New Luxury Jeep Model

I’d buy a Grand Cherokee if it wasn’t for its subpar reliability…this could really backfire

Yahoo Finance Article

If they are trying to ape the Range Rover, then subpar reliability is a requisite.

Basil Exposition wrote: If they are trying to ape the Range Rover, then subpar reliability is a requisite.

I know a lot of luxury cars are crap but it just seems like they’re getting ahead of themselves….like someone setting their sights on a F1 seat while they’re not even competitive in Autocross.

They could probably achieve top tier reliability levels and sell at a discount until their reputation reflected the reliability improvement for less then they’re going to spend on developing this luxury model.

I'm not sure i understand this. The current top of line Grand Cherokee is pretty damn close to the Rangie, in my opinion.

Hmm, so a couple of years ago the bottom fell out for SUV's, then demand for fuel fell out. In the meantime, lots of oil production is slowing down and prices will crank back up - wonder what that will do to the demand for 100K+ SUVs. OTOH, should be able to pick up used ones for about 30 cents on the dollar after a couple of years.

There's no way Fiat can watch GM print money with the new Escalade and not want a piece of it. It may or may not work, but they HAVE to try.

oldtin wrote: Hmm, so a couple of years ago the bottom fell out for SUV's, then demand for fuel fell out. In the meantime, lots of oil production is slowing down and prices will crank back up - wonder what that will do to the demand for 100K+ SUVs. OTOH, should be able to pick up used ones for about 30 cents on the dollar after a couple of years.

In Jeremy Clarkson's voice: The kind of customers that buy serious high end SUVs don't give a crap fuel cost or mpgs. They are also less concerned about long term reliability or resale value. Those are problems for the peasants to worry about.

Would this be something that could be platform mated with a Maserati model?

Basil Exposition wrote: If they are trying to ape the Range Rover, then subpar reliability is a requisite.

I agree. Put nice seats in it, a gee-whiz infotainment system, and make it look pretty with big chrome wheels. Slap a ludicrous price tag on it, then market the snot out of it. It really doesn't matter if the underlying vehicle is worth a poop. They just need to fool a few tens of thousands of buyers into thinking that it's a "status symbol."

Wait...comments about poor Jeep reliability juxtaposing Range Rover quality strikes me as an oxymoron.

mazdeuce wrote: There's no way Fiat can watch GM print money with the new Escalade and not want a piece of it. It may or may not work, but they HAVE to try.

^^^ This

In reply to HappyAndy:

I totally read that in Clarkson's voice

People buy luxo-SUVs so they can tell their friends they have an Escalade or a G-Wagon or a Audi Q7. It's prestige. The name "Jeep" is synonymous with "bare-bones off-road vehicle with a crappy ride and tail lights that also come on harbor freight utility trailers" to most of the populace. It holds no presitge in the country-club set.

Same concept as the Hyundai Equus. It's a stellar car. Better than many of its more expensive peers in almost every way. But it's a Hyundai. And peopel who can afford $100k cars are old enough to remember the Excel.

What they should do is take the Grand Cherokee chassis and drive train, put a stylish body on it, load it up with all kinds of E36 M3 that nobody needs in a car (heated cupholders or something), and then badge it as a Lancia or Alfa Romeo. THAT would get the country-club crowd interested in paying $100k for it. Or simply call it an Abarth.

irish44j wrote: People buy luxo-SUVs so they can tell their friends they have an Escalade or a G-Wagon or a Audi Q7. It's prestige. The name "Jeep" is synonymous with "bare-bones off-road vehicle with a crappy ride and tail lights that also come on harbor freight utility trailers" to most of the populace. It holds no presitge in the country-club set.

That's mostly right, which isn't the same as completely right.

Back in the day the original Wagoneer was the SUV for well to do country folk, gentleman ranchers, and the wealthy ski crowd, before they were even called SUVs.I wouldn't be surprised if they brought back the Wagoneer name.

I agree that there is too much money to be made in that segment to ignore it, especially since they have so much of the technology and parts already on the FCA shelf.

In reply to irish44j:

I second your statement above 1,000%!

There's a metric E36 M3load of people that only care about a name.

(Shoulda seen the look on a girls face when I called her Infinity QX a Pathfinder!)

I don't think we would have ended up with a Grand Cherokee if they made the new Cherokee more like the outgoing model. Both my wife and I had XJs and loved them but when the little guy was on his way, we wanted something with modern safety and a smart AWD system. When we test drove the new Cherokee, neither of us were impressed with it. It felt like an economy car. So we bought a less than one year old Grand with 20k on it for a good price.

Marketing is key. They just need to get product placement on Housewives of Orange County and even my boss's wife will want to buy one. She is on her second RR and the boss HATES the damned things. He has to take it in for service because she finds it too infuriating to deal with the dealer herself. She doesn't own a stitch of clothing that doesn't have a designer label on it.

worked great last time.