If you want a mainstream, mid-size SUV with genuine off-road chops that’s also comfortable on the road and suitable for a family, you don’t have many options in the North American market. In fact, you have precisely two: the Jeep Grand Cherokee and the Toyota 4Runner. Although both are several years old now and the Toyota has a sturdier reputation for reliability, it’s the Jeep that offers more features as well as the option of a fuel-efficient turbo diesel. Has the Jeep stood the test of time or has time marched on?
If the Grand Cherokee seems dated, the 4Runner is positively antediluvian. It predates the Grand Cherokee by two years, having launched in 2009, and, unlike the Jeep, it uses the same interior as it did ten years ago. The rest of the 4Runner package is also almost entirely the same as ten years ago, down to the 4.0 V6/5-speed automatic powertrain with its mediocre gas mileage. There were some minor tweaks in 2013 but Toyota is clearly coasting on the 4Runner (and their brand’s) reputation for quality, reliability and resale value plus its chunky good looks.
The more elegant WK2 Grand Cherokee launched in 2011 but was treated to a significant refresh for 2014, which included a heavily revised interior and an elegantly restyled front and rear end. In addition, there was a new eight-speed automatic and the arrival of the 3.0 EcoDiesel V6. Since then, there have been further tweaks including the addition of stop-start to V6 models (2016), an optional self-parking system (2017) and Android Auto and Apple CarPlay (2018). Jeep hasn’t left the Grand Cherokee sitting still.
Thanks to a strong advertising campaign and a favorable exchange rate, the Grand Cherokee surged up the sales charts in Australia a few years ago to become the second best-selling SUV in its segment after the 4Runner-related LandCruiser Prado. Unfortunately, a weak Aussie dollar and an embarrassingly long list of recalls softened Grand Cherokee sales. Nevertheless, the idea of a refined platform coupled with genuine off-road ability was enough to put the Grand on my radar for my next car. Though the Pentastar 3.6 V6 is a capable engine in, say, a Chrysler 300, the Grand Cherokee’s hefty 5000-pound curb weight made me skeptical of its ability to get up and go, while the Hemi V8 simply used too much fuel. If I was going to buy a Grand Cherokee, it was going to have to be the EcoDiesel. Time for a Turo test drive.
In Australia, if you want an SUV this size with genuine off-road ability and a spacious cabin, you’re not just limited to Jeep and Toyota. In fact, Toyota offers two similarly-sized SUVs (the LandCruiser Prado and Hilux-derived Fortuner), while Ford, Holden, Isuzu and Mitsubishi all sell pickup-derived SUVs. There are even two Chinese offerings, the LDV D90 and the Haval H9. With the exception of the Chinese vehicles, every other SUV is diesel-only. Therefore, it’s the inverse of the US market – instead of the Jeep having the only diesel-powered truck in its segment, they have the only gasoline-powered one.
The Grand Cherokee isn’t simply a wagon body on a ladder-frame chassis like a Ford Everest or Holden TrailBlazer. Instead, it employs unibody construction with four-wheel independent suspension. Its platform was co-developed with Mercedes-Benz during the DaimlerChrysler days and was shared with the third-generation Mercedes-Benz ML/GLE.
The Grand Cherokee lineup is dizzying in its scale, presently comprising Laredo, Limited, Trailhawk, Overland and Summit, plus the high-performance SRT and Trackhawk. There are three different 4WD systems available: a full-time system in the Laredo (Quadra-Trac I), one with a two-speed transfer case and low-range gearing (Quadra-Trac II), and one with an electronic rear limited-slip differential (Quadra-Drive II). There’s also an adaptive air suspension available, called Quadra-Lift. And if you don’t have any desire to go off-road, rear-wheel-drive is standard on all Grand Cherokees bar the SRT, Trackhawk and Trailhawk. The Limited comes standard with Quadra-Trac II, as in my tester, but is also available with Quadra-Drive II and Quadra-Lift.
