Considering purchasing a 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee

[Ivy Mike]

Chrysler's majority owner is Fiat and we're discussing whether there is a reliability issue???? Not to suggest Toyota is w/o fault, I just spent a tidy sum on emissions issues for a 2005 Sequoia.

I vote that he leases a 2013/14 model and continues to post here so we can see how it works out.

 

[Jayhawk5G]

The only problem I have with Jeep is the reliability, the Grand Cherokee is an extremely capable platform in the right guise, certainly as capable if not more capable than the 4Runner. The problem all boils down to reliability and resale. I want to know that if I choose to keep the 4Runner for 10+ years it will still be running with no major problems, and I want to know that if I choose to trade it or sell it that I won't lose a ton of money.

The Jeep has real capability, but unless you buy new every few years and don't mind resale or having your truck in the shop multiple times it doesn't make sense.

The following isn't hype:

Quadra-Drive 2 offers front and rear e-lockers
5.7 offers 360hp and 390tq; 3.0 offers 240hp and 420tq
Select Terrain works well from what I have read
Off-Road Adventure Packs offer skid plates
Etc.

I imagine quite a few would be interested in a 4Runner with iForce 5.7 with a front locker included along with the TE rear locker.

 

[1engineer]

The only problem I have with Jeep is the reliability, the Grand Cherokee is an extremely capable platform in the right guise, certainly as capable if not more capable than the 4Runner. The problem all boils down to reliability and resale. I want to know that if I choose to keep the 4Runner for 10+ years it will still be running with no major problems, and I want to know that if I choose to trade it or sell it that I won't lose a ton of money.

The Jeep has real capability, but unless you buy new every few years and don't mind resale or having your truck in the shop multiple times it doesn't make sense.

The following isn't hype:

Quadra-Drive 2 offers front and rear e-lockers
5.7 offers 360hp and 390tq; 3.0 offers 240hp and 420tq
Select Terrain works well from what I have read
Off-Road Adventure Packs offer skid plates
Etc.

I imagine quite a few would be interested in a 4Runner with iForce 5.7 with a front locker included along with the TE rear locker.

You are missing the point: Jeep is very capable WHEN IT IS RUNNING. What good is any of it if it is not running? Expensive paperweight?

In order to get a dependable SUV that has those options you need to move into the $55-$80K range and above. Hasn't anyone ever stopped to think "How can Jeep offer all that stuff at the same price as a 4Runner? The answer is obvious.

Now you could buy a JGC (some people do) with all those options and never have anything go bad or break and keep it for 10 years. Hit or miss apparently.

 

[2013Trail]

You are correct: I was inquiring about those defects. I really was/am interested... especially regarding claims that the manufacturer wasn't honoring the warranty.

However, as you can see, that post you quoted was mine as well.

I was attempting to explain that I wasn't basing my opinion on a short test drive under a dealer-controlled scenario. So, even under a real world scenario, I didn't find much to dislike. In case it wasn't clear, I found those "irritations" I cited to be negligible.

Jeep had such a reputation in my mind that I expected something to be broken or to break down even during the week I had it. It was quite cathartic to have this play out so smoothly.

My mistake, I misread your post. I thought you were quoting someone else. But I agree with you, those "irritations" are negligible and would not stop me from buying a Jeep. However, this would:

Recall: Some 2012 Chryslers, Dodges, Jeeps to get new engine
This recall is also listed on NADA.com.

And this:

2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee SUVs probed for engine fires

However, the 2012-2014 GC has better Safety Ratings (Crash Ratings) than the 5th Gen 4R. I've never owned a Jeep but when I worked for the Forest Service we had an early 2000s 4X4 model that never had a stitch of a problem. I drove that thing everywhere on and offroad. Never failed me once. And it was rugged.

It's interesting that they continue to have so many problems though. I test drove several new Jeep GC's-- Overland, Limited, Laredo, 2013 and 2014s-- and they all appeared to be very well assembled and had a ton of nice features. The main reason I bought the 4R over the Jeep was the body on frame design and because I thought the 4R fit my needs better than the Jeep. Plus, the 4R is significantly bigger inside than the Jeep. Or at least it feels that way.

All that being said, Toyota, not too long ago, recalled thousands of the Prius Hybrids--covering a number of model years-- for potential battery fires. Then there was the accelerator issue that affected thousands of vehicles in a number of models--that made national news of course. It also caused substantial price increases (which have been passed down to the consumer)--across the board--for all Toyota models.

As for my 4R I'll keep my fingers crossed on reliability. Anything can go wrong at anytime--even with the best-rated vehicles.

