Go Back   Jeep Garage - Jeep Forum > Jeep Platform Discussion > Grand Cherokee - WK2 -

Join Jeep Garage Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
  #25  
Old 11-29-2013, 11:14 PM
Member
My Jeep: 2014 3.6L WK2
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Michigan
Posts: 833
Thanks: 5
Thanked 18 Times in 13 Posts
Rep Power: 127158
loveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by Setoutguy View Post
Just remember the Chrysler V8 is most outdated V8 when compared to Ford, BMW, MB, and GM. Twin plugs are not the hottest current technology.

Test drive and see.

A 5l V8 based on the 3.6l V8 could put out 400+hp without a problem and wiegh significantly less.

And the best part is no more so called hemi commercials
Hi dave, nice to see you again. I have been bored since you left the other forum. At least you never let old habits die...

To the op, you will be taking a major hit on the trade in value of your current jeep, but if you can afford it go for it. The 8.4 is nice as I have that in my truck, but its not something I would be trading a vehicle in for, if your going to do it I would wait until the 2015 model year to make sure all of the bugs have been pretty much worked out. I will agree with you though on the heated seats, my wife's grand had those and I wish I did now that it is getting cold, I actually miss the heated steering wheel most.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 11-30-2013, 03:09 AM
Premium Member
My Jeep: 2013 5.7L WK2
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Diego, Ca
Posts: 640
Thanks: 0
Thanked 16 Times in 16 Posts
Rep Power: 22377
YjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by Setoutguy View Post

They should be since they weigh about 1000lbs less and the prev gen about 700lbs. V6 engines are about equal in technology. Acura has 7 ft lbs more of torque. Torque and hp peaks are within 300rpm+ or -. But peak numbers are misleading its the area under the curves thats important and I cant find curves to compare. I test drove the Pilot and the MDX back in May 12. I havent driven the 2014 but I found the GC better balanced with V6 than the MDX/Pilot back in 2012 since it is based on RWD and the previous gen and current gen are based on FWD platforms. I would much rather chase apexes with a 2014 GC Limited with the ORAI package than a 2014 Pilot/MDX and then I can go off road down a fire road or trail and then across a field etc. Something the MDX cant do. Nothing earth shattering in technology in the new 3.5l for the MDX which probably cam from the RLX/TL.

Depends on what you need I need off road capability which MDX/Pilot will never have. Even the X5 has more off road ability. If I had unlimited funds
I would have gone restored and repowered with a turbo diesel Defender 110.
Just because its the right vehicle to haul Scottish herding dogs to herding trials. I am guessing that at least with me driving lap times at the main circuit at Summit Point would be about equal between a 2014 V6 GC Limited and 2014 MDX SHAWD. Better chassis balance and RWD bias of the GC would make up for the weight handicap. I have at least a couple hundred hours of driving experience there. Now if we also add in lap times on the gravel/dirt road to paddock and then the dirt from the paddock and across the track down to flag station at turn 6 its no contest and the GC wins.

