Business History Books » Business Plans » Jeep Liberty–Whadya Think??
Jeep Liberty–Whadya Think??
Question:
OK, the wraps are officially off of the new Jeep Liberty. What do you think of it? Here are my comments based on a very short look at one (which everyone can ignore at their leisure): I like the looks. Kind of a hybrid of styling from the Grand Cherokee, Wrangler & even the Dodge Durango. Interior looks nice too (but I haven’t sat in one yet). The new 3.7L SOHC engine puts out impressive power, though I’m curious if it will have the low-end urge that the old 4.0L inline six has…especially when looking at the curb weights of the new Liberty, which are in the 3600-3900 lbs. range, somewhat heavier than the "Cherokee Classic". I’ll reserve judement on the powertrain’s agility until I actually drive one I guess. The short overhangs are great. The vehicle looks pretty upright; I hope the track is wide enough for good stability. Call me eccentric, but I think it would be cool to have the 2.5L turbodiesel as an option here in the US market, though I doubt many people would opt for it… Drew — ‘99 PLYMOUTH Voyager Expresso 3.3L/4-speed auto ‘94 Dodge Spirit 3.0L/3-speed auto
Response:
> > Now that the Cherokee is going away, Chrysler ought to name this the > Cherokee. Liberty is a silly name. > I understand it wil still be called Cherokee outside of North America.
That is correct. It will still be called Cherokee outside of North America, where they aren’t so goddamned paranoid about possibly offending someone. It may not even be the case that some indian activist considered the Cherokee name racist (or whatever). More likely is that some white manager decided that some indian activist *might* consider the Cherokee name racist (or whatever), and decided to rename it. This sort of thing does happen. A friend of mine works at an electronics assembly plant. One of the tools used on the line is diagonal cutters, referred to everwhere as "Dykes" (a contraction of the sounds in the words DIagonal CutterS). There were no complaints about the term from any employees, gay or straight. However, a straight manager decided the term was offensive, and ordered that its use be discontinued. The folks on the line — gay and straight alike — now comply with the new policy, much to the chagrin of the managers. Now, instead of "Hey, pass me that set of dykes over there…", they say "Hey, pass me that set of lesbians over there…" –Daniel "Television is a medium. It is a medium because it is neither rare, nor well-done." — NBCS b6f+wg++rp —
Response:
: : > > Now that the Cherokee is going away, Chrysler ought to name this the : > > Cherokee. Liberty is a silly name. : : > I understand it wil still be called Cherokee outside of North America. : : That is correct. It will still be called Cherokee outside of North : America, where they aren’t so goddamned paranoid about possibly offending : someone. It may not even be the case that some indian activist considered : the Cherokee name racist (or whatever). More likely is that some : white manager decided that some indian activist *might* consider the : Cherokee name racist (or whatever), and decided to rename it. This sort You’re sounding like a rvaing lunatic. It wasn’t going to be the Cherokee here because until a couple of weeks ago, DC was going to keep building the XJ Cherokee.
Response:
> : > I understand it wil still be called Cherokee outside of North America. > : > : That is correct. It will still be called Cherokee outside of North > : America, where they aren’t so goddamned paranoid about possibly offending > : someone. It may not even be the case that some indian activist considered > : the Cherokee name racist (or whatever). More likely is that some > : white manager decided that some indian activist *might* consider the > : Cherokee name racist (or whatever), and decided to rename it. This sort > You’re sounding like a rvaing lunatic.
I reckon it takes one to know one, Lloyd. > It wasn’t going to be the Cherokee here because until a couple of > weeks ago, DC was going to keep building the XJ Cherokee.
There exist all kinds of reasons for companies releasing statements about their future plans for their current products vis-a-vis new products in the line. Car companies are not in the business of keeping the general public correctly informed; they’re in the business of selling cars. –Daniel "Cream always rises to the top. However, so does pond scum."
Response:
: : > I like the styling. The round lights and hood bulges that extend back : > from the lights — although styled before the takeover, you can see : some : > Mercedes family resemblance there. : : Oh jeez, you shouldn’ta oughta said that…light fuse, throw, and head : quickly for cover… : : > Very nice taillights too. Looks a lot : > smaller than it is, quite sleek for an SUV. Interior looks good, : > especially the white-face gauges. The Limited should offer wood trim : > instead of the aluminum, however. : : I agree about the wood trim. : : > Now that the Cherokee is going away, Chrysler ought to name this the : > Cherokee. Liberty is a silly name. : : <SHRUG> maybe, maybe not…seems like the auto world is big on silly : names (Lumina, Camry, XTerra, etc. etc.). : : Drew : — : ‘99 PLYMOUTH Voyager Expresso 3.3L/4-speed auto : ‘94 Dodge Spirit 3.0L/3-speed auto : http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Valley/6569/spirit.html : : But why have a Grand Cherokee if you’re not going to have a Cherokee anymore? Of course, Jeep had a Grand Wagoneer when it didn’t have a Wagoneer…
Response:
: I think Lloyd’s right in most of his comments–but I also think the : Cherokee Classic is one heckuva buy. Ya, it doesn’t ride as good as : some of the newer, more car-like SUVs but it’s priced very well and has : great power from the old-tech 4.0L six. Some of the newer, smaller : displacement stuff can outdrag the six-banger Cherokee, but you’ve got : to stick your foot way into it for the engine to develop the power. : It’s a subjective thing, but I tend to like vehicles where I’m not : always winding the whee out of the engine just to keep up with : traffic… : : I’m really interested to drive a new Liberty and see how it performs. : Like I said, it looks great and the interior certainly is inviting… But Jeep will still have the Wrangler and Grand Cherokee for the die-hard off-road rugged types. The Liberty gives them an entry into the more on-pavement crowd. Hopefully, it will sell like crazy.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->I like the styling. The round lights and hood bulges that extend back >from the lights — although styled before the takeover, you can see some >Mercedes family resemblance there. Very nice taillights too. Looks a lot >smaller than it is, quite sleek for an SUV. Interior looks good, >especially the white-face gauges. The Limited should offer wood trim >instead of the aluminum, however. >I’ve read CAR’s review — they didn’t like the small rear door openings, >the front seat runners that intrude on rear seat foot room, or the fact >that the rear seat doesn’t fold completely flat (MT made these complaints >too, although their photo seems to show the rear seat does fold flat if >you fold the cushions forward first). Seems to be very capable off-road, >which ought to help its image (and thus sales) compared to SUVs like the >RAV4, Forester, CR-V, and Tribute/Escape. >Now that the Cherokee is going away, Chrysler ought to name this the >Cherokee. Liberty is a silly name.
