4 Runner vs. Jeep Grand Cherokee?

I own an '03 V6 sport edition. I just got back from a morning jaunt off-road and it performs beautifully. I too suffer no lack in power. I suggest driving both of them before making a decision. I drove a lot of SUVs before I bought my 4runner, including V8 models. I preferred the v6 over the v8 model of the 4runner.

Holmes

My buddies all tell me that the gas tank is plastic on the Grand Cherokee.

Yeah -they take you off-roading in the Discovery for test-drives and show you the various hill assist modes and such.

My friend's shiny new 4-Runner? Same modes. Same results. Oh - and the 40mph through plowed fields doing doughnuts and jumping over whoop-de-dos like a BMXer was fun as well. (he's nuts off-road, btw - most people are far more sane)

Yeah.

Good off-road.

:)

Yeah, what in the heck is that thing for? I still haven't figured that out.

Holmes

that's like apples and oranges.

4runner will outlast any other suv, and will definitely not be in the shop as often as a Grand Cherokee.

as for engine, you will be happy with the v6, you will be really happy with v6 with trd supercharger....

I've seen Jeep Grand Cherokees in wrecks, personal experience in addition to highway rubbernecking mind you, and they looked like twisted tinfoil. For some reason the body just strikes me as being really cheap and flimsy. I've also seen some 4Runners wrecked or nearly so, and seems like they handle better and fare better. Even the 4Runner I saw on a flatbed totally burned out seemed like it could be sandblasted a little, repainted, and put back to use *grin*. I realize the forces in individual wrecks vary greatly, but it's something to consider in addition to vehicle options, price, and mileage. :) I hadn't seen anyone toss safety into the arena here, so that's just my two cents. Dee

Looks are apparently deceiveing. The 4Runner has the worst injury loss rating of any mid-sized SUV, the Grand Cherokee has the best. In general Toyota trucks are at the bottom of the iunjury loss ratings, so I wouldn't expect the new 4Runner to be much better than the old.

Ed

Huh, figures come from?

I have a 98 Tacoma and it was rated one of the best.

CE, we see right through you.

By who, Toyota?

The 2WD Tacoma has the highest injury loss rating of any small 2WD pick-up

1998 Tacoma had the worst rating of any 1998 pick-up tested by NHTSA 95-97 Tacomas hadover three times as many driver deaths per million registered vehiclesas the Ford Ranger Instead of trying to see through me, try looking into the facts. Toyotas usually do reasonably well in the IIHS evaluations, but these good results aren't reflected in real world statistics. People driving Toyota Tacomas are far more likely to die in their truck than people driving almost any other samll pick-up.

Ed

What does a Tacoma have to do with a 4Runner? The last time the 4Runner was tested by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, it came out on top. The Grand Cherokee was more than half way the bottom of the list.

I was responding to MDT Tech's assertion that Tacomas had good safety ratings ("I have a 98 Tacoma and it was rated one of the best.").

While you were at the IIHS site you should have reviewed the 4Runner injury loss ratings

The GrandCherokee had an Injury Loss rating of 61, the 4Runner had an Injury Lossrating of 91 (lower is better). You should also check out the fatalityfacts section Thedriver death rate for 96-97 4WD 4Runner is 126 per million registeredvehicle years, the Grand Cherokee is 52. The 4Runner actaully did well in the NHTSA rating (much better than the Tacoma) except for the rollover rating (which is just a calculation and not an actual test).

Still for whatever reason, the 4Runner has a worse injury loss ratings than many other mid-sized SUVs.

Ed

Should have compared the Tacoma to the Jeep pickup, that would have been more relevant...

Tom - Vista, CA

No, buy the same site you used, except I picked 1998 reffering to my truck.

Gee, same site I get one of the best, like I said before. See it at

Remove foot from mouth.

As for the goverment site check out:

Another site you used. Funny, I get 4 stars, lots of 5 stars, one model did get 3 stars, overall, these are all real good numbers. Of course, you were talking about 4Runners, not Tacomas, but if you look at the 98 Tacoma, you'll see my original reply is as I stated!

The site you chose shows Tacoma as average, so nothing jumps out and grabs me. Of course, it was for 00-2002 models, mine was a 98.

Than "any" or "many", we see the play with words here too. Kinda cute, the way its worded, you'd think the 4Runner finished dead last. Clever CE like i said, I see right through you. Are you and Mike tag teaming for Ford? Hey, do you have a mask?

So can we assume you'll be running out and getting a Tundra? see it at

Oh, if you are tag teaming with Mike for Ford, you wont like the results of the F-150, it was a tthe bottom in this one! :-(

The injury loss rating for a given vehicle has many external variables (not related vehicle design) factored into the rating; number of crashes, number of occupants, vehicle usage, demographics, etc. It doesnt acurately represent the vehicle's inherent safety as does the controlled crash test. The controlled crash test provides data on the vehicle's ability to protect the occupant based solely on its design without consideration to external variables.

Well I partially disagree with this. Crash tests are very rigidly controlled tests that can't reflect most rear world crashes. They give an indication, but don't tell the whole story. I also believe that manufacturers are spending a lot of time trying to redesign vehicles to look good in the well publicized tests, possibly at the expense of overall vehicle safety. Crash tests also don't reflect a vechile's ability to avoid crashes. The biggest problem with the injury loss ratings is the fact that the type of drivers that operate the different vehicles can't be factored out.

Ed

Did you actually look at the sites?

The average small 2WD pickup had an injury loss rating of 83, the

2000-2002 Tacoma had an injury loss rating of 93. It was the worst of the small 2WD pick-up listed.

The 95-97 Tacoma had the highest driver death rating of any small 2WD pickup listed, 211 per million registered vehicle years. The average for small 2WD pickups is 142.

When the Tacoma finished last in two different categories of accident statistics, it seems to take a lot of gall to claim you are driving one of the safest vehicles in a class.

Ed