Jeep Garage  - Jeep Forum banner

first post, seeking advice from current owners!

8K views 89 replies 22 participants last post by  overlanding 
#1 ·
Hey everyone, first post here but I've been lurker for a little while. Seeking some advice from current WK2 owners (particularly Summit owners) but first, a little background: I had a 5.9 limited (miss this car so much) for a few months back in the early 2000's and unfortunately my brother totaled it while I was away in college so that was that. Currently driving a 3rd gen Escalade...nothing wrong with it, but her age is starting to show and the technology (or lack thereof) is rather antiquated and getting a bit long in the tooth.

That said, I'm potentially in the market for a new car in the coming months and, after much back and forth contemplation between various models (new and used), keep coming back to the GC Summit. The feature set is the epitome of fully loaded and relative to comparable models both in and outside of it's segment, it is exceptional value for the money IMO. For reference, I have also considered new/used Lexus GX, Range Rover, MB ML-class, etc.

I have narrowed it down to two choices: lease a '15 Summit (w/HEMI) with the hopes that since the 16's are right around the corner I can get a stupid good deal (and hoping there isn't too much change on the 16's to make me want that), or buying a pre-owned '14 to avoid taking the upfront depreciation hit. I'm leaning towards the lease option simply because it gives me something brand new and under warranty, and because I tend to have the desire to switch cars every few years. Ideally would like 36 mos, 12-15k miles/yr for $600 or less (my current payment +/-)...I wouldn't mind putting money down up front but would prefer not to on a lease. Not really sure if this is realistic and I can't really deep dive the numbers just yet since my wife and I are closing on a house soon (can't pull credit until afterwards). And yes, I have considered an Overland/High Altitude but the Summit just seems to be packed to the gills without having to add options and offers certain things not available on the Overland/HA (correct me if I'm wrong): the HK stereo, the suede/alcantara headliner, adaptive headlights, illuminated door sills, etc. I can certainly live without most (except the HK stereo) but they'd be nice to have.

Thoughts/opinions on what type of deal I could get on a lease or what I should look for if buying pre-owned? I've never negotiated a lease before but am fairly familiar with the concepts of MSRP, cap cost, residual, money factor, etc. I've also read that there are not many lease/incentives for Summits and more for Overland/HA. Is this true? There are at least 10 dealerships (many of which I'd assume are "high volume") within a 25 mile radius of where I live...not sure if this is a good or a bad thing but at least it gives me the ability to shop around. Sorry for the long post but hoping to get some great insight from all the WK2 owners here (bonus points if you're in DC metro, also)...thanks, in advance!
 
See less See more
#2 ·
If it's the HK stereo you can't live with out, just get the Overland. HK became available on the later model 2015's. I missed out on that option as I ordered mine in July of 2014. It shows up as a $795 option when configuring online.
 
#4 ·
Thanks, for your reply. Other than what I listed (headliner, adaptive headlights) are there any other features exclusive to the Summit not available on the Overland? I built out an Overland online with advanced tech pack, QDII, and the HK system. That should be almost 100% comparable, right?
 
#7 ·
#9 ·
I was in a similar situation. Chose the High Altitude over the Summit w/ CA Package because I prefer the blacked out look. The HA is kind of in between a standard Overland and Summit.

The only thing the Summit has the HA doesn't is the adaptive headlights and noise cancelling. HA has the front parking sensors, headlight washers, HK stereo, side skirts, and rear skirts.

I basically traded the adapative headlights and noise cancelling in exchagne for the blacked out look. When I test drove the summit, I couldn't tell the difference for the noise cancelling. Chicago is pretty much a grid, so didn't think the adpative headlights are really going to be all that useful.

Can't go wrong with either choice though.
 
#11 · (Edited)
Thanks, for all the responses everyone this has been immensely helpful. Personally, I could live without the front parking sensors since I don't have them on my car now. Same goes for the noise cancelling and adaptive headlamps. I would probably also opt for the QDII in the Overland vs the blacked out look of the High Altitude as I can always black out the Overland afterwards.

That said, here is the million dollar question: would you rather have a comparably equipped Overland (w/advanced tech pack, QDII, HK, etc) w/the HEMI or a Summit w/the Pentastar? Configured in this way, the Overland actually becomes more expensive (albeit only by $485). Just thought it was worth a mention.

My heart is saying HEMI after having a V8 in my last two trucks (and that throaty growl is hard to beat) but my brain is saying I might have to compromise somewhere and the gas mileage will be better. I also test drove the Pentastar, today and man that thing is pretty effin' smooth but the pulling power on the highway I felt could be better (not saying it's bad, though).

Thoughts?
 