Pretty much agreed. When you compare it to the Escape you get a much more rugged vehicle (WJ type rear axle, good ground clearance, Select and Command trac rather than the Escapes silly system). The front is IFS, but from what I have read if you get 4×4 it (the front diff) comes pretty well armored. They took it, and XJ, a WJ, and a TJ on the Rubicon and it did well. The biggest thing you lose here is that with the IFS it gets alot more difficult to modify if you want. I really like the looks, and the passenger compartment. The back does seem smaller, even without the spare tire there. The 60/40 rear seat is something I wish they had done with the XJ years ago. When the XJ is retired, I would like to see them name the liberty the Cherokee. However, I also would like to see the XJ go on as a ‘third world’ ute. IIRC that was how AMC really wanted it. Won’t happen, but it would be neat. I am holding my opinion on the 3.7 ltre engine until I can drive one. I am a biiiig fan of the 4.0 litre.
Response:
I understand it wil still be called Cherokee outside of North America. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Now that the Cherokee is going away, Chrysler ought to name this the > Cherokee. Liberty is a silly name.
Response:
: snip : > : >Not considering the internal spare tire on the Cherokee. : your right, the full size spare in my 99 made me appreciate the : smaller donut in my 92. : I ASSummed when I checked the specs on the jeep site last nighttit was : *with* the tire installed. : > : >: too small from the outside to even get a cooler or suitcase in side by : >: side. (they were all locked so you couldn’t get too good of a feel for : >: the interior of the car) : >: The Liberty sport now has a 2.5 liter 4 cylinder engine rather than : >: the "bullet proof" 4.0L I-6 of the current Cherokee sport. : > : > : >No, the 2.4 L dohc 4 replaces the 2.5 L IL-4 and the 3.7 sohc V6 replaces : >the 4.0 L IL-6. : I took the 2.5 number from a non US liberty website last night. I believe that’s the diesel engine offered in Europe. : Regardless the current sport does have the 4.0 and the new liberty : sport will have a smaller engine. But with 20 more hp. : >: They are going to be about 10% more expensive than the Cherokee. : >: : >: All in all after giving it careful consideration I’ve came to the : >: following conclusion. : >: Liberty= smaller payload, smaller engine, less utilitarian and more : >: expensive than current Cherokee. : > : >What do you base "payload" on? And the smaller engine makes 20 more hp : >(210 vs 190). : at what RPM and would that be at the flywheel or at the tires? : the liberty weighs more too doesn’t it? I don’t think it’s heavier than the Cherokee. : >It has significantly more passenger room (read the C/D : >article) AND more cargo room. : I haven’t seen the article yet but I based it on the numerous trips my : wife and my three kids take every year (packing every sq inch of my : 99’s rear compartment) Well, don’t put out erroneous information then. : That thing I saw yesterday *looks* to have less luggage space but they : were locked so I really couldn’t get as good a feel for the inside as : I would have liked. : : >: Current Cherokee= Perfect all around SUV with record breaking 1999 : >: sales. : > : >Archaic. Rides poorly, handles poorly, inside spare tire steals room, : >noisy as all get-out, doors too narrow, no chance of capturing sales from : >the RAV4/CR-V/Escape crowd. : the people who drive RAV4s do not belong in a Jeep give em a SUZKI or : a Tracker and they’ll be fine<G> The people who drive RAV4s are a HUGE market group and Chrysler wants their business. For the die-hard off-roaders, there’s still Wrangler and GC. : >: Just let me know if I’m missing something here, If not I think I’ll be : >: buying a Ford Explorer or something when my lease is up. : >: cya : >: LH : >You’re missing quite a bit, as most of your "facts" were wrong. : like I said they were observations I made after viewing the new : liberty and hitting a few websites. You presented them as "facts" not "observations." And if I were to observe, say, the Neon has a 3.0 L engine and the Intrepid has just 2 doors, I’d be wrong. : I appreciate your insightful comments and will definitely take the : liberty for a drive before my lease expires keeping your post handy to : contrast my initial negative conclusions. : That said I think if Chrysler had a brain at the auto show they would : unlock those 4 or 5 they have on display and let the people get a good : close look and feel of the inside. : Yes, that’s often a complaint of mine too, that they put the best cars up on a turntable and won’t let people near it. I try to refrain from observations about interior room and engines in such a case.
