So is this the beginning of the end for Jeep? A car-based Grand Cherokee? Is that what Jeep buyers want?
Or is Cerberus banking on the fact that each year there are less and less true die-hard Jeep afficienados out there, and that sooner or later that number will be so miniscule it won't matter?
"The segment the Grand Cherokee competes in has seen some of the most decline (because of the) high gas prices," said Global Insight analyst Rebecca Lindland. "This new product will allow the consumer to keep all attributes of the Jeep Grand Cherokee. They won't be able to navigate the Rubicon trail but they will get to the grocery store on less fuel."
Oh Lord, did I really read that? A real Jeep that can't do the Rubicon?
You know, it's all fine and dandy that all the other SUV pretenders are being designed to handle nothing tougher than shopping center parking lots, but must Jeep follow that path too? Unlike most SUVs out there Jeep has real off-road credibility, but if they go that route, you can kiss their stellar 60-plus-year reputation of being America's first and true off-roader goodby.
For the record, this is not about being unibody, as the Cherokee and and Grand Cherokee have always been unibody. And it's not about using IFS and IRS, as there are several really good off-road vehicles using IFS and IRS. No, this is about changing the mission of Jeep Grand Cherokee. No longer will it be a true dual-purpose on-off road vehicle, but instead it will be skewed heavily towards on-road abilities at the expense of its famous off-road heritage. So it looks like the Grand Cherokee will become just another CUV. Sad.
For the sake of the Grand Cherokee let's hope I'm dead wrong with this blog entry.
Subscribe
LA Auto Show on Twitter (use #LAAS08)
Recent Posts
Archives
Manufacturers
Auto Shows
More Categories
Links
The marketing seems strange to me. I don't do off road. But, if you are killing of a trail rated SUV,It would seem smart to go with a new name.
Maybe there have determined that many just associate Grand Cherokee with SUV and not so much Rubicon. It is a shame that a smaller lighter Rubicon crosser isn't feasible. I would think the market for that would be small and the cost too high. Good luck with the car based thing.
Turn the page for real. New name,New name, New name.
I couldn't agree more with the sixth paragraph. I don't understand why they can't make a GC with IRS/IFS and Unibody that can still do offroad work, and get reasonable mileage.
In my opinion, they're throwing away the only thing that differentiated themselves from the Highlanders and Muranos of the world.
oh come on, it's only image marketing.. there's virtually no market demand! What percentage of Jeeps are driven off road on anything more difficult to traverse than typical farm or fire roads or daytona beach?
What they are describing should be a Dodge or Chrysler crossover, not a Jeep.
I'm not seeing anything from Chrysler in that story about the capabilities of the next Grand Cherokee, nor what it means when the story says "car-based" versus "truck-based". I'll wait for actual information and not speculation from the Dow Jones newswire and CNNMoney.
Go ahead Jeep. Raise hell. We all know how the Compass did. Also, the Cherokee already is a unibody platform. So this would just be Jeep making it intentionally soft.
albook - perfect analogy. Jeep = rugged, and the Compass should prove that the wimpy route doesn't work with this brand. More importantly, this brand's image is not elastic enough to stretch in that direction, either.
Methinks that Jeep should focus on technology that will allow it to maintain its niche. Perhaps an IRS and some more sophisticated engines would be a good start.
If you read the off road blogs, you find the Grand Cherokee ended production in 2004. The current version has no following among the off roaders (and no following among the cute ute crowd).
Making a car based version would just seal the coffin.
This is ridiculous. If you want a grocery getter, get a wagon (if someone besides the overpriced Europeans could be bothered to make one, that is). If you want to go off-road, then get a Jeep. Why they chose to dumb down functional vehicles to cater to people who don't know how to meet their own needs is beyond me. Its just like how the Camaro is criticized because it won't be an efficient family car. Let the performance cars be performance cars and the off-roaders be off-roaders. Not everyone wants a car to use just to commute and run errands.
Saying the Grand Cherokee ended in 2004 is ridiculous. Yes, the WK (2005+) does not have a solid front axle. Big deal. It was a good change. And this is from a guy that has taken his Grand Cherokee (not Cherokee) on all sorts of 4x4 trails in southern Colorado. Yes, I know I'm unusual in this regard but there are still a ton of people who lift their Grand Cherokees and do extreme 4 wheeling. Do a search on "Lifted WK" if you don't believe me.
Having said that, Jeep will be shooting themselves in the foot if they make the GC not capable of 4 wheeling. That IS the Jeep selling point!