2011 stock for stock better than 2011 Grand Cherokee

[IZwack]

You might love a car like that - but a company like Ford simply can't afford to rely on such vehicles. The majority of buyers need a vehicle that makes sense. The SRT-8 GC doesn't.

How many SRT-8s is GM going to sell when gas is $5/gallon?

The MPG of the 5.7L V8 is already at the edge of what is considered acceptable for a modern vehicle (and yes, to get those impressive numbers, you need the more expensive mid-grade fuel) - the 4x4 version doesn't even get 20 mpg highway. Not very impressive until they launch the 8-speed to bring that number up.

...

A car-manufacturer has to offer what makes sense to stay in business or focus on some individual wishes and desires of performance- and offroad-fans and go broke. The Explorer makes PERFECT sense. It's just as easy as that and nobody can blame them for making a business decision. That's their job.

Ah but from some perspective (like mine), this discussion isnt about survivability of a company. I saw it more as a vehicle vs. vehicle, specification vs specification, performance vs performance - which, to me, isnt about a company's profitability or a certain vehicle's mass market viability.

If it were me, I'd probably go with the SRT8 because I definitely wouldn't buy an SUV if I had MPGs in mind (or encountered gridlock traffic almost every morning) and SUV's these days rarely (if at all) "off road".

 

[LincolnAviFan]

Ah but from some perspective (like mine), this discussion isnt about survivability of a company. I saw it more as a vehicle vs. vehicle, specification vs specification, performance vs performance - which, to me, isnt about a company's profitability or a certain vehicle's mass market viability.

That's true. I was just a bit irritated since thaywood threw in the SRT-8 - which is not a "typical" Jeep either (and not even yet available) - so I thought he was comparing these cars in theory. You can't compare features, specifications or performance of a car before you even know any specs of it, correct?

 

[IZwack]

That's true. I was just a bit irritated since thaywood threw in the SRT-8 - which is not a "typical" Jeep either (and not even yet available) - so I thought he was comparing these cars in theory. You can't compare features, specifications or performance of a car before you even know any specs of it, correct?

I think I was the one that first mentioned SRT8 (first reply of the thread) - but you are correct, we can only make assumptions about the upcoming SRT8. But on the flip side of that assumption coin, as with most year-to-year trends of performance vehicles, it will probably be at least on par with the last model in engine performance (and if not, then probably better).

 

[LincolnAviFan]

If it were me, I'd probably go with the SRT8 because I definitely wouldn't buy an SUV if I had MPGs in mind (or encountered gridlock traffic almost every morning) and SUV's these days rarely (if at all) "off road".

Point well taken - but the majority of SUV-buyers are probably buying an SUV because they "have to" - in other words, their family (incl. dog) won't fit in a coupe. And in that case, they might care about MPG, too..

And you're also right about the importance of "Off-Roading" - or the lack thereof, to be exact.

 

[LincolnAviFan]

But on the flip side of that assumption coin, as with most year-to-year trends of performance vehicles, it will probably be at least on par with the last model in engine performance (and if not, then probably better).

It will be better - that's for sure.

 

[LincolnAviFan]

Oh, BTW, did you guys notice this thread? That's too funny:

http://www.jeepgarage.org/showthread.php?t=15796&page=8

 

[2011EX]

You might love a car like that - but a company like Ford simply can't afford to rely on such vehicles. The majority of buyers need a vehicle that makes sense. The SRT-8 GC doesn't.

How many SRT-8s is GM going to sell when gas is $5/gallon?

The MPG of the 5.7L V8 is already at the edge of what is considered acceptable for a modern vehicle (and yes, to get those impressive numbers, you need the more expensive mid-grade fuel) - the 4x4 version doesn't even get 20 mpg highway. Not very impressive until they launch the 8-speed to bring that number up.

Sure, there will always be a market for high-powered performance cars - but those cars in that category will be sold for a profit by Porsche, Mercedes or BMW - not by Jeep or Ford.

A car-manufacturer has to offer what makes sense to stay in business or focus on some individual wishes and desires of performance- and offroad-fans and go broke. The Explorer makes PERFECT sense. It's just as easy as that and nobody can blame them for making a business decision. That's their job.

The 5.7 Hemi actually gets great gas mileage. The posted numbers are government ratings based on all types of driving. My mom just bought the new GC and she is getting 24MPG cruising at 60MPH on flat roads at the beach and 27MPG driving 45-50MPH down the island. Now driving faster and more city driving drops those numbers to the rated figures, but then again that is not her norm. They take it out on the beach a lot and it serves their purpose.

I am purchasing the new explorer for my wife to haul the kids, it fits out lifestyle better. I would prefer a V8, since gas prices really do not bother me at even $5/gal but its not my daily driver.