 

[Jayhawk5G]

You are missing the point: Jeep is very capable WHEN IT IS RUNNING. What good is any of it if it is not running? Expensive paperweight?

In order to get a dependable SUV that has those options you need to move into the $55-$80K range and above. Hasn't anyone ever stopped to think "How can Jeep offer all that stuff at the same price as a 4Runner? The answer is obvious.

Now you could buy a JGC (some people do) with all those options and never have anything go bad or break and keep it for 10 years. Hit or miss apparently.

I think the first paragraph of my post shows I completely understand and agree with the point that Jeep's reliability is subpar.

I just disagree about the marketing because I don't feel it's without substance. I also think there are reasons beyond the marketing that people pick Jeep, it is literally the last midsize suv available with a V8 and two speed transfer case under $40k.

In terms of luxury suv's and reliability, if it doesn't come from Japan, then reliability isn't a selling feature.

 

[BlackWorksInc]

Chrysler's majority owner is Fiat and we're discussing whether there is a reliability issue???? Not to suggest Toyota is w/o fault, I just spent a tidy sum on emissions issues for a 2005 Sequoia.

I vote that he leases a 2013/14 model and continues to post here so we can see how it works out.

I fail to see your point? Fiat is a very good company in Europe, they aren't the Fix It Again Tonys they were in the 60's and most of that was due to lack of mechanics who knew how to work on them properly. Fiat has come a long long way from there, one of the most commonly bought cars in Europe are Fiat 500's (just watch the Top Gear Episode .)

Fiat bought Chrysler, who the government tried to shove off because they were so; bad so Fiat can bring their products into the United States (It was financially cheaper for them apparently to Trojan Horse them in vs. trying to build a distribution, production, and marketing system by themselves.) The entire premise of Fiat's contract with Chrysler was along the lines of "hey, we know you guys suck... but we got some small car tech we're willin' to send you for something like... 30% of your company? if you guys make any significant profits out of our tech, we own the majority of your company, Kay?"

Now I have no doubt Fiat will turn Chrysler around if given the opportunity to structure it like they do their European business model. The problem is Fiat has a significant amount of crap to weed out of the line-up. The current Jeeps, and majority of Dodge, Chrysler products are built using MB tech & parts that ChryCorp managed to make even worse than when bolted on a base model MB. The Dodge Dart is the beginning of Fiat Design/production influence and it will take a while for Fiat to be in full control of Chrysler. In the mean time you will have to suffer with the current carry-over ChryCorp products which we know are not good.

 

[Roadkill]

In the mean time you will have to suffer with the current carry-over ChryCorp products which we know are not good.

My take on Jeep's reliability issues is that they are suffering from what the software development industry calls "technical debt". In stark contrast to the 4Runner, the JGC seems to have significant changes every model year. They seem to be so fixated on adding new features that they never stop to consolidate what they currently have to make it more reliable.

Take, for instance, the fact that they apparently refactored the entire electronic communication bus in 2014 with their new PowerNet architecture. Okay, maybe that makes sense, but they were already suffering due to their uConnect system having buggy firmware relics from previous model years. Why not pause, take a breath, and fix the bugs before making major changes to other aspects of the uConnect system?

It seems to me that they would be better off spending a model year doing the equivalent of what Apple did with Mac OS 10.6 (Snow Leopard). That version of the OS didn't have many new features, but there were major improvements on the backend in terms of reliability and performance. Chrysler should take a year (or two, whatever) to consolidate what they currently have on the platform by fixing their kludges and design hacks.

I just get the sense that their engineers have been on an annual death march to include all sorts of new features/systems on their vehicles and that they have ended up releasing a series of beta-quality products. Without explicit evidence to the contrary, I am inclined to apply Hanlon's Razor to the issue and presume the reliability issues are due to incompetence rather than a malicious attempt to earn money through repair bills.

Toyota seems to be the exact opposite. In fact, they seem far too cautious about adding new features. Yes, they deserve much praise for "getting it right" wrt reliability. However, they also seem to be resting on their laurels. How many of us were disappointed when they didn't even add a 6-speed transmission in MY 2014? Hell, I was surprised when my wife was looking at the Lexus RX and I discovered that they didn't even offer the option of Lane Departure Warning: something that's available on the Prius as well as all of the RX's competition.

As [MENTION=66316]1engineer[/MENTION] has stated repeatedly: opposite design philosophies reign at these two companies.

 

[Tallicon]

Make more money. Then you won't have to worry and cry about your repair bills. Life is too short to spend it worrying or second guessing every little decision.