MDX is a very nice CUV/station wagon and a shopping mall bias and the GC a very nice SUV with an off road bias. Both are great choices for their intended missions.
Let me get this straight.... the Acura MDX is being compared with the Jeep Grand Cherokee?
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 11-30-2013, 03:40 AM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 97
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Rep Power: 948
overlanding is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by YjagetaJeep View Post
Let me get this straight.... the Acura MDX is being compared with the Jeep Grand Cherokee?
A little. Mainly started with me discussing power trains and then all of the sudden it expanded from there. I would say they are comparable, slightly. Which is a complement to the GC. And I mean it's riding on a MB platform and costs the same as a Lexus RX 350. It holds it's weight well and then some, I was simply implying with similar numbers to other crossovers it feels slower, gets worse mpg (albeit the MDX requires premium gas). I guess I should have compared the Explorer Sport to the GC with a Hemi. The Sport will do circles around the hemi. It's more athletic. Chrysler really should figure out how to make their vehicles feel like they are packing what they claim. (I'm not taking to you, SRT!)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 11-30-2013, 04:51 AM
Premium Member
My Jeep: 2013 5.7L WK2
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Diego, Ca
Posts: 640
Thanks: 0
Thanked 16 Times in 16 Posts
Rep Power: 22377
YjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond reputeYjagetaJeep has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by overlanding View Post
A little. Mainly started with me discussing power trains and then all of the sudden it expanded from there. I would say they are comparable, slightly. Which is a complement to the GC. And I mean it's riding on a MB platform and costs the same as a Lexus RX 350. It holds it's weight well and then some, I was simply implying with similar numbers to other crossovers it feels slower, gets worse mpg (albeit the MDX requires premium gas). I guess I should have compared the Explorer Sport to the GC with a Hemi. The Sport will do circles around the hemi. It's more athletic. Chrysler really should figure out how to make their vehicles feel like they are packing what they claim. (I'm not taking to you, SRT!)
SO MANY CARS, SO LITTLE _ _ _ _ _! There are so many qualities to compare between vehicles. When I settled on the GC, it was (in no particular order) 1) the beautiful interior 2) the beautiful lines of the GC 3) The brute power felt in moving such a heavy beast. The 5.7 may not have the highest H/P or torque of the bunch, but the curve is pretty straight and the power is on tap across the powerband. 4) The serious off road capability. 5) I'm retiring next year and want to tow a trailer around the country for a year or two...I've loaded up the back of the GC with several hundred pounds of paper and I swear, there was almost no difference in acceleration or handling...I handled the load like a truck.
I drove the Explorer sport and seriously considered it, but didn't like the size. I've also some bad luck with Fords in the past and am not ready to trust the brand yet.
If it was only speed and handling I was looking for, that Audi Q5 3.0 would be my car. Damn, that is one quick little SUV!... I wish I could talk my wife into buying one, because I really, really, liked driving it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 11-30-2013, 07:45 AM
Hitchhiking
My Jeep: 2012 3.6L WK2
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 433
Thanks: 0
Thanked 12 Times in 11 Posts
Rep Power: 0
Setoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Thinking of trading up

Quote:
Originally Posted by overlanding View Post
A little. Mainly started with me discussing power trains and then all of the sudden it expanded from there. I would say they are comparable, slightly. Which is a complement to the GC. And I mean it's riding on a MB platform and costs the same as a Lexus RX 350. It holds it's weight well and then some, I was simply implying with similar numbers to other crossovers it feels slower, gets worse mpg (albeit the MDX requires premium gas). I guess I should have compared the Explorer Sport to the GC with a Hemi. The Sport will do circles around the hemi. It's more athletic. Chrysler really should figure out how to make their vehicles feel like they are packing what they claim. (I'm not taking to you, SRT!)
Would be interesting to a comparison test between the 2014 Explorer and GC with normally aspirated V6s.. Not sure about the 2014 Explorer but 2012 pushed and had a lot of front end bias like a typical FWD based CUV. Explorer didnt hold its line as well on Interstate exit ramps and just didnt chase apexes as well as the GC on backroads when pushed. GC maybe slow from a standing start but if if look at C&D tests from 50 to70mph its faster.

Explorer, Pilot, RX, and MDX and even the Q5 cant go as far off road as the GC and are all based FWD platforms with a definite FWD driving bias. Dont believe any of them are offered with a low range. BTW GC is not a crossover
and its still true to its SUV roots.

