I just bought my limited edition liberty and I love it! The only thing I have to say to people with a small fuel budget, think twice. My jeep filled up with $65 today and I am seeing the decline while doing minimal driving. However, yesterday it was put to the challenge: snow, rocks, water, mud, etc. 9/10 easy!
Problem with is Liberty is the lousy mileage , other than that its a great sized vehicle just a bit smaller than the behemoth Grand Cherokee .They should have put in the new 3.6 -- more power better fuel economy .Too bad
I agree with you here; they could use that Pentastar engine that's with the Grand Cherokee. For the Liberty to be viable, it needs a higher end 4-cylander or turbocharger for its competition, but at the same time. it has a tow rating of 5000 lbs as is, which is quite good for its size of SUV. Also, it needs a better transmission; a 4-speed auto, doesn't fly; it needs at least a 5 or 6 speed or CVT like the Compass to be more fuel efficient.
@76carmel My Liberty now has just over 200,000 kilos on it .So I,m pretty happy overall but like I said the engine is too thirsty so the 3.6 would help a lot .I drove a Compass to see if I could live with the 4 . Even tough the engine was capable the C.V. transmission was terrible It seemed like the tranny was trying to keep up with the engine .A 6 speed with the 3.6 and I would consider a new one .Otherwise Lord help me I might need to shop for an import .
I agree with the CVT being not very good for Jeep. Motor Trend tested the Compass in off conditions with the CVT and it had some difficulty; the Wrangler with a 4-speed auto did much better. I'm with you that the Pentastar should be the standard engine on the higher ends of the Liberty place that with a 5-speed auto and you're set; there's also a rumor that says that there will be an 8-speed auto coming to the high horsepower Chrysler engines.
The Liberty is an excellent choice ---One thing Jeep left out for some unknown reason is a locking rear differential or even a limited slip on either front or rear ..Other than that I have no complaints about mine .Lousy mileage I expected -- no big deal ..
It means that there is no central differential, and the whells always will spin with about the same torque and speed, where as a differential would allow you to make turns smoother, though the power only goes to the tires with traction and those without it would just sit there.
i believe that the liberty is a great car because of its outstanding off road capabilities combined with many comforts in the everyday life. something quite handy that few people notice is the selection of 4wd auto which can be used permanently at any speed giving the car great stability, which is really useful in conditions like rain. also i think that the 4 speed automatic gear box despite not being very good generally is just what you need off road because you don't have to change gear often.
I really like this car, it is very capable and functional...but that MPG figure is something Jeep must start to get rid off if they want to survive. They must begin to think more as engineers and less as American Consumers....Fuel efficiency is KEY on the market now, and there are other models in the market like the Suzuki Vitara V6, with same capabilities with better fuel efficiency. 22 mpg is too bad. Even a 3.7 Mustang has better mpg (31 mpg). Liberty will be perfect with an MPG Improvement
The Liberty is not a Wrangler but it is a capable mud-buggy. I have a 2004 with a little over 100,000 miles on it and have had no problems to date. There are places I would not take it but, with the proper tires, it has done all I've asked of it; not an inconsiderable accomplishment.
The Liberty is not a Wrangler but it is a capable mud-buggy. I have a 2004 with a little over 100,000 miles on it and it has had no problems to date. There are places I would not take it but, with the proper tires, it has done pretty much everything I've asked of it; not an inconsiderable accomplishment.
hopefully these will get the new pentastar v6 like the 2011 grand cherokee. the the new cherokee has suspension that you can raise up for offroading and lower it when city driving.
Theres a vid that shows when a 4WD CRV loses traction with 1 front tire on an incline it can't move forward. This is because the front diff is open, and only a small amount of power goes to the rear wheels, not enough to move the car.
I'm lucky enough in the UK to have a 2.8 CRD version of this car, with Select Track II 5 speed auto, this vehicle offers 30 mpg on a run, 24 around town...
