Meet The All-New Three-Row 2021 Jeep® Grand Cherokee L:

Meet The All-New Three-Row 2021 Jeep® Grand Cherokee L:​

The Fifth-Generation Grand Cherokee Is Here!​

Meet The All-New Three-Row 2021 Jeep® Grand Cherokee L:

It was 29 years ago today, that the Jeep® brand shook up the SUV segment with the introduction of the 1993 Jeep Grand Cherokee (ZJ). Originally intended to be a replacement for the legendary Jeep Grand Wagoneer (SJ), the all-new ZJ was introduced to the media at the North American International...

moparinsiders.com

 

[pumadog]

But old = 2 row, new = 3 row.

 

[TripleT]

Gracious, we cannot keep taking about Platforms like is means anything more than the capacity infrastructure. A platform is a no more than build window and build point. Today they could put a entirely brand new Architecture, every part being new and modern to G standards on what is the CUSW platform.

I know potato ... PAtato but it matter when you start listing the short coming of a "Platform" for future products... Like it too heavy or its packaging is inefficient.

Platform refers to the Capacity constraint.... They are now using Architecture to refer to the design or design theme. We cannot continue to have discussions without getting this straight. This is not the 1990 anymore.

 

[TripleT]

Sorry. What is FMC?

Cherokee has one issue. CUSW as the platform is orphaned. There is no similar product in North America or Europe. Actually Pacifica could be ultra big CUSW. If that's true no wonder that Chinese Jeep Commander has received the same PHEV as on Pacifica. Unfortunately that's FWD only PHEV so that can't work in US.

There in lies the issue do you need a distinct capacity in only 2 parts of the world? or do you adjust that capacity to fit a grander theme and flexibility? My guess is not the next model because one would not want to make that investment or decision given the PSA merger.... All a bit too late anyway.

 

[Archknight]

But old = 2 row, new = 3 row.

For now at least. We can expect an short wheelbase version to join the GCL likely in the 3rd quarter of this year as a 22MY.

 

[pumadog]

At least in Europe platform is often used synonymously for architecture or building kit. A technical design with fitting modular elements. Not build points like that classic American (?) platform definition. A modern platform might support several wheelbases, lengths and widths.

 

[Archknight]

There in lies the issue do you need a distinct capacity in only 2 parts of the world? or do you adjust that capacity to fit a grander theme and flexibility? My guess is not the next model because one would not want to make that investment or decision given the PSA merger.... All a bit too late anyway.

I have to agree with both of you in certain aspects. Bili already mentioned the CUSW platform being orphaned, definitely seems to be the case since there are no other models in the US built on it besides the Pacifica. If they are pushing Jeep upmarket with the Renegade and Compass growing in size with the next generation where does that leave the standard Cherokee?

I also agree with you TripleT, as they have probably already outlined their playbook for Jeep before the merger and will proceed as planned. Any good business would not disrupt its cash cow, which why I originally brought up the new "architecture" as something likely to underpin the standard Cherokee.

 

[pumadog]

For now at least. We can expect an short wheelbase version to join the GCL likely in the 3rd quarter of this year as a 22MY.

Yes, it's just hard to compare the weight until we know the numbers of the new 2 row.

 

[Bili]

At least in Europe platform is often used synonymously for architecture or building kit. A technical design with fitting modular elements. Not build points like that classic American (?) platform definition. A modern platform might support several wheelbases, lengths and widths.

I think that Fiat was one of the first if not the first car maker which brought wider platform definition. All from original Fiat Tipo to Alfa Romeo GT were on the same platform. OK, Alfa was on wide version or Revision 3 and had unique suspension typology but it was on Tipo Due platform just as Tipo. Oh, this means that we have more than half of dozen Alfas on this platform. Some Alfiats, but 3 or 4 proper Alfas.

Unfortunately today car makers do not allow so much technical differences between the cars on the same platform. FCA may be one exception just as was ex Fiat Group at the time.

Yes, it's just hard to compare the weight until we know the numbers of the new 2 row.

The numbers show that new platform is the huge step forward especially if we take into account od much larger exterior dimensions of the new Grand Cherokee L and weight of the 3rd row seats.

 

[TripleT]

At least in Europe platform is often used synonymously for architecture or building kit. A technical design with fitting modular elements. Not build points like that classic American (?) platform definition. A modern platform might support several wheelbases, lengths and widths.

While the term is used... It is still incorrect. Platform has a specific meaning and it means the same whether you are here or on Mars. What has happened is that it is evolved passed the constraints of the term. In Europe and in several other manufacturers in the world it became applied modular. Which means the used the same architecture and even components and changed the physical spacing. This is what CUSW was intended to be as it was applied to Minivan and the still born 300. But as I explained and along the way the computational tools got empowered by the exponential movement of technology. When applied to the Minivan and while developing the Alfas they discovered that they were no longer bound by the modular constraints. That if the structure could be optimized topographically so go other components as long as it worked out from a micro-capacity perspective and the a reasonable SKU carry cost. (which by the way is also going through a computational exponential revolution with inventory AI) ...... at some point the term has become obsolete, especially when people assign limitation to it that don't exist anymore. You could have entirely new product on the platform. A good example is the TRX... Its on the same platform as the 1500. The structure and componentry is almost entirely different.

