First reviews and comparison to 2014 GC - Page 3 - 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 Cherokee & Comanche Forums > KL Cherokee 2014 & up > First reviews and comparison to 2014 GC

WJ Modular Recovery & Bull Bar Relocation PackagesRough Country Jeep Suspension Deals at Rockridge 4WD!Steinjager TJ tube doors

Reply
Unread 09-23-2013, 08:47 AM   #31
shark715
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Millington, NJ
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmill89 View Post
The 4 Runner and Xtera have Full-Frames not a uni-body. The Grand Cherokee has a "uni-frame" with a ladder-type frame welded to the floor (full-length rails) in addition to the strength provided by the body, and is a purpose designed platform specifically designed for an SUV. The KL shares it's platform with the Dodge Dart and Alfa-Romeo Giulietta, it is a compact-car chassis which relies on the floor pan, rocker panels, pillars, and roof to form a "space frame" that isn't anywhere near as strong as a full-frame or GC style uni-frame.

You're obviously not going to rip it in half or anything like that (unless it is severely overloaded) and towing a heavy trailer once or twice is probably ok, but if you use it to tow heavy (3,000lb +) trailers on a regular basis I wouldn't be surprised for stress cracks to start showing up in the uni-body and/or doors no longer lining up properly after a few years (likely after the warranty is up).
You make a good point, but I really doubt Chrysler would give it a tow rating of 4500 lbs if it were not easily capable of it. There's just too much risk of doing so...not just potential warranty claims. They would be risking having NHTSA coming after them if stress cracks starting showing up, even well after the warranty period, as well as class action lawsuits.

My current tow vehicle is a 2001 Pathfinder which has a uni-body more akin to what the KL will be according to your description. Nissan rates the tow capacity at 5000 lbs, and for more than a decade I have been towing very close to 5000 lbs. regularly and over long distances. No issues with stress cracks, doors not fitting correctly, or any other uni-body issues.

I would think that moderate to heavy off road use would more likely cause uni-body failure issues than trailer towing. I'm under the impression that trailer towing capacities are typically more constrained by powertrain issues versus vehicle structure. Just look at the trailer towing package offered on Jeep vehicles over the past 20 years. Other than the tow bar itself, the modifications are not to the structure of the chassis or body.

shark715 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-23-2013, 05:44 PM   #32
dmill89
Registered User
1995 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by shark715 View Post
My current tow vehicle is a 2001 Pathfinder which has a uni-body more akin to what the KL will be according to your description. Nissan rates the tow capacity at 5000 lbs, and for more than a decade I have been towing very close to 5000 lbs. regularly and over long distances. No issues with stress cracks, doors not fitting correctly, or any other uni-body issues.
2nd (96-04) generation pathfinders have full-length "frame" rails welded to the floor similar to a Grand Cherokee.

1st (85-95) and 3rd (05-12) generation Pathfinders had full-frames.

Pathfinders (except 2013+), Grand Cherokees, etc. are also RWD (primarily) where as the KL is FWD so the weight of the trailer is pulling/twisting almost the entire length of the uni-body (from the hitch to the front suspension mounts).

Quote:
Originally Posted by shark715 View Post
I'm under the impression that trailer towing capacities are typically more constrained by powertrain issues versus vehicle structure. Just look at the trailer towing package offered on Jeep vehicles over the past 20 years. Other than the tow bar itself, the modifications are not to the structure of the chassis or body.
Towing capacities are determined by all kinds of factors. The Wrangler has a low (2,500lb 2dr / 3,500lb 4dr) towing capacity due to it's relatively short wheelbase even though it has an extremely strong fully-boxed frame and drivetrain more than capable of towing heavy loads.

My 2013 Mustang GT is only rated to tow 1,000lbs. (not that I would ever tow anything with it) even though the drivetrain is capable of far more. This is likely limited by the suspension since the uni-body has significant reinforcement to handle the torque of the V8.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shark715 View Post
I would think that moderate to heavy off road use would more likely cause uni-body failure issues than trailer towing.
Absolutely, though the KL isn't designed for "hardcore" off-roading and any failures as a result of such use would be classified as "owner-abuse", leaving Chrysler/Fiat off the hook for any warranty claims or potential NHTSA investigations.
dmill89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2013, 08:14 AM   #33
KG8893
Registered User
1998 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Middletown, Maryland
Posts: 1,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmill89 View Post
I wouldn't want to tow any trailer over 2,500-3,000 lbs. with a FWD vehicle (especially one based on a compact car platform) no matter what it is rated for. The weight is on the wrong set of wheels and it places allot of stress on a relatively week uni-body, I would also be very hesitant to trust that light-duty 9-speed automatic transmission (again it designed for FWD cars, not trucks/SUVs)with a heavy trailer (I'm kind of worried how they'll hold up in a vehicle as heavy as the KL even without a trailer). For towing I would be looking at an RWD(primary drive) vehicle with either a full-frame or heavily reinforced uni-body such as a Grand Cherokee, Xtera, 4Runner, etc.
That right there. I have seen too many almost deadly wrecks caused by idiots towing motor homes with a prius or crossover. You also forgot to mention brakes. On a vehicle that weighs 2500# towing a 4000# trailer, a damn good set of brakes is needed, and without any type of trailer brake system, it's an accident waiting to happen.
__________________
I'm not saying we should kill stupid people... Just get rid of all the warning labels...
If you find my comments to "infer" something, they don't. Go to hell.
Built Not Bought #666
KG8893 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2013, 08:24 AM   #34
WhiteOut
Web Wheeler
 