That huge scope is a reason the Grand Cherokee is a consistent Top 20 seller in the US and was the 3rd best-selling mid-size crossover in 2018. All that’s missing is a third row of seating as in the gold and silver winners, the Toyota Highlander and Ford Explorer (though neither have anything as wild as the Jeep’s high-performance variants). The Limited is the bread-and-butter Grand Cherokee and the cheapest way to get into the EcoDiesel and V8 and the more sophisticated 4WD systems. In addition to the Laredo’s rear parking sensors, keyless ignition and entry and dual-zone climate control, it adds remote start, bigger (18-inch) wheels, a power liftgate, heated seats front and rear (power-adjustable up front) plus a heated steering wheel. Unsurprisingly, there’s also a glut of available option packages.
My tester had the Luxury Group II package which added a dual-pane panoramic sunroof, rain-sensing wipers, automatic headlights and cooled front seats, among other niceties.
Living in Australia where pickups are almost universally diesel and a great many SUVs are too, I’m used to hearing the cacophonous, unpleasant clatter of idling diesel engines. Though the Grand Cherokee is unmistakably a diesel at idle, it doesn’t sound too bad on the move. On the highway it shines, being exceptionally quiet until you have to overtake. Then, there’s a delightful bent-six growl, albeit one that’s appropriately hushed.
The EcoDiesel accelerates with authority though it never feels fast. Most testers have recorded a 0-60 time of between 7.5 and 8.5 seconds, lineball with the Pentastar V6. Where the engines differ is in power and torque. The Pentastar produces 295 hp at 6400 rpm and 260 ft-lbs at 4800 rpm, while the VM Motori-sourced diesel produces 240 hp at 3600 rpm and a stout 420 ft-lbs at a low 2000 rpm. That’s actually 30 more pound-feet of torque than the 5.7 Hemi V8. The EcoDiesel is also, of course, much more fuel efficient than the Pentastar – the EPA rates it at 21/28 mpg (24 combined), while the Pentastar is rated at 18/25 mpg (21 combined). Those who tow may also prefer the diesel as its 7400-pound maximum towing capacity matches the Hemi and surpasses the Pentastar’s 6200-pound rating.
The Grand Cherokee’s handling is sure-footed and predictable. The steering is light and lacking in feel but it makes the Jeep easier to manoeuvre and park in the city. The ride in the steel-sprung Limited is somewhat firm if comfortable, although there’s some suspension travel over bumps that reminds you this is a truck designed to blaze both pavement and trails. In all, the Grand Cherokee feels substantial on the road in the sense that it feels both heavy and planted. It might feel marginally more truck-like than some car-based crossovers but that’s understandable given its ability. I’d be curious, however, to see how Quadra-Lift-equipped Grands differ from the Quadra-Trac models.
Though the Grand Cherokee has a classier interior design than the 4Runner, it’s not without its flaws. The use of hard plastics on the lower half of the dashboard and doors is forgivable but the “wood” trim is unattractive and patently fake and one section of it was slowly detaching itself from the dash. The interior brightwork is tinged a pale gold which, again, looks somewhat strange. It at least helps brighten up the otherwise funereal black interior. In comparison, Grand Cherokees with the two-tone beige and gray interior are vastly more inviting and upscale in appearance. Upper-spec Grands like the Overland and Summit also have leather-wrapped dashes which improve the ambience somewhat. The overall design of the Grand Cherokee’s dashboard, however, is clean and elegant.
The classy 7-inch digital gauge cluster
Unfortunately, all Grand Cherokees are saddled with a foot-operated parking brake. In a truck with premium aspirations, the absence of an electronic parking brake is disappointing. Fortunately, the infamous electronically-controlled shifter – the one blamed for the tragic passing of actor Anton Yelchin – was consigned to the dustbin in 2017.
There are some other dings to be made against the Grand’s interior. The base of the front seats is a little short though they remained supportive over long distances. The switchgear and paddle shifters were appropriately tactile but the turn signal stalk felt brittle and cheap. Though voice command functions are heralded as an easy, intuitive way to access functions without operating the touch screen in motion, they were unreliable in the Jeep. The Grand Cherokee is also strictly a five-seater, while the 4Runner comes with an optional third row. While many third rows in this segment are strictly for kids, like the Toyota’s, Jeep’s laggardness in offering a three-row version of the Grand is puzzling; the last three-row Jeep, the Commander, was discontinued almost a decade ago.