#14 · (Edited)
Since you are already as high as you are in the dollars just get the v8 summit. the v6 gives some better mileage but not substantially better the thing I would consider more is the upfront cost, the v8 is roughly about 3.5k more depending. but if you are on the fence on engines get the v8 or you will likely regret it latter. if engines arnt that important of a thing to you then get the v6. Also keep in mind QDII is not available on any v6, you get QTII. QDII is standard on v8/diesel summit an option on v8/diesel overland and not available at all on HA. Also the front/rear parking sensors have actually been one of my favorite features I could careless about the swivel headlights but those front/rear parking sensors let me stuff that jeep into the tightest of parking garages, places id never try to put my last sedan, that's just a personal preference though.

if you are going to be doing more harder core off roading the overland does have a more easily removable front airdam than summit and an 18 inch wheel option that are a little better off road its called the ORAII package.

my only advice is since you are looking at the dollar level you are to spend don't skimp out and not get something you want and then regret it later over a couple thousand dollars. Good Luck
 
#12 · (Edited)
I just leased a '15 High Altitude (essentially a Summit when it comes to features and price) last week with the 5.7L V8 and HK audio. $54,300 MSRP.

I traded in my '14 Grand Cherokee Overland, didn't hand the dealership a single penny, and walked out with my '15 High Altitude for $640/mo. My first lease payment was made with the rebates. So I literally paid nothing at signing.

So good deals can be had.
 
#13 ·
I have had both and for me it was without a doubt the V8...and I don't even tow or offroad. I just wanted it for the sound and added performance. Fuel economy will be a few less, but overall its not terrible. I have logged every fillup since new and have been around 17 without even touching a highway. When I had my Pentastar that was in the 19's. So again, not too terribly different. It all comes down to your preference though. I'm not sure if all the bugs have been worked out, but the 8spd with the V6 seemed to have all the issues. The V8 8spd is a different unit and has been extremely solid! They say its the same 8spd gearbox used in some other high end vehicles. BMW M6, Range Rover Sport, one of the Rolls Royce models (forget which one) to name a couple.
 
#17 · (Edited)
It was just brought to my attention that the High Altitude does NOT offer the wood steering wheel like in the Overland or the Summit despite offering the front parking sensors. That's a non-negotiable for me (for very vain, personal reasons) so I guess it's back to Overland vs Summit.

Thanks, again for everyones responses. In an ideal world I would pick up a Hemi Summit w/the platinum series group in granite crystal metallic for what I'd like to pay on a 36mos lease. I'm willing to "settle" (if you can even use that term) for a Hemi Overland w/advanced tech pack, QDII, & HK in billet silver w/the indigo blue interior, though :)

We will see how much dealers are willing to deal on the '15s in a few months (my timeframe, anyway) once the '16s drop. Will definitely report back!
 
#19 ·
Don't be expecting there to be a lot of 2015's "on the lot" in a few months. Jeep, unlike many manufacturers doesn't dump inventory on dealers...every Jeep that comes off the line (about 70% of the up to 1200 a day out of Jefferson North ... the rest are Durangos) is already sold; either as a factory order for a specific customer or for actual dealer orders. Ordering for MY2015 already closed awhile back and MY2016 production starts in about a month if things hold. If you want a MY2015 and are leasing, there are some pretty good incentives and deals to be had "right now".
 
#20 · (Edited)
.....I have narrowed it down to two choices: lease a '15 Summit (w/HEMI) with the hopes that since the 16's are right around the corner I can get a stupid good deal (and hoping there isn't too much change on the 16's to make me want that), or buying a pre-owned '14 to avoid taking the upfront depreciation hit..........
This is the only part I'm not getting. If you're considering leasing, why would you be concerned about depreciation? If you lease you're going to experience 100% depreciation. Because when the lease ends you've got to give the car back, and walk away with nothing.
 
#22 ·
Your question is a good one. Depreciation is important to someone who's leasing as it has impact on the calculated residual value at the end of the lease...and that goes into the subsequent lease payment calculation.
 
#21 ·
Jeep has no problem selling every GC they build. The deals to be had are somewhat disappointing for what you'd expect.

The Summit also has more acoustic glass. Different leather on the seats and the seat cushions are supposedly softer.

Go with the Hemi. The powertrain is more reliable and if 2mpg is going to hurt your wallet, you should probably consider a cheaper vehicle altogether.
 
#24 ·
My school of thought is that either way (most likely) I will turn the car in (if leasing) or trade/sell it (if buying) after a few years, anyway. By leasing, I can walk away clean and start fresh with something else or if buying certified/pre-owned, it limits the possibility of having to deal with negative equity.
 
