Jeep Grand Cherokee lethal in evasive maneuver - Page 5 - 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

WJ Tube Doors Now Available!*VOTE NOW Help Metalcloak Giveaway an XJ Suspension*TJ 5.25" Speaker Adapters - NalinMFG

Reply
Unread 07-14-2012, 09:10 AM   #61
airec13
Registered User
2012 WK 
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Royal Oak, Michigan
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timo_90xj
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..
Watch at 2:25, brakes are being used throughout the maneuver ( http://www.teknikensvarld.se/jeepmoosetest-part4/ ).

Agree 100% that they know what they're doing: controversial reporting resulting in a media attention. They even state how many people have watched the video. Guaranteed they are loving the attention.

airec13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-14-2012, 10:45 AM   #62
FAUEE
Registered User
2011 WK 
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Hickory, NC
Posts: 140
It smells of something "less than legit". Many other agencies have done this same sort of test and have found that it's perfectly safe. Heck, the Euro NCAP tes has an identical test and found it fine.

My guess is they tested it in a "worst case scenario" to get the results that get people talking about their magazine. Lines like "Jeep should stop selling this car" don't do them any help in sounding credible either.

My guess is they have the tires super cold, under inflated, with the suspension in offroad 1, ESP off, and of course they stated they pushed it to the maximum loading possible with sandbags. Cold road, cold tires, extra weight, and suspension all the way up, no ESP, driving like a tard you can tip damn near anything.
FAUEE is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-14-2012, 11:46 AM   #63
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: 5,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by airec13 View Post
Watch at 2:25, brakes are being used throughout the maneuver ( http://www.teknikensvarld.se/jeepmoosetest-part4/ ).
Uuumh.. yeah, brakes are being used automatically by an ESP- equipped vehicle when doing manouvers like that. Many modern vehicles (at least the ones sold in Europe) also illuminate brake lights when ESP system is activated. Some even turn on hazard signals. At the point on the video (2:25) the vehicle obviously had already lost control, which you can notice from it's behaviour -> the test drivers possibly applied brake, or it was the vehicle doing it. If you watch earlier on the video, you can see ie. the Volvo XC90 on the same test, it clearly slows down - that's because of the ESP system activating and slowing down the vehicle a lot. ESP systems are tuned by the vehicle manufacturers, and some vehicles are programmed more on the "safe" side, meaning killing most of the speed on manbeuvers like on this test.

All ESP systems - and I mean every single one - that are used to keep the vehicle upright and going in the direction you want work by applying BRAKES to the wheel(s) needed to keep the vehicle under control. There are no systems in the world by any manufacturer that would do it any other way. Actually, that's the only way possible to do it. Some of the more modern systems also control the steering a little bit. Heck, the newer anti- crash system apply brakes automatically if they detect an inevitable crash situation.

Quote:
Agree 100% that they know what they're doing: controversial reporting resulting in a media attention. They even state how many people have watched the video. Guaranteed they are loving the attention.
Of what I know, Chrysler corporation is one of only a few manufacturers that have complained about the test results on this test because of bad results - and these tests have been done on dozens and dozens of vehicles from IIRC late 70s or early 80s. Some vehicle manufacturers have made significant changes to their suspension systems (ie. Merc, when their then-new A- class flipped on this very same test), changing the tire sizes for the vehicles (Toyota) because of the results found on this test.

I do agree the reporting is somewhat exaggarating - I myself would not go on to say WK2s are dangerous or lethal on evasive manouvers. As I mentioned earlier, this test basically shows one can flip a new SUV if the circumstances are "right". Btw., as I mentioned earlier, when Chrysler loaded the vehicle by their engineers because they weren't happy with the test results and claimed overload- situation, the Jeep handled the same. I don't know where Chrysler got it's "info" to its press release in the USA, but that same test was done after Chrysler staff loaded the Jeep and the results were similar. It's all mentioned on the original text in Swedish, and so it is shown in the English version.


