2004 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited, Low Miles, Original Family Owned on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Consumer Reports says these are the worst new cars of 2014

Consumer Reports has announced its annual list of worst vehicles, a cringe-inducing contrast to its list of top vehicles. Ignominiously leading the way in 2014 is Chrysler, which has a staggering seven models listed.
Jeep nearly sweeps the small SUV segment by itself, with its Compass, Patriot and 2.4-liter version of the new Cherokee, while the only midsize sedans listed by CR were the Chrysler 200 and Dodge Avenger. The new Dodge Dart and the Dodge Journey round out CR's condemnation of Chrysler.
Ford is taking heat as well, with the Taurus, Edge and their counterparts from Lincoln all listed as the worst vehicles in their respective segments. Toyota doesn't fare much better, with its Lexus IS, Scion iQ and tC also making the list.

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.

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.