Jeep Grand Cherokee moose test -- the full story

[enzo1]

[porsche4life]

Makes me feel real good about the new Durango I'm driving around in pulling a trailer....

[onewhippedpuppy]

Yikes. I would expect a car based SUV to do better.

[kaisen]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

Yikes. I would expect a car based SUV to do better.

What car is it based on?

Trick question, it's not. It shares underpinnings with the Mercedes-Benz ML and GL

It's unibody (like most cars), not body-on-frame (like most trucks)....maybe that's what you meant?

[vash]

never seen a cone squished down so efficiently, that it pops!! cool.

and i cant believe th driver had no helmet on..the other guy..was that a bike helmet?

either way..i would duck and t-bone the moose. that is amazing.

[aigel]

Vash, that wasn't the cone rather than the RF tire - every time. That's not a replay but 6 times they blew the same corner tire.

Scary stuff. It doesn't roll on that ideal surface, but it sure will if there is a curb, pot hole or other imperfection in the road at the wrong point.

I just drove behind a Grand Jerkey yesterday and looked at its suspension. It sure isn't the straight-axle old school truck it used to be any more. I would have thought that was an upside in the Moose maneuver.

G

[Paul K]

I'd be interested to see how my Land Rover would handle that.

[Zeke]

Playing it over and over is simply alarmist tactics. Anyone of us could fix that thing with a set of revalved shocks. The combination of the tire spring rate and the chassis spring rate is overcoming the dampening of the shocks.

Possibly a rear bar change, but I'm not a suspension expert. I do know enough to know that matching dampening rate to overall spring rate is important as demonstrated by that "moose" test.

[kaisen]

Originally Posted by Paul K

I'd be interested to see how my Land Rover would handle that.

OOHH!! Let's set up a test!

[kaisen]

Originally Posted by Zeke

Playing it over and over is simply alarmist tactics.

It's several individual tests with the same outcome. Not the same test over and over. Important difference.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Quote de onewhippedpuppy

Yikes. I would expect a car based SUV to do better.

What car is it based on?



Trick question, it's not. It shares underpinnings with the Mercedes-Benz ML and GL



It's unibody (like most cars), not body-on-frame (like most trucks)....maybe that's what you meant?

I was thinking unibody vs body on frame. Were that a tall old school SUV with solid axles I wouldn't be surprised, but a unibody SUV with a relatively low center of gravity and independent suspension should do better. The comparison to the Volvo and VW was a good illustration.

[masraum]

Yeah, they said that they popped 7 different tires (6 on camera) on 3 different Jeeps.

Yes, it needs better shocks, but then I guess the deal is that in other vehicles, they come from the factory with the correct shocks, but with the Jeep GC, they come with crap shocks that need an upgrade (and who knows if an aftermarket is going to have better valving). When you buy a brand new vehicle, do you plan to or think you should need to change the shocks?

My guess is that to make the GC ride as smoothly as possible, they underdamped it which seems like a very American way to go.

[vash]

Originally Posted by aigel

Vash, that wasn't the cone rather than the RF tire - every time. That's not a replay but 6 times they blew the same corner tire.

G

wow! i had the volume muted..thx

[javadog]

I suspect that the tires aren't blowing, just getting pushed off of the bead and losing all their air. That could probably be fixed with more pressure. It would be interesting to see what would happen with different air pressures and firmer shocks.

On the other hand, maybe you should not drive a Jeep like this. Whenever I drove my Ford F250 SD, I took it for granted that I had to be a little more careful than when I drove an M3, or a 911, or....

JR

[aigel]

Originally Posted by kaisen

It's several individual tests with the same outcome. Not the same test over and over. Important difference.

You can tell because the time of day in the videos - it is clear they ran this all day. The video editing sure could be better on that - announcing run 1 ... run 2 etc., so if anything it is non-alarmist. The Scandinavians tend not to overstate IMHO.

G

[aigel]

The key here is that the electronic stability control should never let the car get into this situation. And no - nobody plans on driving like this, but in an emergency situation, you may find yourself trying to avoid something at those speeds. In the VW and Volvo, you'll continue to drive, in this car, more likely you land on your roof at highway speeds and your camping trip ends in the hospital.

G

[javadog]

I guess I'm a little old-fashioned in that I take a little personal responsiblity for what happens to me. I don't expect to be saved from any and every eventuality by some engineer making my cars idiot-proof. Maybe the Jeep could be made better. Maybe there's a factor in the test that exacerbates this behavior. I don't know. I have to say, after 60 Minutes screwed Audi, I have largely ignored these sorts of things.

JR

[aigel]

Originally Posted by javadog

I guess I'm a little old-fashioned in that I take a little personal responsiblity for what happens to me. I don't expect to be saved from any and every eventuality by some engineer making my cars idiot-proof.

All other vehicles have 4 wheel disk brakes, but you'd be fine buying a 4 wheel drum brake vehicle in the same category and just go slower? The issue is that other cars are significantly safer in the same market and price segment.

G

[javadog]

I've found a lot of cars I've owned have one shortcoming or another. As an example, I found early Mercedes 4-Matic systems to respond so slowly to a loss of traction on one end that I could half-spin a car so equipped on a wet road before it got the other end hooked up and driving.

And yes, I do tailor my driving to what car I am in.

Maybe the Jeep should be better. Personally, I'd rather elevate the driving abilities of John Q. Citizen, than make an idiot-proof car. But, I get your point.

JR

[kach22i]

I bet the Jeep would stomp those other vehicles in an off-road test.

However, you got to get there first, and that might be a problem.