This edition of JeepNewsNow.com sponsored by:
 
Grand CherokeeSuperfast Jeeps?
Posted by mike on 2004/6/29 0:00:00 (1001) reads

Grand Cherokee SRT coming soon?

Autoweek.com has an article saying that Jeep may be considering high-horsepower, non-trailrated Jeeps.

Next year Chevrolet will pump up the TrailBlazer with a high-horsepower 6.0-liter V8 and a suspension tweaked at an unlikely location - Germany's famed Nurburgring track.

Meanwhile, Jeep is considering an SUV that would be at home on a racetrack, too. And it definitely wouldn't be "trail rated."

SUVs with big engines and suspension tweaks aren't new. Both Mercedes-Benz and Porsche AG have such vehicles. But it is not yet clear whether nonluxury brands can successfully compete for high-performance bragging rights.

...snip...

Sales of the TrailBlazer SS will begin in fall 2005, she says. All-wheel drive will be optional. Jeep touts its SUVs as "trail rated" and points to their off-road capability. Yet Jeep is considering a Grand Cherokee SRT.

SRT is the Chrysler group's performance unit, which created vehicles such as the Dodge Viper SRT-10 and Ram SRT-10 pickup. Vehicles developed by the group feature horsepower, braking and handling enhancements.

"There is room for SRT in Jeep," says Joe Eberhardt, the Chrysler group's executive vice president of global sales, marketing and service.

While not confirming that a Grand Cherokee SRT will be produced, Eberhardt says, "I won't think that a couple of thousand SRT Jeeps will destroy the overall imagery and trail-rated capability of the Jeep brand."

But a Jeep aimed at performance enthusiasts would have to be re-engineered. The center of gravity would have to be lowered, which would affect the vehicle's off-road capability, Eberhardt says.

"We cannot lower the suspension of the vehicle enough to get high speed, highly capable handling and then have the articulation you need" to go off road," he says. "It doesn't work."

"I don't think people would expect a racing inspired, street-legal, high-performance Jeep to be at the same time off-road capable. That's the tradeoff."

Here's the entire story.

Reader Reactions

The comments are owned by the poster.
We aren't responsible for their content.
You must login or register to post a comment.

Poster Thread
Anonymous
Posted: 1969/12/31 19:00  Updated: 1969/12/31 19:00
 Originally posted by: Lynton Doyle
here is my comment

Build the heavy metal beast.It will be a seller.
People can have more thet one Jeep.
I have friends who use a Grand for everyo day commuting and a Cherokee( you call it a Liberty) with a lift for escapes to the bush.

When is the 5.7 litre going to be available in Australia?

Poster Thread
Anonymous
Posted: 1969/12/31 19:00  Updated: 1969/12/31 19:00
 Originally posted by: Amar
It ain't a JEEP without solid axles.

Poster Thread
Anonymous
Posted: 1969/12/31 19:00  Updated: 1969/12/31 19:00
 Originally posted by: SmilinJackRuby
I don't understand why people are so concerned about Daimler having a good "revenue stream," at the cost of changing the brand to the point of homogenization. Are you car enthusiasts or business enthusiasts?

If I want to go fast, I'll buy a sports car. Making a top-heavy SUV try to pull .9 g's and out-accelerate a Corvette is stupid beyond words. To dilute an iconic brand known for off-road prowess to do it is pure shite. You can teach a dog to walk on it's hind legs, but not well... and people will laugh at you.

To be honest, my remaining interest in Jeep's new products is the TJ (especially the Unlimited). I check here periodically to see if there's any news of new versioning in that line. When it's gone... my interest in Jeep will dwindle with it.

Have fun with your "fast" poseurmobiles (honestly, whatever makes you happy). I'll stick with solid axles and a 3 mph crawl, or my cavernous FSJ when I need to haul.