There were plenty of positives, however. FCA’s uConnect has been further improved over the years but even in this 2016 model it was easily navigable and worked well after some initial Bluetooth teething troubles; my tester came with the larger 8.4-inch touch screen, an option on the Limited and standard on trim levels above. The blind-spot monitor had both a visual and audible warning and it worked well instead of aggravating with incessant beeping. The cooled front seats made me feel as though my butt had been injected with alien DNA and I had begun to metamorphose into a cold-blooded reptile. Finally, the most upscale touch were mirrors that tilted down when the truck was shifted into reverse.
For someone who wants the ability to very occasionally tackle some trails but who also wants a refined on-road experience – so, somebody like me – the Grand Cherokee is an excellent compromise. It’s spacious, comfortable and pleasant to drive and there’s a Grand Cherokee for almost every buyer and budget. Though it’s showing its age in some respects, Jeep has done a highly respectable job of keeping it fresh. Nevertheless, there are still some question marks over the Grand Cherokee’s reliability. That’s enough to keep the Toyota 4Runner a more desirable option for many even if it’s a less impressive truck. And for those buyers who don’t care about off-road ability, the mid-size crossover segment is also brimming with excellent choices.
As for me? My extended test drive did nothing to take the Grand Cherokee off of my shortlist.
Photographed in around Tacoma, WA in June 2019.
Related Reading:
Personally, I think it’s a crying shame that more isn’t done to promote LPG in Aus these days.
Jeep always had a turbodiesel option, this isnt a new idea ever since the revamped Cherokee landed a TDI was optional its probably the same diesel used in the 300 sedan which on road equaled the V8 for performance but like all diesels you dont have to rev the snot out of it to make it go like a gas engine.
Throughout the years, Jeeps have been offered with Renault, Volkswagen, Mercedes-Benz, VM Motori and FPT (Fiat) diesels. These days only VM (fully owned by FCA) and FPT.
Fun fact: the 3.0 V6 VM Motori can also be found under the hood of Maseratis, although with more power than in the Jeep GC.
Handsome truck. Much much much much much much much better looking than that Toyota with the Alice Cooper makeup on. But its FCA so I would need a warranty. Forever. Good review.
Despite the passing of years – or perhaps, in light of the wrinkled and angry excressence of styling since, BECAUSE of it – the Grand Cherokee still looks true to name. It is really handsome, in and out. I have ridden in one: it was unremarkably decent.
Yet here’s a bit of your classic internet-sourced unsolicited counsel for you, William.
Go to a boatyard, buy three bargepoles, and tie them end-to-end. Use this distance as the measure the measure between yourself and the purchase of one of these, being careful to make sure you do not actually touch it.
Or, don’t. Hell, it’s only had 21 govt-mandated recalls since the design came out here. It’s only got the worst resale of any SUV (barring perhaps the new Chinese brands). Sure, you might be able to get one with some warranty, which is reassuring except that it will only mean you spend a lot of time without the car you actually purchased. And on the existing experience, the problems – and there WILL be problems – won’t be able to be solved by the dealers anyway. Hell, you MIGHT find a yard willing to trade it when your frustration boils over, but know that there a substantial number of dealers who simply will not take it, mainly because they can’t get rid of it through the trade themselves. And sure, modern emissioned super-diesels can give expensive trouble even from respected makers like Toyota, but I’m sure an Italian job sold in (relatively) tiny numbers here will be a cinch to diagnose and get fixed.
The ideal compromise? I’m afraid the Old Grand C represents only the ideal of what NOT to do, and all it will compromise is your wealth and sanity.
The recall record is indisputable and FCA’s reputation for reliability is decidedly worse than Toyota’s but I tell myself surely the Grand Cherokee isn’t a reliability nightmare on the level of a Chevrolet Citation. I know plenty of people with Jeeps who have had no problem with them. But then I think, “Oh no, but what if the air suspension failed? Or the panoramic roof? Or the power seats? Or…”
Perhaps that’s why my current next car shortlist (this is still a couple of years away but hey, I’m a planner) includes three other cars and they’re all Japanese. Also, incidentally, none of them are off-roaders. Sorry, but a LandCruiser Prado doesn’t interest me. A good truck but I don’t like off-roading that much.
These are attractive vehicles, no doubt. As for the 3rd row issue, they do make one – it’s called the Dodge Durango. I don’t know if they share much in the way of features and trim, but the basic platform is the same. The problem with this approach is that for three rows you have to buy something that says “Dodge” on it instead of “Jeep”.
