The Jeep Liberty and the Jeep Cherokee
unklemunky wrote that the Liberty is not worthy of the Jeep name and heritage:
DC is saying they took the Jeepster concept and the Dakar concept and combined them to produce the Liberty.
The Dakar (essentially a 4 door Wrangler), was a pretty decent looking rig and WOULD have been a vehicle that filled a hole that there wasn't a Jeep available in right now. Same with the Jeepster....a "fun roadster", but not heavy-duty serious type vehicle...would have appealed to the "cutesy", but not serious crowd more!
What they have done is damaged the Jeep name with this KJ (Liberty) model. Yes, it might ride a little smoother (IFS), and it might have some other minor appointments compared to past Jeep models, but that's where the "pluses" end!
Basically...it is larger on the outside, SMALLER on the inside than a comparable current Cherokee! LESS "utility" in otherwords! Nearly 500 lbs HEAVIER all around compared to comparable Cherokee models, and barely better rated engines....which see "peaks" in VERY high RPMs, that are going to be seen at highway speeds or other type driving...where 4wd is NOT as vital! Jeeps have LONG been "low end power" vehicles...for a REASON....they were meant to be TOUGH, not just "fast"! They HAD to have low end power or they wouldn't have been serious work vehicles! Now, they're just a posh All Wheel Drive vehicle!
"Liberty" is a good name itself....BUT, the Liberty is NOT worthy of the Jeep badge! When you compare it to the other SUVs on the market....cargo capacity, mpg, engine ratings, size, even styling now....it's "average"...some better, some worse....in all respects! Depends on what you prefer, but it's NOT a leader. AND, it's NOT "true" to the Jeep name! Let me explain more!
There are two VERY important things to differentiate between here that often get muddled, and have been TOTALLY misinterpreted (particularly by Chrysler and DC!). The first is Tradition. The second is Heritage. We hear a LOT about "Jeep Heritage" but most of it is so off based, it's pitiful!
The Wrangler, is NOT as true to the "Heritage" as many would think....it IS very true to the "Jeep Tradition" though...more so than any other Jeep vehicle! See....when "Jeep" became a name, and began to mean something to the public, it was as a WORK vehicle. It wasn't a toy, not meant just for trail bopping...it was a serious work vehicle....work first, play later! It's all backwards now....99% of all 4wd talk seems to be play (or onroad security) and not work...especially in respect to Wranglers! I'd make a bet that if you asked Wrangler owners what percentange of their usage of their vehicle is for work (and I don't mean just getting TO/FROM work, unless there is no other way!), you'd see a VERY small percentange!
That is totally different than in the 1940s. When CJs were first pushed to the public after WWII, one of their big aims was farmers....you could get a PTO and equipment to go with your CJ2A....my grandfather had one for that reason. Unfortunately, they weren't as practical as a real tractor in many cases, but they did find a market for people who wanted a vehicle that could go/do what others couldn't! Then came the Willys wagons and pickups....again, extending the service to their owners principle! Pickups for more serious, harder work (and almost no play probably!), and the wagons to business men, sportsmen, even families for a more capable family "truckster" if you wish.
From the late 40s until '92 when the Comanche disappeared, Jeep had a pickup in the lineup. Now...bear in mind that pickups are usually the work side of a line....minus a pickup, you lose a LOT of seriousness in a vehicle, not to mention toughness in future designs lacking full truck integration in the line!
Jeep continued to add service and work vehicles to their lineup. Forward Control pickups in the late 50s, the J-series(Gladiator/Wagoneer) lineup in early 60s, and overlapping most lines. They also had a "FleetVan" (milk truck type) in the early 1960s. Around 1964 or 1965, you had NO LESS than 3 DIFFERENT pickup lines to choose from, a Fleetvan (2wd), a couple CJ models, a DJ model (mail Jeep), a few wagon forms, and it was incredible.
What do you have now...3 vehicles...period! The "original" Cherokee came out in '74 as a more sporty 2 door version of the Wagoneer(though a 2 door wagoneer, including panel version, WERE available in the 60s previously). The Cherokee took over where the Commando failed to yield much response....competition to the Scout, Broncos, and Blazers.
In 1984, the Cherokee and Wagoneer were downsized into the XJ models (though the large wagon continued as Grand Wagoneer until '91!). These models continued something that had LONG been another VERY important aspect of "Jeep Heritage"...."maximum vehicle in minimal space." Jeeps had NEVER been "bloated junk"....they were tight vehicles, most of them designed as 4wd vehicles from the ground up! It may have had some to do with Jeep always being an independent, but Jeeps were "smaller" overall, but STILL had a FULL size capability (in their class!). Including the full size pickups(which I am quite familiar with!).