 

[philsey]

.......I just get the sense that their engineers have been on an annual death march to include all sorts of new features/systems on their vehicles and that they have ended up releasing a series of beta-quality products.
.

I think their engineers work for designers/product planners, and do what they're told to do to design/build cars that will sell. Engineers are caught between them and cost-control types. It's a "sell it today, deal with the rest tomorrow" mentality. Engineers per se are not the problem.

..... Toyota seems to be the exact opposite.

This. The Japanese are smarter, err cleverer.

..... However, they also seem to be resting on their laurels.

Wrong - cleverer. You see, they don't HAVE TO put a 6-speed in the 4R or LDW in the RX. The ppl who buy these vehicles are going to anyway - regardless. There's another case where the Japanese are smarter - they KNOW THAT TOO. Toyota builds exactly enough content for their market and their profit. Chrysler simply operates on a different philosophy; e.g. "more content is better, crank 'em out, deal with it later". They both work, neither is wrong actually, except to the other marketplace.

..... How many of us were disappointed when they didn't even add a 6-speed transmission in MY 2014?.

And how many of "us" will buy a GC because of it? An irrelevant number. Again, Toyota knows who buys their products, and why. So does Chrysler, actually. Each is playing to their respective buyer, and neither buyer understands the other. Me? buy a 4R, when I can get all these 'features', you serious? ... or .... Me? buy a GC with all those problems, no way.

.....
As [MENTION=66316]1engineer[/MENTION] has stated repeatedly: opposite marketing philosophies reign at these two companies.

Fixed it.

 

[Roadkill]

You see, they don't HAVE TO put a 6-speed in the 4R or LDW in the RX. The ppl who buy these vehicles are going to anyway - regardless. [...] Toyota builds exactly enough content for their market and their profit.

I believe we are in agreement: this is effectively the definition of "resting on laurels". If you prefer, you can substitute the allegory of the tortoise and the hare.

Me? buy a 4R, when I can get all these 'features', you serious? ... or .... Me? buy a GC with all those problems, no way.

Your assessment is correct. However, to your point, what would happen if the JGC engineers/developers began to address these issues?

For example, that "Broken Jeep" video showed the effects of poor foresight in their computer placement/waterproofing. Should be trivial to remediate that.

As for the weird & disturbing vehicle shorting? That's likely poor planning/execution for the electrical grounds in the system (also a simple design tweak to ameliorate).

The "clunking" in the recent model transmissions? Based on what I have read I believe that is due to firmware, of all things. The transmission is good, it's just the computer code that controls it has bugs.

Similarly, the on-demand 4WD controller firmware has boundary cases that can cause it to cycle on/off ~20x/minute in certain circumstances. Nothing mechanically wrong with the drivetrain—just brain damaged code.

Things like this earn the Jeep a horrible, well-deserved reputation. However, it's just hard to believe that these decisions that led to reduced reliability were made out of malice/"value engineering". I am certain that Chrysler would welcome improved reliability as it would gradually start to win buyers who previously shunned Jeep.

Of course, this is all academic: Chrysler would have to have their engineers stop and go back over their previous work with a critical eye using the repair data. They would also need to have their firmware developers concentrate on testing/quality rather than developing features like Astronomy Zone for Blind Spot Monitoring. Come on... priorities, people!

 

[Telepi]

they don't HAVE TO put a 6-speed in the 4R or LDW in the RX. The ppl who buy these vehicles are going to anyway - regardless. Me? buy a GC with all those problems, no way. [/I]


This describes me. I came over to Toyota from my H3 and thought I was upgrading in all aspects. My H3 had the Adventure package, but was still a pretty basic vehicle. My SR5 is pretty basic as far as 4Runners go too. But it has so much more than my H3. It's pretty luxury feeling to me. The fit and finish on it are so much better. We went through a car wash the other day, and my wife commented, it's so much more quiet. At highway speeds too, it's very quiet. And talk about a silky smooth ride. I'm scoring points everytime my wife gets in it. She's slowly forgetting about the H3, until one passes us.

I'm getting about 5 miles per gallon more too. The computer consistently shows 21 to 22 MPG. I had a Scan Guage II in my H3 ( I took it out when I traded). It averaged 16 to 17 MPG. The H3 was 4wheel all the time and had big Duelers on it. The 4R is RWD with more street friendly tires. And it's not shaped so much like a brick. Maybe that helps with the mileage?

I'm very happy with it and how it performs. Of course, I just switched from dial up to DSL on my computer a couple years ago. I tend to be a little late to the change in technology parties. It took me forever to switch from cassettes to CD's (not to mention the change from 8 Tracks). I still don't have anything on MP3 either.