If only FCA were capable of the kind of reliability that Toyota has become known for. They (and other US manufacturers) have routinely offered vehicles with more style and appeal. If they had the baked-in durability they would be ruling the world right now.
And on the parking brake thing – yes, I know I’m a luddite who almost always prefers a mechanical solution to an electrical one. I have owned a lot of old cars and the manual cable/pedal or handle parking brake has never failed. Not once. I wonder if owners of all of these electrically actuated parking brakes will be able to say this in ten or twenty years.
Yes, the current Durango is the 3-row partner built on the same platform. But, the Durango is geared more towards on-road and doesn’t have the same off road chops that the GC does. While the GC has several different 4 wheel drive systems available, the Durango is listed as All Wheel Drive by Dodge.
I don’t know much about Australia or Australians except for what I read/see online. It never fails to impress me how wealthy a country it must be, for all the Australians I know of seem to have scads of money for world travel. It always impresses me.
Haha! No, not really, though over the last 20 years, the place has risen almost to US-levels of GDP per capita. Aussies tend to know how to travel very light when young (camping, backpackers, etc), and so do it very cheaply. And a large older, retired cohort has money to do it more salubriously partly because of a massive compulsory-contribution pension scheme here.
Also, younger Aussies of travelling age (like Will here) are not burdened by huge university debts: uni is half-subsidised and the rest is paid progressively through one’s taxation as one’s income rises over time (without interest). That frees up a lot of young spending. Four weeks annual leave is also compulsory, which helps.
Some 75% of Aussies have a passport (vs just 36% of Americans: the population, at 25million, is small but relatively uniform (even if spread over an area getting on for the size of the US), which raises the bug to meet other peoples: and it is a young, immigrant country, so the urge to see what’s out there is strong.
Which is how we seem to be everywhere, even though there really aren’t enough of us for that to be actually true!
Justy is absolutely spot-on here. And when you’re an island in the middle of the ocean, you’re much more willing to go overseas because, well, you have to go over seas to get anywhere!
Why buy an SUV that will leave you stranded in the woods if you get a drop of water on it? It’s the Toyota all the way. Why would anyone still buy a Fiat after all these years of their lack of…well, anything good. It’s just silly. Yeah, buy ‘Murrucun. Buy a tow truck, too. But not a Fiat Ram.
Fiat Ram? What model is that?
You never heard of the Fiat Ram? 😉
Maybe he meant the Fiat Strada/Ram 700 compact pickup.
So there really is a Fiat Ram. Neat.
There’s a lot of hate here for the Jeep. Likely some of it warranted due to bad experiences by some or more but can’t the same be said for most (all?) of the Germans, the rest of the Italians, the Brits, and depending which soapbox one uses, the Ford and GM products as well? They really do all suck in their own ways if one is completely objective about such things.
I don’t disagree that by the law of averages the Toyota in this case likely will be the superior product when it comes to reliability and durability as well as (if ever intended to be) resale, HOWEVER that’s not what drives passion in an automotive purchase. Style and in some cases interesting engineering does.
Sometimes it’s not about what will cost the least in the long run. Otherwise nobody would ever go out to eat at a restaurant (easier/cheaper to make PB+J at home), or travel anywhere in the world (set up a tent in the backyard and read the guidebook about your own hometown), or buy a new pair of shoes (just wear the wellies all the time, they last forever.)
I think this is one of those things that some change their views on as they age and experience. Very few of us bought a Toyota (or Honda, or Nissan or whatever) from day one. Most/many of us tried some different things and somehow perhaps were disappointed and then one day made a switch and some of us never went back (and some did but now with Eyes Wide Open).
The Grand Cherokee is a popular vehicle, I’ve not experienced that particular engine in that Jeep before but powerwise it’s similar to the Touareg TDI I had which performed well, especially in highway situations. That Jeep also seems to not tire visually, the exterior styling has held up extremely well and the interior, while not looking increasingly “conservative”, has stayed that way for good reason, it works. I did, however, drive one with the PentaStar V6 and found it perfectly adequate – not a speed demon but certainly no slug either. It’s likely fine for 90% of the buyers.