WhiteOut's Avatar
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,832
Quote:
Originally Posted by shark715 View Post
I would think that moderate to heavy off road use would more likely cause uni-body failure issues than trailer towing
So your claim is that a 2014 unibody is going to be manufactured with less strength and worse design that something 10+ years old?

If you're going to claim this, you'd better get over to the ZJ, WJ, XJ sections and let them know that offroading will break their unibodies.
WhiteOut is online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2013, 10:22 AM   #35
shark715
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Millington, NJ
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmill89 View Post
Absolutely, though the KL isn't designed for "hardcore" off-roading and any failures as a result of such use would be classified as "owner-abuse", leaving Chrysler/Fiat off the hook for any warranty claims or potential NHTSA investigations.
Not sure what constitutes hardcore, but I were a KL Trailhawk owner that broke because of off road use, and Chrysler tried to use that as an excuse not to cover the repair, I would certainly walk into court armed with one of their brochures that clearly shows they are marketing the product for off road use. Granted it's unreasonable to expect it to survive being driven off a cliff, but it should be able to handle the situations shown in the photos no holes barred.
shark715 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2013, 10:29 AM   #36
shark715
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Millington, NJ
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteOut View Post
So your claim is that a 2014 unibody is going to be manufactured with less strength and worse design that something 10+ years old?

If you're going to claim this, you'd better get over to the ZJ, WJ, XJ sections and let them know that offroading will break their unibodies.
No, not saying that at all. I'm suggesting that the moderate to heavy off road use is more likely to cause a unibody (or body on frame, for that matter) failure versus trailer towing within the manufacturers specs.
shark715 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2013, 03:30 PM   #37
dmill89
Registered User
1995 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by shark715 View Post
Not sure what constitutes hardcore, but I were a KL Trailhawk owner that broke because of off road use, and Chrysler tried to use that as an excuse not to cover the repair, I would certainly walk into court armed with one of their brochures that clearly shows they are marketing the product for off road use. Granted it's unreasonable to expect it to survive being driven off a cliff, but it should be able to handle the situations shown in the photos no holes barred.
I haven't seen a warranty book for a KL yet, but many warranties for Trucks and SUVs (even ones with full-frames that can handle pretty serious off-roading) specifically any damage resulting from off-road use is not covered.


The 2013 Wrangler warranty actually lists "driving over curbs" as an example of "misuse" .

Quote:
From 2013 Jeep warranty book: (link)
3.6 Other Exclusions
Your warranties don’t cover the costs of repairing
damage or conditions caused by any of the following:
• fire or accident;
• abuse or negligence;
misuse — for example, driving over curbs or overloading;
• tampering with the emission systems, or with a part
that could affect the emission systems;
• use of used parts, even if they were originally supplied
by Chrysler (however, authorized Chrysler /
MOPAR remanufactured parts are covered);
• windshield or rear window damage from external
objects;
• any changes made to your vehicle that don’t comply
with Chrysler; or
• using any fluid that doesn’t meet the minimum
recommendations in your Owner’s Manual.
dmill89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-24-2013, 03:52 PM   #38
krawler510
Registered User
1999 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: MD
Posts: 1,751
Quote:
Originally Posted by KG8893
On a vehicle that weighs 2500# towing a 4000# trailer, a damn good set of brakes is needed, and without any type of trailer brake system, it's an accident waiting to happen.
Agreed, but nothing weighs 2500# except Smart Cars(less) and Lotus.