 

[Thai]

The following isn't hype:

Quadra-Drive 2 offers front and rear e-lockers

Not sure about the latest version of QDII, but QD is far far from being a real locker. It is more like a glorified electronic LSD.

The problem with the Jeep GC's system in the past is that it has a bypass valve...therefore, if there is too much stress on the diff (e.g. one wheel with tracton, opposite wheel slipping), the QD system becomes inoperable to prevent axle breakeage. Remember, JGC has IFS and IRS.

You can read more about horror stories of QD: http://www.toyota-4runner.org/comparisons-reviews/57-jeep-grand-cherokee-horror-stories.html

Toyota seems to be the exact opposite. In fact, they seem far too cautious about adding new features. Yes, they deserve much praise for "getting it right" wrt reliability. However, they also seem to be resting on their laurels. How many of us were disappointed when they didn't even add a 6-speed transmission in MY 2014? Hell, I was surprised when my wife was looking at the Lexus RX and I discovered that they didn't even offer the option of Lane Departure Warning: something that's available on the Prius as well as all of the RX's competition.

Hehehe, my Prius has that. I am sure that Toyota is like Honda. They reserve their best techs for their higher-end products or luxury division. Or it could be that most of 4runner's main competition does not have much better fuel economy to warrant grabbing a 6-speed tranny from their luxury bin. In addition, the EPA requirements from the government has not really come down yet...so, they have time.

Wrong - cleverer. You see, they don't HAVE TO put a 6-speed in the 4R or LDW in the RX. The ppl who buy these vehicles are going to anyway - regardless. There's another case where the Japanese are smarter - they KNOW THAT TOO. Toyota builds exactly enough content for their market and their profit.

Although mostly true, i think that Toyota has been caught napping in a few areas. For example, the Corolla is horrifically outdated. 4-speed auto. 1.8L engine. Not much faster than my Prius (a BAD thing!). Horrible interior quality. The competition has caught up and is actually surpassing Corolla in sales. The only reason Corolla is even in the top5 is due to reputation, but that is declining every year as shown by its sales numbers. Only in 2014 will we get a new Corolla...and that one is not all that impressive.

I like what Honda has done with the Civic. Civic came out a few years ago (2011?) and got horrible reviews. Yeah, it still sold well...but was criticized for cheap interior and lackluster ride/noise. Despite selling well, Honda went back to the drawing board immediately and, less than 2 years later, an updated Civic is now out and pretty much everything that was wrong with it was fixed! So, despite selling well to its core customers, Honda realized that they cannot simply rest on their past reputation to guarantee future sales. What has Toyota done? They deleted some colors and added some colors to the outdated Corolla.

The other thing that i find odd about Toyota is the slow response to poor crash scores. Other manufacturers race to improve their crash scores. Toyota does nothing. 4runner's roof strength test is average. Has that been address since 2010? Not until the 2014 model...and it barely made the grade! I guess that we will see how fast Toyota will address the POOR rating on Camry's small overlap frontal test score.

I don't mind so much that Toyota is slow in incorporating the latest features and technologies. They have always been slow...and their version usually is trouble-free compared to the pioneering German technologies. However, when it comes to basic features of a car that needs updating, i would like to see Toyota respond a little quicker.

 

[Jayhawk5G]

Not sure about the latest version of QDII, but QD is far far from being a real locker. It is more like a glorified electronic LSD.

The problem with the Jeep GC's system in the past is that it has a bypass valve...therefore, if there is too much stress on the diff (e.g. one wheel with tracton, opposite wheel slipping), the QD system becomes inoperable to prevent axle breakeage. Remember, JGC has IFS and IRS.

You can read more about horror stories of QD: http://www.toyota-4runner.org/comparisons-reviews/57-jeep-grand-cherokee-horror-stories.html

QD2 doesn't have the bypass valve situation, and is signicificantly beefed up over the original QD.

While you do have to follow the maintenance on QD2 it works very well.

 

[aspade]

The Jeep is a $50,000 luxury car built to $25,000 standards and sells around halfway between the two . It can impersonate a truck, but not very well.

The 4R is a $25,000 truck built to $50,000 standards and also sells around the halfway point. It can impersonate a car, also not very well.

 

[DDM4]

Ehhhh.... Here's the reality: For the majority of current gen JGC owners, their vehicles start every morning and suffer few problems.

That being said, a GREATER majority of T4R owners experience the same thing.