In the end you’ve got to be happy with what you drive, life’s too short to have it just bore you to death or disdain it. Sometimes fuel economy is what excites some, low maintenance and flawless reliability others, and for some (or anyone who buys most cars, no matter the manufacturer), simply interesting or personally attractive styling as well as proven capability be it speed, comfort, or some sort of specialized ability. I’m glad William finally got to try one of these and seems to be impressed by it. I doubt they are all bad and the trick is to figure out how to get a good one and then take care of it and its needs, at least while it is still a mutually beneficial relationship.
All true, but the unknowns are known here, at least for Oz. There’s a reason sales went from a respectable 30,000 (in a 1.1 mill market) to 8000 between ’14 and ’18. People like Jeep, hell, I do too, but there’s another type of boredom in life (and screaming frustration) when an expensive purchase is dysfunctional. Added to which the Cherokee is just not special enough to endure such, er, character flaws.
I doubt Will’s a rich guy, and though my ramblings above are partly dressed in absurdity, the advice not to fall for this particular temptation is heartfelt!
I used to study Consumer Reports and pretty much any publication I could get my hands on, which inevitably led me to Honda and Toyota, including a 4Runner.
They were not bad experiences, but they were certainly not as perfect as I had been led to believe and boy were they dull.
Now I am back to buying what I like, which has brought me back to domestics. Have not regretted it yet.
If I wanted to keep a vehicle for 15+ years I guess I would look at Toyota again, but that’s not my thing. Performance, safety, and convenience advance too fast for me to be happy with anything that long.
Just curious, what’s with the Australian obsession with parking brakes? Every time I read a review on an Australian car website they always seem to work in a mention about parking brakes and how much they hate the foot-operated ones. It’s not like they get a lot of use in an automatic car anyway, unless you live on a hill.
I believe that the US is the outlier here in that most areas don’t teach proper use of the device in the first place and as a result most/many people don’t use them. The rest of the world usually does from what I can tell. In some countries an insurance payout is predicated and adjusted for “personal responsibility”, i.e. if the insurer realizes that your car rolled away and caused damage due to not using the parking brake, the insured is on the hook for the damage.
So, in places that actually use them, usability, convenience, and functionality is a parameter than can be used during purchase consideration.
There’s been enough well publicized issues of cars in the US rolling away of their own accord not just recently but in decades past that it astounds me that people don’t use them every single time the car is turned off.
I’m not Australian, but I always use the parking brake, whether on hills or on flat terrain. When the vehicle is stopped, and I do not want it to move, I apply the parking brake.
Why? I feel it is better to do it and not need it, than to not do it and wish I had done it.
My long history of driving manual shift cars may be one reason for this habit (I also leave MTs in gear). Another reason may be my father’s advice, and a third reason may be that when parking with automatic transmissions on hills, I first apply the parking brake, let the vehicle settle onto that brake, and then put it in Park. That sequence prevents the vehicle from resting its weight on the transmission’s Park pawl which can make it hard to get the shift lever out of Park when I want to leave.
Of course, YMMV.
RL Plaut, my mileage varies not a word from yours, fatherly advice and all. As to the rationality of it all, others can debate.
I’ll second that, same exact thing here. I did have one go bad once, on my Buick LeSabre T-Type – foot operated but the release handle disconnected itself from the steel wire when it was time to leave. I had to lame-puppy it to my mechanic, didn’t even think about attaching pliers at the time, duh.
Handbrakes turns, mate!
Once upon a time, the footbrake-style was seen only but only on US cars here. Aussies also bought manuals for a lot longer than in the US – it was compulsory to get your licence in one – in which such an arrangement requires three feet for smooth operation. Although the British did do nuclear testing here, I have never seen any local humans so equipped. Thus, it became that the “normal” parking brake was the handbrake, as indeed the parking brake is still always called here.
Even by current times, the appearance of the foot-operated park brake looks a bit odd to sunburnt eyes. But when writers, like here, complain of it being there, it’s now because it seems an anachronism in these days of electric ones, especially if the thing is a bit upmarket like the Cherokee. Mind you, I’m with JP above – an electric job is just another uneccessary thing to go bung.
And as for “need”, well, in 70% of this place, you don’t need brakes, let alone emergency ones. There’s no-one and nothing to hit.