The CRD is a turbo diesel and and well as offering a mountain of torque, will push you back in you seat on demand, when overtaking ... which was a nice surprise as I saw this car as a bit of a cruiser on road.....
This car in the UK is called the Cherokee, State-side this car wasn't hardcore enough to have the privilege of this name....
this is a nice looking off road capable jeep but Chrysler did not do one thing they desperately needed and they need a new v6. The 3.7lv6 is has been unchanged since 2001 and it only has 210hp. Also only a 4 speed automatic in this day and age? ford is using 6 speed autos. I wish they would make it a 3.5v6 with 250hp and put a 5 or 6 speed auto in it.
I have one ( 2010 Jeep Liberty 4x4 Limited Edition ) and i have to say it's not a bad car. I got loads of room upfront and rear. One problem is that my muffler and pipes have gotten rusted quite fast. Also, if you listen carefully, it sort of sounds like a diesel.
Its an all-too-common misconception that 4-LO is what should be used in heavy snow. In reality, the increase in torque is the exact opposite of what you want, as it just makes the wheels spin more readily.
Out here in the MidAtlantic after this blast of snow we had three neighbors with Land Crusier/ LX's and one with a 4Runner get stuck because they were in low. They just changed to high when I let them know, and they were out of there in an instant!
@bg1379 You are RIGHT ON! BG, i thought the same thing when i saw the 4Lo switch on for only a 1.5FT of snow. I live in Winter-Cuse (Syracuse) and have only had to use 4Lo to get out of a Real Impound With things in tow.
4-LO creates much more torque, using 4-HI makes all wheels spin more quickly with less torque (which is ideal for snow, but not, say, towing out of an incline)
@bg1379 Actually 4-Lo is what you want in deep snow, or when you're in a bad way. It's not the added torque that is the problem. Most people drive in low as they would in high, you can't push the gas in the same manner you do in high. You have to regulate how you use the 'go pedal' in low to use it properly. With high, if your wheels break free they will be spinning that much faster and dig you into a hole a lot quicker. A proper use of the accelerator in low will get you out a lot better.
@1997FordProbeGT Yeah I love Chryslers design department. I mean the 300 was a beautiful car I had one for a rental while my Nitro was in the shop. I almost looked forward to my POS braking down because i knew they would bring the 300c. The sad part is that chryslers cars a shit, literally everything about them. The PT cruiser is actually probably the most reliable car they make and that is because it uses the world engine. I hope Fiat fixes their mess because they obviously cant do it.
@1997FordProbeGT From the research i did on the previous liberty it was not a very reliable SUV. It had several electrical problem just like every other chrysler. You sound like you know your cars a bit. But this car is built on the same platform engine and all. My buddy did have one of the old gen liberties and never had a problem. But I'm still just pissed about my purchase and all the money i lost trading it in. I'll never buy another chrylser product. This wasn't my first either.
Dan always does a great job with his reviews. I feel i need to let people know how unreliable this platform is. It is the same platform from the old jeep liberty which was one of the worst suv chassis in recent history. I had an 07 nitro which is essentially the same car, (I.E. engine, chassis electronics) and all it was for me was a headache. It broke 6 times and it nearly got me in an accident at a red light when the RPMs jumped. It also stalled on me with only 9,000 kms on it. Bad MPG also.
For anybody who doesn't need the off road capability of the Liberty, they'd be crazy to get this thing over a RAV4. Now I'm not a Toyota fan by any stretch of the imagination, but I had a 2008 RAV4 V6 Limited 4WD for a couple days and it was spacious, solid, had a ton of cargo room, handling was almost car-like, it had a TON of power, and it got very surprising mileage for the size and power it had. It's modern design in comparison to the archaic Liberty make it a better choice.
Its funny- I was going to say the EXACT same thing about buying this over a Rav4! I don't know any sensible person who would buy this over that, especially seeing as it placed NINTH of nine in C/D's last comparo against 4 cylinders like the Rav4.