 

[2011EX]

Oh, BTW, did you guys notice this thread? That's too funny:

http://www.jeepgarage.org/showthread.php?t=15796&page=8

HAHA that is too funny. Guess there are a lot of people on both sides of the fence.

 

[LincolnAviFan]

The 5.7 Hemi actually gets great gas mileage. The posted numbers are government ratings based on all types of driving. My mom just bought the new GC and she is getting 24MPG cruising at 60MPH on flat roads at the beach and 27MPG driving 45-50MPH down the island. Now driving faster and more city driving drops those numbers to the rated figures, but then again that is not her norm. They take it out on the beach a lot and it serves their purpose.

I am purchasing the new explorer for my wife to haul the kids, it fits out lifestyle better. I would prefer a V8, since gas prices really do not bother me at even $5/gal but its not my daily driver.

If that's the case, it seems they improved the engine and - of course - the aerodynamics. We owned a 2006 Overland with the HEMI and the mileage wasn't that great.

Honestly, I don't get this bashing on both sides. I like BOTH and I'm seriously considering getting the GC for myself and the EX for my mother. I'm not commuting, either, so the V8 would be my choice as well. The SRT-8 would simply be a bit "overkill" for me..

 

[Mishtar]

I'd say, they are "different". If you need an SUV with 3 rows, the Ex wins. If you want to go offroading, the GC is your choice.

The GC gives you a huge "bang for the buck" and the fit and finish is great, too.

Depends where you live. The cheapest I could get a Cherokee with Leather was $45k in Canada. The Explorer ran me $40k

 

[LincolnAviFan]

Depends where you live. The cheapest I could get a Cherokee with Leather was $45k in Canada. The Explorer ran me $40k

Now that's interesting - so it's vice versa. When I'm looking at the prices for a Jeep in Europe (let's say, Germany)...they are about 50% more over there.

 

[barho]

I think I was the one that first mentioned SRT8 (first reply of the thread) - but you are correct, we can only make assumptions about the upcoming SRT8. But on the flip side of that assumption coin, as with most year-to-year trends of performance vehicles, it will probably be at least on par with the last model in engine performance (and if not, then probably better).

The 2012 SRT8 will have the new 6.4L 470HP/470TQ that is currently being placed in the 2012 Chally.

 

[edge929]

470/470? At what point is it just too much power for a given vehicle? I'm all for monster engines......... on sports cars and maybe even a super-off-road (torque) but the Jeep is neither of these. Does Jeep want to compete with the ZR-1 vette or perhaps a 5.0 Mustang? Please, somebody explain to me why 470HP/tq is needed (bragging rights aside)?

 

[Joe Dirt]

To be fair I think you'll find that thread quite old, and many, many guys who didn't like it at first (a common trait with anything new) have now become fans of the WKII.

And I would bet my underpants that the same is going to happen on the Explorer-Forum.

Go figure.

470/470? At what point is it just too much power for a given vehicle? I'm all for monster engines......... on sports cars and maybe even a super-off-road (torque) but the Jeep is neither of these. Does Jeep want to compete with the ZR-1 vette or perhaps a 5.0 Mustang? Please, somebody explain to me why 470HP/tq is needed (bragging rights aside)?

Aside from serious off-roading or max towing, it's not. I have a V8 Ex, and it went over 3,000 RPM once, for a sound clip for Sam. My boat is a 14' Aluminum, and none of what I do requires anything more than what the new Ex can offer.

If it's a special production vehicle, like the SRT-8, or the SVT anything, that's one thing. But to stuff them into large volume sellers just because Biff needs a V8 because Biff thinks he needs one at the hockey rink to pick up Biff Jr., is pointless to me anymore. Not with similar performance, and in most cases better performance- than the V8's they replace or combat.

 

[thaywood]

You might love a car like that - but a company like Ford simply can't afford to rely on such vehicles. The majority of buyers need a vehicle that makes sense. The SRT-8 GC doesn't.

Yep. I would love an SUV like that. The GC isn't a car. Unfortunately, I can't afford one and probably never will. But the point is that they should be offered for those who can afford them and want to drive them. Chrysler seems to have no problem offering RWD V-8 powered mid-size SUV's for the masses. What's Ford's problem?

How many SRT-8s is GM going to sell when gas is $5/gallon?

None. GM doesn't make Jeeps Jusk kidding. I know you meant to say Chrysler. Anyway, according to how many of them I see on the road in my area, they'll probably make quite a few of them. And gas hasn't gotten to $5 a gallon yet. It probably will be there by the end of this year, but it's still around $3 where I live.

The MPG of the 5.7L V8 is already at the edge of what is considered acceptable for a modern vehicle (and yes, to get those impressive numbers, you need the more expensive mid-grade fuel) - the 4x4 version doesn't even get 20 mpg highway. Not very impressive until they launch the 8-speed to bring that number up.