Except he is not complaining that it isn’t a hand brake, he is complaining that it isn’t electronic, ie a push button.
Handbrake turns, you obviously dont drive a Citroen, the handbrake acts upon the front drive wheels, trust me it is not an E brake though I’d love to see someone try it just not in my car, Old truck driver habit gearbox in neutral parking brakes on everytime you park, two reasons if air pressure drops you have no clutch to get 45 tonnes resting on the gears into neutral to restart it and brake on so its still there when you return.
I hate the footbrake in my ’15 Grand Cherokee Overland. But I wouldn’t want a handbrake. I think this car should have an electronic parking brake.
My previous two cars (’16 Cruze, ’14 MKS) had foot-operated parking brakes. They are mostly an American thing, although I’ve seen them on Mercedes-Benz products.
As for Chrysler, newer stuff like the Ram 1500, 200, and Cherokee have power parking brakes. The only reason the Grand Cherokee doesn’t is that it’s old. But they could have retrofitted one when they did the refresh in 2014.
I think foot-operated parking brakes feel weird and they take up valuable space in the footwell. They just seem archaic to me.
IIRC, even some Lexus models have one. But yes, it does tend to be more common in vehicles targeted at (or built in) the US.
I live in British Columbia, where there are basically two directions: up and down. I always use the hand/foot parking brake. This is doubly important in VVT cars as they have so little engine braking.
The 300 I had last week had a foot operated parking brake and it was grim.
Here in Poland, those are seen as luxury cars, not ordinary family ones.
Though the Grand Cherokee’s top-share-of-market and top-prestige moment, the mid-2000s, has passed. People have turned away from their “mini-Hummer badass dudebro” image that used to be in demand, and large crossover buyers now prefer German and Swedish stuff, especially the XC60 and X5.
It’s still rather luxurious, but slightly less so, and not always in the way buyers want.
Maybe it wouldn’t feel that way in a Grand Cherokee, but the Pentastar feels pretty darn smart in a 5,000 pound Promaster!
My wife has a 2016 GC as our family car and it’s been a great vehicle (only 25k miles so far and yes, we have got the extended warranty). Only seen the dealer for oil changes and a software Re-flash. The many people I know with FCA products have had great experiences, so I think the build quality is better than the rumor would have it. Certainly better than my colleague’s BMW X5!
Fear of damaging the nice 20” Overland wheels has stopped us doing any serious off roading, but it is great in the snow and very pleasant on long road trips. Incidentally, one can alter the weight of the steering in one of the screen menus.. I still love the styling of this model – great proportions and not overdone like so many newer designs – it’s handsome and exudes “Jeep”.
BTW, in the USA the resale value of these is near top of the class and the Wrangler beats almost every other car or truck in this metric…..The Jeep brand keeps getting stronger here……
I must be the only person who hates it when the mirrors tilt down while reversing. I guess it comes in handy for parallel parking, but when backing up in general I find it so annoying. Thank you for the writeup on this Jeep and when it comes to parking brakes I still prefer the pedal.
An appealing vehicle on paper, and probably to drive as well, but I wouldn’t say it’s “better” than the US market 4Runner, even setting aside reliability and resale. The 4Runner is based on the Land Cruiser Prado, not the Tacoma (or Hilux) and is a decent offroad vehicle with a stellar reputation for ruggedness, a simple part time 4wd system and some good offroad option packages, though nothing as sophisticated as Jeep’s offerings. For what it’s worth, in the western US at least, the most popular vehicle seen in remote off-pavement areas, where a breakdown could be life threatening, is the Jeep Wrangler; but 4Runners are far more prevalent out in the backcountry than GC’s.
So setting aside reliability and resale, how is the 4Runner better?
1. It has only the one powertrain.
2. That powertrain is much less fuel-efficient than the GC V6 and diesel.
3. It has fewer features including fewer off-road options.
4. It’s not as good to drive on-road.
5. Its interior is more dated.
In its defence, besides the aforementioned reliability and resale, it has an available third-row. And… I can’t think what else.