All in all, the consensus on these is that they are not even near par, and, to be honest, I'm pretty bummed that Dan didn't stress how overwhelming the negatives to this are, especially given his the supposed focus on eco-friendliness.
haha, yeah i know...I can't believe Dan didn't stress the ancient body-on-frame chassis which yields a rough ride along with sloppy steering and body control...and the fairly terrible mileage make it a wonder these things sell at all! It's all in the Jeep brand I swear...some people just want to say they have a Jeep, and apparently they're more than willing to put up with sub-par, ancient vehicle designs to say they've got one.
Truth be told, I'm not a fan of SUVs in general. Folks should buy the vehicle that best suits their actual (rather than perceived) needs.
Test driving a relatively soft mid-sized conventionally-powered SUV in-between test driving two compact sporting fuel-efficient five-door turbodiesels is an eye-opener.
It's mighty tough to convince someone to switch from one vehicle to the other ... in most cases, they've already convinced themselves what they're going to buy.
C/Ds out there to sell issues. We're just here to report in the unique way we report, rather than pick favorites.
The Liberty and RAV4 are what they are, but there's a reason why we avoid using terms like "eco-friendly" and the "green" thing. If folks really need an off-road capable vehicle, more power to 'em.
and I love the way mpgomatic test cars, I agree completely...you're right, it is best to let the mainstream media be critical and not try to change people's minds. Anyways, keep up the great work mpgomatic! One of the best channels on youtube! -mercmilan06
underwhelming, and outclassed in a market of lighter more fuel efficient Xovers. For you to feather your driving to obtain just 22.8 in a reletively small SUV is a bit embarrising. Now I understand the off roadability of this thing, which is one of it's few merits. I think it should have remainded the cherokee. It probably would have kept strong sales, w/ that brand equity alone. Just my two bits.
My gma's Chevy Equinox is AWD, it gets around 16MPG and its NOT rated for any off roading. For this to be off road capable and 4WD AND still get 22.8 (not to mention the bigger engine in the jeep vs the equinox), that's quite good.
It's sold as the Cherokee outside the States. Not sure why they didn't keep the name here.
Aerodynamics definitely work against it on the highway, when it comes to fuel economy ...
With a modern turbodiesel (not the VM Motori 2.8L), the Liberty/Cherokee could deliver highway mileage in the mid-thirties with plenty of torque for towing and off-road.
@bajabusta I owned a 2001 Jeep Cherokee and I agree with you on the thought that it should have continued on that way. However, this is not a crossover and it shouldn't be compared to crossovers. Thank god someone is still making a REAL SUV. Jeep is among the very few that do these days and I get a little irked when people complain about gas mileage with these things cause that's just not what they're made for. I'm just countering your opinion. Nothing personal and I do enjoy your videos/posts.
@misterrain837 I agree, but my point was 'in a market full of lighter x'overs' it is hard to get the average consumer to understand it's real benefits, when they are coming to the lots looking for an Escape/Edge, or anything in that realm to compete. Now change the interior jeep, like you have w/ your other stablemates and you could have a winning small, actual SUV!
@bajabusta I hear ya. I hate crossovers. It's fine that they exist and I understand their purpose but I just wish that the manufacturers would get that there are those of us out there that still want a 4x4 that's not a silly Toyota FJ Cruiser.
@bajabusta I disagree. I did a few tests with mine when I bought it. I put 30k miles on it in one year running between detroit and chicago. The best MPG I got was 27hwy, city 18. Combined 22. I've added enough under armor (skids and rock rails) to put mine around 4600lbs. I've pulled our scout trailer that hits 3900 when loaded for summer camp. Reason why I didn't buy a cute ute. I wanted something like a Jeep that could be useful. That's why Im on my 3rd Liberty. I own 2.