Response:
: The Car and Driver test has the V6 going from 0 to 60 MPH in 9 seconds : even..not bad for a SUV. That was their _estimated_ time; they didn’t do a test on it. MT reports 10.0 sec, but didn’t say if it was measured or estimated. Since all the auto mags’ exposure was at the DC unveiling, I doubt MT did an instrumented test. :
: : : > OK, the wraps are officially off of the new Jeep Liberty. What do you : > think of it? Here are my comments based on a very short look at one : > (which everyone can ignore at their leisure): I like the looks. Kind : > of a hybrid of styling from the Grand Cherokee, Wrangler & even the : > Dodge Durango. Interior looks nice too (but I haven’t sat in one yet). : > : > The new 3.7L SOHC engine puts out impressive power, though I’m curious : > if it will have the low-end urge that the old 4.0L inline six : > has…especially when looking at the curb weights of the new Liberty, : > which are in the 3600-3900 lbs. range, somewhat heavier than the : > "Cherokee Classic". I’ll reserve judement on the powertrain’s agility : > until I actually drive one I guess. : > : > The short overhangs are great. The vehicle looks pretty upright; I hope : > the track is wide enough for good stability. : > : > Call me eccentric, but I think it would be cool to have the 2.5L : > turbodiesel as an option here in the US market, though I doubt many : > people would opt for it… : > : > Drew : > : > — : > ‘99 PLYMOUTH Voyager Expresso 3.3L/4-speed auto : > ‘94 Dodge Spirit 3.0L/3-speed auto : > : >
Response:
: : >Yep, not bad–about the same as the 4.0L in the older Cherokee : >would turn in. I’m just hoping that it’s not one of those engines that : >you have to rev the bejeebers out of to get the power. Fortunately, the : >engine does have some "cubes" to give torque (almost the same : >displacement as the old 225 slant-six)…but the 4.0L has always been : >such a great torquer that didn’t need a heavy foot to deliver the power. : > Hopefully, the 3.7L will behave in a similar way (with maybe even : >better power "up top").. : > : >Drew : Well I just got home from the Detroit auto show and I have a few : observations on the new Liberty. : (this is coming from a person who does no off roading but has been : extremely satisfied over the last 10 years with his last two Cherokee : sports) : First off, it’s rear compartment is significantly smaller than the : Cherokee (31.2 cu. ft. vs.34.0 cu ft) IMHO the rear compartment looked Not considering the internal spare tire on the Cherokee. : too small from the outside to even get a cooler or suitcase in side by : side. (they were all locked so you couldn’t get too good of a feel for : the interior of the car) : The Liberty sport now has a 2.5 liter 4 cylinder engine rather than : the "bullet proof" 4.0L I-6 of the current Cherokee sport. No, the 2.4 L dohc 4 replaces the 2.5 L IL-4 and the 3.7 sohc V6 replaces the 4.0 L IL-6. : They are going to be about 10% more expensive than the Cherokee. : : All in all after giving it careful consideration I’ve came to the : following conclusion. : Liberty= smaller payload, smaller engine, less utilitarian and more : expensive than current Cherokee. What do you base "payload" on? And the smaller engine makes 20 more hp (210 vs 190). It has significantly more passenger room (read the C/D article) AND more cargo room. : Current Cherokee= Perfect all around SUV with record breaking 1999 : sales. Archaic. Rides poorly, handles poorly, inside spare tire steals room, noisy as all get-out, doors too narrow, no chance of capturing sales from the RAV4/CR-V/Escape crowd. : Just let me know if I’m missing something here, If not I think I’ll be : buying a Ford Explorer or something when my lease is up. : cya : LH : : You’re missing quite a bit, as most of your "facts" were wrong.
Response:
> I like the styling. The round lights and hood bulges that extend back > from the lights — although styled before the takeover, you can see some > Mercedes family resemblance there.
Oh jeez, you shouldn’ta oughta said that…light fuse, throw, and head quickly for cover… > Very nice taillights too. Looks a lot > smaller than it is, quite sleek for an SUV. Interior looks good, > especially the white-face gauges. The Limited should offer wood trim > instead of the aluminum, however.
I agree about the wood trim. > Now that the Cherokee is going away, Chrysler ought to name this the > Cherokee. Liberty is a silly name.
<SHRUG> maybe, maybe not…seems like the auto world is big on silly names (Lumina, Camry, XTerra, etc. etc.). Drew — ‘99 PLYMOUTH Voyager Expresso 3.3L/4-speed auto ‘94 Dodge Spirit 3.0L/3-speed auto http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Valley/6569/spirit.html
Response:
I think Lloyd’s right in most of his comments–but I also think the Cherokee Classic is one heckuva buy. Ya, it doesn’t ride as good as some of the newer, more car-like SUVs but it’s priced very well and has great power from the old-tech 4.0L six. Some of the newer, smaller displacement stuff can outdrag the six-banger Cherokee, but you’ve got to stick your foot way into it for the engine to develop the power. It’s a subjective thing, but I tend to like vehicles where I’m not always winding the whee out of the engine just to keep up with traffic… I’m really interested to drive a new Liberty and see how it performs. Like I said, it looks great and the interior certainly is inviting… Drew — ‘99 PLYMOUTH Voyager Expresso 3.3L/4-speed auto ‘94 Dodge Spirit 3.0L/3-speed auto http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Valley/6569/spirit.html – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > : > : >Yep, not bad–about the same as the 4.0L in the older Cherokee > : >would turn in. I’m just hoping that it’s not one of those engines that > : >you have to rev the bejeebers out of to get the power. Fortunately, the > : >engine does have some "cubes" to give torque (almost the same > : >displacement as the old 225 slant-six)…but the 4.0L has always been > : >such a great torquer that didn’t need a heavy foot to deliver the power. > : > Hopefully, the 3.7L will behave in a similar way (with maybe even > : >better power "up top").. > : > > : >Drew > : Well I just got home from the Detroit auto show and I have a few > : observations on the new Liberty. > : (this is coming from a person who does no off roading but has been > : extremely satisfied over the last 10 years with his last two Cherokee > : sports) > : First off, it’s rear compartment is significantly smaller than the > : Cherokee (31.2 cu. ft. vs.34.0 cu ft) IMHO the rear compartment looked > Not considering the internal spare tire on the Cherokee. > : too small from the outside to even get a cooler or suitcase in side by > : side. (they were all locked so you couldn’t get too good of a feel for > : the interior of the car) > : The Liberty sport now has a 2.5 liter 4 cylinder engine rather than > : the "bullet proof" 4.0L I-6 of the current Cherokee sport. > No, the 2.4 L dohc 4 replaces the 2.5 L IL-4 and the 3.7 sohc V6 replaces > the 4.0 L IL-6. > : They are going to be about 10% more expensive than the Cherokee. > : > : All in all after giving it careful consideration I’ve came to the > : following conclusion. > : Liberty= smaller payload, smaller engine, less utilitarian and more > : expensive than current Cherokee. > What do you base "payload" on? And the smaller engine makes 20 more hp > (210 vs 190). It has significantly more passenger room (read the C/D > article) AND more cargo room. > : Current Cherokee= Perfect all around SUV with record breaking 1999 > : sales. > Archaic. Rides poorly, handles poorly, inside spare tire steals room, > noisy as all get-out, doors too narrow, no chance of capturing sales from > the RAV4/CR-V/Escape crowd. > : Just let me know if I’m missing something here, If not I think I’ll be > : buying a Ford Explorer or something when my lease is up. > : cya > : LH > : > : > You’re missing quite a bit, as most of your "facts" were wrong.
