2011 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Sport Sport Utility 4-door 3.8l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Dodge Durango SRT vs. Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT | Which should you buy?

Choice is a good thing. And when it comes to high-performance sport utility vehicles, there are more choices today than ever before to tantalize buyers into showrooms. And why not? Americans love SUVs, and, while there's a stronger push to go green now than ever before in the history of internal combustion, there's still a large contingent of buyers who firmly believe in choosing the biggest, baddest, most powerful powerplant. For those buyers, the Dodge Durango SRT and Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT are two of the most potent options. But which one should you buy? They both deliver 475 horsepower and 470 pound-feet of torque to all four wheels through an eight-speed automatic transmission. They both do 0-60 in around 4.4 seconds, and both boast top speed numbers that will handily land you in jail if written on a speeding ticket. Choosing between the two, then, is a bit more nuanced than which is faster. That said, the Jeep is probably a bit quicker at the track than the Dodge. We'd wager than the Grand Cherokee SRT's 5,104-pound curb weight (versus 5,510 for the Durango SRT) and 114.8-inch wheelbase (versus 119.8) will pay small dividends in acceleration, cornering, and braking performance. So, if that's the only category by which you believe these SRT-fettled SUVs should be judged, choose the Jeep. View 17 Photos But let's get real here for a moment. As much fun as it is to wrangle a brutish ute 'round a racetrack – and trust us when we tell you it's a blast – the number of hi-po SUV owners who will ever show up at Bondurant in an SRT-badged 4x4 is probably in the single digits. So, when evaluating which of the two Hemi-powered vehicles is right for you, ultimate lap times are probably of little concern. If you're choosing between these two overpowered players, practicality is probably just as important as performance. And in that category, the Durango SRT comes out on top. For starters, the Dodge is a three-row SUV with six seats, whereas the Jeep is a two-row, five-passenger platform. Fold down the rear bench and there's 84.5 cubic feet of cargo area in the Durango, versus 68.7 in the Grand Cherokee. And if you tow, the Durango SRT's 8,600-pound max rating handily bests that of the Grand Cherokee SRT's 7,200-pound capacity. Ask yourself what's most important: performance or practicality. And then consider the price. The Dodge is nearly $4,000 less expensive than the Jeep.

NYIAS: 2017 Jeep Grand Cherokee Trailhawk, ooh-rah!

I was very happy to see Jeep offer a stand-alone, off-road-oriented model to the Grand Cherokee for 2017, the Trailhawk. This is not the first time for a GC Trailhawk, as they offered a limited run a few years ago to see if there might be a market for such a model. Looks like there is, as there are Trailhawk models for the Cherokee and Renegade, and now the Grand Cherokee as well. Just to be clear here, Jeep has always offered off-road ready packages (tow hooks, one inch more ground clearance, skid plates) for the Grand Cherokee and Cherokee in the past. They were called "Up Country," or more recently, "Off Road" groups. That was all well and good but, at least where I was living, almost impossible to find. Rarely would you ever find one so-equipped on dealer lots. If you ever saw one on the street, most likely the owner special-ordered it. Having said that, now that I'm living by the beach, I am seeing a few Up Country-equipped older Jeeps; not many, but more than I've seen in the past. As to the new Cherokee and Renegade Trailhawks; I'm seeing a bunch of them. It took a little while for the public to discover this trim level, but now I see them everywhere. Must be the orange tow hooks? Speaking of orange tow hooks... I'm not a big fan of them. Tow hooks for sure, orange ones, not so much; same with the matte black hood decal, not a fan. If I were ever to get a Trailhawk, it would be either dark gray or black, as that effectively hides the hood decal. So Jeep has packaged the Trailhawk as a premium model within each respective model line. While I fully understand the thinking, I do wish Jeep would also offer an entry-level off-road model, one with all the Trailhawk off-road goodness, but minus all the visual and luxury fluff. A lot of off-roaders don't want to pay, or can't pay top dollar for stuff they don't want or need. As to a name, how about "Trail," that being Trailhawk minus the "hawk;" or perhaps "Pioneer?" That's an old name from Cherokees of yesteryear. Back then the Pioneer was positioned as a mid-low level model. I think either name would work well for a back-to-basics-off-road-focused Cherokee and/or Renegade. Content it like the current entry-level Sport or mid-level Latitude models, but include the Trailhawk's off-road prowess. The Grand Cherokee should probably pass on that suggestion, as it would run counter to that model's high-end image. Related Video: Image Credit: Jeep Jeep open road

Chrysler recalling 644k more Dodge Durango and Jeep Grand Cherokee SUVs over brakes

Early last month, we reported on Chrysler issuing a preemptive, proactive recall for about 25,000 units of the Jeep Grand Cherokee and Dodge Durango. The issue revolved around a brake system that wasn't causing any actual problems, but delivered an unsatisfactory brake feel, so Auburn Hills called in a good 25,000 of SUVs around the world, including 18,700 in the United States.
Now Chrysler, having apparently determined that the brake problem on its sport utes is actually much bigger than it initially realized, has drastically broadened the scope of the recall. As a result, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has issued a recall for precisely 655,354 examples of the Grand Cherokee and Durango, covering the 2011 through 2014 model years. In addition, Chrysler is recalling 42,380 units in Canada, 21,376 in Mexico and 159,685 overseas.
The problem which Chrysler found revolves around the brake booster, whose center shell has been found to be subject to corrosion, allowing water to get into the brake system. That water in turn could freeze, preventing the brakes from working as well as expected.