Quote:
Originally Posted by FAUEE View Post
....Heck, the Euro NCAP tes has an identical test and found it fine.

My guess is they tested it in a "worst case scenario" to get the results that get people talking about their magazine. Lines like "Jeep should stop selling this car" don't do them any help in sounding credible either.

My guess is they have the tires super cold, under inflated, with the suspension in offroad 1, ESP off, and of course they stated they pushed it to the maximum loading possible with sandbags. Cold road, cold tires, extra weight, and suspension all the way up, no ESP, driving like a tard you can tip damn near anything.
If you watch the test and would bother reading the text, you'd notice a few things:

1. Yes, this is the worst case scenario test - it is somewhat harsher than the standard Euro NCAP and similar evasive manouver tests done in the United States. But they do this exact same test, exactly in similar fashion to all vehicles they test. So far there have been no more than a few vehicles that have rolled or have been close to roll over. They have tested hundreds, if not thousand of different vehicles.
2. Tires were at running temp, infalted to manufacturers specs. for fully laiden vehicle
3. ESP and anti- roll systems were turnerd on (as with all other vehicles they test that has these systems)
4. The Jeep used in the test had air suspension, set to "Auto" mode.

This test is very well known within Europe, and the results gotten in this test are usually taken very seriously by manufacturers selling vehicles in Europe.
__________________
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 online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-14-2012, 03:31 PM   #64
airec13
Registered User
2012 WK 
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Royal Oak, Michigan
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timo_90xj

Uuumh.. yeah, brakes are being used automatically by an ESP- equipped vehicle when doing manouvers like that. Many modern vehicles (at least the ones sold in Europe) also illuminate brake lights when ESP system is activated. Some even turn on hazard signals. At the point on the video (2:25) the vehicle obviously had already lost control, which you can notice from it's behaviour -> the test drivers possibly applied brake, or it was the vehicle doing it. If you watch earlier on the video, you can see ie. the Volvo XC90 on the same test, it clearly slows down - that's because of the ESP system activating and slowing down the vehicle a lot. ESP systems are tuned by the vehicle manufacturers, and some vehicles are programmed more on the "safe" side, meaning killing most of the speed on manbeuvers like on this test.

All ESP systems - and I mean every single one - that are used to keep the vehicle upright and going in the direction you want work by applying BRAKES to the wheel(s) needed to keep the vehicle under control. There are no systems in the world by any manufacturer that would do it any other way. Actually, that's the only way possible to do it. Some of the more modern systems also control the steering a little bit. Heck, the newer anti- crash system apply brakes automatically if they detect an inevitable crash situation.
Yes, I agree the ESP system activated the vehicles brakes. BUT I'm pretty sure the exterior brake lights are only activated via the brake switch (which means the driver was depressing the brake pedal). If I'm wrong please provide a link showing the 2011-2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee has a feature which turns on the EXTERIOR brake lights due to ESP activation.

I know Mercedes has their "adaptive brake lights" which flash the exterior brake lights due to ESP, but the Jeep lights were solid and I'm still not convinced the Jeep even has this feature. Again, I don't care if some vehicles have this feature, let's stick to the vehicle in question.

Assuming the driver was applying the brakes might be a factor, or maybe not. But could this imply the driver was coming in too fast? Was he braking (pulsing) in a way to excite the soft off-road suspension and then oversteering late in the second gate to try to hit the last gate? They have been testing cars a long time. You can't rule out foul play on this test. It's very possible the driver has the ability to expose weaknesses by driving/testing a certain way. I would like to see a rebuttal video from Chrysler showing this bogus test being conducted at a Chrysler proving grounds with a Chrysler driver. I know for a fact the vehicle dynamics group at Chelsea proving grounds would have tested numerous limit handling maneuvers on their VDF track.
airec13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-14-2012, 03:56 PM   #65
w1pf
Who, me?
 
w1pf's Avatar
2007 WK 
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Amherst, MA
Posts: 754
One more thing that makes it seem a bit sensationalist is the use of the word "lethal"

Did someone get killed?

