I honestly believe they have a strategy that didn't simply spring from their head. I guess they are conducting a pre-emptive strike on attitudes towards car branda and types, and they probably have elaborated a long-term strategy. We all know pre-emptive strikes will bear fruit only in the long run, and sacrifices are made on the way. Often, controversial ideas that have been named dead at their conception were surprisingly alive later.

I would rather the Pacifica looked a little more like a station wagon. But then, I like wagons. Vista Bruisers, 57 Pontiac Safaris, Bentley shooting brakes. What I'd really like is a Subaru Loyale, the crisp wagon two design changes back, with a WRX drive train, but I'd settle for a Pacifica.

But you are right. The Germans don't understand the Americans. The Japanese got lucky, They sent corporate outcasts here to run their marketing operation. They in turn bothered to learn enough about Americans as to be willing to keep battling the head office back in Japan until they won approval for putting radios in pickup trucks.

In Japan, pickup trucks were for rough work, driven by lowly employees who didn't need to listen to the radio. Selling mini-pickups in a country where the buyers were garden maintenance entrepeneurs and surfer dudes took a whole nother mindset. The Japanese were able to acquire, and learn to seek out, that mindset. The Germans are far less likely to.

I don't get the whole Jeep thing. Stock, they're absolutely nasty vehicles. I'd put a Porsche Cayenne or Toyota 4Runner up against a Jeep any day of the week, and whip its ass in performance, handling and off-road ability. And that's before the tool boxes come out.

I'm not much of a luxury car kind of guy, so I won't comment on the 300C, save for: God damn that thing is ugly. Looks like someone took a 5-series BMW and beat it to death with an ugly stick.

There's no reason for them not to get it. In 6,000 km of driving rentals around western Europe the two most commonly seen American cars (hands down) were Jeep Grand Cherokees and Dodge mini-vans.

My god, is that 300C thing UGLY! It looks like it is choking on its own grille!

Anyway, as a new owner of a Jeep Liberty (Rocky Mountain Edition -- I think that's the "Freedom" edition in the US), my claim to Jeep purist status is weak -- Rubicon trail or not.

However, there is a big difference between a "cute" jeep, and something that is not a jeep at all! My mother has the Subaru Forrester, and while it is a decent vehicle, it is nothing like getting behind the wheel of a Jeep.

K

I thought they had already watered down the jeep - have you not seen the Jeep Liberty? What self-respecting Jeep-lover buys such a 'cutsy' SUV?

And whoever it was that said that the Cayenne and the 4Runner can do better off-road than a Jeep has obviously never gone off-roading in any of the above vehicles.

Wasn't the Jeep Liberty the first move in the soft direction. My wife has the last model of Jeep Cherokee (I believe it was 2001) and we're going to have to keep that one running forever...unless of course they bring the Cherokee back.

What in holy hell are you talking about? Where have you been for the past ten plus years? Jeep went soft back when Chrysler bought them, not when Daimler bought Chrysler: its inferior product status was attained well before the Germans got involved.

Compare a Jeep made pre-Chrysler buyout and one made after: the pre-Chrysler model, with regular oil changes, is probably still on the road, and functions with few problems. One made after the Chrysler buyout is probably on its last legs and its owner is probably shelling out serious coin to mechanics. Two friends are in this situation: one owns 'a 79 Cherokee---and it still runs just fine and despite rust, the car is on the road and starts up every time on the first try. The other friend owns a '96 Grand Cherokee, with all the trimmings---she just spent a boatload on fixing the drive train, the starter, and the fuel pump.

There's a reason why, if you're in the market for an old CJ-7 or Cherokee, they cost a lot for a car that's that old: they're workhorses and are well worth any money you have to put in them. I wouldn't buy a Chrysler made Jeep if you paid me to: they're simply not worth the money involved.

How do I know this? My husband is an IT consultant to car dealers and my brother owns a Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge dealership and when he gets a pre-chrysler-Jeep on the lot, he makes money on it. When have you ever heard of a dealer taking in a car like that and reselling it? It doesn't happen often.

Most car dealers, with the exception of those who peddle upmarket cars, don't make a dime on the sale of the actual car. They make their coin on financing, insurance, after-market products, body work, repairs, etc. Daimler, however, is used to making money on the sale of its cars: they don't want to have to become a financing company. It's not simply that they don't get it, it's that they refuse to adjust the business model that's been so successful for them in the past. They will have to change it if they're to make any money with their Chrysler products. The American-made car market is vastly different than that of the market they're used to selling to. It's that simple: their business model is flawed.