Response:
: OK, the wraps are officially off of the new Jeep Liberty. What do you : think of it? Here are my comments based on a very short look at one : (which everyone can ignore at their leisure): I like the looks. Kind : of a hybrid of styling from the Grand Cherokee, Wrangler & even the : Dodge Durango. Interior looks nice too (but I haven’t sat in one yet). : : The new 3.7L SOHC engine puts out impressive power, though I’m curious : if it will have the low-end urge that the old 4.0L inline six : has…especially when looking at the curb weights of the new Liberty, : which are in the 3600-3900 lbs. range, somewhat heavier than the : "Cherokee Classic". I’ll reserve judement on the powertrain’s agility : until I actually drive one I guess. : : The short overhangs are great. The vehicle looks pretty upright; I hope : the track is wide enough for good stability. : : Call me eccentric, but I think it would be cool to have the 2.5L : turbodiesel as an option here in the US market, though I doubt many : people would opt for it… : : Drew : : — : ‘99 PLYMOUTH Voyager Expresso 3.3L/4-speed auto : ‘94 Dodge Spirit 3.0L/3-speed auto : : I like the styling. The round lights and hood bulges that extend back from the lights — although styled before the takeover, you can see some Mercedes family resemblance there. Very nice taillights too. Looks a lot smaller than it is, quite sleek for an SUV. Interior looks good, especially the white-face gauges. The Limited should offer wood trim instead of the aluminum, however. I’ve read CAR’s review — they didn’t like the small rear door openings, the front seat runners that intrude on rear seat foot room, or the fact that the rear seat doesn’t fold completely flat (MT made these complaints too, although their photo seems to show the rear seat does fold flat if you fold the cushions forward first). Seems to be very capable off-road, which ought to help its image (and thus sales) compared to SUVs like the RAV4, Forester, CR-V, and Tribute/Escape. Now that the Cherokee is going away, Chrysler ought to name this the Cherokee. Liberty is a silly name.
Response:
Yep, not bad–about the same as the 4.0L in the older Cherokee would turn in. I’m just hoping that it’s not one of those engines that you have to rev the bejeebers out of to get the power. Fortunately, the engine does have some "cubes" to give torque (almost the same displacement as the old 225 slant-six)…but the 4.0L has always been such a great torquer that didn’t need a heavy foot to deliver the power. Hopefully, the 3.7L will behave in a similar way (with maybe even better power "up top").. Drew – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > The Car and Driver test has the V6 going from 0 to 60 MPH in 9 seconds > even..not bad for a SUV. > OK, the wraps are officially off of the new Jeep Liberty. What do you > think of it? Here are my comments based on a very short look at one > (which everyone can ignore at their leisure): I like the looks. Kind > of a hybrid of styling from the Grand Cherokee, Wrangler & even the > Dodge Durango. Interior looks nice too (but I haven’t sat in one yet). > The new 3.7L SOHC engine puts out impressive power, though I’m curious > if it will have the low-end urge that the old 4.0L inline six > has…especially when looking at the curb weights of the new Liberty, > which are in the 3600-3900 lbs. range, somewhat heavier than the > "Cherokee Classic". I’ll reserve judement on the powertrain’s agility > until I actually drive one I guess. > The short overhangs are great. The vehicle looks pretty upright; I hope > the track is wide enough for good stability. > Call me eccentric, but I think it would be cool to have the 2.5L > turbodiesel as an option here in the US market, though I doubt many > people would opt for it… > Drew > — > ‘99 PLYMOUTH Voyager Expresso 3.3L/4-speed auto > ‘94 Dodge Spirit 3.0L/3-speed auto
Response:
>The Car and Driver test has the V6 going from 0 to 60 MPH in 9 seconds >even..not bad for a SUV.
Yes, but it IS an SUV, and if it is actually USED off-road, how’s the off-idle and low-RPM torque. THOSE are the points to ponder.