This isn’t to knock the 4Runner (though Toyota could’ve done a much better job keeping it fresh). But if the Jeep had Toyota’s level of reliability and build quality, there would be no question the Jeep was the smarter choice. Not to mention, upper levels of the Grand Cherokee can be credibly shopped against some premium offerings, especially in markets like Europe where the Jeep brand has even more cachet. Is anyone doing the same with a 4Runner?
Mind you, Lexus has a rugged off-roader to appeal to buyers that want a more premium 4Runner. But it’s also very much behind the times too with a single, inefficient powertrain relative to rivals and an interior that, while well screwed-together, is looking very dated.
The inefficient powertrain aspect is fairly irrelevant to buyers in the US due to low gas prices, proven by increasing sales as the vehicle gets older without updates. In other countries that is obviously different.
For off-roading in remote areas (or just driving in remote areas) simple equals reliable and low operator stress.
The 4Runner in the US has brand cachet among those using it as designed and a sort of upper crust cachet as being capable and a good choice for what it can do. Just like a simple Wrangler but nobody says a Wrangler is a luxury vehicle or a great on-road vehicle, objectively speaking. Here in CO there are LOADS of upper middle class women cruising around in 4Runners who wouldn’t dream of getting them dirty and yes, they can mostly easily afford more expensive machinery, the 4Runner is becoming a suburban status symbol (or is that what is known as anti-status?). The Jeep GC is not necessarily viewed as a step up, or certainly not as something to aspire to after a 4Runner.
The third row in the 4Runner is fairly useless, not much of a plus point that sways many in my opinion as it also takes away cargo capacity (when folded the cargo floor sits much higher).
Off-road options – the GC does have more options available but for most people this side of the Camel Trophy the simplest most efficient system is just fine. Get 4WD intead of RWD and maybe better tires to start. All the extra “tech” just can cause more issues. Not really worthwhile until one has really exhausted the capability of the basic package. Most TRD Pro 4Runner owners won’t use the extra capability (and a stock TRD Pro 4Runner is likely WAY more capable off road than any stock GC.)
That being said, if someone does not like the 4Runner for whatever reason I would never recommend they buy one. Don’t buy what you don’t like. But also be careful of how you talk yourself into one vehicle over the other and at the end of the day be sure that the reasons actually apply to you specifically.
I think others have answered this better than I can, but to me (obviously in the minority 😀) an SUV is primarily about function and durability, and the Toyota wins there. I do think the Jeep is probably “better” (ie more desirable to me) than a modern Range Rover, Discovery or just about any high-end crossover like Cayenne, X5 etc. But both are excellent vehicles, just different.
“More offroad options”
Please explain. You talking about the Quadralift air suspension? That’s a liability more than anything else on a trail. And in its raised position to get to stock 4Runner ground clearance levels, leaves you banging/clanging uncomfortably at the top of the strut travel with very little suspension compliance. You can’t leave it up in that position and drive very far or at any real rate of speed. A GC might show off some impressive ability on a curated course, but to actually trust something to get you out into the wilderness and then BACK, the 4Runner is the very easy choice.
Other notable factors in favor of the Toyota: much larger cargo area, and for people that have dogs, the rolldown rear window is awesome.
So for on-road use with less cargo carrying duty, the GC is indeed a nicer driving vehicle and a great choice IMO, reflected in their popularity in my yuppie neighborhood. For a longer term ownership window, with actual offroad use in mind, the 4Runner walks away with it IMO.
Seeing this reminded me of the USS Hornet. Apparently Jeep is doing some kind of promotion called driving across America or something like that. Seems they are starting on the West Coast, or ending on the West Coast, by setting up an obstacle course on the flight deck of the aircraft carrier. Yes, you heard me and the obstacles are planes and helicopters.
Seems there will be professional race drivers brought in to drive the vehicles at a slow speed. Hopefully no one goes over the side. Also hopefully there is a huge indemnity policy for any damage. I have heard that the fee for this is in the six figures to the museum. Also heard it is vintage and new this coming July 26-28. I will be down there on July 27th as usual. Aircraft was being placed today ahead of time since July 20th is the big Apollo 11 50th Anniversary on board the ship.
Usually an obstacle course for 4wd vehicles means they have to drive OVER said obstacles. I’ll just assume not in this case.
Why y’all talking about the Grand Cherokee’s resale value like it’s an ’88 Cimarron? Part of the reason Jeeps lease so well is the favorable rate of deprecation.
