Topic: Comparison Test: 2014 Jeep Cherokee Limited vs 2014 Subaru Forester XT

[Autos_Editor]

The AJAC Canadian Utility Vehicle of the Year goes head-to-head with one of Autos.ca's favourite compact utility vehicles and a very close competition ensues.

Read More...

[dewey9315]

Question of the day: Could you get the Jeep to get into (and stay) in 9th gear?

[redman]

Great comparison thanks and one that I considered.

My biggest concern stems from the transmission comparisons. I feel more comfortable with a tried and tested chain CVT than I do with a newly developed 9Sp transmission which delayed delivery of the Cherokee.
I like boxy styling and ease of entry, exit and better visibility, along with the large side mirrors which work in a utility vehicle.
I agree that the Forester needs the new HK system in the 15 Legacy in order to match up to it's competitors.
It's almost like the Forester needs the next version to make it the ideal mid ute.
Bet if the Forester was manufactured in Indiana vs Japan that it would offer the H6 now with CVT (if it would fit).

[blotter]

great article and review!

I like the Jeep (but have yet to drive it) but LOVE the Forester.
Unfortunately the Forester doesn't meet our requirements (towing) and the Jeep does.

If the H6 was put into the Forester, I think it would be a no brainer for me.
(as mentioned, even if the interior isn't as lush as the Jeep)

[JRM]

Good comparison!    I find the use of "fashionable" to describe a CUV quite amusing.  Similar to fashion models, they are generally tall , narrow (skinny) and awkward looking.  On the other hand some could be described as overweight and even bloated, which isn't so fashionable in today's society.  Kind of an oxymoron on wheels.  However, they have been well marketed and people buy literally tonnes of them, even though they consume more fuel than wagons and hatches and generally have poorer driving characteristics.
That being said, the Jeep does stand out in the sea of CUVs and the interior looks quite good.   On the other hand, the Subi is too tall and boxy and the interior boderline dreadful to these eyes.

I like a sleek, not too skinny (narrow) down to earth look with some interesting curves in the right places.   I guess I'll always be a sedan/wagon kinda guy.  Call me old fashioned.

[Canadiain]

No scores for likely long term reliability then?

Surely thats a factor for most people plonking down $40+k of their own money, and I know which I would go for on that front!

[tortoise]

Question of the day: Could you get the Jeep to get into (and stay) in 9th gear?

You could use that in your add when it comes time to sell.

"Jeep Cherokee in excellent condition.  9th gear is as good as new,  barely used."

[Mr. Legacy]

No scores for likely long term reliability then?

Surely thats a factor for most people plonking down $40+k of their own money, and I know which I would go for on that front!

Hear, hear.   

[blotter]

I like a sleek, not too skinny down to earth look with some interesting curves in the right places.

you talking about a car?
 

[Waterlooresident]

Sorry but that Jeep Cherokee must have one of the UGLIEST front ends I have ever seen !
Only the Edsel from the 50's is worse.
A guy would have to be blind to buy one of those monsters.

And that's not just my opinion, most of the people I talk to agree with me.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Autos/comments/1m9vlw/the_2014_jeep_cherokee_is_fucking_ugly/
==
Quote:  "Personally, I feel that it is a disgrace to Jeep, and by part, the Cherokee badge.
Just what was Chrysler/Jeep thinking? When I 1st saw it, I couldn't figure out just where the headlights were. I thought those clear blobs on the hood were the headlights. Great technology, ugly Jeep."

http://wot.motortrend.com/refreshing-or-revolting-2014-jeep-cherokee-391909.html
==
Quote: "I would have bought the new Jeep Cherokee Limited but the outside, side and front views, was just too ugly! I simply couldn't live with such an ugly car, but I loved the interior, powertrain and the dealer. Had it looked classy like a Grand Cherokee it would be in my driveway instead of a new Hyundai Santa Fe. Cripes, what a mess. It's the new Aztec! So sad that a major company could screw up a new roll out like this."


AND HERE IS A PAGE THAT ACTUALLY COMPARES IT TO THE EDSEL:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3000641/posts

QUOTE:  "That’s an awful lot of ugly that Chrysler’s engineers managed to fit on one car. Most impressive!"

[tooscoops]

it's called polarizing.. means you have an opinion on the subject, rather than just a "whatever" type of approach... it's a gamble because you know some people will hate it.. you are just gambling that more will love it.. and more importantly, that the look appeals to the target audience.

who the hell cares if a 40 year old farmer, 100% truck buyer hates the look? he wouldn't have bought it if it was the prettiest thing he had seen since his sister. likewise a wealthy 75 year old thinks it looks too japanese and cute and is a disgrace to the name cherokee? oh no! he can think that all he wants as he drives his 7 series since he would never step foot in a chrysler dealer anyway. (just examples i've found when out and about)

good comparison... i think these are two must try's in the segment for any potential buyers. i would think it will be split 50/50 for most people who have narrowed it down to these finalists... and neither person is wrong.

[johngenx]

The Wrangler is for the old-school Jeep diehards (as I would be) but they need modern designs too that are competitive in their segments.  I'm not a fan of the look of the new Cherokee, but it does look way better in person, and I'll be curious to see how it ages.  Sure is nice inside.  It tromps the Subaru there, no doubt.  But, we're used to that, are we not?