Poster Thread
Anonymous
Posted: 1969/12/31 19:00  Updated: 1969/12/31 19:00
 Originally posted by: scramblejim
the 5.9 ZJ was a Dodge 360, not the AMC 360 that was in the grand wagoneers. And I dont think theres a need to lower the suspension to have a "performance" WK grand cherokee. Please DCX, dont ruin the brand by trying to sell an extra thousand vehicles. It will hurt in the long run. I promise you that. build an SRT pacifica or PT cruiser if the guys in the SRT shop are bored.

Poster Thread
Anonymous
Posted: 1969/12/31 19:00  Updated: 1969/12/31 19:00
 Originally posted by: RUBICONTRAIL.NET
In reality, I am not sure why they would have to give up off-road capability for speed. With an adjustable air suspension and adjustable sway bar couldn't the vehicle be lowered at high speeds but still maintain full ground clearance and articulation for off-roading?

But my feeling is DaimlerChrysler needs to work on defining and keeping brand images...



Mercedes should concentrate on building luxury vehicles and high-performance luxury vehicles (AMG)

Chrysler should concentrate on building near luxury sedans (300C), coupes (Sebring, Sebring Convertible), minivans, and niche vehicles (PT Cruiser, perhaps something like the Prowler).

Dodge should concentrate on building its agressive image with RAM trucks, sport sedans and wagons, and high performance vehicles (Viper, SRT-4, SRT-10).

Jeep should keep building off-road vehicles and fully off-road capable luxury SUVs. They should not produce two wheel drive vehicles just to satisfy market demand. They should consider expanding their US lineup by adding more trim levels to the 2005 Grand Cherokee (ie, an Overland package), by building vehicles such as the Dakar, the Rescue, the Cherokee 2500, and perhaps a pickup truck (reminiscent of either the J-series, Willys pickup, or Commanche).


Poster Thread
Anonymous
Posted: 1969/12/31 19:00  Updated: 1969/12/31 19:00
 Originally posted by: basics
Uh ... Sport UTILITY Vehicle. How about getting back to the basics of utility, DC. There are some of us who purchase jeeps because we live in rural areas and need rugged utility. Remember it was this population that help establish the jeep icon. Why do you continue to erode it?

Poster Thread
Anonymous
Posted: 1969/12/31 19:00  Updated: 1969/12/31 19:00
 Originally posted by: jacktowncrawler
The Exec is wrong. Sure the posrche is superfast, but one does enough research, they will find that Porsche has developed a sophisticated off-road system with this vehicle as well as the Toureg. the standard ground clearance is close to 9" as well as a standard fording depth of close to 20". This ain't no Hummer, but that isn't bad for something that will blow the doors off anyone who challenges you. Furthermore, the Cayenne turbo actually ups the ante with an adjustable suspension
Ground Clearance: 6.18 - 10.75 in
Wading Depth: 21.85 in
The self-leveling air suspension with ride height control, center differential and two-speed transfer case combine to offer exceptional off-pavement capabilities. That is low-range. Not rock crawling low-range, but low range anyway.
A super fast Jeep should at least have an adjustable suspension. Drops low on the highway, raises in 4hi adn 4lo. Keep the Hemi and add the suspension, and your there.

Poster Thread
Anonymous
Posted: 1969/12/31 19:00  Updated: 1969/12/31 19:00
 Originally posted by: OR Bruce
I think high performance SUVs are really stupid, but carmakers and aftermarket folks have made a lot of money selling such things. I guess I can't blame DC for wanting to make huge profit margins on a low volume vehicle. Please, just don't dilute the base model's capabilities. If I get the next GC, it most likely would be a Laredo with the base 3.7 V6. I don't need my Jeep to go fast. The old 4 liter is fine in my WJ. When I fling a car around or spend a day at the track, it's not in a Jeep, for God's sake.

What amazes me is the huge number of SUVs with huge wheels lowered, etc. Also the AMG M-Class and G wagens. Cache is everything, function means nothing. I even saw a Galaendewagen with dub-dub (22") wheels with spinners, and probably 30 series tires. It definitely passes the "gee-whiz" test, but how about the "what for?" If people are rich and dumb enough to want this stuff, it might as well be DC that makes the profit.