Will be interesting to see what happens with next major redesign of the GC especially with Fiat involved and taking all jeeps R&D money back to Italy.
At least the folks at MB had G wagen. Fiat wouldnt know a SUV from a whole in their head and have no expertise in that area. They will kill the GC if they make it just another CUV.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 11-30-2013, 08:55 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 108
Thanks: 0
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Rep Power: 1286
TonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by Setoutguy View Post
Would be interesting to a comparison test between the 2014 Explorer and GC with normally aspirated V6s.. Not sure about the 2014 Explorer but 2012 pushed and had a lot of front end bias like a typical FWD based CUV. Explorer didnt hold its line as well on Interstate exit ramps and just didnt chase apexes as well as the GC on backroads when pushed. GC maybe slow from a standing start but if if look at C&D tests from 50 to70mph its faster. Explorer, Pilot, RX, and MDX and even the Q5 cant go as far off road as the GC and are all based FWD platforms with a definite FWD driving bias. Dont believe any of them are offered with a low range. BTW GC is not a crossover and its still true to its SUV roots. Will be interesting to see what happens with next major redesign of the GC especially with Fiat involved and taking all jeeps R&D money back to Italy. At least the folks at MB had G wagen. Fiat wouldnt know a SUV from a whole in their head and have no expertise in that area. They will kill the GC if they make it just another CUV.
Ford Explorer is a Taurus underneath. Lol Atleast our JGC shares genes with the current MB ML. Has the typical MB trait of rifle bolt sounding door locks. Love my Jeep.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 11-30-2013, 09:25 AM
Hitchhiking
My Jeep: 2012 3.6L WK2
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 433
Thanks: 0
Thanked 12 Times in 11 Posts
Rep Power: 0
Setoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Thinking of trading up

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyMontana View Post
Ford Explorer is a Taurus underneath. Lol Atleast our JGC shares genes with the current MB ML. Has the typical MB trait of rifle bolt sounding door locks. Love my Jeep.
Problem is what is the next generation of GC going to share DNA with? Do you really want any DNA from Alfa, Fiat, Ferrari or Maserati. Some nice cars there but never known for reliability or durability and Ferraris were never the vehicle to head from London or Bonn to Cannes and Monte Carlo for the Grand Prix and the film festival. A Porsche, AM or Jag is better suited. Ferrari has no experience in SUVs and price a major service on a 458 and tell me why you would want any Ferrari help with engine or drivetrain design.

Other issue is where will Jeep find the R&D dollars since all the cash will be heading back to Italy if Sergio has his way.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 11-30-2013, 10:16 AM
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 313
Thanks: 9
Thanked 38 Times in 27 Posts
Rep Power: 692
Gtaz19 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Setoutguy View Post
No dont have hemi envy. Nothing to envy. Even back in 1970 didnt have Hemi envy. I was into road racing so it was air cooled V12s or an aluminum rat motor in the back of a McLaren Can Am car. Chrysler Hemis never did well at Le Mans or in Can Am. How many other modern engines currently have dual plugs and are not sold by Fiat/Chrysler? Ancient technology. They can use the cast iron block for the HD pick ups like GM does. Dual plugs just arent needed anymore with modern technology. Dont see any dual plug engines in F1 or any premier road racing or off road racing series do you? No need for cast iron block in light duty truck or in car either. All the other manufacturers have gone to an aluminum block for light duty. Is it a new V8 or a turbo V6 to compete with Ford, BMW,Mercedes, and GM? Chrysler should be able to get around 420hp or more easily out of a turbo V6. Fiat/Ferrari can use a tie in with F1 since for 2014 turbo V6s are the engine spec. Maybe Chrysler could then develop the engine for the 24hrs of Daytona and the 12 hours of Sebring like the Ecobust. And the current engine isnt really a hemi now is it?
The turbo V6 engines are nice, and while they put out good HP, they lack towing capabilities. The Hemi V8 still tows more.
__________________
______________________________
2014 Black R/T - 5.7L HEMI V8 AWD
Technology Group, Trailer Tow Group IV, Premium Nappa Leather Group, Second-Row Fold / Tumble Captain Chairs, Power Sunroof, Uconnect(R) 8.4 AN, 20-Inch X 8-Inch Polished / Painted Wheels
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 11-30-2013, 10:24 AM
Member
My Jeep: 2014 3.6L WK2
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Michigan
Posts: 833
Thanks: 5
Thanked 18 Times in 13 Posts
Rep Power: 127158
loveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtaz19 View Post
The turbo V6 engines are nice, and while they put out good HP, they lack towing capabilities. The Hemi V8 still tows more.
While it is useless to argue with him as it is like arguing with a wall I have to disagree with you on that, the Ecoboost will out tow the hemi, it will suck gas while doing it but it will. Now I would still take the hemi as I think it will last longer as it is an iron block and does not rely on turbos to make power. Good for building power on diesels which are built to last and tow, but for an all aluminum application that will last in a passenger car bit towing 10k pounds on a consistent basis? Who knows.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 11-30-2013, 10:32 AM
Member
My Jeep: 2014 3.6L WK2
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Michigan
Posts: 833
Thanks: 5
Thanked 18 Times in 13 Posts
Rep Power: 127158
loveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond reputeloveracing1988 has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by Setoutguy View Post
How many other modern engines currently have dual plugs and are not sold by Fiat/Chrysler? Ancient technology.
I say this every time and you always choose to ignore it, the ford 6.2 has dual plugs, you aren't knocking that motor.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-30-2013, 10:36 AM
Hitchhiking
My Jeep: 2012 3.6L WK2
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 433
Thanks: 0
Thanked 12 Times in 11 Posts
Rep Power: 0
Setoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond reputeSetoutguy has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Thinking of trading up