Sent from my iPhone using JeepForum
__________________
'The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.'
krawler510 is online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-27-2013, 02:49 PM   #39
kens97sto171
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Florence, Kentucky
Posts: 120
I thought I read the new Cherokee weighs 4000#
They mentioned it was the reason the car is a bit slower than they thought it would be with the pentastar v6

If that weight is correct. It should tow better than one would think.
kens97sto171 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-28-2013, 01:19 PM   #40
barnettd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: fort myers, florida
Posts: 95
Context

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmill89 View Post
I haven't seen a warranty book for a KL yet, but many warranties for Trucks and SUVs (even ones with full-frames that can handle pretty serious off-roading) specifically any damage resulting from off-road use.


The 2013 Wrangler warranty actually lists "driving over curbs" as an example of "misuse" .
Those references illustrate illegal or un-intended uses.

"Yeah I was trying to get away from some terrorists in a VW van and I drove over some curbs and down the grass slope in the parking lot of the Lone Pine Mall because my 08 wrangler can't get to 88 miles per hour!"

I have a 2008 wrangler, no issues with repair work with my dealer even though it has obviously been on the trail...
barnettd is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-29-2013, 06:05 AM   #41
jay-h
Registered User
1989 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: , NJ
Posts: 4,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by barnettd View Post
Those references illustrate illegal or un-intended uses.

"Yeah I was trying to get away from some terrorists in a VW van and I drove over some curbs and down the grass slope in the parking lot of the Lone Pine Mall because my 08 wrangler can't get to 88 miles per hour!"

I have a 2008 wrangler, no issues with repair work with my dealer even though it has obviously been on the trail...
I think it's more lawerese. If you damage a tire, rim, or dent the body going over a curb, I doubt those would be covered. But it wouldn't affect your transmission warranty.
__________________
My toys
'89 Wrangler YJ
'47 CJ2-A

wife's toys
97 Grand Cherokee (ZJ)
87 MB 560SL roadster
jay-h is online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-30-2013, 10:28 AM   #42
KG8893
Registered User
1998 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Middletown, Maryland
Posts: 1,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by shark715 View Post

Not sure what constitutes hardcore, but I were a KL Trailhawk owner that broke because of off road use, and Chrysler tried to use that as an excuse not to cover the repair, I would certainly walk into court armed with one of their brochures that clearly shows they are marketing the product for off road use. Granted it's unreasonable to expect it to survive being driven off a cliff, but it should be able to handle the situations shown in the photos no holes barred.
A good friend of mine drove his 2012 silverado through a mud hole and hydro locked his motor and the dealer refused to cover it under warranty. He went in there with a lawyer and one of their advertisement videos showing it driving through mud, and he got a brand new motor.
__________________
I'm not saying we should kill stupid people... Just get rid of all the warning labels...
If you find my comments to "infer" something, they don't. Go to hell.
Built Not Bought #666
KG8893 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 10-01-2013, 12:29 PM   #43
kloubik
Registered User
2014 WK 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 109
Another review on thetruthaboutcars.com

From the article:

"Any reservations about the new Cherokee dishonoring the vaunted XJ Cherokee of years past, as well as the Jeep brand, can be put to bed. This is the real deal as far as off-road capability. The big problem is that the vast majority of Cherokees, Trailhawk models included, will probably not see an off-road course. At most, they’ll traverse a gravel driveway or a turnout. If you want a crossover that can hang with a Wrangler Rubicon, then there is no other option. But for anybody looking for a solid CUV option for the daily grind, it’s tough to recommend the Cherokee. Discounting its amazing off-road abilities, it does not appear to be competitive with the current class leaders in terms of on-road performance, build quality and cargo capacity. The fact that its big brother, the Grand Cherokee, is so competent makes the Cherokee’s faults even more disappointing."
kloubik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 10-01-2013, 06:00 PM   #44
barnettd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: fort myers, florida
Posts: 95
What a goofy bunch of crap

Quote:
Originally Posted by kloubik View Post
Another review on thetruthaboutcars.com

From the article:

"Any reservations about the new Cherokee dishonoring the vaunted XJ Cherokee of years past, as well as the Jeep brand, can be put to bed. This is the real deal as far as off-road capability. The big problem is that the vast majority of Cherokees, Trailhawk models included, will probably not see an off-road course. At most, they’ll traverse a gravel driveway or a turnout. If you want a crossover that can hang with a Wrangler Rubicon, then there is no other option. But for anybody looking for a solid CUV option for the daily grind, it’s tough to recommend the Cherokee. Discounting its amazing off-road abilities, it does not appear to be competitive with the current class leaders in terms of on-road performance, build quality and cargo capacity. The fact that its big brother, the Grand Cherokee, is so competent makes the Cherokee’s faults even more disappointing."
This has so many illogical and goofy conclusions... I don't even know where to start.
barnettd is offline   Reply With Quote




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.