Response:
The Car and Driver test has the V6 going from 0 to 60 MPH in 9 seconds even..not bad for a SUV. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > OK, the wraps are officially off of the new Jeep Liberty. What do you > think of it? Here are my comments based on a very short look at one > (which everyone can ignore at their leisure): I like the looks. Kind > of a hybrid of styling from the Grand Cherokee, Wrangler & even the > Dodge Durango. Interior looks nice too (but I haven’t sat in one yet). > The new 3.7L SOHC engine puts out impressive power, though I’m curious > if it will have the low-end urge that the old 4.0L inline six > has…especially when looking at the curb weights of the new Liberty, > which are in the 3600-3900 lbs. range, somewhat heavier than the > "Cherokee Classic". I’ll reserve judement on the powertrain’s agility > until I actually drive one I guess. > The short overhangs are great. The vehicle looks pretty upright; I hope > the track is wide enough for good stability. > Call me eccentric, but I think it would be cool to have the 2.5L > turbodiesel as an option here in the US market, though I doubt many > people would opt for it… > Drew > — > ‘99 PLYMOUTH Voyager Expresso 3.3L/4-speed auto > ‘94 Dodge Spirit 3.0L/3-speed auto
Response:
OK, the wraps are officially off of the new Jeep Liberty. What do you think of it? Here are my comments based on a very short look at one (which everyone can ignore at their leisure): I like the looks. Kind of a hybrid of styling from the Grand Cherokee, Wrangler & even the Dodge Durango. Interior looks nice too (but I haven’t sat in one yet). The new 3.7L SOHC engine puts out impressive power, though I’m curious if it will have the low-end urge that the old 4.0L inline six has…especially when looking at the curb weights of the new Liberty, which are in the 3600-3900 lbs. range, somewhat heavier than the "Cherokee Classic". I’ll reserve judement on the powertrain’s agility until I actually drive one I guess. The short overhangs are great. The vehicle looks pretty upright; I hope the track is wide enough for good stability. Call me eccentric, but I think it would be cool to have the 2.5L turbodiesel as an option here in the US market, though I doubt many people would opt for it… Drew — ‘99 PLYMOUTH Voyager Expresso 3.3L/4-speed auto ‘94 Dodge Spirit 3.0L/3-speed auto
Response:
The Car and Driver test has the V6 going from 0 to 60 MPH in 9 seconds even..not bad for a SUV. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > OK, the wraps are officially off of the new Jeep Liberty. What do you > think of it? Here are my comments based on a very short look at one > (which everyone can ignore at their leisure): I like the looks. Kind > of a hybrid of styling from the Grand Cherokee, Wrangler & even the > Dodge Durango. Interior looks nice too (but I haven’t sat in one yet). > The new 3.7L SOHC engine puts out impressive power, though I’m curious > if it will have the low-end urge that the old 4.0L inline six > has…especially when looking at the curb weights of the new Liberty, > which are in the 3600-3900 lbs. range, somewhat heavier than the > "Cherokee Classic". I’ll reserve judement on the powertrain’s agility > until I actually drive one I guess. > The short overhangs are great. The vehicle looks pretty upright; I hope > the track is wide enough for good stability. > Call me eccentric, but I think it would be cool to have the 2.5L > turbodiesel as an option here in the US market, though I doubt many > people would opt for it… > Drew > — > ‘99 PLYMOUTH Voyager Expresso 3.3L/4-speed auto > ‘94 Dodge Spirit 3.0L/3-speed auto
Response:
>The Car and Driver test has the V6 going from 0 to 60 MPH in 9 seconds >even..not bad for a SUV.
Yes, but it IS an SUV, and if it is actually USED off-road, how’s the off-idle and low-RPM torque. THOSE are the points to ponder.
Response:
Yep, not bad–about the same as the 4.0L in the older Cherokee would turn in. I’m just hoping that it’s not one of those engines that you have to rev the bejeebers out of to get the power. Fortunately, the engine does have some "cubes" to give torque (almost the same displacement as the old 225 slant-six)…but the 4.0L has always been such a great torquer that didn’t need a heavy foot to deliver the power. Hopefully, the 3.7L will behave in a similar way (with maybe even better power "up top").. Drew – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > The Car and Driver test has the V6 going from 0 to 60 MPH in 9 seconds > even..not bad for a SUV. > OK, the wraps are officially off of the new Jeep Liberty. What do you > think of it? Here are my comments based on a very short look at one > (which everyone can ignore at their leisure): I like the looks. Kind > of a hybrid of styling from the Grand Cherokee, Wrangler & even the > Dodge Durango. Interior looks nice too (but I haven’t sat in one yet). > The new 3.7L SOHC engine puts out impressive power, though I’m curious > if it will have the low-end urge that the old 4.0L inline six > has…especially when looking at the curb weights of the new Liberty, > which are in the 3600-3900 lbs. range, somewhat heavier than the > "Cherokee Classic". I’ll reserve judement on the powertrain’s agility > until I actually drive one I guess. > The short overhangs are great. The vehicle looks pretty upright; I hope > the track is wide enough for good stability. > Call me eccentric, but I think it would be cool to have the 2.5L > turbodiesel as an option here in the US market, though I doubt many > people would opt for it… > Drew > — > ‘99 PLYMOUTH Voyager Expresso 3.3L/4-speed auto > ‘94 Dodge Spirit 3.0L/3-speed auto
Response:
: OK, the wraps are officially off of the new Jeep Liberty. What do you : think of it? Here are my comments based on a very short look at one : (which everyone can ignore at their leisure): I like the looks. Kind : of a hybrid of styling from the Grand Cherokee, Wrangler & even the : Dodge Durango. Interior looks nice too (but I haven’t sat in one yet). : : The new 3.7L SOHC engine puts out impressive power, though I’m curious : if it will have the low-end urge that the old 4.0L inline six : has…especially when looking at the curb weights of the new Liberty, : which are in the 3600-3900 lbs. range, somewhat heavier than the : "Cherokee Classic". I’ll reserve judement on the powertrain’s agility : until I actually drive one I guess. : : The short overhangs are great. The vehicle looks pretty upright; I hope : the track is wide enough for good stability. : : Call me eccentric, but I think it would be cool to have the 2.5L : turbodiesel as an option here in the US market, though I doubt many : people would opt for it… : : Drew : : — : ‘99 PLYMOUTH Voyager Expresso 3.3L/4-speed auto : ‘94 Dodge Spirit 3.0L/3-speed auto : : I like the styling. The round lights and hood bulges that extend back from the lights — although styled before the takeover, you can see some Mercedes family resemblance there. Very nice taillights too. Looks a lot smaller than it is, quite sleek for an SUV. Interior looks good, especially the white-face gauges. The Limited should offer wood trim instead of the aluminum, however. I’ve read CAR’s review — they didn’t like the small rear door openings, the front seat runners that intrude on rear seat foot room, or the fact that the rear seat doesn’t fold completely flat (MT made these complaints too, although their photo seems to show the rear seat does fold flat if you fold the cushions forward first). Seems to be very capable off-road, which ought to help its image (and thus sales) compared to SUVs like the RAV4, Forester, CR-V, and Tribute/Escape. Now that the Cherokee is going away, Chrysler ought to name this the Cherokee. Liberty is a silly name.