Oh, and now, with all the extra weight and larger tires, I'm getting 22hwy, 16 city. It's a mistake most people make. The Jeep is not a suv or a crossover. And, cute utes are not Jeeps. It's like compairing apples and oranges. If I was a old guy and wanted to have something to get me to the doctors office, I might go with a AWD stationwagon/hatchback that most of these new x-overs look like but for now, I like getting dirty in my Jeep.
Why is 2 wheel drive even an option with jeep or any other off road vehicle?
motav8er 1 month ago
I just bought my limited edition liberty and I love it! The only thing I have to say to people with a small fuel budget, think twice. My jeep filled up with $65 today and I am seeing the decline while doing minimal driving. However, yesterday it was put to the challenge: snow, rocks, water, mud, etc. 9/10 easy!
1369jeejee 3 months ago
With a soft top, headroom does not matter :3
Xtremedude9 6 months ago
I LIKE IT
thecakeinthepark 7 months ago
Problem with is Liberty is the lousy mileage , other than that its a great sized vehicle just a bit smaller than the behemoth Grand Cherokee .They should have put in the new 3.6 -- more power better fuel economy .Too bad
millwrightman99 11 months ago
@millwrightman99
I agree with you here; they could use that Pentastar engine that's with the Grand Cherokee. For the Liberty to be viable, it needs a higher end 4-cylander or turbocharger for its competition, but at the same time. it has a tow rating of 5000 lbs as is, which is quite good for its size of SUV. Also, it needs a better transmission; a 4-speed auto, doesn't fly; it needs at least a 5 or 6 speed or CVT like the Compass to be more fuel efficient.
76carmel 10 months ago
@76carmel My Liberty now has just over 200,000 kilos on it .So I,m pretty happy overall but like I said the engine is too thirsty so the 3.6 would help a lot .I drove a Compass to see if I could live with the 4 . Even tough the engine was capable the C.V. transmission was terrible It seemed like the tranny was trying to keep up with the engine .A 6 speed with the 3.6 and I would consider a new one .Otherwise Lord help me I might need to shop for an import .
it even hurts to write that down
millwrightman99 10 months ago 2
@millwrightman99
I agree with the CVT being not very good for Jeep. Motor Trend tested the Compass in off conditions with the CVT and it had some difficulty; the Wrangler with a 4-speed auto did much better. I'm with you that the Pentastar should be the standard engine on the higher ends of the Liberty place that with a 5-speed auto and you're set; there's also a rumor that says that there will be an 8-speed auto coming to the high horsepower Chrysler engines.
76carmel 10 months ago
my liberty is perfect so domt worry
donkeyman94 1 year ago
The Liberty is an excellent choice ---One thing Jeep left out for some unknown reason is a locking rear differential or even a limited slip on either front or rear ..Other than that I have no complaints about mine .Lousy mileage I expected -- no big deal ..
millwrightman99 1 year ago
God I would kill for one of those!!!
316Gator 1 year ago
what does 4 lock mean on the 4wd switch?
bcorreia1993 1 year ago
@bcorreia1993;
It means that there is no central differential, and the whells always will spin with about the same torque and speed, where as a differential would allow you to make turns smoother, though the power only goes to the tires with traction and those without it would just sit there.
arsHW 1 year ago
i believe that the liberty is a great car because of its outstanding off road capabilities combined with many comforts in the everyday life. something quite handy that few people notice is the selection of 4wd auto which can be used permanently at any speed giving the car great stability, which is really useful in conditions like rain. also i think that the 4 speed automatic gear box despite not being very good generally is just what you need off road because you don't have to change gear often.
jeepcherokeeKK37 1 year ago
does driving this car in 4wd auto funtion like normal
cougars552 1 year ago
its, its own plow! ha ha
zacheryds 1 year ago
I really like this car, it is very capable and functional...but that MPG figure is something Jeep must start to get rid off if they want to survive. They must begin to think more as engineers and less as American Consumers....Fuel efficiency is KEY on the market now, and there are other models in the market like the Suzuki Vitara V6, with same capabilities with better fuel efficiency. 22 mpg is too bad. Even a 3.7 Mustang has better mpg (31 mpg). Liberty will be perfect with an MPG Improvement
wtrdogg20 1 year ago
i just took one out for a test drive very suprise realy nice ride come check them out at bob bannerman s jeep ask for rawl 289 388 7918
rawlification 1 year ago
The Liberty is not a Wrangler but it is a capable mud-buggy. I have a 2004 with a little over 100,000 miles on it and have had no problems to date. There are places I would not take it but, with the proper tires, it has done all I've asked of it; not an inconsiderable accomplishment.