#32 · (Edited)
From a black and white perspective, I agree that you are mainly correct but there is more to finances then just that. When purchasing a car, the depreciation is a sunk cost; it will be there regardless of how much you put down. For me, if I can finance at or near 0%, I’d rather keep my money and invest it where I’ll theoretically get a larger return. My net net is higher. This requires discipline (to keep the money invested and not spend it elsewhere) but is a better use of your capital. Again, it’s personal preference though. Some people would rather be debt free and have piece of mind, which carries more “value” to them than the returns they could get on the cash.

Overall, budgeting is about dollars and cents as well as people’s personal preferences. If you save enough in retirement/rainy day, have little debt etc etc, then your discretionary money is yours to spend on what you want. If you love cars, trade them in often and this habit/personal preference fits within your discretionary budget, then leasing “makes sense” and you should have at it!

**Meant to reply to Billt
 
#33 · (Edited)
For me, if I can finance at or near 0%, I’d rather keep my money and invest it where I’ll theoretically get a larger return. My net net is higher.
The so called "Zero Percent Financing" scam is just that. A total scam, and a complete ruse designed to attract unsuspecting buyers. You gain nothing, and in fact, it usually results in you paying more.

Car dealers, (or banks for that matter), will not lend out money for nothing. They wouldn't be in business very long if they did. Much like the old Fram oil filter commercials, you'll either pay now, or else pay later.

You will never get a vehicle for "0% Financing" at the same price you would have gotten it for cash, or by financing through a bank at competitive rates. All you'll be doing is paying for the financing up front, in the higher purchase price they'll charge you for the car.

About the only exception to this rule is on very hard to move vehicles, that have become unpopular, or never were to begin with. And as a result, the dealers want to rid themselves of costly, hard to move inventory. (Watch how fast "0% Financing" pops up everywhere at Volkswagen dealers on their once popular diesel models, since the whole EPA fiasco started). The Jeep Grand Cherokee does not fall into any of these categories.

I proved all of this to myself, (rather the dealer actually admitted it to me), when I purchased my Jeep last April. After much back and forth, I negotiated the best cash price I could get on the vehicle I wanted. Afterward I asked him about "0% Financing To Qualified Buyers", just to get his reaction. He flat out told me they did not offer it on Grand Cherokee models. And he said if they did, there was no way he could sell me the car at the agreed upon cash purchase price we had just negotiated. When I played dumb and asked him why, he told me, (rather honestly I thought), "Because we're not in the business of losing money".

"0% Financing" amounts to nothing more than fuzzy math. When all is said and done you'll wind up paying more, not less. And as we all know, automobile dealers are very good at coming up with ways to separate you from as much of your money as possible. "0% Financing" is one of the best ways yet.

Don't Fall for 0% Financing

Tips and Advice - Know the Facts: 0% Financing

The 0% Financing Scam and How to Avoid It
 
#34 ·
If you know what you are doing leasing can make perfect sense, especially if you plan on keeping the vehicle less than 5 years either way.

If you understand how the lease calculation works, and time your purchase to a good residual and good incentives you are often better off leasing than owning and selling in 3-4 years.
 
#35 · (Edited)
If you know what you are doing leasing can make perfect sense, especially if you plan on keeping the vehicle less than 5 years either way.

If you understand how the lease calculation works, and time your purchase to a good residual and good incentives you are often better off leasing than owning and selling in 3-4 years.
As I've said before, with a lease you're paying 100% depreciation. It is simple math. There is no way around it. Selling off a vehicle after 5 years or less means you are taking the biggest depreciation hit you can possible take, owning over such a short time span. Why would you do either when both represent the most costly ways you could possibly purchase and own, (or rent), a new car?
 
#45 · (Edited)
Did you know that you can heavily modify any vehicle that you lease? You just might have issues turning the car back into the dealer after your 36 months is up and you walk away.

But who does that? That wouldn't be smart.

You could just trade your Jeep in if you want to get rid of it. To any dealership. Any brand. Or you could buy it for the payoff amount. Or you could sell it private party. And you'd probably have good 'equity' in it.

So many people don't understand this.
 
#40 ·
The issue I have with the "100% depreciation" idea is that a lease isn't a buy/investment. it's a long term rental. From an accounting standpoint, depreciation is tied to an asset (the vehicle) and is borne by the vehicle owner...which is the leasing company. They account for that in how they calculate the lease/rental fee as mentioned previously, but for the lessee...there's zero actual depreciation since they don't own the asset.

I don't disagree that financially, leasing may not be the best decision for many folks, but for those that have a reason to lease, regardless of that reason, it's their decision to make.

I used to lease cars and at that time, it met my personal needs/wants to be able to drive a much nicer vehicle than I could have afforded to buy and finance and be able to change out to something different more frequently. I also wasn't driving very many miles, so the cost was even less as a result. When my driving pattern changed and I also gained the financial ability to have a reasonable down payment, I switched back to buying. Leasing wouldn't make any sense at all for me at this point, unless it was to gain some kind of extraordinary deal and then immediately finance a lease buy-out at a very low interest rate from my credit union. I put close to 20K miles a year on so buy works better. And I don't mind staying in the same vehicle for 5-7 years now, too.
 
