2014 Jeep Cherokee Latitude on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Weekly Recap For 5.20.16 | Autoblog Minute

Senior Editor Greg Migliore recaps the week in automotive news, including a look at the Aston Martin Vanquish Zagato, two Volvo concepts, and the FCA Jeep airbag recall.

EPA posts 2018 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited fuel economy

When Jeep loosed a trio of 2018 Wrangler photos in October, Jeep cognoscenti parried over details like radio antenna placement and painted tailgate hinges, while every other viewer merely noted, "It's still a Wrangler." Now that the Environmental Protection Agency's listed fuel economy ratings for the 2018 Wrangler Unlimited with the 3.6-liter V6, Jeep savants will again parry over details. Every other viewer will merely note, "It's still got Wrangler gas mileage." According to the EPA, the current Wrangler Unlimited with the 3.6-liter V6 and six-speed manual clocks 16 miles per gallon in the city, 21 on the highway, and 18 combined. The 2018 version with the same six-speed manual comes in at 17/23/19. Switching transmissions, the current model with the five-speed automatic hooks up 16/20/18, the 2018 model with an eight-speed automatic does 18/23/20. Those numbers might not jump off the page, yet according to the EPA's cost calculator, you'll save $250 per year on gas with the eight-speed auto 2018 Wrangler Unlimited, $150 per year with the coming six-speed manual. The eight-speed auto option also exceeds Chrysler's prediction from 2014 of a nine-percent improvement in fuel economy over the five-speed auto. Now we wait for numbers on the dark horse four-cylinder, which we'd expect to best the sixer's numbers, unless the rumors are true and the four-pot really is packing every wild horse it can handle. In that case, we'll turn to the EcoDiesel for frugal kicks. If we don't find out beforehand, we can expect those goodies and more at the LA Auto Show in December. Related Video: News Source: FuelEconomy.gov via Motor Trend Auto News Government/Legal Jeep SUV Off-Road Vehicles

Trying the new Compass and other Jeeps on for size

If any brand has license to sell several like-sized SUVs, it's Jeep, which invented the concept in the first place. Yet, with the Cherokee, Renegade, and the redesigned 2017 Jeep Compass revealed at the LA Auto Show, just how like-sized is this trio of compact SUVs? Well, as it turns out, that answer is more complicated than just looking at various spreadsheets of specifications. After the cover was pulled off the new Compass, I managed to explore each back-to-back-to-back to see how their back seats and cargo areas compare. Perhaps obviously, the Renegade is the smallest of the trio no matter how you look it. Well, it actually has the most headroom, but rear legroom is cramped (a 6-footer can't sit behind another 6-footer) and it's quite obvious the cargo area is about nine cubic feet smaller with the rear seats raised. However, the Cherokee and Compass are surprisingly similar both on paper and in person – and even more surprisingly, the newer, smaller-on-the-outside Compass is actually a bit more spacious despite being nine inches shorter in overall length. View 14 Photos When seated in back, my knees were just touching the driver seat when it was motored most of the way back to accommodate my 6-foot-3 frame. However, the Cherokee's slightly chunkier seatback meant the Compass actually had a bit more rear legroom. I then set the passenger seat to a more average distance and again, the Compass had a slight advantage. The Cherokee did have a bit more under-thigh support, however, which indicates the seat is mounted a bit higher. But that creates a problem, as headroom is more significantly affected when the panoramic sunroof is specified. In the Cherokee, my head was into the sunroof cavity and resting against its rigid surround. In the Compass, there was just enough clearance. It should be a difference, both in terms of headroom and perceived roominess that those of average height should notice. As for their cargo areas, the Compass' is larger and more useable. With the rear seats raised, it has 27.2 cubic feet versus the Cherokee's 24.6. You can scoot its sliding seat forward to nearly equal the Compass, but of course doing so reduces its rear legroom. The main reason is width. The Cherokee is noticeably narrow and it gets worse when equipped with the optional subwoofer. In terms of maximum cargo volume with the rear seats lowered, the Compass has 59.8 cubic feet to the Cherokee's 54.9.