Seems pretty likely that even a full rollover in that vehicle wouldn't be lethal to belted-in occupants. Might be cause for a clean set of underwear tho.
__________________
2014 WK2 Overland 5.9L
2007 WK Limited 5.7L
And some past Durangos
Red WK #19, Hemi #68.. I think..
Durango Owners Club DOTY 2011
-------
"Must have been that yesterday was the day that I was born"
w1pf is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-14-2012, 04:22 PM   #66
ColdCase
My Reality Check Bounced
 
ColdCase's Avatar
2011 WK 
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 3,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timo_90xj View Post
... you can see ie. the Volvo XC90 on the same test, it clearly slows down - that's because of the ESP system activating and slowing down the vehicle a lot. ESP systems are tuned by the vehicle manufacturers, and some vehicles are programmed more on the "safe" side, meaning killing most of the speed on manbeuvers like on this test.....
That why Volvos are so dangerous to drive off road, and in poor and variable traction conditions with crap like that interfering with good judgement. Friends don't let friends drive Volvos....
ColdCase is online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-14-2012, 04:54 PM   #67
airec13
Registered User
2012 WK 
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Royal Oak, Michigan
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdCase

Friends don't let friends drive Volvos....
All of the Volvo lovers might find this interesting: according to safercar.gov the 2012 XC90 has the same 4 star rollover rating as the 2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee. However, the Jeep is said to have a risk of rollover of 16.8% while the Volvo has a 17.9%.

Jeep: http://www.safercar.gov/Vehicle+Shop...vehicleId=6591

Volvo: http://www.safercar.gov/Vehicle+Shop...vehicleId=6583

Others I found were the Toyota 4-Runner (3-star, 24.6%), Nissan Pathfinder (3-star, 22.8%), Audi Q7 (4-star, 18.5%), BMW X5 and Ford Explorer (4-star, 17.4%), Acura MDX (4-star, 14%), Lexus RX350 (4-star, 16.4%).

Maybe the crazy Swedes were on to something.... SUVs should be banned, they are ALL potentially lethal! Lol.
airec13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-14-2012, 06:45 PM   #68
LibGrandCher
Registered User
2012 WK 
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: , Ontario
Posts: 368
Nothing good happens when people swerve.
That said...
Why does the JGC look like its going faster than the other vehicles?, strange.

I investigate fatalities weekly.
Simple rule...'if its bigger than you, swerve(safely if posible).If its smaller than you, hit it and fix the repairs later.'
Just last week investigated a kid driving a neon(maybe bad example...chrysler product), he died swerving to avoid a rabbit at 80 km\hr. This happens daily all over the world, people trying to avoid tire tread,mufflers,hub caps,road kill,other people changing lanes,mattresses and other debris.
Debris most likely will damage your vehicle,Yes .
Swerving almost never ends well. Not sure why people feel they can be instant stunt drivers when they encounter danger.
Most cars have amazing systems to help drivers in front impact collisions(airbags,windshield,seatbelts etc.)

That said Chrysler needs to get out infront of this quickly.