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtaz19 View Post
The turbo V6 engines are nice, and while they put out good HP, they lack towing capabilities. The Hemi V8 still tows more.
If you are towing then a the turbo diesel is your best choice. Unlike its competitors the Chrysler V8 has not had a major update since the days of the Chrysler commercials and its a hemi. Well it aint. Current 5.3l GM small block has almost the same hp and torque and weighs significantly less. Twin plugs and a cast iron block are not the most modern technology. Even the new 6.4l truck engine is down on hp and tq when compared to Chevy 6.2l

Towing just isnt the engine compare the towing on the Ram 1500 with the V8 to the Ford 150 with Ecoboost.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-30-2013, 10:42 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 108
Thanks: 0
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Rep Power: 1286
TonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond reputeTonyMontana has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by Setoutguy View Post
Problem is what is the next generation of GC going to share DNA with? Do you really want any DNA from Alfa, Fiat, Ferrari or Maserati. Some nice cars there but never known for reliability or durability and Ferraris were never the vehicle to head from London or Bonn to Cannes and Monte Carlo for the Grand Prix and the film festival. A Porsche, AM or Jag is better suited. Ferrari has no experience in SUVs and price a major service on a 458 and tell me why you would want any Ferrari help with engine or drivetrain design. Other issue is where will Jeep find the R&D dollars since all the cash will be heading back to Italy if Sergio has his way.
Agreed. I hope the next JGC is an evolution of the current model and not a ground up redesign. Unless of course Fiat let's Jeep have their way with very little over seas input. The DaimlerBenze era was a turn around product wise for DodgeChryslerJeep. European frames with North American V8s stuffed in them. The architecture was old but way better than anything Chrysler and the gang had at the time. Here's hoping Fiat doesn't screw up a good thing and just endows them with the resources to keep evolving the great products Chrysler has going for them.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Thinking about trading for an 06 SRT... Need Advice 06RC22 Grand Cherokee SRT8 - WK 28 07-08-2012 03:04 PM
Thinking about trading my '00 Cherokee in for a used JK 4-door greenexplr Wrangler-YJ, TJ & JK 5 04-14-2011 12:07 PM
Thinking about trading jp467 Grand Cherokee - WK2 - 4 03-28-2011 10:07 AM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2012 - JeepGarage.Org
The Jeep Grand Cherokee Owners Community