 

[Bili]

2015 Grand Cherokee WK2 ground clearance data, on the left standard suspension, on the right with air suspension in position 2, all data is in SI units (metric):
Ground Clearance (with P245/70R17 Tire and 3.6-liter engine) - 218, 264
Chassis (fuel tank) - 243, 271
Front axle - 236, 246
Rear axle - 253, 282



2021 Grand Cherokee L WL75 ground clearance data, on the left standard suspension, on the right with air suspension in position 2, all data is in SI units (metric):
Ground Clearance (with P265/50R20 tire and 3.6-liter engine), 215, 276
Chassis (fuel tank) - 261, 320
Front axle - 246, 305
Rear axle - 275, 355



Of course someone may say that WL75 has tire advantage over WK2. That's not true. 20" as on WL75 has 773 mm diameter while 17" as on WK2 has 775 mm diameter. So slightly but unimportant advantage to WK2 due to tires.

Now comparison on various (ground) clearance data, how much worse or better is WL75 against WK2, negative number means that WL75 is worse than WK2.
Ground Clarence - -3, 12
Chassis (fuel tank) - 18, 49
Front axle - 10, 59
Rear axle - 22, 73

As we can see WL75 has in general improved capability when it comes to ground clearance. It has much improved ground clearance when it comes to ground clearance with air suspension. Vital parts are much more from the ground in comparison to WK2.


There is a data for approach, breakover, and departure angles, WK2 on the left with WL on the right, all data with front fascia mounted on the car, both with air suspension:
Approach angle - 29.8°, 30.1°
Breakover angle - 22.8°, 22.6°
Departure angle - 27.1°, 23.6°


So with air suspension WL75 has slightly better approach angle but slightly worse breakover angle than WK2. Latter is amazing result if we know how much longer is wheelbase on WL75. Of course departure angle is worse but it's as expected due to much longer rear overhang.


We can be sure that WL74 will eclipse WK2 in every off road related metrics.


Here is WK2 data:

https://media.fcanorthamerica.com/download.do?id=17797&mid=4

Here is WL75 data:

https://media.fcanorthamerica.com/download.do?id=22432&mid=1

 

[Bili]

2021 Jeep Grand Cherokee L First Look: Three Rows and New Bones

Jeep's fifth-generation Grand Cherokee is the first with a third row.

www.motortrend.com

The next-generation 2021 Jeep Grand Cherokee (codenamed WL), the L included, rides on a new architecture with a chassis based on the lightweight Giorgio platform that gives the Alfa Romeo Stelvio its sublime road manners. The new Grand Cherokee uses more aluminum and is engineered to provide more comfort, refinement, safety, tech, and 4x4 capability than the current WK, Meunier said.

There are two off-road settings that raise the Grand Cherokee an extra 1.6 or 2.4 inches for a maximum 10.9 inches of ground clearance and up to 24 inches for water fording capability (versus 20 inches on the outgoing model). The air suspension rises and lowers twice as fast as the outgoing model.

More aluminum, including the hood and tailgate, and lighter high-strength steel, were used to help reduce weight and improve fuel efficiency. The Grand Cherokee L also automatically disconnects the front axle if the vehicle senses that road conditions don't require all-wheel drive, another way to keep mileage reasonable.

 

[UN4GTBL]

Alfa Romeo Stelvio has 111" long wheelbase. I don't expect that the Giorgio based Cherokee would have much longer wheelbase although Cherokee could be longer and boxier for better space utilization. But for that class size overall weight shouldn't be taller than Stelvio. Just look at Range Rover Velar size. RWD Cherokee would be direct competitor.

We should wait for the new plan. I think that @AlexB said that plan unveil is scheduled for September.

We can only hope!

A boxy, RWD Cherokee with the 3.6 hybrid system perhaps?

 

[Ryan]

We can only hope!

A boxy, RWD Cherokee with the 3.6 hybrid system perhaps?

2.0 hybrid, preferably. More torque.

 

[TripleT]

The only reason they would design anything to fit with the V6 is as a temp measure until Kokomo is up to full speed. Its a obsolete powerplant

 

[Bili]

2.0 hybrid, preferably. More torque.

PHEV?

 

[Bili]

A boxy, RWD Cherokee with the 3.6 hybrid system perhaps?

Hmh... Presumably it would start if with 2.0 turbo MHEV or maybe with upcoming 1.5 turbo MHEV if weight is not too high, lower that the current Cherokee.

3.6 is near the end of its path.

 

[Ryan]

I would think the next-generation Cherokee, if it goes RWD, would only have 2.0T and 2.0T PHEV powertrains in the US. Maybe 1.3T PHEV but that seems like a stretch.

 

[TripleT]

if the hot model could get the 3 liter that would be impressive

 

[Bili]

Inline 6? Absolutely.

 

[Mopar392]

Alfa Romeo Stelvio has 111" long wheelbase. I don't expect that the Giorgio based Cherokee would have much longer wheelbase although Cherokee could be longer and boxier for better space utilization. But for that class size overall weight shouldn't be taller than Stelvio. Just look at Range Rover Velar size. RWD Cherokee would be direct competitor.

We should wait for the new plan. I think that @AlexB said that plan unveil is scheduled for September.

Well, if Mazda is really planning to make the next CX5 a RWD with an Inline-6 engine, I’d like to see FCA and Jeep try that as well.
An affordable RWD compact crossover could be the next hit.