Response:
: The Car and Driver test has the V6 going from 0 to 60 MPH in 9 seconds : even..not bad for a SUV. That was their _estimated_ time; they didn’t do a test on it. MT reports 10.0 sec, but didn’t say if it was measured or estimated. Since all the auto mags’ exposure was at the DC unveiling, I doubt MT did an instrumented test. :
: : : > OK, the wraps are officially off of the new Jeep Liberty. What do you : > think of it? Here are my comments based on a very short look at one : > (which everyone can ignore at their leisure): I like the looks. Kind : > of a hybrid of styling from the Grand Cherokee, Wrangler & even the : > Dodge Durango. Interior looks nice too (but I haven’t sat in one yet). : > : > The new 3.7L SOHC engine puts out impressive power, though I’m curious : > if it will have the low-end urge that the old 4.0L inline six : > has…especially when looking at the curb weights of the new Liberty, : > which are in the 3600-3900 lbs. range, somewhat heavier than the : > "Cherokee Classic". I’ll reserve judement on the powertrain’s agility : > until I actually drive one I guess. : > : > The short overhangs are great. The vehicle looks pretty upright; I hope : > the track is wide enough for good stability. : > : > Call me eccentric, but I think it would be cool to have the 2.5L : > turbodiesel as an option here in the US market, though I doubt many : > people would opt for it… : > : > Drew : > : > — : > ‘99 PLYMOUTH Voyager Expresso 3.3L/4-speed auto : > ‘94 Dodge Spirit 3.0L/3-speed auto : > : >
Response:
: : >Yep, not bad–about the same as the 4.0L in the older Cherokee : >would turn in. I’m just hoping that it’s not one of those engines that : >you have to rev the bejeebers out of to get the power. Fortunately, the : >engine does have some "cubes" to give torque (almost the same : >displacement as the old 225 slant-six)…but the 4.0L has always been : >such a great torquer that didn’t need a heavy foot to deliver the power. : > Hopefully, the 3.7L will behave in a similar way (with maybe even : >better power "up top").. : > : >Drew : Well I just got home from the Detroit auto show and I have a few : observations on the new Liberty. : (this is coming from a person who does no off roading but has been : extremely satisfied over the last 10 years with his last two Cherokee : sports) : First off, it’s rear compartment is significantly smaller than the : Cherokee (31.2 cu. ft. vs.34.0 cu ft) IMHO the rear compartment looked Not considering the internal spare tire on the Cherokee. : too small from the outside to even get a cooler or suitcase in side by : side. (they were all locked so you couldn’t get too good of a feel for : the interior of the car) : The Liberty sport now has a 2.5 liter 4 cylinder engine rather than : the "bullet proof" 4.0L I-6 of the current Cherokee sport. No, the 2.4 L dohc 4 replaces the 2.5 L IL-4 and the 3.7 sohc V6 replaces the 4.0 L IL-6. : They are going to be about 10% more expensive than the Cherokee. : : All in all after giving it careful consideration I’ve came to the : following conclusion. : Liberty= smaller payload, smaller engine, less utilitarian and more : expensive than current Cherokee. What do you base "payload" on? And the smaller engine makes 20 more hp (210 vs 190). It has significantly more passenger room (read the C/D article) AND more cargo room. : Current Cherokee= Perfect all around SUV with record breaking 1999 : sales. Archaic. Rides poorly, handles poorly, inside spare tire steals room, noisy as all get-out, doors too narrow, no chance of capturing sales from the RAV4/CR-V/Escape crowd. : Just let me know if I’m missing something here, If not I think I’ll be : buying a Ford Explorer or something when my lease is up. : cya : LH : : You’re missing quite a bit, as most of your "facts" were wrong.
Response:
> I like the styling. The round lights and hood bulges that extend back > from the lights — although styled before the takeover, you can see some > Mercedes family resemblance there.
Oh jeez, you shouldn’ta oughta said that…light fuse, throw, and head quickly for cover… > Very nice taillights too. Looks a lot > smaller than it is, quite sleek for an SUV. Interior looks good, > especially the white-face gauges. The Limited should offer wood trim > instead of the aluminum, however.
I agree about the wood trim. > Now that the Cherokee is going away, Chrysler ought to name this the > Cherokee. Liberty is a silly name.