Also ,tires poping on the the steering axle is just crazy dangerous in any situation.
LibGrandCher is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-14-2012, 09:03 PM   #69
jgc4ever
Registered User
2012 WK 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 343
I think the jgc looks like it's going faster than the Toureg and XC90 too. And it looks like the jgc was turned more violently than the other two vehicles were turned.
jgc4ever is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-14-2012, 10:33 PM   #70
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: 5,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdCase View Post
That why Volvos are so dangerous to drive off road, and in poor and variable traction conditions with crap like that interfering with good judgement. Friends don't let friends drive Volvos....
I hated the V50 I occasionally drove when I didn't have a vehicle for a while a couple years ago during winter the slightest amount the rear-end started going sideways and the vehicle would start correcting it.. I still can't understand how can it be safe on corners, because all it did was instead of turning to right direction with slight amount of oversteer, it went on to understeer and trying go off tho road. Maybe it had an off-road vehicle's heart within
__________________
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 online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-15-2012, 11:29 AM   #71
AndreasK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Vaggeryd, Sweden
Posts: 18
The auto setting does not lower the car until somewhere around 60mph in auto setting, maybe the result would have been better if it had lowered the car at 25mph and that the driver had to raise manually or use one of the other settings to gain height?
AndreasK is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2012, 08:14 AM   #72
Bale
Registered User
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Jeep Heaven, Norway
Posts: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by WKdeuce View Post
That's gotta be the quadra-lift version right?

Neither of the "reference cars" have an air suspension, so that's apples to oranges. ....
Ehhh? So it's OK for a vehicle to roll over if it has air suspension?

Shouldn't the air suspension system be modified if it causes rollover tendencies?
__________________
1998 ZG (ZJ) Grand Cherokee Ltd, 4L 4x4
Bale is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2012, 08:23 AM   #73
Bale
Registered User
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Jeep Heaven, Norway
Posts: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackal01 View Post
... My biggest issue with the entire "test" is that none of them were wearing any sorta of personal protective equipment. Anyone who is anybody with any sorta of legitimate agency or company would protect the occupants in a test vehicle.
This as an auto magazine, not an agency. They do not claim to be.

I assume they do not use PPE because their experienced test drivers are able to safely abort the test if a rollover is imminent (as they did in this case).
__________________
1998 ZG (ZJ) Grand Cherokee Ltd, 4L 4x4
Bale is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2012, 09:07 AM   #74
AndreasK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Vaggeryd, Sweden
Posts: 18
The "trained testdriver" is a retired police officer known to appear in tv shows and commenting on police chase clips etc. So I would regard him as experienced but not trained, ie he is not schumacher.

the worst thing is not the behaviour itself, I pretty much assumed this on the car type (laws of physics). But Chryslers lie "sting of truth" is alarming. He stated that this behaviour could not be repeated with them present but it could as shown in the follow up sequence. He knew that they where filming and still he tried to blame the magazine. Chrysler next statement (if any) will be very interesting.

As Chrysler where present at the second test I guess they watched the speed closley. At the first test they drove 63kmh where the normal speed should be 70 as for the XC90 etc. It is possible that the behavior did not occur at 63 the second time and that the tests on film2 is at 70.

The air suspension should be a good thing but I can agree that it is not correct to compare to XC90 or tourag as they are not the same class. In my view they are normal cars with SUV qualities as where the Jeep is a SUV with normal car qualites. More comparable cars in the Swedish market could be Land Rover Discovery HSE, Pajero, Toyota LandCruiser or Nissan Pathfinder. My GC has "semi" off road tyres with larger pattern in the inner where as the XC90 has normal on road tyres.

They probebly did try this but I would have been interesting to see a run in the SPORT mode, this would have answered if settings on the car could resolve the problem or if is a hardware based problem.
AndreasK is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-17-2012, 06:43 PM   #75
WKdeuce
Registered User
1998 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Malvern PA
Posts: 2,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by LibGrandCher View Post
Why does the JGC look like its going faster than the other vehicles?, strange.
It sure looks like it's turning much sharper than the other two.

I'd be curious to see the test with 20s on the VW and Volvo, but I really want to see the test with 18s on the Cherokee.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bale View Post
Ehhh? So it's OK for a vehicle to roll over if it has air suspension?

Shouldn't the air suspension system be modified if it causes rollover tendencies?
Seeing as I don't own the air suspension, yeah, that's a piece of info that I'm very interested in. That's another variable I'd like to see. Let's see the same test with coils & 18s.
Not that it matters to Chrysler's lawyers, but it matters when I hand the keys to my wife...

In for more developments, hopefully.
__________________
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.