To be fair, in January, I was at the National Auto Dealers Association Convention in San Francisco. Now, this is not a show where you generally see a lot of prototypes, (Ford was the only other car manufacturer who did show prototypes, but that was part of the 100th Anniversary celebration) but Daimler had expended the effort and coin to bring all the new models to the show. And they were plugging them hard: I was just a wife at this convention and they were selling me when I hit their booth: I can only imagine how they tried to plug them to the actual dealers. To me, it's not a good sign when you have to sell the dealers on new models, but at least they were making the effort, instead of just forcing the dealers' hands. That says something.

Personally, I'm still pining for the International Scout . . . .

Oh, woe is me.....
What is this web site coming to? The merits of Corn binders and Jeeps?
Must be politically slow.....

Ed

don't slag chrysler made jeeps

i had to put my 90 cherokee down a few years ago. for one reason only: the canadian winters (and the salt) had led to massive corrosion of the brakes (and other parts) there was very little solid metal left so that when they had to retap to put the brakes back on (as they'd just been hanging there... they pulled the brakes off by hand without undoing the screws)

but that was with 250k miles on it... so its mostly my fault..

98 jeep gc is doing fine... and liberty sucks... period

i do want to get a cj sometime soon.. those things rock

My first Jeep was an 89 Wrangler. Dropped some serious coin keeping that thing functioning. Nevertheless, with it's stock set-up, it took me over the trail between Teluride and Ouray. One of the most vivid days of my life was driving on the floor of Monument Valley with the top down. Just me and the monoliths. I never got the red dust completely out of the car and that was a good thing. It also saw me through some nasty Tennessee back woods that a city boy like me would not want to get stuck in. I relunctantly traded it in for a somewhat more practical 96 Cherokee Sport 2 Door. It's one of the few things I can hold against my wife. It's all emotion. Maybe Toyota owners feel the same degree of affinity. I don't care. I now own a Honda Odyssey and just bought an Accord, but I refuse to relinguish the Jeep, unless it is to get another one. But I don't like what Chrysler is doing to the Jeep. They are not cars. Chrysler already makes a fair number of cars, so why crush the one original brand they have. The fact that they would even use the SUV acronym to describe a Jeep is a serious trouble sign. It's not an SUV. It's a Jeep. Again, it's emotion. I considered the Liberty but my Cherokee has the classic box shape and doesn't look like a Suzuki on steroids. The Liberty began a reactionary trend and I believe Jeep blew the potential to take control of the $20-$25K off road market. No offence, but the Liberty is just too feminine and soft. The Grand Cherokee is up for a redesign I think next year but I'm not hopeful. And god forbid if they come out with some "all wheel drive" nonsense.

When all else fails get a Hummer and go 'Jeep Fishin'

"And whoever it was that said that the Cayenne and the 4Runner can do better off-road than a Jeep has obviously never gone off-roading in any of the above vehicles."

Don't know about the Cayenne, but I'm a former Grand Cherokee owner who now owns a 4Runner, and there'sno comparison: the build quality (especially in the electrical/electronics systems) is way, way higher in the 4Runner. There's just no comparison. Jeep is living off a reputation that it no longer deserves.

...and for what Porsche wants for a Cayenne, you can buy a Jeep, and two spare jeeps for when the first one breaks.

And whoever it was that said that the Cayenne and the 4Runner can do better off-road than a Jeep has obviously never gone off-roading in any of the above vehicles.

On the contrary. I've driven CJ's, YJ's and TJ's quite extensively. I've gone up trails at 60mph that would make most people wet themselves. I've blown differentials up crawling over rocks, shredded transmissions which are generally rather hard to shred, and rolled various mud toys dozens of times.

Stock for stock, a 4Runner will eat a Jeep alive. Sorry, but it's true. Feel free to visit NY sometime if you'd like a demonstration. As for the Porsche, if you think ANYthing compares to that little buggy, you haven't driven one. The 450 horsepower twin turbo V8 has just a slight edge on the competition.

I wholeheartedly agree that the 4Runner is better than the Cherokee but there is not a better "pure" SUV than the Wrangler, for the price. It's a classic case of simple is good. Now, if money's no object, go get a Hummer if you want a truly rugged SUV. Or maybe Range Rover, but my understanding is there quality has really slipped.

