Allpar Forums banner

41 - 60 of 90 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,171 Posts
Indeed, for all its weightiness, the original Liberty was not very big inside or out. The current Cherokee is spacious inside in comparison.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,029 Posts
If they are making RWD they have to stuff an I-6 in it.
More likely the next Cherokee starts with the 2.0L hurricane as the standard option. I don't know what the future holds in the 3.2L vs. a successor to fit in that slot. More likely they keep powertrain options separate between the two vehicles, which means the next Cherokee will not have the I6 as an upgrade option. That will belong to the next Grand Cherokee.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,969 Posts
More likely the next Cherokee starts with the 2.0L hurricane as the standard option. I don't know what the future holds in the 3.2L vs. some derivative of the next Grand Cherokee's I6. More likely they keep powertrain options separate between the two models, which means the next Cherokee will not have the I6 as an upgrade option.
A Cherokee Trackawk with an inline-6 sounds awfully appealing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,727 Posts
I thought I read the Cherokee will have the I6 as a differentiator between itself and the Compass. The Grand Cherokee will rely more on extra size and high end models to separate from the Cherokee. All subject to change of course.;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: UN4GTBL and T_690

·
Jeepaholic
Joined
·
5,715 Posts
Pretty sure it's already bigger than the Liberty.

Edit:
2002 Liberty - 71.6" wide, 174.7" long
2012 Liberty - 73.1" wide, 176.1" long
2019 Cherokee - 73.2" wide, 182" long

In fact, the Liberty is closer in size to the new Compass.
Parked side by side, Liberty appears much larger (perhaps because of different shape, and it’s much taller?). I imagine the extra length for Cherokee is accounted for by its longer snout. Interior cargo room, there is no comparison...Liberty has an extra 4.4 cubic feet of cargo space behind the second row (29 vs 24.6) and an extra 14.1 cubic feet behind the first row (69 vs 54.9). I guess packaging is everything...and I suppose Cherokee probably has to account for more safety equipment which takes up room.

Indeed, for all its weightiness, the original Liberty was not very big inside or out. The current Cherokee is spacious inside in comparison.
The interior specs are very similar, with Liberty better in some areas and Cherokee better in others. Where Liberty shined was it’s cargo capacity...something that’s lacking in the current Cherokee.

2019 Jeep® Cherokee Model Comparison Chart - Detailed Specs | Jeep® (at https://www.jeep.com/compare/detailed-chart.cherokee.2019.html?modelYearCode=CUJ201908&sid=1037056&KWNM=2019+jeep+cherokee+interior+dimensions&KWID=43700041663110211&TR=1&channel=paidsearch&gclsrc=aw.ds&ds_rl=1267886&ds_rl=1272981&ds_rl=1273020&gclid=Cj0KCQjwl6LoBRDqARIsABllMSaT4XM9em8xDiGEdi8FePyvD2Q57lFYbXUVMjLa0lRiz5QqNIQMi6gaAu4LEALw_wcB )

2003 Jeep Liberty Specs: 4-Door Sport Specifications (at https://www.thecarconnection.com/specifications/jeep_liberty_2003_4dr-sport )
 
  • Like
Reactions: UN4GTBL and GasAxe

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,986 Posts
This is FCA - you will be up-modeled, and you will like it!
Question is on which platform will Cherokee end up. Small "ultra stretch", Compact, Giorgio, Giorgio G. I can see Compact EOL with this Cherokee.

As I said I can see the major difference between Giorgio and Giorgio G up front. Which engines can be fit. Giorgio has only 2.0, 2.2 diesel, and V6 90° which sits very low. We can only speculate what else fits and with which repercussions

Italians can give a hand with V6 90° for Trackhawk if it's necessity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
Discussion Starter #48
I thought I read the Cherokee will have the I6 as a differentiator between itself and the Compass. The Grand Cherokee will rely more on extra size and high end models to separate from the Cherokee. All subject to change of course.;)
We know that the I-6 is roughly 3.0L in displacement, correct? Perhaps the I-6 will come in a number of different configurations based on the application. For example, in the Ram pickup (the heaviest application) it might use dual turbos or the twin-scroll turbo. For something smaller like the Cherokee, perhaps a single turbo would suffice.

Additionally, perhaps the I-6 will vary in displacement a little depending on the application, such as 3.2L for the Ram and 2.8L for the Cherokee (I'm just making those up).

Don't forget the FCA patent from a few years ago that would allow for a lower valvetrain height (or something like that?) which might come in handy for an otherwise tall I-6.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,969 Posts
Question is on which platform will Cherokee end up. Small "ultra stretch", Compact, Giorgio, Giorgio G. I can see Compact EOL with this Cherokee.