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Sorry but that Jeep Cherokee must have one of the UGLIEST front ends I have ever seen !
Only the Edsel from the 50's is worse.
A guy would have to be blind to buy one of those monsters.

And that's not just my opinion, most of the people I talk to agree with me.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Autos/comments/1m9vlw/the_2014_jeep_cherokee_is_fucking_ugly/
==
Quote:  "Personally, I feel that it is a disgrace to Jeep, and by part, the Cherokee badge.
Just what was Chrysler/Jeep thinking? When I 1st saw it, I couldn't figure out just where the headlights were. I thought those clear blobs on the hood were the headlights. Great technology, ugly Jeep."

http://wot.motortrend.com/refreshing-or-revolting-2014-jeep-cherokee-391909.html
==
Quote: "I would have bought the new Jeep Cherokee Limited but the outside, side and front views, was just too ugly! I simply couldn't live with such an ugly car, but I loved the interior, powertrain and the dealer. Had it looked classy like a Grand Cherokee it would be in my driveway instead of a new Hyundai Santa Fe. Cripes, what a mess. It's the new Aztec! So sad that a major company could screw up a new roll out like this."


AND HERE IS A PAGE THAT ACTUALLY COMPARES IT TO THE EDSEL:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3000641/posts

QUOTE:  "That’s an awful lot of ugly that Chrysler’s engineers managed to fit on one car. Most impressive!"

Quoting FreeRepublic is not the way to garner legitimacy for any point of view, ever.

Pick any of the Hollywood starlets and you've find some basement dwelling internet warrior who thinks she's ugly.

All that matters is that it's selling, and selling well.

[SaskSpecV]

Another nice review guys.  It really focused in on the key differences between the vehicles - the whole idea behind a "comparative" review.

My preferences definitely skew towards visibility, cargo space,  simplicity, so no secret which vehicle I'd pick.  But I can certainly see why others would go in a different direction.

BTW, interesting that the HK sound system in the XT is still terrible.  What is it about Subaru and horrible audio? (Maybe the boxer engine noise cancels out the speaker sounds  )  But if I do pull the trigger on a Touring, I won't feel like I'm missing out on the HK system.

[blotter]

the look of the Jeep is polarizing.  Sure the first picture I seen, I thought it was horrid.
But the look has grown on me.   Now there's quite a few poping up in the region and the more I see it, the more I really like it.   Been a while that a vehicle design (mainstream) has generated so much hate and love.   Meanwhile just about all the other CUVs just simply blend in.   Kudos on Chrysler for being pretty wild.

[mixmanmash]

BTW, interesting that the HK sound system in the XT is still terrible.  What is it about Subaru and horrible audio? (Maybe the boxer engine noise cancels out the speaker sounds  )  But if I do pull the trigger on a Touring, I won't feel like I'm missing out on the HK system.

Lol.  Active Audio Cancellation system via the engine.

[dirtyjeffer]

i like the Cherokee, and think the new Trailhawk in that deep red colour (with black rims and the red tow hooks) looks great...i did see a new XT fozzie pull out into traffic about a month ago and "give 'er"...it was pretty quick at zipping up to speed...i like both of these and am not sure which one i would take...i'd have to give both a drive and see for myself...one thing about Subbies, they seem to be well built.

[EV-Light]

This quote below perfectly describes how I feel about the whole Subaru line up:

...When hopping out of the lounge-like Cherokee, the Subaru feels as if we’ve been sent a press car from two generations ago instead of the current model...

Regardless...
1) $43k for a fully loaded Cherokee? LOL No thanks, I'd rather give up some equipment and get a REAL luxury CUV - read Audi Q5 Progressiv with NAV.
2) That 9-Speed transmission doesn't spell confidence, Jeep forums are filled with people that have had them replaced and there are articles out there stating that dealer have been replacing transmission on these in droves.

So yeah...fool me once, fool me twice....NEVER AGAIN :-)

[blotter]

This quote below perfectly describes how I feel about the whole Subaru line up:

...When hopping out of the lounge-like Cherokee, the Subaru feels as if we’ve been sent a press car from two generations ago instead of the current model...

Regardless...
1) $43k for a fully loaded Cherokee? LOL No thanks, I'd rather give up some equipment and get a REAL luxury CUV - read Audi Q5 Progressiv with NAV.2) That 9-Speed transmission doesn't spell confidence, Jeep forums are filled with people that have had them replaced and there are articles out there stating that dealer have been replacing transmission on these in droves.

So yeah...fool me once, fool me twice....NEVER AGAIN :-)

granted forking out $43K for a Cherokee isn't for everyone, but you get a heck of a lot at that price.
The 2.0 Q5 Progressiv is $43,700 without NAV and the 3.0 is $46,200 without NAV.
You get far more stuff in the Cherokee than the Q5 and outside the idea that Audi is a premium brand, after sitting in both cars at the show, I don't see one being / feeling more luxurious than the other.

[neil]

Well, she has a Butter-Face, but I quite like the Cherokee in the flesh,  I am seeing many on the road, and the Chrysler store I drive past daily has very few in stock, I imagine it is selling very well.