2009 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited Sport Utility 4-door 4.7l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2014 Jeep Cherokee: Long-term wrap-up [w/video]

Sorry, Sweet Brown. Your place in Autoblog history as the most highly demanded long-term car has come to an end. We just finished a one-year test of a 2014 Jeep Cherokee Trailhawk, and after 27,000 miles of hard use, one thing is very clear: this is one of the best all-rounders we've ever tested. The Jeep Cherokee isn't perfect, and our long-term tester proved that. But no compact crossover is. Still, the Trailhawk oozed personality where other small CUVs seem bland, and the Jeep felt more like a trusty companion than just another test car. For road trips, the requests weren't, "Can I have a long-term car this weekend?" They were specific: "I'd like the Cherokee, please." No matter the season, the driver, or the situation, the Jeep was always a sure fit. Fiat Chrysler bet big with this one. It had a global platform, a new engine, and one heck of a funny face. The end result was a CUV that we'd gladly welcome back into our fleet any day. View 51 Photos Our car carried a sticker price of $38,059, but that's without goodies like HID headlamps, a sunroof, or even full leather seats. Lots To Like Admittedly, we picked the Trailhawk trim for cosmetic reasons (more on it's off-road capability in a second). To this day, many of us still think the Cherokee is a homely little thing, but its inherent weirdness doesn't stand out as much when you add the black accents and big, knobby tires of the Trailhawk model. The butched-up look really works here, and we wouldn't have wanted the Jeep any other way. Of course, opting for Trailhawk package meant getting one of Jeep's more expensive Cherokees. Our car carried a sticker price of $38,059, but that's without goodies like HID headlamps (which we could have used – the halogens were pretty weak), a sunroof, or even full leather seats. This car genuinely felt premium, though. Right off the bat, the Cherokee received compliments for its comfortable, supportive seats, not to mention the high quality of interior materials and the general fit and finish. Specifically, the interior packaging won us over early on. We appreciated things like the higher-end stereo, smart layout of the center console, and ample storage, including a bin under the front passenger seat cushion. (That said, we also found that this bin becomes a catch-all for wrappers, french fries, and anything else that might get dropped on the seat.) The Uconnect infotainment system was a joy to use, never giving us any finicky problems or usability issues.

Jeep Grand Cherokee, Dodge Durango to lose color options temporarily

In the market for a Jeep Grand Cherokee or Dodge Durango? Well, if you fancy a more expressive color for your new SUV, you'd better get your order in, or plan on waiting until well into 2015.
The SUVs will be limited to just four monochromatic shades - black, white, silver and gray - until at least February, thanks to an upgrade to the paint shop at the two vehicles' Jefferson North factory. For the Grand Cherokee, that means it's losing more than half its color palette while the Durango is dropping two-thirds of its color catalog.
The loss of colors is inconvenient, but the upgrade will have a slightly bigger effect on the overall supply of SUVs, as Chrysler will need to end its relentless build pace at the factory for a three-week shutdown starting on December 22. The good news for fans of the SUVs is that once the work is completed, we should see a gradual expansion of the color palettes for both the Durango and Grand Cherokee, beyond even what's offered now.

Auto Mergers and Acquisitions: Suicide or salvation?

We love the Moses figure. A savior riding in from stage right with the ideas, the smarts, and the scrappiness to put things right. Alan Mullaly. Carroll Shelby. Lee Iacocca. Andrew Carnegie. Steve Jobs. Elon Musk. Bart Simpson. Sergio Marchionne does not likely view himself with Moses-like optics, but the CEO of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles recently gave a remarkable, perhaps prophetic interview with Automotive News about his interest and the inevitability of merging with a potential automotive partner like General Motors. Marchionne has been overtly public about his notion that GM must merge with FCA. For a bit of context, GM sold 9.9 million vehicles in 2014, posting $2.8 billion in net income, while FCA sold 4.75 million units and earned $2.4 billion in net income, painting a very rosy FCA earnings-to-sales picture. But that's not the entire picture. Most people in the auto industry still remember the trainwreck that was the DaimlerChrysler "merger" written in what turned out to be sand in 1998. It proved to be a master class in how not to fuse two companies, two cultures, two continents, and two management teams. Oh, it worked for the two individuals at both helms pre-merger. They got silly rich. And the industry itself was in a misty romance at the time with mergers and acquisitions. BMW bought Rolls-Royce. Volkswagen Group bought Bentley, Bugatti, and Lamborghini, putting all three brands into their rightful place in both products and positioning. No marriages there, so no false pretense. Finally, Nissan and Renault got married in 1999. A successful marriage requires several rare elements in this atmosphere of gas fumes and power lust. But a successful marriage requires several rare elements in this atmosphere of gas fumes and power lust, the principle part being honesty. Daimler and Chrysler lied to each other. The heads of each unit, the product planners, and finance all presented their then-current and long-range forecasts to each other with less-than-forthright accuracy. Daimler was the far greater equal and no one from the Chrysler side enjoyed that. The cultures were entirely different, too, and little was done to bridge that gap. Which brings me back to the present overtures by Marchionne to GM. "There are varying degrees of hugs," Marchionne stated in the Automotive News piece. "I can hug you nicely, I can hug you tightly, I can hug you like a bear, I can really hug you." Seriously?