As I said I can see the major difference between Giorgio and Giorgio G up front. Which engines can be fit. Giorgio has only 2.0, 2.2 diesel, and V6 90° which sits very low. We can only speculate what else fits and with which repercussions

Italians can give a hand with V6 90° for Trackhawk if it's necessity.
Guessing something between Giorgio and Giorgio G. Like I keep saying, Dodge was at one point supposed to get a smaller RWD crossover, so it can probably share build points with a theoretical RWD Cherokee.

GG seems like it's made for larger vehicles, right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
It would not surprise me to see the next gen Cherokee come with 1.3T base, 2.0T upgrade and a PHEV as top choice and probably etorque with smaller choices. Unless next gen Charokee goes rwd which I doubt it will not have T 6 option. T 6 will not likely be rwd/awd/4wd only. I would not be surprised to see 2.0T become base for Grand Charokee, with T 6 being option, with 6.4 Hemi and 6.2SC Hemi on SRT and Trackhawk models. 5.7 Hemi might stick around as it is phased out. I also suspect etorque and phev options too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,986 Posts
Guessing something between Giorgio and Giorgio G. Like I keep saying, Dodge was at one point supposed to get a smaller RWD crossover, so it can probably share build points with a theoretical RWD Cherokee.

GG seems like it's made for larger vehicles, right?
I think that Stelvio is just about right size for its class. More boxy Jeep design will just offer even more space.

My whole post was directed to a engine selection. Which engines can fit inside.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,986 Posts
We know that the I-6 is roughly 3.0L in displacement, correct? Perhaps the I-6 will come in a number of different configurations based on the application. For example, in the Ram pickup (the heaviest application) it might use dual turbos or the twin-scroll turbo. For something smaller like the Cherokee, perhaps a single turbo would suffice.

Additionally, perhaps the I-6 will vary in displacement a little depending on the application, such as 3.2L for the Ram and 2.8L for the Cherokee (I'm just making those up).

Don't forget the FCA patent from a few years ago that would allow for a lower valvetrain height (or something like that?) which might come in handy for an otherwise tall I-6.

Capacity is x.y. :p

AFAIK you are thinking in the wrong direction. Search P2 mild hybrid, electric supercharger...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
Discussion Starter #53
AFAIK you are thinking in the wrong direction. Search P2 mild hybrid, electric supercharger...
So maybe I'm wrong on the details but right on the fact that the I-6 will use different forced induction strategies and other add ons (e-Torque, hybrid, etc) depending on the application?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,389 Posts
By mandate everyone is all in on some form of Electrification for the EU ..... the NA roll in will be slower. My 5 year prediction was wrong. It’s 3.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,986 Posts
So maybe I'm wrong on the details but right on the fact that the I-6 will use different forced induction strategies and other add ons (e-Torque, hybrid, etc) depending on the application?
Actually it's important due to packaging.

For example Inline 6 with P2 MHEV system consumes just a little more space in comparison to a classic Inline 4. Electric motor is sandwiched between engine and transmission. In case of ZF 8HP it takes place of a torque converter and whole hybrid version of transmission takes same amount of space as normal version of ZF 8HP.
But P2 MHEV can use all electric auxiliaries which means there are no belts which means shorter engine in length. More efificent packaging and as I said it takes just a little more space than Inline 4.

In that case it's very likely that Cherokee could use Giorgio and not Giorgio G or some form of a hybrid platform.

This is a position of GME T4 and V6 90° inside of Giorgio based car:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,321 Posts
Pretty sure it's already bigger than the Liberty.

Edit:
2002 Liberty - 71.6" wide, 174.7" long
2012 Liberty - 73.1" wide, 176.1" long
2019 Cherokee - 73.2" wide, 182" long

In fact, the Liberty is closer in size to the new Compass.
Don't be fooled, Liberty has more usable space. Better packaged.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,171 Posts
Don't be fooled, Liberty has more usable space. Better packaged.
I have owned both vehicles (well, 1st gen Liberty) and my impression from my memory of that vehicle was that the Cherokee at least simply "feels" bigger inside. I always found the Liberty's cargo area nice and tall - but very short front to back which limited the horizontal size of objects with the back seats up. I found the Cherokee's cargo area much more usable for what I typically carried.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,003 Posts
Don't be fooled, Liberty has more usable space. Better packaged.
I amazed myself that the two boxed items I bought last night fit in my XJ Cherokee.
If I had room I'd save the boxes and bring them with me when vehicle shopping.
I doubt they would fit in a KL Cherokee or WK Grand Cherokee.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,321 Posts
I have owned both vehicles (well, 1st gen Liberty) and my impression from my memory of that vehicle was that the Cherokee at least simply "feels" bigger inside. I always found the Liberty's cargo area nice and tall - but very short front to back which limited the horizontal size of objects with the back seats up. I found the Cherokee's cargo area much more usable for what I typically carried.
Cherokee's length goes to the snout, and more leg room for the rear seat
 
41 - 60 of 90 Posts
Top