2009 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited 4wd 4dr Sahara on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2019 Jeep Cherokee First Drive Review | Still the most truck-like crossover SUV

The history of the SUV has been one of ever-increasing refinement, and that arc bends towards carlike forms. It's a trend that even the hardiest of nameplates has succumbed to, including the venerable Cherokee, which for 2014, moved from the solid-axle brick of yore to the shark-nosed, independently suspended crossover of modern-day. That wasn't necessarily a bad thing. We found it to be quite a competitive machine at the time, and one that was plenty capable. But time marches on, and five model years later, Jeep has updated the Cherokee. The polarizing shark nose has been toned down, with all the headlight elements integrated into single units on either side. The hatchback has been revised and now sports a cutout for the license plate. Besides improving the looks at the back, Jeep says it allowed them to expand the rear cargo area to 25.8 cubic feet, an increase of 1.2 cubes, because moving the license plate space allowed them to pull the latch assembly farther out. It should be noted, though, that the Cherokee still doesn't have as much cargo capacity as the new 27.2-cubic-foot Compass. Besides the cosmetic changes, the new Cherokee gets a new engine, a 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder good for 270 horsepower and 295 pound-feet of torque that shares commonality with the Jeep Wrangler and Alfa Romeo Giulia engines. However, it lacks the mild hybrid technology of the Wrangler because of space issues, and it has a cylinder head with two camshafts rather than the Alfa's single-overhead cam design. In addition to the new 2.0-liter turbocharged engine, the Cherokee's old naturally aspirated engines, a 2.4-liter four-cylinder (180 hp, 170 lb-ft) and a 3.2-liter V6 (271 hp, 239 lb-ft), carryover unchanged except for the addition of standard engine start-stop functionality. The question is, can mild changes to the Cherokee keep it competitive in a segment where several rivals have been completely redesigned? In terms of capability, the answer is a resounding, "yes," particularly for the Trailhawk, which in turbocharged guise, has even shorter gearing for its low-range four-wheel-drive setting than before at 51.2:1. Like the previous model, the Trailhawk includes different front and rear bumpers for improved clearance and approach and departure angles. It features a set of skid plates and gets a steel oil pan for protection from obstacles, and the rear axle can be locked for additional traction.

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.

Wrangler Pickup, Triumph Fined, Cherokee Production Moves | Autoblog Minute

"Autoblog senior editor Greg Migliore reports on highlights from the week in automotive news. " UAW/Unions Jeep Autoblog Minute Videos Original Video FCA recap