The FC models, the Wagoneer, the Willy's pickups, and obviously the CJ models, even the XJ Cherokees, continued the "most vehicle in less space" heritage. You got MORE vehicle and less bloat! In a '70s ad for the pickups, you saw they had HIGHER ground clearance underneath than comparable full size GM/Ford/Dodge trucks! Interestingly, load height (tailgate height) was still LOWER, and overall height, width, AND length were less, yet still seated 3 in the cab (bench seats), AND...the longbeds....full load for plywood in the back(I know!). "Shortbeds" were actually longer than GM/Ford/Dodge at 7 feet long (again, I have had one!). Even with a 7 foot bed on a shortbed, Jeeps were shorter than 6-6.5 foot beds on GM/Fords/Dodges! You had a more maneuverable, accessible, and economical (Jeeps often cost less than the big guys!) vehicle that was STILL capable of a FULL work load. A "serious" truck with no compromises!
On the IFSJA forums recently someone also found a review from a 4wd magazine '75 of the big name vehicles, and Jeep came in with the best mpg ratings on average....across ALL their reviews! Jeep "Heritage" is about giving you one heck of a LOT of vehicle in a small space, and a vehicle that is tough as nails and can get you in/out of places that others leave you stranded! It is ALSO about serving its owners for their lives and work! Not just getting to/from work on roads that a Geo Metro can travel just as well....nor how comfy it is to go get groceries....that is no place to discuss "attributes" of a Jeep....it could care less!
Jeep "Tradition" has more to do with the SWB (short wheel base) Jeeps...the ones viewed as the "traditional" type Jeep.....small and aggressive.....capable of getting you to the near ends of the earth, but also capable of basic travel(but little cargo room!). Unfortunately, the CJ/Wrangler have all but lost their "work" ethic and have become "toys" for the most part. Being there had been "other" Jeep vehicles to fill the more serious work lines (pickups, wagons, etc.) that was not the worst loss, but still, Jeep "Heritage" is more about a "work ethic" and NOT a cutesy theme jingle of "go anywhere, do anything".....if they can't work seriously, forget the "do anything" bit.
Jeep "Heritage"(and tradition to a good extent") has more to do with the "do anything".....which is all but lost with LESS space and bigger, less maneuverable vehicles like the Liberty! When it comes to tradition, it's "what's traditionally considered a Jeep"....short wheel base (CJ/Wrangler), and even most of the other Jeeps carry a small stance, but a serious ability.
When the XJ Cherokees came out as '84 models, they were sporting a length of about 10" LESS than a K-car! Yes, nearly a foot SHORTER than a K-car! And, K-cars were no monsters themselves! Yet, in that small space, Jeep packed in a fully capable (albeit smaller than previous Jeep wagons) little truck! Seating for up to 5 (4 was more realistic), and a pretty decent cargo area (for a vehicle that size!). "Decent" 4wd units, and ones, that due to their small size, 4 doors, and very capable AMC engines, caught on quickly! The competition didn't step up to 4 doors until '91! Likewise, when they did, they were notably longer than a 4 door Cherokee!
When they came out in '83, the XJ models were rated 71.2 cu feet cargo capacity(rear seat down). In '87, they changed to 71.8...ironically, this coincided with the firewall adaptation to make room for the inline 6(4.0L) engine...theoretically cutting into interior space, but AMC did it well and got MORE room for cargo inside!!
In the '90s, this dropped to 69.0 cu feet(probably due to interior comfort features!), and for some odd excuse it was this until 2001, when it's interestingly rated 66.0 cu feet(and yet supposedly no changes made!).
What's the Liberty got? How about 68.7 cu feet? That's only 1 cubic foot more than a K-car wagon....they were 67.7! AND....Liberty has an outside swing spare, while Cherokee has a "stock" inside spare! If you compared apples to apples there, you'd see a BIG difference! And, that's in a Liberty that's longer, wider, HIGHER (notably), and much heavier than a Cherokee, yet effectively a fair amount LESS interior space...particularly for cargo! The rear cargo room that IS there is more "vertical" meaning you'll have to stack your stuff more and block viewing out windows more to utilize what is actually LESS space inside! A REAL cramp on "utility" once again!
In times with tighter gas prices, this larger size and more weight should go over very well.
Interestingly, the "footroom" is slightly LESS in the front of a Liberty vs. a Cherokee, and "slight" more in the rear.....averaging about the same overall! So....what you end up with is a BIGGER vehicle with LESS "utility"(or ability in essence). This is NOT "true" to the Jeep name....PERIOD!