#42 · (Edited)
The issue I have with the "100% depreciation" idea is that a lease isn't a buy/investment. it's a long term rental. From an accounting standpoint, depreciation is tied to an asset (the vehicle) and is borne by the vehicle owner...which is the leasing company. They account for that in how they calculate the lease/rental fee as mentioned previously, but for the lessee...there's zero actual depreciation since they don't own the asset.
Everything you've said is technically true. In technical financial terms by taking out a lease, you yourself are not absorbing the actual depreciation. But you ARE paying for it. It's no different than a renter paying the landlord's mortgage. He's gaining while you're losing.

The fact is 100% of what you pay is gone, and you will never see a dime of it again.... Same as the tenant's rent checks. And you must remember this is going to amount to thousands of dollars over the term of the lease. All with no recourse. You are in essence paying for the car, but will never have a dimes worth of vested interest in it. It really is a losing deal all the way around.

And today, with the unlimited time and mileage warranties that are available at relatively low cost, maintenance is hardly an issue any longer. This regardless of how long you keep, or how far you drive the vehicle. It's covered. The person leasing isn't really gaining anything at all from that standpoint. Especially when you consider they can and will be assessed for every scratch, dent and stain on the vehicle when they turn it in. Or else have to fork up as much as .50 cents a mile if they go over the allotted miles. This alone can run into hundreds, if not thousands of dollars if you're exceptionally hard on the vehicle.
 
#48 ·
I lease and plan on continuing to lease in the future.
My wife and I view cars as a service, not a good. The service provided is transportation.

How much are you willing to pay for your monthly transportation cost? You can think of it like a bus pass of sorts. You pay for the convenience of having your personal "bus" in your driveway or garage, to use whenever you need it. When leasing, you pay for peace of mind regarding reliability, and minimized maintenance costs. When purchasing, you are spreading out the cost of the service over time, but increase your risk of adding additional costs (repairs, etc.).

Chrysler Canada nor other third party companies offer lifetime warranties here. And as vehicles become increasingly too complex for the average shade tree mechanic, dealer visits become prohibitively expensive fast.

I don't think anyone here is disputing the concept of depreciation. Someone (the driver) ends up paying for it one way or another.

However, when talking finances, it is best to make your money work for you in the smartest way possible. In our case, the money we "save" from financing a vehicle versus the monthly leasing price is put towards an asset that appreciates in value over time: our condominium. From this perspective, we are already in a profitable position.

I'm glad both options are available to us. This way we can all enjoy our cars in the way that suits us financially.


Sent from my iDevice.
 
#52 ·
+1

While leasing is not for everyone it can be a good option for many buyers. Those who opt for this type of financing should fully understand how the numbers (m.f., residual, cap cost, etc.) work. Otherwise the advantage goes to the dealer. I have purchased many vehicles and have paid cash for some, used traditional financing and leased. My current JGC was acquired using a 3 year lease. It works for my requirements today.

I read the (many) messages from billt and understand his position. Though, in my opinion, a lot of his statements are incorrect as it pertains to leasing.

OP, to answer your original question, my preference in the beginning was to purchase an Overland. I prefer the exterior styling vs. the Summit. Now that I have the Summit, I still prefer the Overland's exterior styling but prefer the added features in the Summit. I also have the Hemi. For me, it's worth the extra cost just for the sound, feel and acceleration when driving on the interstate.
 
#51 ·
Usually the tenant informs the landlord and obtains permission beforehand. I can confirm however that Quebec is the worst place to own rental property. Tenant laws are disproportionately in favour of tenants as opposed to the landlord. Unless you let luxury properties, avoid this line of business. Too many headaches.


Sent from my iDevice.
 
#56 ·
You touched on a point Bill, at the very end. Living in Arizona, your car doesn't take as much abuse as a car would in harsh winter climes where roads are salted. Cars don't last as long here.

Furthermore, leasing a Chrysler product makes more sense than leasing a Toyota. One will be much more reliable than the other and the overall costs associated with the lifetime of the product should influence the decision to buy or lease as well.

For example, in my building, the eight or nine Range Rovers all have commercial license plates, typical of leased vehicles. Buying a LRRR would be folly. The Lexii on the other hand run the spectrum of new to old because people hold on to them.

To reiterate an earlier point I made, we have lower monthly payments for the car through leasing, which frees up money to pay down the mortgage (an appreciating asset), faster. It seems your neighbours are living above their means if they still have mortgage payments when they should be retiring.

We see transportation as a service, not a good. If you prefer to see it as a good, it should be a consumable good and not an asset.


Sent from my iDevice.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top