Poster Thread
Anonymous
Posted: 1969/12/31 19:00  Updated: 1969/12/31 19:00
 Originally posted by: Douglas
This Simple JEEP exec's.....

KEEP JEEP......JEEP!
first you stop producing CHEROKEE...and gave us what? LIBERTY??? Come on now....The WJ/ZJ...now coming in '05..This Mercredes-Monsrosity?..Sorry, but that AIN'T a Grand without SOLID AXLES..You people or TALKING HEADS running JEEP are gonna KILL AN AMERICAN ICON..with these schemes..Go Back to Making REAL JEEPS..Like my 95 YJ..SIMPLE don't cave to the mass market morons....

Poster Thread
Anonymous
Posted: 1969/12/31 19:00  Updated: 1969/12/31 19:00
 Originally posted by: whatever
if i wanted a fast jeep, i'd end up buying a dodge. i love jeep's
ads for getting chills up your spine or whatever when crawling at
3mph and now they're f'ing around with fast? please. someone
needs to take these execs out on a trail for a week and show
them what jeep is about. it seems they're forgetting why people
buy them in the first place.

Poster Thread
Anonymous
Posted: 1969/12/31 19:00  Updated: 1969/12/31 19:00
 Originally posted by: XJameson
Interesting... I really like the idea and would probably buy one. A buddy of mine had the famed 5.9L and, well, if you drove one you know what I mean - it was awesome. It wasn't lowered too much, was it? (interesting, the 5.9L was the same 360ci as the Grand Wagoneer, just with EFI instead of a carb, and the carb was the main problem with the GW's V8). I think a Grand Cherokee SRT would sell like crazy, and would probably push the price tag over $45K, if not $50K. Also, the engine would most likely be beefier than the 4.7HO, and would probably be the same thing as is going in the new Grand Wagoneer (2006? 2007?), whether it be a new motor or the good 'ol 360. Its the classic case of Jeep looking at the parts they have and saying "What can we do with this stuff?" Hence my 1996 Cherokee with the same mirrors, overhead console, etc from the Grand Wagoneer.

Poster Thread
Anonymous
Posted: 1969/12/31 19:00  Updated: 1969/12/31 19:00
 Originally posted by: Gunsworth
I personally dont see the problem with it, its not like anyone wheels grand cherokees anyways, at least not enough to influence sales. As far as Im concerned the only thing that should be called a jeep is the wrangler, the original jeep. But if selling some more road worthy vehicles will help put more money into the brand then more power to em. However if Jeep only sold the wrangler and listened to off-road enthusiasts the brand would never have seen the 90s. Get realistic guys

Poster Thread
Anonymous
Posted: 1969/12/31 19:00  Updated: 1969/12/31 19:00
 Originally posted by: XJameson
I'm not sure I totally understand everybodys dislike of this idea... It's not as if Jeep is replacing the Grand Cherokee with a superfast, less capable model. It is simply an option; a package. It would be the same thing as the 5.9L (my mistake on the motors). For those of us that still want to buy a dependable, rugged Jeep utility vehicle, it will still be out there in other models - just because Jeep is offering (or might offer) an SRT GC doesn't mean you have to buy it. Frankly, if it sells well and provides a good revenue stream for Jeep, then why not?

Poster Thread
Anonymous
Posted: 1969/12/31 19:00  Updated: 1969/12/31 19:00
 Originally posted by: xjgary
Scramblerjim is right
Main Menu
JeepNewsNow Everywhere
Login
Username:

Password:


Lost Password?

Register now!
Jeep Classifieds
Syndication - RSS
Add Jeep News Headlines to your site for free!

Display the latest Jeep news headlines on your Web site using our RSS 2.0 news feed!

RSS 2.0

Or, if you prefer, an even easier way of putting the headlines on your Web site is to utilize our free, JavaScript-based headlines. Check them out!
Who's Online
13 user(s) are online (3 user(s) are browsing News)

Members: 0
Guests: 13

more...
Advertisements
mike's totally free jeep news now is designed and maintained by AnelloConsulting.com
Copyright © 1998-2010 mike's totally free jeep news now
Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Advertising Info