hushpuckena 1 year ago
The Liberty is not a Wrangler but it is a capable mud-buggy. I have a 2004 with a little over 100,000 miles on it and it has had no problems to date. There are places I would not take it but, with the proper tires, it has done pretty much everything I've asked of it; not an inconsiderable accomplishment.
hushpuckena 1 year ago
hopefully these will get the new pentastar v6 like the 2011 grand cherokee. the the new cherokee has suspension that you can raise up for offroading and lower it when city driving.
leadnsteel 1 year ago
Why even compare it to Xovers
Theres a vid that shows when a 4WD CRV loses traction with 1 front tire on an incline it can't move forward. This is because the front diff is open, and only a small amount of power goes to the rear wheels, not enough to move the car.
ronmann606 1 year ago
How do I turn on the Eco mode?
joeu5431 1 year ago
I'm lucky enough in the UK to have a 2.8 CRD version of this car, with Select Track II 5 speed auto, this vehicle offers 30 mpg on a run, 24 around town...
The CRD is a turbo diesel and and well as offering a mountain of torque, will push you back in you seat on demand, when overtaking ... which was a nice surprise as I saw this car as a bit of a cruiser on road.....
This car in the UK is called the Cherokee, State-side this car wasn't hardcore enough to have the privilege of this name....
tlinford 1 year ago
Comment removed
leadnsteel 1 year ago
i wish it had xenon headlights :(
EDDYCER 1 year ago
great review
lucasfan18 1 year ago
what would you recomend? liberty sport or ford escape i4 ? which is better?
chops066 1 year ago
this is a nice looking off road capable jeep but Chrysler did not do one thing they desperately needed and they need a new v6. The 3.7lv6 is has been unchanged since 2001 and it only has 210hp. Also only a 4 speed automatic in this day and age? ford is using 6 speed autos. I wish they would make it a 3.5v6 with 250hp and put a 5 or 6 speed auto in it.
leadnsteel 1 year ago 3
@leadnsteel
Seems that they want save costs
harmankardonbose 1 year ago
I have one ( 2010 Jeep Liberty 4x4 Limited Edition ) and i have to say it's not a bad car. I got loads of room upfront and rear. One problem is that my muffler and pipes have gotten rusted quite fast. Also, if you listen carefully, it sort of sounds like a diesel.
undeadkillers 1 year ago
love the car. i just have one question; isn't the repair cost extremely expensive?
meggsters0919 1 year ago
Better thAn a śubarû forešter.
westboundcali 2 years ago
Its an all-too-common misconception that 4-LO is what should be used in heavy snow. In reality, the increase in torque is the exact opposite of what you want, as it just makes the wheels spin more readily.
bg1379 2 years ago 6
Thanks, BG! Hey, at least I've erred on the side of the all-to-common misconception. Been doin' it wrong all these years ... :)
mpgomatic 2 years ago
@mpg
Out here in the MidAtlantic after this blast of snow we had three neighbors with Land Crusier/ LX's and one with a 4Runner get stuck because they were in low. They just changed to high when I let them know, and they were out of there in an instant!
bg1379 2 years ago 4
Good stuff!
mpgomatic 2 years ago
@bg1379 lol
fenixans 1 year ago
@bg1379 You are RIGHT ON! BG, i thought the same thing when i saw the 4Lo switch on for only a 1.5FT of snow. I live in Winter-Cuse (Syracuse) and have only had to use 4Lo to get out of a Real Impound With things in tow.