The Liberty is not a bad "vehicle", it is just NOT worthy of the Jeep name, and CERTAINLY NOT as "successor" to the Cherokee.....trust me...it's no Cherokee!!!
...(with regard to the independent front suspension:)
So far, but there is a lot of concern that DC is aiming to put IFS on ALL Jeep models in the future. Having seen the Liberty near a Cherokee, I took visual comparisons.....the Cherokee actually hangs down less in the front, and about the same overall elsewhere, than the Liberty, and the suspension looks a lot more durable on a Cherokee.
I would NOT take a Liberty where it is brushy terrain or anywhere where toughness were absolutely necessary! Though it is somewhat different, there are definitely some comparisons that could be made to a FWD setup on a car to an IFS on a truck....you have two variable shafts coming out the sides to do the axle work, requiring boots and less durable contruction overall....more weak spots for sure! AWD, fine, but not a tough vehicle like what a Jeep should be!
The Liberty is following the market and not leading it as the Cherokee did. Which is the sad thing here....the market had used the Cherokee as the benchmark since 1984 for compact SUVs....and yes, as AJ noted, it brought about the term SUV to the masses! Now, Jeep is "copying the imitators".....ironically, those who were imitating Jeep in the first place......talk about giving up the throne! More like they hurled it to the competition as they thought it was more important to put out a new vehicle than keep something better that's already proven itself!!
There are definitely some areas that the Cherokee could have used some improvements, but nothing that couldn't have been done with proper positioning of the lines. Chrysler/DC totally blew it on this one. If they'd had one ounce of brains, they'd have done as follows: When they redesigned the Grand Cherokee, they should have beefed it up...longer, bigger (mostly on the inside).....give a little more competition to the Explorer, Suburban market, etc. Instead, the redesign a few years ago was little more than a makeover....at least in positioning for sure! The reason this would have been important is because it would have given the "successor" to the Cherokee more room to breathe! Instead, what you ended with is something that you can detail EVERY aspect of its result..the Liberty!
See....they couldn't upstage the GC, so they had to keep it shorter than the GC. Yet, they had to make it "bigger" than the Cherokee! AND.....try to boost the comfort and roominess inside. Well....since they only had about 15" to expand length in, well...you know which direction it grew! That's why it's taller! That's why it's only somewhat longer than a Cherokee...but not much (the rear spare gives it an illusion of more size too)!
Don't forget the obligatory "7 slot grille and round headlights" for the front....the "trademark fetish"....had NOTHING to do with the real value of the vehicle, just DC's trademarks! Make it more plush inside.....so it's more comfy. Hopefully they succeeded on that last point, but it eats into interior space by doing so! Go with IFS for a "smoother" ride....again, for "comfort" and not "toughness".
Now.....what you have is the basic vehicle, but what about the spare tire? Well....HAVE to put that thing on the outside as a swingout! Imagine putting a spare tire inside an area that sports 68.7 cu feet MINUS the spare tire.....and you have probably 63-65 cu feet.....LESS than a K-car wagon (which actually had a spare-donut- inside as well!).
Don't forget that we're still under the impression that higher HP ratings are important...who cares what RPM they're at....they sell vehicles! So, the "new" engines! There you have it...."Liberty".....a compromise all around!
Seriously....if Chrysler/DC had actually revamped the positioning of the lines more, they could have made room for a Dakar (4 door Wrangler), a new compact SUV (to replace Cherokee), an extended version of the compact, for those who want more size, but similar design and integrity, AND THEN, had the "luxo" Grand model on top of all that! A "pickup" version of the extended length compact SUV could have been a possibility as well! AND...."no compromises"!
As well...to exploit the "fun" crowd...sure, do a Jeepster....but not that ugly thing they have out on the show circuit....a "Jeep roadster" would be more like it! Fun, but not as serious! AND...keep the "real" Jeep's full solid axles for the toughness....that's something lacking in the market! Maybe revitalize the Eagle name and pull off the "Subaru" thing of AWD wagons. That would have been the way to go...would have BUILT the Jeep name, and not destroyed it as Chrysler and DC have been doing for some years now....sorry, but it's true!
That's why I say the Jeep name is on the verge of "losing its trademark".....it's been watered down and doesn't have "tough" to it anymore. Jeeps can "play hard", but that's it....it used to be "work hard" first, then people realized that if something could "work hard" it could also "play hard". The logic does NOT work in reverse. If you know "p then q", it does NOT mean "therefore q then p"......it's basic logic, and DC apparently has no understanding of that!