Anecdotally, regarding long term reliability, the Jeep ZJ has attained cockroach of the road status here in Rustopia. All the second gen 4Runners morphed into swiss cheese, long ago.
Because unless a lot is negotiated a lot off of MSRP, it *is* like an ’88 Cimarron compared to the 4Runner.
The ZJ was more than 20 years ago. The models that followed don’t have it’s reputation for durability while the Toyota never lost it. We don’t all live in Rustopia.
I don’t live in Rustopia (I’m in coastal California) and while ZJ GC’s are indeed rolling cockroaches here too, some 1st and 2nd, many 3rd and 4th and plenty of 5th gen T4R’s are seen in parks, trailheads, surf spots, and remote dirt roads. In particular, it’s not uncommon to see 3d gen’s, last sold in 2002, that look about as clean and straight as when they rolled out of the dealership. Not so true for Jeep WJ’s, even less so for WK’s.
Good review, William, I always like your perspective. I had to make this choice myself and the Jeep didn’t win. Granted, I’m an outlier in my use case because I plan on keeping the vehicle beyond a decade and use it in places for which the recall history and additional complexity/failure points on the GC are far more decisive than it’s nicer infotainment and squishy dashboard materials. I’m weird, but I’ve found that the relative inefficiency and slight crudeness of the Toyota 4.0 is far preferable to wondering what the first expensive maintenance item will be on a hyper-complex turbo diesel with a $4500 upcharge here in the states. That engine makes little sense here unless you need the towing capability and are willing to pay for it. The Pentastar worries me far less, but then the rest of the vehicle comes into play—in addition to reliability the depreciation is steeper, the cargo area is small for the size (probably why no 3rd row), and the 4R feels airier from the lower beltline and more upright windshield. If I planned on rolling from lease to lease, I’d have tried the Jeep, approaching it like I would a VW: nicer driving experience and “wow factor” at the risk of longevity. For buying and keeping with my intended use, a larger gulf between two competing vehicles would be hard to find in today’s market.
FWIW, those who want the 4Runner to handle nearly as well as the Jeep, $700 will buy parts and installation of Bilstein 5100 shocks that greatly narrow the gap.
95K miles on my 2014 GC and all i have done to it is oil changes, air filters, PCV change and a set of tire. Best vehicle I have ever owned.
A couple of years ago my husband and I were shopping for a new to us vehicle, and the Grand Cherokee and Ram EcoDiesels were on our list. We ended up with a Certified PreOwned Ram 1500 EcoDiesel, which I have written about on this site as part of my COAL series.
If you were considering a GC, I would recommend it. I would recommend my Ram. Both of them, with any engine other than the EcoDiesel. Of the GCs that I’ve driven, as well as my Ram, I’ve loved them. I’ve loved the interiors, the way that they look, the materials used inside, features, electronics, all great. Never have had any issues with them. I take that back, the cruise control On/Off button intermittently worked, and it was replaced under warranty.
But it’s when the engine has a problem it is almost always a serious problem. In two years, the Ram was on a flat bed 5 times. Once it had to be towed almost 300 miles to the nearest dealership. It left us stranded almost int he middle of nowhere because of a cracked high pressure fuel line. As soon as throws an engine code, the engine goes into limp mode. I’ve driven it to the dealer twice in limp mode, and 3 of the times it was on a flat bed was for a limp mode (I got tired of driving to the dealer at 30 mph).
A year into ownership, it went into service for a Turbo Underboost error. This was the third time for that error. Replaced a cracked air inlet pipe. Three days later, back in for the same error. After a week of running tests with nothing coming up failed, and not replacing anything, they wanted to apply a new emissions calibration to the computer. Which required approval from CARB… which left my truck in the shop for 6+ months. WhenI finally got it back, I had it for two weeks until another Turbo Underboost, this time caused by a fouled sensor. One month later, the second cracked high pressure fuel line sidelined it and put it on the flatbed for the last time (pic attached).
We just finished with the buy-back from FCA.
I would by another FCA product again (really looking at the Gladiator to replace the Ram). My family and I have had a lot of great luck and cars with Dodge / Ram / FCA / DaimlerChrysler. But that VM Motori Diesel engine… Nope!Nope!Nope!