<SHRUG> maybe, maybe not…seems like the auto world is big on silly names (Lumina, Camry, XTerra, etc. etc.). Drew — ‘99 PLYMOUTH Voyager Expresso 3.3L/4-speed auto ‘94 Dodge Spirit 3.0L/3-speed auto http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Valley/6569/spirit.html
Response:
I think Lloyd’s right in most of his comments–but I also think the Cherokee Classic is one heckuva buy. Ya, it doesn’t ride as good as some of the newer, more car-like SUVs but it’s priced very well and has great power from the old-tech 4.0L six. Some of the newer, smaller displacement stuff can outdrag the six-banger Cherokee, but you’ve got to stick your foot way into it for the engine to develop the power. It’s a subjective thing, but I tend to like vehicles where I’m not always winding the whee out of the engine just to keep up with traffic… I’m really interested to drive a new Liberty and see how it performs. Like I said, it looks great and the interior certainly is inviting… Drew — ‘99 PLYMOUTH Voyager Expresso 3.3L/4-speed auto ‘94 Dodge Spirit 3.0L/3-speed auto http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Valley/6569/spirit.html – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > : > : >Yep, not bad–about the same as the 4.0L in the older Cherokee > : >would turn in. I’m just hoping that it’s not one of those engines that > : >you have to rev the bejeebers out of to get the power. Fortunately, the > : >engine does have some "cubes" to give torque (almost the same > : >displacement as the old 225 slant-six)…but the 4.0L has always been > : >such a great torquer that didn’t need a heavy foot to deliver the power. > : > Hopefully, the 3.7L will behave in a similar way (with maybe even > : >better power "up top").. > : > > : >Drew > : Well I just got home from the Detroit auto show and I have a few > : observations on the new Liberty. > : (this is coming from a person who does no off roading but has been > : extremely satisfied over the last 10 years with his last two Cherokee > : sports) > : First off, it’s rear compartment is significantly smaller than the > : Cherokee (31.2 cu. ft. vs.34.0 cu ft) IMHO the rear compartment looked > Not considering the internal spare tire on the Cherokee. > : too small from the outside to even get a cooler or suitcase in side by > : side. (they were all locked so you couldn’t get too good of a feel for > : the interior of the car) > : The Liberty sport now has a 2.5 liter 4 cylinder engine rather than > : the "bullet proof" 4.0L I-6 of the current Cherokee sport. > No, the 2.4 L dohc 4 replaces the 2.5 L IL-4 and the 3.7 sohc V6 replaces > the 4.0 L IL-6. > : They are going to be about 10% more expensive than the Cherokee. > : > : All in all after giving it careful consideration I’ve came to the > : following conclusion. > : Liberty= smaller payload, smaller engine, less utilitarian and more > : expensive than current Cherokee. > What do you base "payload" on? And the smaller engine makes 20 more hp > (210 vs 190). It has significantly more passenger room (read the C/D > article) AND more cargo room. > : Current Cherokee= Perfect all around SUV with record breaking 1999 > : sales. > Archaic. Rides poorly, handles poorly, inside spare tire steals room, > noisy as all get-out, doors too narrow, no chance of capturing sales from > the RAV4/CR-V/Escape crowd. > : Just let me know if I’m missing something here, If not I think I’ll be > : buying a Ford Explorer or something when my lease is up. > : cya > : LH > : > : > You’re missing quite a bit, as most of your "facts" were wrong.
Response:
: : > I like the styling. The round lights and hood bulges that extend back : > from the lights — although styled before the takeover, you can see : some : > Mercedes family resemblance there. : : Oh jeez, you shouldn’ta oughta said that…light fuse, throw, and head : quickly for cover… : : > Very nice taillights too. Looks a lot : > smaller than it is, quite sleek for an SUV. Interior looks good, : > especially the white-face gauges. The Limited should offer wood trim : > instead of the aluminum, however. : : I agree about the wood trim. : : > Now that the Cherokee is going away, Chrysler ought to name this the : > Cherokee. Liberty is a silly name. : : <SHRUG> maybe, maybe not…seems like the auto world is big on silly : names (Lumina, Camry, XTerra, etc. etc.). : : Drew : — : ‘99 PLYMOUTH Voyager Expresso 3.3L/4-speed auto : ‘94 Dodge Spirit 3.0L/3-speed auto : http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Valley/6569/spirit.html : : But why have a Grand Cherokee if you’re not going to have a Cherokee anymore? Of course, Jeep had a Grand Wagoneer when it didn’t have a Wagoneer…
Response:
: I think Lloyd’s right in most of his comments–but I also think the : Cherokee Classic is one heckuva buy. Ya, it doesn’t ride as good as : some of the newer, more car-like SUVs but it’s priced very well and has : great power from the old-tech 4.0L six. Some of the newer, smaller : displacement stuff can outdrag the six-banger Cherokee, but you’ve got : to stick your foot way into it for the engine to develop the power. : It’s a subjective thing, but I tend to like vehicles where I’m not : always winding the whee out of the engine just to keep up with : traffic… : : I’m really interested to drive a new Liberty and see how it performs. : Like I said, it looks great and the interior certainly is inviting… But Jeep will still have the Wrangler and Grand Cherokee for the die-hard off-road rugged types. The Liberty gives them an entry into the more on-pavement crowd. Hopefully, it will sell like crazy.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->I like the styling. The round lights and hood bulges that extend back >from the lights — although styled before the takeover, you can see some >Mercedes family resemblance there. Very nice taillights too. Looks a lot >smaller than it is, quite sleek for an SUV. Interior looks good, >especially the white-face gauges. The Limited should offer wood trim >instead of the aluminum, however. >I’ve read CAR’s review — they didn’t like the small rear door openings, >the front seat runners that intrude on rear seat foot room, or the fact >that the rear seat doesn’t fold completely flat (MT made these complaints >too, although their photo seems to show the rear seat does fold flat if >you fold the cushions forward first). Seems to be very capable off-road, >which ought to help its image (and thus sales) compared to SUVs like the >RAV4, Forester, CR-V, and Tribute/Escape. >Now that the Cherokee is going away, Chrysler ought to name this the >Cherokee. Liberty is a silly name.
Pretty much agreed. When you compare it to the Escape you get a much more rugged vehicle (WJ type rear axle, good ground clearance, Select and Command trac rather than the Escapes silly system). The front is IFS, but from what I have read if you get 4×4 it (the front diff) comes pretty well armored. They took it, and XJ, a WJ, and a TJ on the Rubicon and it did well. The biggest thing you lose here is that with the IFS it gets alot more difficult to modify if you want. I really like the looks, and the passenger compartment. The back does seem smaller, even without the spare tire there. The 60/40 rear seat is something I wish they had done with the XJ years ago. When the XJ is retired, I would like to see them name the liberty the Cherokee. However, I also would like to see the XJ go on as a ‘third world’ ute. IIRC that was how AMC really wanted it. Won’t happen, but it would be neat. I am holding my opinion on the 3.7 ltre engine until I can drive one. I am a biiiig fan of the 4.0 litre.
Response:
I understand it wil still be called Cherokee outside of North America. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Now that the Cherokee is going away, Chrysler ought to name this the > Cherokee. Liberty is a silly name.
