't appeal to women or men, so just what the heck is it supposed to be doing?
By autoboy16
on November 24, 2007
11:42 PM
jeep should bring back a diesel liberty! The liberty should have 2 engines and 2 transmissions:
3l CRD with 200hp and 300lbs ft
3.5-4l V6 with 250hp and 250lbs ft
A 6AT or 6MT for either engine. If i could get the diesel and much less plastic interior trim, I'd look forward to getting a liberty!!
The only CUVs/SUV's I'd get would be the Tiguan, CR-V, or my liberty.
The Patriot should stay but with 3 engines and 3 transmissions:
A 2.4l I4 with 180hp
A 2.8l CRD from the old liberty with 160hp and 295lbs ft
A 3.5l v6 from sebring/avenger
The 4cyl with 4AT and 6MT
The diesel and 6cyl with 6AT or 6MT.
Still, no more overly plastic interior or useless cvt!! Oh and compass gotta go!!
-Cj