rae2xus 1 year ago
@bg1379 I thought in 4-LO mode all 4 wheels turn at the same speed? Isn't 4-LO mode made for heavy conditions?
muscle1983 1 year ago
@muscle1983
4-LO creates much more torque, using 4-HI makes all wheels spin more quickly with less torque (which is ideal for snow, but not, say, towing out of an incline)
bg1379 1 year ago
LOL @ 2:30 : "Woaw a lot of headroom!" :-)
muscle1983 1 year ago
@bg1379 Actually 4-Lo is what you want in deep snow, or when you're in a bad way. It's not the added torque that is the problem. Most people drive in low as they would in high, you can't push the gas in the same manner you do in high. You have to regulate how you use the 'go pedal' in low to use it properly. With high, if your wheels break free they will be spinning that much faster and dig you into a hole a lot quicker. A proper use of the accelerator in low will get you out a lot better.
angusandleigh 11 months ago
@1997FordProbeGT Yeah I love Chryslers design department. I mean the 300 was a beautiful car I had one for a rental while my Nitro was in the shop. I almost looked forward to my POS braking down because i knew they would bring the 300c. The sad part is that chryslers cars a shit, literally everything about them. The PT cruiser is actually probably the most reliable car they make and that is because it uses the world engine. I hope Fiat fixes their mess because they obviously cant do it.
flatblackstrat 2 years ago
@1997FordProbeGT From the research i did on the previous liberty it was not a very reliable SUV. It had several electrical problem just like every other chrysler. You sound like you know your cars a bit. But this car is built on the same platform engine and all. My buddy did have one of the old gen liberties and never had a problem. But I'm still just pissed about my purchase and all the money i lost trading it in. I'll never buy another chrylser product. This wasn't my first either.
flatblackstrat 2 years ago
Dan always does a great job with his reviews. I feel i need to let people know how unreliable this platform is. It is the same platform from the old jeep liberty which was one of the worst suv chassis in recent history. I had an 07 nitro which is essentially the same car, (I.E. engine, chassis electronics) and all it was for me was a headache. It broke 6 times and it nearly got me in an accident at a red light when the RPMs jumped. It also stalled on me with only 9,000 kms on it. Bad MPG also.
flatblackstrat 2 years ago 4
@flatblackstrat Odd, i haven't had anything besides the bad MPG on my Liberty, 13K miles on mine.
undeadkillers 1 year ago
For anybody who doesn't need the off road capability of the Liberty, they'd be crazy to get this thing over a RAV4. Now I'm not a Toyota fan by any stretch of the imagination, but I had a 2008 RAV4 V6 Limited 4WD for a couple days and it was spacious, solid, had a ton of cargo room, handling was almost car-like, it had a TON of power, and it got very surprising mileage for the size and power it had. It's modern design in comparison to the archaic Liberty make it a better choice.
mercmilan06 2 years ago 2
@mercmilan
Its funny- I was going to say the EXACT same thing about buying this over a Rav4! I don't know any sensible person who would buy this over that, especially seeing as it placed NINTH of nine in C/D's last comparo against 4 cylinders like the Rav4.
All in all, the consensus on these is that they are not even near par, and, to be honest, I'm pretty bummed that Dan didn't stress how overwhelming the negatives to this are, especially given his the supposed focus on eco-friendliness.
bg1379 2 years ago
haha, yeah i know...I can't believe Dan didn't stress the ancient body-on-frame chassis which yields a rough ride along with sloppy steering and body control...and the fairly terrible mileage make it a wonder these things sell at all! It's all in the Jeep brand I swear...some people just want to say they have a Jeep, and apparently they're more than willing to put up with sub-par, ancient vehicle designs to say they've got one.
mercmilan06 2 years ago
Truth be told, I'm not a fan of SUVs in general. Folks should buy the vehicle that best suits their actual (rather than perceived) needs.
