consensus on new commander?

Sat in one at the state fair, but that's as close as I'll probably get.

Boxy, very boxy, and confining. Not quite as boxy as the new Land Rover and not near as much cheap plastic, but it still didn't make me feel either safe or comfy behind the wheel.

I think they went and tried to copy Hummer and accommodate the class A, hypertensive, cigar puffing, red faced, intolerant boob that usually can be found behind the wheel.

As for how it drives, dunno. But it left me with the impression I needed to be about 7' tall, 300lb, cigar smoking, steroid driven governor to feel like I fit in it.

If you can get the financing on a Grand Cherokee I would go with that.

I've only seen the Commander at the dealership when the kids bought their Grand Cherokee. While my opinion is not as strong as Doug's I cannot see myself in one.

Ultimately it comes down to what you want and what you want to do with it once you have it.

*plays the Simpson's "Canyonero!" theme song*

It felt more like "Mr. Plow", but that's a good choice. :)

My step dad just bought one with the Hemi option. It's loaded. I had the opportunity to drive it to the beach for the weekend. Round trip about 450 miles. I'm 6'2 and 325lbs, it seems roomy enough at first, but down the road a ways, the door handle was digging into my left knee, the emergency brake handle was digging into my right thigh, and the armrest has an unnatural shape to it that makes my forearm hurt when using it on a long trip. Rear room was adequate, but my wifes Explorer is better. The windshield seemed short in height, but I got used to that.

My 8 year old loved the DVD player and the wireless head set, but the screen wouldn't turn to face her, just faced straight back.

Engine power is phenomenal. All you need and more, but, you are so detached from your surroundings from the extreme quiet, you don't get a feel for the road or the engine, and it's very easy to speed if you don't pay attention. First tankful mileage was 13-1/2 highway. Second tank got up to around 17. Remember, it's a brand new vehicle not yet broken in.

The ride is a little bit on the soft side.

Just my opinions

I guess I like it overall, but not anymore for long trips.

Spdloader

The link takes a password, can you e-mail it?

Why? The ride's apparently quite a bit mushier on the JGC than the Commander.

I'd have bought another Cherokee in a heartbeat. Plain, simple and durable. Of course they'd rather squander brand loyalties and shove this latest crap on us instead.

Excellent, feedback from someone that's ACTUALLY DRIVEN ONE.

I'm 6'4" and about a hundred pounds less.

I greatly despise how most vehicles these days insist on having a center console. I want some room to shift the legs. I'll take note of what you've had trouble with when I demo one this week.

That's the alternative vehicle being considered.

I could care less about gadetry like that. I don't want/need it. It no doubt gets foisted on us because of inclusion in other packages. But I'd certainly live without it otherwise.

Heh, unlike my old Cherokee. I joke, the only way it'd ever do 80 would be as it plummeted off an escarpment. Even a friend's Bronco I've driven gets wiggly anywhere faster than 75.

Got the 'lead out' of your right foot on seeing the MPG? Or just stopped kicking down the throttle on the hemi 'for fun'?

Thanks!

-Bill Kearney

If your Cherokee didn't like to go 80 there was something wrong with it or you really had it set up for rock crawling or something.

Mine is quite happy cruising at 80, will do it all day with no problems.

If the Commander was about 1/3 smaller and had a 4.0 I6 in it I'd be interested, as it is...

I'd rather have a Studebaker Commander!

It's even the same body style as my Cherokee!

Jeff DeWitt

Bill Kearney wrote:

Jeep just knew a good idea when the stole it

A few other familiar names that Studebaker used first...

Daytona (DC) Challenger (DC) Golden Hawk (Jeep) Sky Hawk (Buick) Transtar (International) Wagonaire (I know, Jeep used Wagoneer, both were designed by Brooks Stevens and both had similar rear end treatments, although only the Studebakers roof actually moved) Land Cruiser (Toyota) Interestingly Studebaker built a special version of the Land Cruiser just for export that was intended for use off road in desert environments. It had oversize tires, heavy duty everything, opened up wheel wells, about everything you can think of to make a 2 wheel drive car perform well in the desert.

One great old Studebaker name that I don't expect to see used again is "Dictator"!

Jeff DeWitt

L.W.(Bill) Hughes III wrote:

> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O> mailto: snipped-for-privacy@aol.com

Personal preference, I found the transition from an XJ to WJ quite a change, I don't think I would want to got all the way to the Commander.

But that is just a personal preference.

Who cares?

I found it interesting even though it did not apply to the question at hand.

At least it is more or less on topic unlike most of the bullshit posted here these days.

Mike

86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view! Jan/06 (More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)

Mike Romain wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@sympatico.ca:

What, you got something against spiders? Frogs? Navy Ships? I suppose you thing we should talk about Jeeps?

As for the Commander, I haven't even looked at one yet and probably won't even bother, my 1993 GC Ltd. will probably do me forever, but I have seen a fair number running around the streets of Phoenix so I think it's selling fairly well for whatever that's worth.

So I was at the dealer today. Saw the compass, ick. But at least it's "less ugly" than the Dodge Caliber it's based upon. Sat in Commander and hated it. The thing's just "wrong" all around.

I agree with you on the door handle and the brake. No way to drive it without them jabbing you, definitely a deal-killer.

But it's worse than just the seating. Visibility sucks all around. The 3rd row seats are a joke. They waste a good 8" of vertical space when folded down. And they're not even removable! The Liberty actually has better leg room in the rear (not 3rd) seats. And talk about too much plastic, the commander is loaded with junk that's SURE to break.

If, and it's a big IF, they made the Commander without the craptacular interior, more like a Liberty let's say, it might be possible to overlook the visibility issues. Strip it down, get rid of the stupid looking allen head bolts and it'd probably have a CHANCE of selling. I hated it when it first came out and even 0% interest doesn't change that.

I just can't grow to like the Explorer. I think it's mainly due to being a Ford truck with all the crappy trim and controls they all have.

The Liberty's not bad, but a bit too much of an 'econobox' in the way of interior styling. The 3.6L V6 seems to carry it along pretty well.

I drove a JGC with the 5.7 Hemi and, yeeeeeowch, is that thing QUICK! I could surely see speeding tickets in my future if I bought one. The thing accelerates like it's got electric motors; it's that smooth. Give it the gas and it just builds speed, hard and fast. Not the usual grabbing roar you'd usually equate with a V8. It just sweeps right up the speedo, damned fast!

So I brought home a Grand Cherokee Limited for a demo. It's got the 4.7 V8 engine and 4wd. Nice ride. It could use a little more rear leg room, the Liberty still beats it. But overall it's a pretty decent vehicle, wife seems to like it too. What's the typical decent price for one lately?

Anyone have the GJC with the 3.7 V6?

-Bill Kearney

I actually don't have one ...I didn't test the download before posting the link - sorry. A google search should yield a different link that works.