I have been getting worried with the Mercedes takeover of Chrysler and this just confirms my fears. German engineering is nice, but it's not necessarily a guarentee of quality. Mercedes has been getting killed in Consumer Reports the last several years, so they aren't all they are cracked up to be.

As for the Jeep Liberty, it's still a great 4x4. I wouldn't call it cute. I think it's meant as a fusion of the Wrangler "look" but with some sleek modern design. I kind of like it. And it's still considered a great off road vehicle if you choose to go that route. But, I'd still rather I had my Wrangler back any day of the week (sadly, it's not a very practical family vehicle).

If I were Jeep I'd be worried that Hummer will tackle the smaller SUV market.

I have to agree that the Germans just don't get it.... I'm a big All-Wheel-Drive fan, and as such have owned a number of AMC Eagles over the years (haven't driven anything better in the snow, except maybe my '89 BMW 325iX (also AWD)).... but Daimler-Chrysler seems to be missing the boat.

They just don't seem to get high-performace and all wheel drive. One or the other, but not both. I just read that the new Dodge Magnum with the Hemi in it won't be available in AWD... and the Durango with the Hemi isn't either. Heck, they put the AWD NP242HD transfer case behind the Cummins turbo diesel in the Ram for a few years, so it isn't that they can't find one stout enough...

I own an '03 Subaru WRX, which is as fun as a basket of kittens to drive, and makes a great daily driver. I also own an '03 Jeep Wranger Rubicon, which is the best off-roader I've owned (I've also offroaded in an '82 AMC Eagle (don't laugh, never got it stuck, and used it to pull out other rigs), '93 Dodge Dakota (did get it stuck), '96 Dakota, '65 Jeep CJ-5A, etc...) I agree that the build quality isn't 100% on the Jeep... but it'll do more off-road than I want to! And I don't have any doubts about its trail ability... as a pure off-road rig it's great.

The on-road handling and performance aren't as good as the WRX, but I don't expect them to be, and the '03 Jeep rides LOADS better than the '65... or than a buddy of mine's '87 Wrangler. So Jeep is capable of making things better without killing the off-road ability... if the engineers and not marketing / sales / upper management get to make the decisions.

I've driven a Grand Cherokee and a Liberty. The GC seemed pretty nice, but didn't ride as nice as the interior would suggest. =) The Liberty road better than a Dodge Intrepid I test drove the same day! And the V6 in the Liberty had plenty of power and a sweet exhaust note... I might have to look at one to replace the WRX in the spring if they offer AWD with the turbo diesel option that is coming out. Note that the Liberty is called the Cherokee overseas, replacing the old model.

So Jeep has done some good things with the things that were in progress before the merger. Whether they'll keep it up is another thing.

And, yes, killing off Plymouth as a separate brand was stupid.

Jeep Trivia: Did you know that the Jeep Cherokee (designed / produced by AMC) was one of the first vehicles to be designed and tested by computer before prototypes were built?

As every Brit knows, there's only one real off-roader: the old Land Rover Defender. One hauling out of the mire some upmarket school-run SUV that's gone off-road at the weekend (and looks like staying there) is a fairly common sight in the country at weekends.

Mind you, on road they're rough old beasts. I don't think they sell it in the US, as it makes the average tractor look refined and luxurious.

Anyway, Lara Croft drives one :)

Yes, the old style Land Rovers and the Defender series (90 and 110) were sold in the US. They stopped selling the Defenders here because of air bag / side impact requirements. They are pretty good off-road rigs, but expensive compared to a Jeep Wrangler which is just as or more capable.

Actually, in the latest Tomb Raider movie, Lara Croft is driving a Jeep Wrangler Rubicon... Jeep made and sold just over a 1000 special "Tomb Raider" edition Rubicons as a promotional tie in.

Had a Wagoneer - Like driving a tank. Awesome.
Had a Cherokee - It was a beast offroad.
Have a Liberty - It's also great offroad.
Have a Wrangler - It's better than all three.
Never had a problem with any of 'em.

We used to have a great time winching out the pick up, Nissan, and Toyota crowds when they'd get stuck in the sand on the Outer Banks. Great way to make beer $$$.

Porsche makes an SUV?? What's next, Caddy making a pick up?

Re Cayenne: Don't laugh until you've tried one.

Actually the new Touraeg with the V10 turbo diesel sounds really interesting.... but still wouldn't replace the Wrangler for off-road. Maybe the WRX though...