Response:
: snip : > : >Not considering the internal spare tire on the Cherokee. : your right, the full size spare in my 99 made me appreciate the : smaller donut in my 92. : I ASSummed when I checked the specs on the jeep site last nighttit was : *with* the tire installed. : > : >: too small from the outside to even get a cooler or suitcase in side by : >: side. (they were all locked so you couldn’t get too good of a feel for : >: the interior of the car) : >: The Liberty sport now has a 2.5 liter 4 cylinder engine rather than : >: the "bullet proof" 4.0L I-6 of the current Cherokee sport. : > : > : >No, the 2.4 L dohc 4 replaces the 2.5 L IL-4 and the 3.7 sohc V6 replaces : >the 4.0 L IL-6. : I took the 2.5 number from a non US liberty website last night. I believe that’s the diesel engine offered in Europe. : Regardless the current sport does have the 4.0 and the new liberty : sport will have a smaller engine. But with 20 more hp. : >: They are going to be about 10% more expensive than the Cherokee. : >: : >: All in all after giving it careful consideration I’ve came to the : >: following conclusion. : >: Liberty= smaller payload, smaller engine, less utilitarian and more : >: expensive than current Cherokee. : > : >What do you base "payload" on? And the smaller engine makes 20 more hp : >(210 vs 190). : at what RPM and would that be at the flywheel or at the tires? : the liberty weighs more too doesn’t it? I don’t think it’s heavier than the Cherokee. : >It has significantly more passenger room (read the C/D : >article) AND more cargo room. : I haven’t seen the article yet but I based it on the numerous trips my : wife and my three kids take every year (packing every sq inch of my : 99’s rear compartment) Well, don’t put out erroneous information then. : That thing I saw yesterday *looks* to have less luggage space but they : were locked so I really couldn’t get as good a feel for the inside as : I would have liked. : : >: Current Cherokee= Perfect all around SUV with record breaking 1999 : >: sales. : > : >Archaic. Rides poorly, handles poorly, inside spare tire steals room, : >noisy as all get-out, doors too narrow, no chance of capturing sales from : >the RAV4/CR-V/Escape crowd. : the people who drive RAV4s do not belong in a Jeep give em a SUZKI or : a Tracker and they’ll be fine<G> The people who drive RAV4s are a HUGE market group and Chrysler wants their business. For the die-hard off-roaders, there’s still Wrangler and GC. : >: Just let me know if I’m missing something here, If not I think I’ll be : >: buying a Ford Explorer or something when my lease is up. : >: cya : >: LH : >You’re missing quite a bit, as most of your "facts" were wrong. : like I said they were observations I made after viewing the new : liberty and hitting a few websites. You presented them as "facts" not "observations." And if I were to observe, say, the Neon has a 3.0 L engine and the Intrepid has just 2 doors, I’d be wrong. : I appreciate your insightful comments and will definitely take the : liberty for a drive before my lease expires keeping your post handy to : contrast my initial negative conclusions. : That said I think if Chrysler had a brain at the auto show they would : unlock those 4 or 5 they have on display and let the people get a good : close look and feel of the inside. : Yes, that’s often a complaint of mine too, that they put the best cars up on a turntable and won’t let people near it. I try to refrain from observations about interior room and engines in such a case.
Response:
> > Now that the Cherokee is going away, Chrysler ought to name this the > Cherokee. Liberty is a silly name. > I understand it wil still be called Cherokee outside of North America.
That is correct. It will still be called Cherokee outside of North America, where they aren’t so goddamned paranoid about possibly offending someone. It may not even be the case that some indian activist considered the Cherokee name racist (or whatever). More likely is that some white manager decided that some indian activist *might* consider the Cherokee name racist (or whatever), and decided to rename it. This sort of thing does happen. A friend of mine works at an electronics assembly plant. One of the tools used on the line is diagonal cutters, referred to everwhere as "Dykes" (a contraction of the sounds in the words DIagonal CutterS). There were no complaints about the term from any employees, gay or straight. However, a straight manager decided the term was offensive, and ordered that its use be discontinued. The folks on the line — gay and straight alike — now comply with the new policy, much to the chagrin of the managers. Now, instead of "Hey, pass me that set of dykes over there…", they say "Hey, pass me that set of lesbians over there…" –Daniel "Television is a medium. It is a medium because it is neither rare, nor well-done." — NBCS b6f+wg++rp —
Response:
: : > > Now that the Cherokee is going away, Chrysler ought to name this the : > > Cherokee. Liberty is a silly name. : : > I understand it wil still be called Cherokee outside of North America. : : That is correct. It will still be called Cherokee outside of North : America, where they aren’t so goddamned paranoid about possibly offending : someone. It may not even be the case that some indian activist considered : the Cherokee name racist (or whatever). More likely is that some : white manager decided that some indian activist *might* consider the : Cherokee name racist (or whatever), and decided to rename it. This sort You’re sounding like a rvaing lunatic. It wasn’t going to be the Cherokee here because until a couple of weeks ago, DC was going to keep building the XJ Cherokee.
Response:
> : > I understand it wil still be called Cherokee outside of North America. > : > : That is correct. It will still be called Cherokee outside of North > : America, where they aren’t so goddamned paranoid about possibly offending > : someone. It may not even be the case that some indian activist considered > : the Cherokee name racist (or whatever). More likely is that some > : white manager decided that some indian activist *might* consider the > : Cherokee name racist (or whatever), and decided to rename it. This sort > You’re sounding like a rvaing lunatic.
I reckon it takes one to know one, Lloyd. > It wasn’t going to be the Cherokee here because until a couple of > weeks ago, DC was going to keep building the XJ Cherokee.
There exist all kinds of reasons for companies releasing statements about their future plans for their current products vis-a-vis new products in the line. Car companies are not in the business of keeping the general public correctly informed; they’re in the business of selling cars. –Daniel "Cream always rises to the top. However, so does pond scum."