To act as if the wheels are going to fall off, while you catch on fire, and get an STD simply from sitting inside a JGC is... let's call it disingenuous.

You wouldn't own a new T4R without a warranty, the same holds true for the JGC. Luckily, they both come with one. Gotta keep these things relative.

Personally, I try to own 1 vehicle for 10+ years while I switch my wife's car every 2 to 3 years. In that vein, something from Toyota fits the bill best for me. However, I've done the 10+ year thing in a Chevy Tahoe as well.

I've bounced back and forth about getting my wife a JGC for her next 3 year stint. Hopefully it and the T4R don't argue over sharing a garage...

 

[RainCityShecks]

Two different rigs with regards to finish. Period. I test drove both the GC and 4runner twice each before deciding on the Toyota. The GC while boasting more features has a feel similar to my little sisters Kia she'd purchased right out of college. I believe I've called the Jeep a 'Kia Grand Cherokee' before, and, I still stand by that observation. Loads of options but overall the vehicle just feels cheap. Which rhymes with Jeep. Go figure.

 

[mdogg]

You wouldn't own a new T4R without a warranty, the same holds true for the JGC. Luckily, they both come with one. Gotta keep these things relative.

While true, having a problem (labor/parts) covered by a warranty is not the same as having a vehicle that just works without issue. There are costs associated with each and every trip to the dealer for a repair - time to and from, time waiting, gas to and from, hassle of scheduling, hassle of possibly going out of your way to the dealership, hassle of possibly fighting with service writer to make sure repair is covered by warranty, hassle of getting a loaner, possible costs of a loaner if they don't provide one to you....

 

[Thai]

Best way to gauge cost of parts (thus, cost of ownership) and how reliable/durable a car is........ask how much factory extended warranty costs for each vehicle.

 

[Telepi]

I've bounced back and forth about getting my wife a JGC for her next 3 year stint.

Living dangerously...:scared:

We owned both a 1996 and a 2000 JGC. Both were actually fine trucks. This time around, my wife actually declared she did not want another Jeep. No particular reason, just didn't want one. Of course, that made we want to at least check into them. I walked around a dealer lot one morning on the way to work. They looked fine, I didn't see anything wrong with them. Then I started looking at the reviews and repair histories on Truedleta going back a few years. That's when I backed off from them. I did not want to trade in a perfectly good working truck and take a chance on getting something that was going to be back at the dealer for warranty work within a month and posslibly frequently. I could hear my wife say, (and normally I don't hear her), "I told you not to get a Jeep".

The 4Runner was the only SUV that had the best reviews and repair histories out there. It's repairs were for small mostly cosmetic items. The Jeeps and others were for more major electrical and mechanical itmes. I'm still on my honeymoon after less than two weeks. But the 4Runner is in a league by itself.

 

[DDM4]

While true, having a problem (labor/parts) covered by a warranty is not the same as having a vehicle that just works without issue. There are costs associated with each and every trip to the dealer for a repair - time to and from, time waiting, gas to and from, hassle of scheduling, hassle of possibly going out of your way to the dealership, hassle of possibly fighting with service writer to make sure repair is covered by warranty, hassle of getting a loaner, possible costs of a loaner if they don't provide one to you....

You're right, and I agree entirely. Multiple trips to the dealer cost time and money beyond what any warranty will cover. If I had to deal with that, I would be pissed.

That being said, my family has had handful of repetitive issues with multiple vehicles including Lexus and Toyota. I shared my experiences in another thread around here. However, my personal experiences, being such a small sample size, can not be used (if I'm being intellectually honest, at least) to form my own "facts". I understand this, and it's why I continue to patronize Toyota. I'm not submitting anyone is doing the opposite in this thread, merely pointing out a problem I see in these types of conversations. Change the topic to Ford vs Chevy or Apple vs Microsoft, and the same thing happens.

If I was forced to take my brand new vehicle in for something major, once... Hey, shit happens. Over and over, not acceptable.

However, the point I want to drive home is found in the first part of my original post:

Ehhhh.... Here's the reality: For the majority of current gen JGC owners, their vehicles start every morning and suffer few problems.

That being said, a GREATER majority of T4R owners experience the same thing.

To act as if the wheels are going to fall off, while you catch on fire, and get an STD simply from sitting inside a JGC is... let's call it disingenuous.

If you buy a new JGC, chances are you'll enjoy your vehicle with no major hiccups. Do you stand a better chance of having the same positive outcome in a T4R? Yes.

That's what the data makes clear. Everything else is conjecture and personal opinion, which... has it's place, but let's be honest about which is what. That's all I'm getting at. :tea: