Jeep Grand Cherokee lethal in evasive maneuver - Page 4 - JeepForum.com
Search  
Sign Up   Today's Posts
User: Pass: Remember?
Advertise Here
Jeep Home Jeep Forum Jeep Classifieds Jeep Registry JeepSpace Jeep Reviews Jeep Gallery Jeep Clubs Jeep Groups Jeep Videos Jeep Events Jeep Articles
Go Back JeepForum.com > Models > Jeep Grand Cherokee & Commander Forums > WK2 Grand Cherokee Forum > Jeep Grand Cherokee lethal in evasive maneuver

Engo winches available at www.rockridge4wd.com! Free shippRough Country Lift Kits and Parts!Steering and more from Ruffstuff!

Reply
Unread 07-13-2012, 01:00 PM   #46
WKdeuce
Registered User
1998 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Malvern PA
Posts: 2,081
That's gotta be the quadra-lift version right?

Neither of the "reference cars" have an air suspension, so that's apples to oranges.

Spare me the kool aid quips. I'd like to see a 3rd party test. Not saying any other rag is more reputable that TV, but another party doing this would add credibility to either side of the story.

__________________
2011 5.7L WK2 | 5.3L TJ work in progress
Rust in Pieces Blue
JEEP FIEND CLUB
WKdeuce is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-13-2012, 01:41 PM   #47
Snipe315
Registered User
2012 WK 
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 197
I think their entire "test" is suspect.

The fact that these results could not be reproduced when Chrysler reps were present makes it suspect. And despite what they wrote on their website, the tires in the initial test sure look under inflated to me! I've never seen a properly inflated tire give that much to a point where the rim is darn near contacting the road.



IMHO, they have their own agenda to this "issue".
__________________
Poll for Quadra-Lift Owners:

http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f309/poll-wk2-owners-ql-1154625/
Snipe315 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-13-2012, 02:01 PM   #48
MacDad
Registered User
2012 WK 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 12
Poor journalism = test that can't be reproduced. Simple.

What I want to read from them is WHY they can't replicate the results-- they could actually build their case further if they were to do so (legitimately), assuming their reasons don't expose methodological flaws.

In the end, we all want the truth here about the vehicle's safety... the magazine, if they do as well, will answer for the discrepancy in their reporting. Otherwise, doesn't matter what their reputation is...
MacDad is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-13-2012, 02:27 PM   #49
WKdeuce
Registered User
1998 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Malvern PA
Posts: 2,081
^you guys clearly did not watch the retest. the tires on it when Chrysler was present popped.

Now sure, again, this is TV's take. Also, by giving them more clicks it's making them more money, but whatever.

Another thing I noticed it rewatching, check out how much sharper the GC turns than the other two. Might be too agressive of a tire & wheel for a tippy SUV. Hones

Quote:
Originally Posted by jlused View Post
__________________
2011 5.7L WK2 | 5.3L TJ work in progress
Rust in Pieces Blue
JEEP FIEND CLUB
WKdeuce is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-13-2012, 02:46 PM   #50
jgiuliani
Registered User
2012  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Apex, NC
Posts: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by WKdeuce View Post
Neither of the "reference cars" have an air suspension, so that's apples to oranges.
Say what? I don't think your logic is correct. By your logic the only other comparable test vehicle would be others with an air suspension?

Their comparison was with two other vehicles in the same class as the JGC - mid-sized SUV's. That's apples to apples.

When consumer reports, car and driver, or motor trend release their ratings of the JGC against other mid-sized SUV's do you consider that apples to oranges also? The same logic applies.
jgiuliani is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-13-2012, 03:13 PM   #51
Timo_90xj
Web Wheeler
 
Timo_90xj's Avatar
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland - on the European side of the Atlantic
Posts: 5,243
Quote:
Originally Posted by WKdeuce View Post
^you guys clearly did not watch the retest. the tires on it when Chrysler was present popped.

Now sure, again, this is TV's take. Also, by giving them more clicks it's making them more money, but whatever.

Another thing I noticed it rewatching, check out how much sharper the GC turns than the other two. Might be too agressive of a tire & wheel for a tippy SUV. Hones
They also almost rolled a brand-new Toyota Hilux a couple years ago, which resulted in Toyota equipping all of their Hiluxes on the European market with 17" wheels to reduce sidewall height (which was the main reason for it almost rolling) and lessen the risk of a rollover.

They also rolled the A- class Merc back in the late 90s, which made Merc redesign the whole suspension and add ESP as standard equipment on the A- class.

The tests they do are credible, but they do include very aggressive evasive manouvers on it which can result in pretty spectacular results. Any vehicle with higher COG under full load (the test they did with the GC it was not overloaden; when Chrysler loaded the vehicle results were even worse) doing a manouvre like that can roll.


Having looked at the TVs test videos and read the test that was published in Swedish, I belive the new GC is a safe vehicle to drive - and a much safer vehicle than a lot of other SUVs in the market or especially the older ones a lot of us are driving. What the test IMO showed is that you can roll a modern SUV when the conditions are right. Nothing more than that.
__________________
1998 Grand Cherokee 5.9 LX daily driver, 1.75" BB, 32" KM2s, HPD30 Eaton e-locker/D44a stock LSD, 4.56 gears, custom- fabbed tube bumpers and tube fenders,...

http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f13/d...s-etc-1222317/


1990 XJ Limited (4-door), 4.0 I6, AW4, NP242, ***rolled and totalled @ 165k miles***

***Under construction***
1990 XJ (4-door), 4.0 I6, AW4, NP242, PBR 42" tires, Unimog 404 portal axles, 110" WB, full cage + uniframe completely rebuilt, front 3-link + panhard / double triangulated 4-link rear,... ***SOLD***
Timo_90xj is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-13-2012, 03:34 PM   #52
jlused
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Chatham, NJ
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgiuliani View Post
Say what? I don't think your logic is correct. By your logic the only other comparable test vehicle would be others with an air suspension?

Their comparison was with two other vehicles in the same class as the JGC - mid-sized SUV's. That's apples to apples.

When consumer reports, car and driver, or motor trend release their ratings of the JGC against other mid-sized SUV's do you consider that apples to oranges also? The same logic applies.
Agreed. If anything, shouldn't the quadra-lift perform better? If you pay the extra $ for quadra-lift, does it include some disclosure that while you gain ride height adjustability, it will result in poorer handling than the base model? Obviously not.

I love the GC and Durango. I purchased the D because I think it's a good product. But that doesn't mean I'm going to defend it in this case where it's bouncing around, getting up on two wheels and popping tires in a driver induced maneuver on flat pavement - especially when everything else in the class can pull off the feat problem free.
jlused is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-13-2012, 05:38 PM   #53
Snipe315
Registered User
2012 WK 
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 197
ANY vehicle can roll given the right conditions!

When I was a Marine, we had a HUMMV roll on road. It had about half a dozen troops onboard along with a small amount of gear.

And a HUMMV is one Wide vehicle with large & strong tires.
__________________
Poll for Quadra-Lift Owners:

http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f309/poll-wk2-owners-ql-1154625/
Snipe315 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-13-2012, 06:26 PM   #54
jlused
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Chatham, NJ
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snipe315 View Post
ANY vehicle can roll given the right conditions!

When I was a Marine, we had a HUMMV roll on road. It had about half a dozen troops onboard along with a small amount of gear.

And a HUMMV is one Wide vehicle with large & strong tires.
While any vehicle can be made the roll given extraordinary circumstances, the fact is that the GC is exhibiting dangerous handling characteristics in this test and its competitors are not. That you can strap depleted uranium slabs to the roof of a Touareg and make it roll does not change the fact that the GC is performing in an inferior manner.
jlused is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-13-2012, 11:34 PM   #55
airec13
Registered User
2012 WK 
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Royal Oak, Michigan
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlused

While any vehicle can be made the roll given extraordinary circumstances, the fact is that the GC is exhibiting dangerous handling characteristics in this test and its competitors are not. That you can strap depleted uranium slabs to the roof of a Touareg and make it roll does not change the fact that the GC is performing in an inferior manner.
I don't consider the XC90 a competitor to the JGC (looks like a pacifica to me). The Touareg is closer but even that, not so much. Just go to the VW website, all the Touareg photos are on pavement because it's not an off road vehicle. If only they tested a Land Rover on this "moose / elk" test.... Oh wait, they did, the Defender, and it faired quite well!

http://forums.finalgear.com/general-...se-test-19747/

If they came out and said the JGC isn't handling as well as we would like to see, then yes, I would agree. Vehicles can always be improved. BUT they are calling it a death trap and asking Jeep to stop selling it which IMO is quite an exaggeration. Perhaps the Swedes are just upset it's out selling their precious Volvo!
airec13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-13-2012, 11:49 PM   #56
Greg012GCO
Registered User
2012 WK 
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Livermore, Colorado
Posts: 283
Irresponsible and biased reporting. Calling the GC "fatal"? You can roll anything. I could roll my Silverado doing that as well. Here's the thing. Don't do that. I've pulled some crazy maneuvers avoiding death. Never rolled anything.
Another thing - the driver is wearing no protective gear. That tells me he is extremely good at tipping stuff. Probably hits the brakes just right at the point of over correction. I call BS.
Anything will roll.
Greg012GCO is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-14-2012, 04:52 AM   #57
Timo_90xj
Web Wheeler
 
Timo_90xj's Avatar
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland - on the European side of the Atlantic
Posts: 5,243
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg012GCO View Post
Irresponsible and biased reporting. Calling the GC "fatal"? You can roll anything. I could roll my Silverado doing that as well. Here's the thing. Don't do that. I've pulled some crazy maneuvers avoiding death. Never rolled anything.
Another thing - the driver is wearing no protective gear. That tells me he is extremely good at tipping stuff. Probably hits the brakes just right at the point of over correction. I call BS.
Anything will roll.
Irresponsible and biased? No.
Calling the GC fatal? That's exaggerating for sure

Most of you guys calling that test BS or "overdoing the manouvre" don't obviously know what the point of the whole test is - it's done to see how vehicles react to sudden swerve from a lane to another and back. Elk/ moose- related accidents are very common here in Scandinavia, and they cause a lot of deaths on the roads. I would imagine same thing on areas in the States where there are lots of moose.

That's why tests like that are being done. If you've ever encountered a moose walking right in front of you, you know you WILL try avoiding it as much as possible. Even most SUVs are low enough for the moose to smash right through the windshield and roof. On a passenger vehicle, you don't really stand a chance if you're going over 55mph.

On the test, they do not use brakes during the evasive manouver. However,they do the tests with the ESP and other electronic aids turned on if the vehicle is equipped with such systems. They've been doing that type of test in Sweden for about 30 years, or even longer. They know what they're doing..
__________________
1998 Grand Cherokee 5.9 LX daily driver, 1.75" BB, 32" KM2s, HPD30 Eaton e-locker/D44a stock LSD, 4.56 gears, custom- fabbed tube bumpers and tube fenders,...

http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f13/d...s-etc-1222317/


1990 XJ Limited (4-door), 4.0 I6, AW4, NP242, ***rolled and totalled @ 165k miles***

***Under construction***
1990 XJ (4-door), 4.0 I6, AW4, NP242, PBR 42" tires, Unimog 404 portal axles, 110" WB, full cage + uniframe completely rebuilt, front 3-link + panhard / double triangulated 4-link rear,... ***SOLD***
Timo_90xj is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-14-2012, 05:30 AM   #58
rockit
Registered User
2012 WK 
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: south NJ
Posts: 301
If they know what they are doing then tell me why passenger safety was no concern. No head gear???
rockit is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-14-2012, 05:51 AM   #59
Timo_90xj
Web Wheeler
 
Timo_90xj's Avatar
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland - on the European side of the Atlantic
Posts: 5,243
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockit View Post
If they know what they are doing then tell me why passenger safety was no concern. No head gear???
Maybe people aren't as overprotective as you guys there in the States.. in all honesty, I don't know why they don't wear helmets. Usually they do. But it does not make the test any less credible IMO.

Btw., at least here in Finland we are required to practise that similar manouver on a test track for the driver's license. It is done on a skid pad, to prevent roll- overs. Dunno if the Swedes have the samething for their license. Probably yes.
__________________
1998 Grand Cherokee 5.9 LX daily driver, 1.75" BB, 32" KM2s, HPD30 Eaton e-locker/D44a stock LSD, 4.56 gears, custom- fabbed tube bumpers and tube fenders,...

http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f13/d...s-etc-1222317/


1990 XJ Limited (4-door), 4.0 I6, AW4, NP242, ***rolled and totalled @ 165k miles***

***Under construction***
1990 XJ (4-door), 4.0 I6, AW4, NP242, PBR 42" tires, Unimog 404 portal axles, 110" WB, full cage + uniframe completely rebuilt, front 3-link + panhard / double triangulated 4-link rear,... ***SOLD***
Timo_90xj is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-14-2012, 06:26 AM   #60
WKdeuce
Registered User
1998 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Malvern PA
Posts: 2,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlused View Post
Agreed. If anything, shouldn't the quadra-lift perform better?
Ok, apples to oranges it's not. You guys are right, comparing it in it's class is spot on.
I guess I was trying to say, take an SUV with a sprung suspension & 17" tires through a slalom, it's not gonna perform like an SUV with air ride and 20" wheels. If you asked me before seeing this video, I'd have said the latter would do better too.

That's not in defense of Chrysler at all, it sure looks like they've got too aggressive of a tire on there.

Timo really nailed it though:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Timo_90xj View Post
What the test IMO showed is that you can roll a modern SUV when the conditions are right. Nothing more than that.
__________________
2011 5.7L WK2 | 5.3L TJ work in progress
Rust in Pieces Blue
JEEP FIEND CLUB
WKdeuce is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Thread Tools


Suggested Threads





Jeep, Wrangler, Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and other models are copyrighted and trademarked to Jeep/Chrysler Corporation. JeepForum.com is not in any way associated with Jeep or the Chrysler Corp.