Test driving a relatively soft mid-sized conventionally-powered SUV in-between test driving two compact sporting fuel-efficient five-door turbodiesels is an eye-opener.
It's mighty tough to convince someone to switch from one vehicle to the other ... in most cases, they've already convinced themselves what they're going to buy.
mpgomatic 2 years ago
C/Ds out there to sell issues. We're just here to report in the unique way we report, rather than pick favorites.
The Liberty and RAV4 are what they are, but there's a reason why we avoid using terms like "eco-friendly" and the "green" thing. If folks really need an off-road capable vehicle, more power to 'em.
mpgomatic 2 years ago
and I love the way mpgomatic test cars, I agree completely...you're right, it is best to let the mainstream media be critical and not try to change people's minds. Anyways, keep up the great work mpgomatic! One of the best channels on youtube! -mercmilan06
mercmilan06 2 years ago 2
Thx!
mpgomatic 2 years ago
The Chrysler Pentastar V6 is going to be beast.
sideburns2009 2 years ago
underwhelming, and outclassed in a market of lighter more fuel efficient Xovers. For you to feather your driving to obtain just 22.8 in a reletively small SUV is a bit embarrising. Now I understand the off roadability of this thing, which is one of it's few merits. I think it should have remainded the cherokee. It probably would have kept strong sales, w/ that brand equity alone. Just my two bits.
bajabusta 2 years ago 9
My gma's Chevy Equinox is AWD, it gets around 16MPG and its NOT rated for any off roading. For this to be off road capable and 4WD AND still get 22.8 (not to mention the bigger engine in the jeep vs the equinox), that's quite good.
sideburns2009 2 years ago
It's sold as the Cherokee outside the States. Not sure why they didn't keep the name here.
Aerodynamics definitely work against it on the highway, when it comes to fuel economy ...
With a modern turbodiesel (not the VM Motori 2.8L), the Liberty/Cherokee could deliver highway mileage in the mid-thirties with plenty of torque for towing and off-road.
mpgomatic 2 years ago
@bajabusta I owned a 2001 Jeep Cherokee and I agree with you on the thought that it should have continued on that way. However, this is not a crossover and it shouldn't be compared to crossovers. Thank god someone is still making a REAL SUV. Jeep is among the very few that do these days and I get a little irked when people complain about gas mileage with these things cause that's just not what they're made for. I'm just countering your opinion. Nothing personal and I do enjoy your videos/posts.
misterrain837 1 year ago
@misterrain837 I agree, but my point was 'in a market full of lighter x'overs' it is hard to get the average consumer to understand it's real benefits, when they are coming to the lots looking for an Escape/Edge, or anything in that realm to compete. Now change the interior jeep, like you have w/ your other stablemates and you could have a winning small, actual SUV!
bajabusta 1 year ago
@bajabusta I hear ya. I hate crossovers. It's fine that they exist and I understand their purpose but I just wish that the manufacturers would get that there are those of us out there that still want a 4x4 that's not a silly Toyota FJ Cruiser.
misterrain837 1 year ago
@bajabusta I disagree. I did a few tests with mine when I bought it. I put 30k miles on it in one year running between detroit and chicago. The best MPG I got was 27hwy, city 18. Combined 22. I've added enough under armor (skids and rock rails) to put mine around 4600lbs. I've pulled our scout trailer that hits 3900 when loaded for summer camp. Reason why I didn't buy a cute ute. I wanted something like a Jeep that could be useful. That's why Im on my 3rd Liberty. I own 2.
tc1uscg 5 days ago
Oh, and now, with all the extra weight and larger tires, I'm getting 22hwy, 16 city. It's a mistake most people make. The Jeep is not a suv or a crossover. And, cute utes are not Jeeps. It's like compairing apples and oranges. If I was a old guy and wanted to have something to get me to the doctors office, I might go with a AWD stationwagon/hatchback that most of these new x-overs look like but for now, I like getting dirty in my Jeep.
tc1uscg 5 days ago