BTW.....for those who are familiar with my postings, I have owned Jeeps for most of the past 13 years.....MOST are the older full sized. I may not be an expert, but I know more than the average duck when it comes to Jeeps, and I have long been "proud" of the Jeep name. I am having a VERY hard time saying that any more.
DeSoto44@aol.com wrote:
We're not exact opposites on the Jeep-loving spectrum, but we do have some pretty strong differences.
First of all, you said that the Liberty doesn't really fill a hole in the SUV market. What did you expect? Every angle of the market has been used to death. There's everything from the obnoxiously big Excursion to the cute mini-utes and even some weird niche-fillers like the Aztek and the Escape. There is really nothing creative that can be made in the SUV market. The SUV craze has hit a plateau...and Jeep needs to find a way of conquering the market that remains. Jeep realized this, and moved to the spot where they felt they could get the biggest piece of the pie. Granted, its not the Cherokee...but if it sells enough to save Jeep (and DC for that matter) then the end justifies the means.
You're completely right when you said the Liberty (or any other Jeep these days for that matter) isn't fully geared towards heavy-duty work...and you pointed out Jeep's logic behind that move as well. Only a tiny fraction of Jeep-owners use their Jeeps for off-roading...so why have their line-up geared towards that tiny fraction? The Liberty is what most buyers are looking for (no counting for judgement there). It is essentially like all the other SUVs on the road today, except it has the Jeep nameplate and hopefully will stand up to the test of time as its predecessors have. The Liberty will most likely be successful at the dealerships, because people are looking for Jeep-quality in everday cars. Jeep has spent the last, what, 60 years building up this reputation for quality...it's about time they used it to their advantage.
Honestly, the Liberty isn't a dog in its performance. I saw a hour-long special on SpeedVision a few weeks ago that showed a test run of the Liberty alongside some modified CJs. The Liberty came along with relative ease...and its independent front suspension held up great against some ugly obstacles. In some cases, the Liberty was actually outperforming the CJs. The rack-and-pinion steering allowed it to do some pretty tight maneuvers, that the other Jeeps had to go around. Also, its lower center of gravity let it take a slanted river bed that the CJ had to angle itself to get down (dont ask me how the center of gravity is lower in that vertically-stretched beast, but it was...they pointed it out). So, if the Jeep can make it to the river for fishing, then provide a smooth ride on the highway home...what's the harm?
As for the engine, I'm not a supporter of it either...I'll miss the 4.0 as much as the next guy. But the new engine will be more than adequate for how the typical Jeep owner will use it. If someone needs a vehicle to do some really extreme work, they're not going to buy a new Jeep anyway when an old Cherokee or Wagoneer will do the same thing for a fourth of the cost.
In essence, what I'm trying to say is that the Liberty will sell to those who like that sorta vehicle. So, DC has done their jobs...they're selling cars. The fact that it's not the worker the Cherokee was is irrelevant in today's SUV market. You hit it right on the nose when you said they're just looking for impressive horsepower figures and a name they can trust. I'd actually like to see more Jeep-quality cars in the everyday market. The Varsity concept, for example, is a great example of Jeep stepping outside of its constrictive off-road specialty. And despite the cries of serious off-roaders, there's a big market in "city SUVs." Jeep quality shouldn't be held back when every vehicle on the road today could use an extra dose of Jeep toughness.
Drew Beck wrote:
My relationship with Jeeps goes 'way back--I learned to drive in a '48 Willys CJ-2A when I was 8 years old (all of us kids on the farm learned to drive in this thing!). My thoughts on the Liberty are: It's probably the best vehicle of its type on the market. I'd rather have the Liberty than any of the other small to mid-sized SUVs out there.
That being said, I'd rather have a Cherokee than a Liberty for my own vehicle. The Cherokee is many hundreds of pounds lighter (especially in AWD/six-cylinder form), more compact externally, and I have a strong attachment to the torquey and bullet-proof 4.0L inline six under the hood. Yes, I'm a little sentimental about the powertrain, but that's a big part of the Cherokee's appeal for me.
I haven't driven a Liberty yet but hope to soon. I want to like it, but I'm really disappointed with the vehicle's weight. Same with the latest Chrysler/Dodge minivans--those things weigh a good 500-600 lbs more than the earlier models. Yes, they are probably safer in a collision, but all that weight extracts a penalty in fuel economy, tire wear, etc.
Click here for details on the Jeep Liberty.
Click here for an engineer's view of the Liberty.
Jeep Cherokee/Liberty forum - reply to these views there!