So? People still buy them or Chrysler wouldn't still be building them. And the Flexplorer V-6 AWD gets a combined city/highway mpg of 19. And it only does 17 in the city and 23 on the hwy. Not a whole heckuva lot better than the Jeep.

Sure, there will always be a market for high-powered performance cars - but those cars in that category will be sold for a profit by Porsche, Mercedes or BMW - not by Jeep or Ford.

Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT-8??? That sounds like a Chrysler product to me. And it will be returning next year. Chrysler seems to think folks will buy them. And I agree.

A car-manufacturer has to offer what makes sense to stay in business or focus on some individual wishes and desires of performance- and offroad-fans and go broke. The Explorer makes PERFECT sense. It's just as easy as that and nobody can blame them for making a business decision. That's their job.

I can blame them. Chrysler, Dodge, Toyota, Nissan, and other companies seem to understand that there are still many people...not just off-roaders (I'm not an off-roader)...who would still prefer the capabilities and security of a real SUV with RWD and a true low-range 4x4 drivetrain. I see the GC/Durango twins selling quite well and Chrysler making a tidy profit on them. Too bad I can't afford one, or I'd be all over that Jeep with the Hemi!!

 

[thaywood]

470/470? At what point is it just too much power for a given vehicle? I'm all for monster engines......... on sports cars and maybe even a super-off-road (torque) but the Jeep is neither of these. Does Jeep want to compete with the ZR-1 vette or perhaps a 5.0 Mustang? Please, somebody explain to me why 470HP/tq is needed (bragging rights aside)?

Because that's a whole $h!tpile of horsepower and it's AWESOME!!!! The more power the better, I always say. There's not substitute for cubic inches! Power! Power! POWER, BABY!!!! That's what it's all about!!! MOAR PA'R!!!!!! Horsepower rules!!!!!! Me likey POWER!!!!!

 

[Thrumcap]

This one could be interesting!!!
The F-150 version of the 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6. Additional tuning is expected to push the F-150's EcoBoost engine to around 400 horsepower and 400 pound-feet of torque, a jump over the Taurus SHO and Flex crossovers on the road. While a six-cylinder isn't normally equated with work trucks, Ford will push the direct-injected, twin-turbo V-6 as a workhorse, which will also be the first EcoBoost application on a pickup truck.

Yes- this is the Ecoboost I am talking about. I currently have a BMW M3 and a 535xi. We now need a vehicle with 3 rows and unfortunately the X5 is just too small. The Explorer would interest me if it had just a little more driving excitement to offer but with the current V6 it does not differentiate itself from enough from it's crossover competition.

 

[barho]

You might love a car like that - but a company like Ford simply can't
How many SRT-8s is GM going to sell when gas is $5/gallon?

All 3,000 of the units they make each year, that's how many. They were still selling when gas hit $4/gal. Low production performance vehicles will always sell, cause you will always find 3,000 folks every year that have to have them.

 

[2TimingTom]

I can blame them. Chrysler, Dodge, Toyota, Nissan, and other companies seem to understand that there are still many people...not just off-roaders (I'm not an off-roader)...who would still prefer the capabilities and security of a real SUV with RWD and a true low-range 4x4 drivetrain. I see the GC/Durango twins selling quite well and Chrysler making a tidy profit on them. Too bad I can't afford one, or I'd be all over that Jeep with the Hemi!!

For now. Maybe Ford is just the first of its kind. Maybe the others will follow suit and copy Ford with their SUVs.

There's not substitute for cubic inches!

I think the expression you're looking for is:

There's no replacement for displacement.

And my answer to that is: yes there is. It's called technology and forced induction.

The T/A in Smokey and The Bandit was a 6.6L pushrod piece of crap. It made something like 177 horsepower. There are 2 liter 4 bangers almost putting out that kind of power today without a turbo. And turbo 4 bangers putting out 300 hp from the factory.

And back to the SRT8 GC- has anyone priced out a brake job for those massive binders (at least on the current GC)? I've heard you can't run down to your local Autozone and pick up pads and rotors. Dealer only parts. $1000 or so in parts alone will get you squared away.

And the 2010 GC SRT8 comes with run-flat performance tires. These type of tires are great at providing awesome grip in dry and wet conditions. In the snow- they suck. Off-road- they suck. And with 284/40/20 tires, you won't be going too far off-road anyway unless you like dented wheels. So basically, the 4x4 system on an SRT8 GC is just weight.

 

[Joe Dirt]

All 3,000 of the units they make each year, that's how many. They were still selling when gas hit $4/gal. Low production performance vehicles will always sell, cause you will always find 3,000 folks every year that have to have them.

That's the argument both for a short run SVT type vehicle, and against for a high production guzzler- make money on them, don't drive people to other makes and models because it's all you can offer in a similar trim/performance...

I mean- look at the people that are looking and buying this new Ex- Lexus owners, now BMW drivers... Come on- you can't discredit everything with regards to powertrain on this vehicle...